Faraday to John James Chapman   11 August 18321

Royal Institution | Aug 11. 1832

My dear Sir

I received your letter and would willingly answer the one accompanying it if I could, but it is no easy task. When a set of Capitalists embark immense sums into such a trade as that of Iron for the purpose of manufacturing it, they soon for their own sakes get all the knowledge that is well ascertained, & add to it much more, experimentally, of their own. This early possession is a consequence of the close connection existing between such knowledge & the increase or even safety of their property. It is hardly to be expected, therefore that such as I or Daniell or others, should have any information on the point that has not been demanded; for large offers are continually being made for such knowledge; and if a man has any that is useful he quickly obtains an equivalent for it.

These causes have brought large manufacturers like that of iron into what might be called a discovery state: those concerned know all that has been ascertained, & apply it; & further improvements (of which there are no doubt plenty in the womb of time) can only be made by further discoveries[.]

Now I really have no time or inclination to take up a manufacture like that of iron. A very important fact to a manufacturer, & requiring much labour for its development, is very often of such a nature as to give no scientific reputation; and then, on the other hand, the remaining stimulus of interest is not with me; for if I improved, others would profit, & at the same time try to evade acknowledging the source of the improvement that they might not be expected to share their profits[.]

I had enough of endeavouring to improve a manufacture when I gave all my spare time for nearly three years in working on glass2: one such experiment in a mans life is enough. I think I might have made three or four philosophical discoveries in that time if I had pursued my own thoughts & views instead of working for a committee on a trading matter[.]

With regard to Mr. Gibbons3 queries, many of them in conversation would bear of a qualified answer; or rather would deserve discussion: but none of them can be answered by a mere yes or no. I am therefore shy of putting on paper any thing which may be supposed to express my opinion, because, there it would stand, I do no know how long, or in what company, and might be quoted as proof of ignorance, when of course it could hardly be proof of any thing else because as I have said I think all well ascertained knowledge is already in the hands of the Iron Masters[.]

Mr. Gibbons I think was at Oxford4 and talked perhaps with Mr. Johnstone [sic] who has some recent expts on steel5. No man can have better opportunities than Mr Gibbon of working & thereby getting the true answers to his queries. Wishing you a cheerful journey

I am | Dear Sir | faithfully Yours | M. Faraday

Capt. Chapman FRS6

John James Chapman (1788-1867, Anon (1891), entry 1279). An officer in the Royal Artillery.
James (1991).
Unidentified.
At the meeting of the British Association.
Reported briefly in Johnston (1833).
This is an error. Chapman was not elected to the Royal Society until 1836.

Bibliography

ANON (1891): List of Officers of the Royal Regiment of Artillery, 3rd edition, London.

JOHNSTON, James Finlay Weir (1833): “Notice of a Method of analysing Carbonaceous Iron”, Rep. Brit. Ass., 400.

Please cite as “Faraday0606,” in Ɛpsilon: The Michael Faraday Collection accessed on 29 April 2024, https://epsilon.ac.uk/view/faraday/letters/Faraday0606