CHAPTER IV.

GRADUAL SPREAD OF LIGHTNING CONDUCTORS IN EUROPE.

In singular contrast with the burst of applause with which the whole

scientific world of Europe received the great discovery of Benjamin

Franklin, was the extreme slowness of the actual introduction

into Europe of lightning conductors. The opposition they met

with in Franklin’s own country was trifling to that which they

encountered in the principal states of Europe, more particularly

in England and France. It was natural, perhaps, that the lower

classes--ultra-conservative, through the mere effect of ignorance, in

every country in the world--should see danger in the setting-up of

iron rods which, as they were told, drew lightning from the skies;

and it was, perhaps, equally natural that religious fanatics should

regard them with extreme suspicion, as removing one of their imagined

instruments of heaven for punishing sinful mortals. Both these classes,

the untaught multitude and the bigoted zealots, opposed in Europe,

as they did in America, the establishment of lightning conductors;

but to the strength of these parties was unexpectedly added a third

in a not numerous but powerful section of learned literary men. They

were chiefly French, but had many adherents in England, as well as in

Germany, the _savants_ of both countries looking then upon France as

the seat of all science, and indeed human knowledge.

The opposition raised against lightning conductors in France was

entirely personal, its origin being due to the wounded vanity of a

very estimable but likewise a very weak man, the already mentioned

Abbé Nollet. Born in 1700, the Abbé had very early in life gained

renown for his scientific researches, and after a while devoted much

of his time to electrical experiments, in conjunction with two other

celebrated men, Dufay and De Réaumur. When the report of Franklin’s

discoveries arrived in Europe, the Abbé Nollet was generally looked

upon as the greatest of living ‘electricians,’ and the general homage

paid to him having roused his self-esteem to an inordinate degree, he

got fiercely irritated that another man, a previously quite unknown

person, in a distant land, should have dared to snatch from him his

scientific laurels. Accordingly, he used all his influence among the

public, in the scientific world, and at the French court, where he held

a high position as tutor of the King’s children, not only to depreciate

Franklin’s lightning conductors, but to set them down as something like

an imposture. In various treatises and articles published in learned

papers, Abbé Nollet sought to prove that the person called Benjamin

Franklin--in whose very existence he formerly refused to believe, but

which he now grudgingly acknowledged--was an individual unacquainted

even with the first principles of the science of electricity, and that

his proposal for protecting houses against lightning was so absurd

as not to be worth engaging the attention of any thinking man. More

than this, he argued that the proposed lightning conductors were not

only inefficacious, but positively dangerous. By thus joining in the

vulgar cry of lightning being, so to speak, sucked from the clouds

by Franklin’s conductors, the learned Abbé had the satisfaction of

retarding their introduction in his own, as well as other European

countries, for a number of years.

In France itself the thus awakened resistance to the setting-up of

lightning conductors was strikingly shown by an incident which occurred

at the town of St. Omer, not far from Calais. A manufacturer settled

here, who had been in America, and there learnt to appreciate the

usefulness of Franklin’s lightning conductors, had one made for his

own house, and quietly fixed it to wall and roof. But the populace no

sooner heard of it when there arose a public disturbance, and the iron

rod was torn down by force. So far from repressing the rioters, the

municipality of St. Omer, acting under priestly influence, forbade the

manufacturer to erect another lightning conductor, on the ground that

it was ‘against law and religion.’ Thereupon the bold manufacturer, a

man of English descent, to try his right, appealed to the tribunals,

and the judges at last, after protracted pleadings, not being able to

discover any statutes against the fastening of metal rods to buildings,

declared that the thing might be done, but with precautions. The lawyer

who pleaded the case of the lightning conductors before the French

tribunals at this momentous period was a very young man, quite unknown

to fame at the time, but destined for a superabundance of it. His name

was Robespierre.

