202 
MICHAEL FARADAY. 
assistant in the laboratory. The first of these was the report of an analysis of 
a sample of native caustic lime from Tuscany, accompanied with some obser¬ 
vations upon it by Sir Humphry Davy, in 1816. From this time to the year 
1822, the following communications from Mr. Faraday’s pen were inserted 
in successive numbers of the same journal:— 
“ Some account of the Alstonia theaformis (Symplocos Alstonia ), or Tea of 
Bogota.” 
“ Some Experiments and Observations on a New Acid Substance.” 
“ An account of some Experiments on the Escape of Gases through Capil¬ 
lary Tubes.” 
“ On the Solution of Silver in Ammonia.” 
“ On Sulphuret of Phosphorus.” 
“On Combinations of Ammonia with Chlorides.” 
“ On the Sounds produced by Flame in Tubes.” 
“ On a New Metal, Sirium.” 
“ Observations on Gallic Acid, Tannin, etc.” 
“ On the Separation of Manganese from Iron.” 
“ Some Experimental Observations on the Passage of Gases through 
Tubes.” 
“An Analysis of Wootz, or Indian Steel.” 
“ On Sirium or Vestium.” 
“ On the Decomposition of Chloride of Silver by Hydrogen and by Zinc.” 
“Description of a New Apparatus for the Combustion of the Diamond.” 
“ On the Vapour of Mercury at Common Temperatures.” 
It is right to observe, however, that none of these early communications of 
Mr. Faraday’s represented or pretended to represent the results of complete 
or elaborate investigations of the subjects referred to. They were generally 
short fragmentary notices of results obtained in the ordinary pursuits of 
the laboratory assistant of the Royal Institution. 
In 1821 Mr. Faraday’s name became associated with those of most of the 
leading chemists in London, as a scientific witness on an important trial be¬ 
tween a sugar refiner and an insurance office; the latter having refused to 
pay the insurance on some extensive premises which had been destroyed by 
fire, on the ground that a dangerous process, in which an oil-bath was used 
for evaporating sugar, had been adopted without the knowledge of the insur¬ 
ance office. This trial was remarkable on account of the large number of 
celebrated chemists who were engaged as witnesses, and the opposite and irre¬ 
concilable nature of the evidence given by men of equal standing on each side. 
On one side were Samuel Parkes, W. T. Braude, Frederic Accum, William 
Allen, Thomas Barry, and Thomas Coxwell; while on the other were Michael 
Faraday, Richard Phillips, Dr. Bostock, J. G. Children, John Taylor, aud 
Arthur Aikin. 
The quondam bookbinder, since assistant in the laboratory of the Royal 
Institution, after a training in so good a school, had now evidently taken his 
position as a full-fledged chemist. 
About this period we find the records of several events, which, while they 
serve to indicate the character, must have also influenced the career of the 
young philosopher. He was associated with a number of scientific men 
forming a little society, the meetings of which were held in the neighbour¬ 
hood of Fleet Street, for the discussion of chemical and other scientific sub¬ 
jects. It appears that some dissension arose among the members of this so¬ 
ciety, and that an angry discussion took place at one of the meetings, which 
was made the subject of a burlesque in doggrel verse by one of those pre¬ 
sent. The manner in which Faraday was alluded to in this document, a copy 
of which is now before us, will serve to indicate the opinion then formed of 
him :— 
