570 Prof. TyndalFs Remarks on the 



Brewster, to whom Prof. Tait addresses his communication], 

 Forbes, Herschel, or Piazzi Smyth, can surely not be regarded as 

 unsuitable for a paper on ' Energy/" Did I say it was ? Did I not 

 rather state that it was both laudable and desirable that men in 

 your high positions should instruct the readers of 'Good Words; * 

 and I may here add, what I am known to have stated a hundred 

 times, that in my opinion it would be an incalculable boon to En- 

 glish society if our best men could be prevailed upon to write our 

 scientific manuals, and to teach the public through our leading 

 magazines. But I also said, and I think rightly, that < Good 

 Words' is not the place to give vent to insinuations prejudicial 

 to the character of a scientific fellow-worker. And inasmuch 

 as I know that the character you impugn is of a quality 

 to defy all your attacks, if only openly made, it is only natural 

 that I should invite you to make your charges against it in 

 the presence of a jury competent to understand your evi- 

 dence. 



With regard to the publication of my lecture on Force the 

 course pursued was this : the abstract of the lecture was pub- 

 lished, as all such abstracts are, in the l Proceedings of the Royal 

 Institution/ and it was transferred thence to the Philosophical 

 Magazine. With its further publication I had nothing whatever 

 to do. Until you informed me of the fact, I did not know that 

 the lecture had been honoured by admission into the 'Illustrated 

 London News/ the 'Engineer/ and < Macmillan's Magazine/ 

 ine gentleman whom you denominate my f pupil ' is quite un- 

 known to me. But even had I written my abstract expressly 

 tor any of these journals, there would, I submit, be nothing 

 unworthy or inconsistent in the act; for the lecture contains 

 imputations upon no man's character. My object in giving the 

 lecture was not to defame anybody, but to raise a noble and a 

 suffering man to the position which I believed his labours en- 

 titled him to occupy, and from which I am persuaded your efforts 

 will be unavailing to remove him. 



In proof of your acquaintance with Mayer, you refer me to a 

 paper of yours m the Edinburgh Transactions, in which I am 

 informed you give him "the full credit that his scientific claims 

 can possibly be admitted to deserve." This is an assertion made 

 without knowledge. Regarding Mayer's labours you knew, I 

 assume, what everybody knew— the contents of his first paper 

 which, able and important as it is, is in reality nothing more than 

 a preliminary note*. Everybody was acquainted with this paper, 



< " To secure what I had discovered against eventualities, I put together 

 its most important portions in a short paper, which I sent to Liebig in the 

 spring of 1842, with a request that it might be published in the Annate* 



