From William Francis   Dec. 1850¹

Red Lion Court. | Dec. 1850.

My dear Tyndall,

I have been passing the last few days at Brighton in order to escape a little of the London fog² which will account, I hope satisfactorily, for my long silence; and now I find I have so much to write about that I hardly know with what to commence. You talk of the difficulties of editorial life,³ but it has also its pleasures. To the Magazine I owe much for making me acquainted with many friends and many a pleasant letter, such for instance as accompanied the return of Donovan and Phillips’ MSS.⁴ It is fortunate for you that you are destined to emigrate, otherwise I should certainly request you to allow your name to figure on the wrapper of the Magazine that you might partake not only of the troubles. With respect to Donovan’s paper⁵ I quite agree with you as to its value and the absurdity of attempting to assign a distinct cause for every fact; but as you truly observe the Magazine has a commercial as well as a scientific aspect and in order to print the good papers it is sometimes necessary to give one of little or no value. I have therefore decided upon printing it especially as I found that course would be most agreeable to Mr Taylor’s feelings from his being an old correspondent and moreover likely to interest many who do not plunge deep into the mysteries of science and amuse some that do.

Woods also will be printed.⁶ In writing to him I informed him that the objections would probably appear in the next following Number⁷ but I leave this for you to determine and will therefore furnish you with a duplicate proof of his paper as soon as it is in type. You will then be able to put your objections into proper form and give them either as a separate paper or if you wish to preserve the incog. append them to his paper in the form of an editorial note. This morning I received a note from him complaining of Thomson who in his Mechanical Theory of Electrolysis 2nd paragraph⁸ states as one of his grounds of argument that decomposition causes the absorption of as much heat as combination produces without alluding to Dr Wood’s paper. He asks how Prof. Thomson found this out; if he proved it himself he ought to say how – I shall advise him to put the question to Prof. Thomson himself.

In stating the objection you made to Reuben Phillips’ view⁹ on molecular polarization I availed myself of the opportunity of telling him what you mentioned with respect to the application of his ingenuity in the hope it might do him some good – He took it kindly but declined to modify his views – I however send you his note and as soon as the foot-note alluded to is in type will furnish you with that also that you may see what answer he makes¹⁰ to the objection.

And now a few words with respect to Hunt. The review I think will do exceedingly well and I return you many thanks for it – I had more than a suspicion when I sent you the book that you would find it a most miserable production; and from the opinions I have heard expressed by others I think you have been pretty merciful.¹¹ I had much rather he had not written the book for to me it is most disagreeable to have to print any thing unfavourable to an author; but in the present case I consider it my duty to print the review for it is scandalous that a person so unfit should have been appointed by Government to teach Mechanics and Physics to the rising generation of miners – I have long thought the author to be a conceited person and do not feel any inclination to spare him. Mr Hunt should stick to the Poetry of Science¹² and not expose himself to be more than laughed at. From his Introductory Lecture¹³ you would fancy him to be a most wonderful man; although people do say that the glass covering at Kew is a miserable failure.¹⁴

With this I inclose proofs of your Report on Magnus¹⁵ and also a portion of Schlagintweit – It is absolutely requisite that I should make some attempt to get rid of the latter, otherwise it will become stale. I therefore propose, subject to your approval, to bring it out, at least a part, this month; ¹⁶ and to leave Magnus over to form the first Article in the February Number, but the contrary can be done just as easily if you consider it advisable or if it should be most agreeable to you that Magnus should appear without delay – Pray let me know your wishes on the subject. In Magnus’s paper there are several references to figures to which queries are attached. Figs 1,2, and 9 of the orig. I suspect you do not consider necessary and I hope it may be so, as those referred to by you will just fill an Octavo plate – I shall not place them in the Engraver’s hands until I learn from you whether my supposition be correct.

I also inclose copies of the Introductory Lectures delivered at the School of Mines¹⁷ thinking they might interest you – Should you in perusing them find anything worth noticing for the Magazine I should be glad to devote a page or two to the subject. Forbes and Playfair’s¹⁸ seem to be good but I can’t say that I altogether approve of the way they run down the study of the Classics – They appear to me just as one sided as the people at Oxford and Cambridge, and although I consider the study of Natural History most excellent, I do not exactly see that it is necessary to understand Zoology to be a miner. It should be as in Germany. Teach both at the High Schools. Undoubtedly there are too many people even among the educated classes who are totally ignorant of the very first principles of the Physical and Chemical Sciences, but that is no reason for casting a slur upon the cultivation of other departments of knowledge.

But enough, I fear before you have half got through this scrawl your patience will be sadly tried and you will set me down as a great bore. Yours most sincerely. William Francis.

RI MS JT/1/TYP/12/3978–3979

LT Transcript Only