Sciences," the astronomer royal of France, the man who stands, if not first, in- 

 contestably in the first rank of living meteorologists in a word, than M. Arago 

 no one would think it entitled to a serious answer. It would be classed 

 among those strange obliquities of historic vision which have led some persons 

 to see in Richard and Macbeth, not tyrants and murderers, but mild and virtu- 

 ous princes, cruelly wronged by the calumnies of tradition. 



Nollet conjectured the probable identity of lightning and electricity, but gave 

 not the most distant hint of any possible method by which the probability could 

 he experimentally tested. Franklin boldly maintained the identity of these 

 agents, gave numerous and cogent reasons to support that position, and more- 

 over prescribed with minute details two distinct methods by which lightning 

 could be brought into the hands of the observer, and submitted to the same ex- 

 perimental examination as electricity had undergone. One of these two meth- 

 ods was, in scrupulous accordance with his directions, applied in France ; 

 and the other, within a few weeks, was adopted by himself in America. The 

 results of both were precisely what Franklin had foretold. Both were com- 

 pletely successful. 



But, rejoins M. Arago, the whole affair of the experiment was useless, for 

 it had already been effected. The flame on the javelins of the Roman senti- 

 nels of the fifth legion was sufficient as an experiment, not to mention Castor 

 and Pollux, so often seen by sailors on their mast-tops ! What would so se- 

 vere a reasoner as M. Arago say to another who should maintain, without fur- 

 ther experiment, that either of these luminous appearances was identical with 

 lightning 1 and if that were conceded, where would have been found the 

 proof that these meteors, and the lightning with which they would be granted 

 to be identified, were due to the same physical agent as that manifested by the 

 friction of glass and resin ? 



If however, says M. Arago again, the experiment were necessary or useful, 

 science owes it to M. Dalibard, who executed it at Marly-la- Ville a month be- 

 fore Franklin, with his kite, made it at Philadelphia. This statement is not 

 attended with the circumstantial accuracy which M. Arago is accustomed to 

 observe. The fact, as stated by M. Dalibard himself, was, that he took Frank- 

 lin's printed directions as to the manner of performing his (Franklin's) project- 

 ed experiment, and followed them to the letter in preparing his apparatus at 

 Marly-la-Ville. Having accomplished this, he put the directions for making 

 the observations into the hands of one Coiffier, an old retired soldier, who fol- 

 lowed the trade of a carpenter, and who probably also erected the apparatus 

 itself, and desired Coiffier to make the experiment in the manner prescribed 

 by Franklin, if a storm should occur at a time when he (Dalibard) was absent. 

 The first storm did occur when Dalibard was at Paris. Coiffier presented a piece 

 of metal to the rod, and received several sparks. He then ran for the cure, 

 who, with him, repeated the experiment, and immediately wrote a full descrip- 

 tion of it, with which he despatched Coiffier himself to Paris to M. Dalibard. 



Thus it appears that so far from science being indebted to M. Dalibard for 

 the earliest exhibition of this capital experiment, that philosopher had no other 

 share in it, save that of having caused the erection of the conducting rod and 

 other apparatus according to Franklin's directions. In the actual performance 

 of the first experiment, he had no share whatever. 



Let us now see how the account of credit stands on the score of this memo- 

 rable discovery : 



In 1708, Dr. Wall mentions a resemblance of electricity to thunder and light- 

 ning. 



In 1735, Mr. Grey conjectures their identity, and that they differ only in \ 

 degree. 