Perhaps the violent opposition which the erection of lightning

conductors--or ‘Franklin rods,’ as they were often called--met almost

everywhere, would have proved more effective than it ultimately turned

out, had not the great discoverer himself showed admirable temper in

meeting his enemies, thus pouring oil upon the stormy waters. His

calmness and confidence is admirably shown in a letter, dated July 2,

1768, addressed to Professor John Winthrop, of Cambridge, in answer to

one in which astonishment was expressed at the ‘force of prejudice,

even in an age of so much knowledge and free inquiry,’ of not placing

lightning conductors upon all elevated buildings. Franklin--or he must

now be called Dr. Franklin, having received the degrees of LL. D.

and D. C. L. from the universities of St. Andrew’s, Edinburgh, and

Oxford--was residing in England at the time, as agent of the people of

Pennsylvania. He was thoroughly acquainted with the state of public

feeling, yet so far from being angry, smiled down upon it like a

true philosopher. ‘It is perhaps not so extraordinary,’ he wrote to

his friend, ‘that unlearned men, such as commonly compose our church

vestries, should not yet be acquainted with, and sensible of, the

benefits of metal conductors in averting the stroke of lightning, and

preserving our houses from its violent effects, or that they should

still be prejudiced against the use of such conductors, when we see

how long even philosophers, men of science and of great ingenuity, can

hold out against the evidence of new knowledge that does not square

with their preconceptions; and how long men can retain a practice that

is conformable to their prejudices, and expect a benefit from such

practice, though constant experience shows its inutility. A late piece

of the Abbé Nollet, printed last year in the Memoirs of the French

Academy of Sciences, affords strong instances of this; for though

the very relations he gives of the effects of lightning in several

churches and other buildings show clearly that it was conducted from

one part to another by wires, gildings, and other pieces of metal

that were _within_, or connected with the building, yet in the same

paper he objects to the providing of metallic conductors _without_ the

building, as useless or dangerous. He cautions people not to ring the

church bells during a thunderstorm, lest the lightning, in its way to

the earth, should be conducted down to them by the bell ropes, which

are but bad conductors; and yet he is against fixing metal rods on the

outside of the steeple, which are known to be much better conductors,

and through which lightning would certainly choose to pass, rather than

through dry hemp. And though, for a thousand years past, church bells

have been solemnly consecrated by the Romish Church, in expectation

that the sound of such blessed bells would drive away thunderstorms,

and secure buildings from the stroke of lightning; and, during so long

a period, it has not been found by experience, that places within

the reach of such blessed sound are safer than others where it is

never heard, but that, on the contrary, the lightning seems to strike

steeples by choice, and at the very time the bells are ringing, yet

still they continue to bless the new bells, and jangle the old ones

whenever it thunders.’

‘One would think,’ continues Dr. Franklin, with exquisite humour,

‘that it was now time to try some other trick. Ours is recommended,

whatever the able French philosopher may say to the contrary, by more

than twelve years’ experience, during which, among the great number of

houses furnished with iron rods in North America, not one so guarded

has been materially hurt by lightning, and many have been evidently

preserved by their means; while a number of houses, churches, barns,

ships, &c., in different places, unprovided with rods, have been struck

and greatly damaged, demolished, or burnt. Probably, the vestries of

English churches are not generally well acquainted with these facts;

otherwise, since as good Protestants they have no faith in the blessing

of bells, they would be less excusable in not providing this other

security for their respective churches, and for the good people that

may happen to be assembled in them during a tempest, especially as

these buildings, from their greater height, are more exposed to the

stroke of lightning than our common dwellings.’

While Franklin thus wrote of ‘the great number of houses furnished with

iron rods in North America,’ there was not a single public building

so protected in England. Several private persons had adopted them for

their houses, following the example of Dr. William Watson--subsequently

Sir William--vice-president of the Royal Society, who had been the

first to set up a lightning conductor in England, erecting one over

his cottage at Payneshill, near London, in 1762. But notwithstanding

the evident utility of the ‘Franklin rods,’ they were refused where

they were most wanted--for larger buildings, and particularly for

churches. The ‘unlearned men, such as commonly compose our church

vestries,’ openly declared against them, and among the clergy there

was a steady, if often silent, antagonism to their introduction. The

first movement towards its being upset was given by an occurrence which

caused much commotion, and gave rise to a vast amount of discussion.

