206 
forces be as causes indiscriminately satisfied with each other’s effects, and, in 
addition, always vary inversely. That either gravity, electrical attraction, or 
calorific action should increase as another of them diminishes is taught by no 
a 'priori reasoning, and, as a fact, is unequivocably denied by every experiment 
so soon as it can be divested of mystery. Mr. Warington will be satisfied 
with fact in illustration. He remarks that the advocates of “ conservation ” 
teach that when two effects result from the same cause “ the two effects are 
only equal to the original cause when taken together.” Now, when we send 
two electrical currents from two equal voltaic batteries, instead of one, 
through a given conductor in a given time, we shall have of course a double 
current of electricity ; but instead of merely that double effect of a doubled 
cause, we have, as admitted by Dr. Joule, a quadrupled calorific effect, the 
u conservation of force ” seeming in that case to make two equivalents into 
six ; as with gravity, the equivalents are increased from one to four by halving 
the distance. It may be instructive in more respects than one to explain that 
the voltaic experiment, in common with all others supposed to illustrate 
“ conservation,” resolves itself into a case of the equality of action and re- 
action : a double quantity of electricity, representing a quadrupled electrical 
force (as I have shown), acts on a given wire with a quadrupled electrical effect, 
producing a first physical equation ; and the quadrupled electrical effect, as a 
heating cause, produces four equivalents of calorific effect, which is simply a 
second physical equation in the consecutive order of events. 
The Chairman has remarked of the present view of the origin of nature 
that it presents a subject difficult to treat ; and I have no doubt the difficulty 
of considering it has been in some degree increased by the insufficient manner 
of my dealing with it ; but at the same time I venture to express my con- 
viction that the doctrines I have endeavoured to make intelligible need only 
to be philosophically extended in all their bearings to justify generally the 
same amount of confidence I myself have in their truthfulness ; and I am 
thankful to the Victoria Institute for allowing the discussion of a theory so 
entirely new. 
[Note. — Mr. Darning’s Reply, as well as his original paper, has been 
carefully read with his MS., and the proof-sheets of both were also revised 
by himself. I state this because of the difficulties I have felt with regard to 
the precise meaning of some of his sentences, and also with reference to some 
of his statements not specially questioned in the discussion : as, for instance, 
the remark he makes above, that “ with gravity, the equivalents are increased 
from one to four by halving the distance,” and (in a puzzling sentence, on 
p. 204) that Faraday wished “to get rid of conservation.” — J. R, Ed.] 
