and on the Chemical and Contact Theories. 269 
write merely to say, that when it was sent to me as printed 
in Silliman’s Journal, I sent a brief letter back, declining to 
enter into discussion, since I had nothing more to say than had 
been said, and still thought that that was sufficient to enable my 
own mind to rest in the view it had taken of static induction, 
&c. My reason for declining was no want of respect to Dr. 
Hare, but a strong conviction that controversial reply and 
rejoinder is but a vain occupation. Professor Silliman wrote 
me word that he had very unfortunately lost my brief note, 
but hoped’to find it and print it. Since then I have forgotten 
the matter, and only renew it to give the same sort of answer 
to the letter as contained in your Journal. 
I perceive also in your Magazine several attacks, from Ger- 
many, Italy and Belgium, upon the chemical theory of the vol- 
taic battery, and some of them upon experiments of mine. For 
my own part I refrain from publicly noticing these arguments, 
simply because there is nothing in them which suggests to 
my mind a new thought illustrative of the subject, or gives 
any ground for a change in my opinion. But whilst speaking 
on this point I cannot help expressing a wish that some of 
the advocates of the contact theory would touch upon the 
consideration which, up to this time, seems to have been most 
carefully avoided, namely the unphilosophical nature of the 
assumed contact force, as I have endeavoured to express it 
in par. 2065 to 2073 of my “ Experimental Researches,” and 
as Dr. Roget has expressed it in words which I have ap- 
pended in a note to my paper. Such a consideration seems 
to me to remove the foundation itself of the contact theory. I 
wish you could be persuaded to think it worth while to re- 
print those three pages in your Magazine*. As far as I can 
perceive, they express a fundamental principle which cannot 
be set aside or evaded by a philosophical mind possessing 
only a moderate degree of strictness in its reasonings; and I 
must confess, that until some answer, or some show of answer 
in the form of assumption or otherwise, is made to that ex- 
pression of what I believe to be a law of nature, I shall feel 
very little inclined to attach much importance to facts which, 
though urged in favour of the contact theory, are ever found 
by the partisans of the chemical theory just as favourable to, 
and consistent with, their peculiar views. 
I am, my dear Sir, 
Very faithfully yours, 
M. Farapay. 
Royal Institution, March 11, 1843, 
* We purpose to insert these pages in our next Number.—Epb, 