On Sunday, June 18, 1764, a few minutes before three in the afternoon,

the splendid steeple of St. Bride’s Church, in the city of London, one

of the architectural monuments of Sir Christopher Wren, was struck by

lightning, the flash being intensely vivid, blinding several people.

The damage done was so serious that about ninety feet of the steeple

had to be taken down entirely, while great and expensive repairs

were required for the rest. Dr. Watson, as the first introducer, so

one of the chief promoters of Franklin’s invention in England, took

this opportunity of publishing in the ‘Philosophical Transactions’

a detailed account of the effects of lightning upon St. Bride’s

steeple, explaining the potency of conductors in the very action of the

electric force. He showed how the lightning first struck the metallic

weathercock at the top of the steeple, and ran down, without injuring

anything, the large iron bars by which it was supported. At the bottom

of the bars, the electric force shattered a number of huge stones into

fragments, to make its way to some other pieces of iron, inserted into

the walls to give them strength. So it went on till there were no more

metals, when havoc and destruction became the greatest. Thus, as Dr.

Watson conclusively proved, the beautiful steeple of St. Bride was

wilfully made over to ruin for want of a few hundred yards of iron, or

other metal, which would lead the electric force harmlessly from the

weathercock on the summit into the earth. He finished by telling in

the plainest terms, to all on whom devolved the duty of taking care of

churches, that it was neglectful, even to criminality, not to protect

them by conductors against the always imminent danger of being struck

by lightning.

The lay-sermon of Dr. Watson, deeply impressive by the power of the

indisputable facts on which it was based, had a considerable effect

in rousing public opinion, finding its way even into the dull ears of

‘such as commonly compose church vestries.’ Among the most important

results was a step taken, after long and solemn deliberations,

extending over several years, by the Dean and Chapter of St. Paul’s.

They made an application to the Royal Society, asking for advice as

to the best means of protecting the great cathedral, Sir Christopher

Wren’s noblest creation, against the perils of lightning. The

application was made on March 22, 1769, as recorded under that date in

the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine.’ ‘A letter from the Dean and Chapter of St.

Paul’s,’ it was stated, ‘was read at the Royal Society, requesting the

direction of that learned body for the sudden effects of lightning.

It was referred to a committee consisting of Dr. Franklyn (_sic_),

Dr. Watson, Mr. Canton, Mr. Edward Delaval, and Mr. Wilson, who,

after having examined the building, are to report their opinion.’ The

committee thus nominated embraced all the most eminent men of the

day who had studied the phenomena of electricity, and in the order

in which they ranked. Next to the great discoverer of the lightning

conductor himself, Dr. Watson could claim to stand; and next to him Mr.

John Canton, a most painstaking and intelligent worker in the field,

inventor of the pith-ball electrometer, and other instruments.

But a curious element of discord pervaded from the first this small

conclave of learned men, chosen to decide the not unimportant question

as to the best means of providing the cathedral of St. Paul with

lightning conductors. That the noble building should be so protected,

all were agreed; and it was clearly understood, besides, that if once

St. Paul’s had lightning conductors, all the other cathedrals and

principal churches of England would follow suit. What they differed

upon was not this, but the best form of lightning conductors.

Franklin’s steadfast assertion that points to the elevated rods were

not only far preferable to any other form of conductors, but the only

really protective ones, was adopted by Dr. Watson and Mr. Canton; but

they were opposed by Mr. Wilson, who asserted, with some degree of

vehemence, that points were dangerous, and that balls on the summit of

the rods afforded infinitely better protection. Standing alone in this

view among the eminent members of the committee of the Royal Society,

his arguments naturally had no effect, and the recommendation to the

Dean and Chapter of St. Paul’s was to protect the cathedral by pointed

lightning conductors. This was done accordingly. ‘Franklin rods’ were

attached to Wren’s splendid structure, worthy to be the introducer of

them, on a large scale, in Europe.

The dispute as to pointed conductors, or balls, was by no means brought

to a termination by the decision that was come to regarding St. Paul’s.

