106 Hare on Eltciriciiy. 



with Franklin's doctrine, as above stated : but how cau it 

 be reconciled with the idea that the electricities are radi- 

 cally different, that the same state of excitement may be 

 confounded with either. It may, indeed, be alleged, that 

 the fluid is never completely vitreous, or resinous, or neu- 

 tral; that although the proportion of either fluid be great, it 

 may still be increased : that one conductor may be more 

 vitreous than a second, but less so than a third — or more 

 resinous than a second, but less so than a third ; and hence 

 in either case, may give sparks with either. This is, to me, 

 nevertheless, a complicated and unsatisfactory solution of 

 the difficulty. 



Pursuant to the Franklinian theory, there can be no re- 

 ally neutral point ; though the earth, as a reservoir, infinite- 

 ly great, compared with any producible by art, furnishes an 

 invariable standard of intensity, above and below which, all 

 bodies electrically excited, are said to be minus or plus.* 

 It is perfectly consistent with this theory, that sparks should 

 pass, as they are often seen to do, from conductors in either 

 state ; not only from one to the other, but to bodies nomi- 

 nally neutralized by their communication with the earth. 

 As the difference between the electrical states of the oppo- 

 sitely electrified bodies, must be greater than between either 

 of their states, and that of the great reservoir, the sparks 

 between them will be longer, but, in all other characteris- 

 tics, will be the same. This practical result is irreconcile- 

 able with the doctrine of two fluids, according to which, 

 there can be no electricity in the earth, which is not in the 

 state of a neutral compound, formed by these opposite elec- 

 tricities. For it would be an anomaly, to suppose the re- 

 action between a neutral compound, (a tertium quid,) and 

 either of its in£;redients, to resemble in intensity, and in its 

 characteristic phenomena, the reaction which arises between 

 the ingredients themselves. As well might we expect aque- 

 ous vapour to explode with hydrogen or oxygen gas, as 



*In pome discussions which took place some years ago, between Mr. 

 Donovan and Mr. De Luc, iu Nicholson's Journal, it was erroneously 

 charged ajcainst Ffanklin's doctrine, that he supposed that there was an ab- 

 solute state ol neutrality. The doctrine of one universal fluid, is, to me, 

 obviously irreconcileable with that idea, otherwise than as above explain- 

 ed. The quantity of electricity in the globe, is as unalterable in any sen- 

 sible degree, as the quantity of water in the ocean ; and it may therefore 

 *be assumed to be invariably the same. 



