R Institution | May. 10. 1830
Dear Sir
I have hastily looked in the papers (remember hastily)[.]
It appears to me that they are not so important as the propositions &c would seem to imply because if I mistake not most of the practical matter mentioned is already known & in possession of the public and the theory into which the facts are built is not altogether so new or so sure as to have in itself any new influence over the arts to which it refers in addition to what the known facts themselves have[.]
The author speaks of Phlogiston & in those parts of the Essay which are Sensibly different to public knowledge appears to me to assume a good deal[.]
In the last page the author speaks of two new practical discoveries he tells what they are but does not tell how to practice them[.] These I should say would be the parts worth making known to the public if any are & they would be the best reasons why confidence should be reposed in the reasoning of the paper sent to you[.]
The theory of making oxygen the colouring agent is in my mind parallel to the old French theory of making oxygen the acidifying agent[.] It agrees with a great many fact[s] but still would beset knowledge injuriously were the statement to be made general.
As to the paper on light Dr Roget can judge better of that than I can but it seems to me to imply a want of knowledge of Newton’s theory & of what also is known of light now - a great deal of mere hypotheses - and a clumsy idea of the facts by which the phenomena can be illustrated - I am rather confident that this paper i.e the one on light is worth nothing <-> and the other is not I think fit for the Transactions especially without the two discoveries.
Every Truly Yours | M. Faraday
Capt Sabine RN [sic] | &c &c
Please cite as “Faraday0445,” in Ɛpsilon: The Michael Faraday Collection accessed on