FARADAY. 407 



these supposed interactions between magnets and cur- 

 rents. When, therefore, Faraday in October published 

 his successful experiment, without any allusion to Wol- 

 laston, general, though really ungrounded, criticism 

 followed. I say ungrounded because, firstly, Faraday's 

 experiment was not that of Wollaston, and secondly, 

 Faraday, before he published it, had actually called 

 upon Wollaston, and not finding him at home, did not 

 feel himself authorised to mention his name. 



In December, Faraday published a second paper on 

 the same subject, from which, through a misappre- 

 hension, the name of Wollaston was also omitted. 

 Warburton and others thereupon affirmed that Wol- 

 laston's ideas had been appropriated without acknowl- 

 edgment, and it is plain that Wollaston himself, though 

 cautious in his utterance, was also hurt. Censure 

 grew till it became intolerable. ' I hear/ writes Fara- 

 day to his friend Stodart, ' every day more and more 

 of these sounds, which, though only whispers to me, 

 are, I suspect, spoken aloud among scientific men.' 

 He might have written explanations and defences, but 

 he went straighter to the point. He wished to see 

 the principals face to face to plead his cause before 

 them personally. There was a certain vehemence in 

 his desire to do this. He saw Wollaston, he saw Davy, 

 he saw Warburton; and I am inclined to think that 

 it was the irresistible candour and truth of character 

 which these viva voce defences revealed, as much as 

 the defences themselves, that disarmed resentment at 

 the time. 



As regards Davy, another cause of dissension arose 

 in 1823. In the spring of that year Faraday analysed 

 the hydrate of chlorine, a substance once believed to be 

 the element chlorine, but proved by Davy to be a 

 compound of that element and water. The analysis 

 27 



