4th January–1856
My dear Sir
I have read Mr Joule’s paper1 carefully over – What my remarks upon the paper2 in its former state were I do not accurately remember, but a comparison of those remarks with the paper in its present state condition would, I think, shew that what I formerly stated has not been rendered quite nugatory by the recent alterations. Were I permitted to express an opinion I would say that Mr Joule’s eminence as an experimenter might be reasonably accepted as a sufficient guarantee that his communication is fit for the Philosophical Transactions; though I confess my own opinion is that the reputation of Mr Joule would not be increased by the publication of the paper. To my mind the reasoning appears loose, the conclusions do not seem to be in all cases warranted, and the mode of experiment seems doubtful. I say this with extreme reluctance, simply because it is my unpleasant duty to say it; and I hope the council will bear in mind, in forming their estimate of these remarks, that Mr Joule is a far older labourer in the domain to which his paper refers than I am.
I am dear Sir | very truly yours | John Tyndall
Prof, Stokes Sec. R. S.
RS MS RR/3/157
Please cite as “Tyndall1181,” in Ɛpsilon: The John Tyndall Collection accessed on