Endless pamphlets were published on the subject, and it went so far as

to being turned into a political question. As priests scented heresy

in the daring attempt to draw lightning from the clouds, so the court

faction and ultra-conservatives of England smelt republicanism in the

erection of iron rods designed by the representative of the disaffected

American colonies. The king was understood to have given his own high

opinion entirely against points, and in favour of balls, declaring his

preference by ordering a cannon ball of large size to be placed on

the top of a conductor erected over the royal palace at Kew. Meeting

such high patronage, the ‘anti-Franklinians’ only sought an occasion

to break out into open scientific warfare, and they were not long in

finding it. On May 15, 1777, a large public building at Purfleet, on

the Thames, serving as a storehouse for war material, was struck and

greatly damaged by lightning, although protected by a pointed lightning

conductor. Thereupon arose an instant outcry against the system

advocated by Dr. Franklin. From much evidence adduced, there could be

no doubt that the building at Purfleet had been hurt simply because the

conductor was defective in parts, and was besides not laid deep enough

into the ground; still this did not stop the clamour raised. Chiefly

through the agitation of Mr. Wilson, the members of the Royal Society

entered into hot discussions about the respective merits of pointed

and round conductors. The feeling of the partisans of the latter side

ran so high on this occasion, that Sir John Pringle had to resign the

presidency of the Royal Society, which post he had ably filled since

1772, for making himself an advocate of points against balls. When the

fever of the learned men had cooled down a little, it was resolved to

settle the great question of points _versus_ balls by a series of

experiments, to be held in the Pantheon, a large building in Oxford

Street, dome-like in the interior. The arrangement, in fact, carried

out under the direction of Mr. Wilson, leader of the ‘ball’ party, was

to create an artificial thunderstorm--or, as it should properly be

called, ‘lightning storm’--by means of powerful electrical batteries,

to be discharged upon conductors of various forms. His Majesty George

III., greatly interested in the subject, and cherishing fond hopes that

cannon-balls would carry off the victory in the scientific dispute,

as well as in the graver political one with Franklin’s countrymen,

undertook to pay all the expenses of the Pantheon experiments, and

they took place accordingly on an elaborate scale. But though prepared

entirely with a view of showing the inefficiency of Dr. Franklin’s

points, they proved absolutely the contrary. Artificial, like real,

lightning clearly showed its preference for a lancet over a ball; it

would glide down the former quietly, but fall heavily, mostly with an

explosion, upon the latter. However, the question being in reality less

a scientific controversy than a dispute arising from the fiery heat

of political passions, it was by no means set at rest by the Pantheon

trials. ‘Franklin rods’ were more than ever abhorred by a multitude of

persons, learned and unlearned, after the great citizen of Philadelphia

had set his hand, on July 4, 1776, to the declaration of independence

of the ‘United States of America,’ and more than a quarter of a century

had to elapse, a new generation of men growing up, before there arose

clear and unimpassioned views about lightning conductors.

While thus the battle of the rods was being fought in England, it raged

no less hotly on the continent of Europe. Here there was religious

prejudice alone at work, the political sympathies running in favour

of anything coming from America. But priestly animosity by itself

proved as strong an obstacle as any other to the erection of lightning

conductors. Where it did not exist, they sprang up with rapidity; but

wherever its influence was felt, the movement was arrested. In the

most enlightened parts of Germany, the seat and home of Protestantism,

the ‘Franklin rods’ early made their appearance. The first lightning

conductor set up over a public building in Europe was erected early

in 1769 on the steeple of the church of St. Jacob, Hamburg; and so

rapid was the spread of them that, at the end of five years from

this date, there were estimated to be over seven hundred conductors

within a circle of ten miles of the old Hanse town. To this day

they are comparatively more numerous in this district than anywhere

else in Europe. In contrast with Northern Protestant Germany, the

Roman Catholic South refused the ‘Franklin rods,’ and so did France,

although making a hero of Franklin personally. For many years after

young Robespierre pleaded the case of lightning conductors before the

tribunal of St. Omer, the strongest abhorrence to them was expressed

by the priests and their mob following in almost all parts of France,

and the active antagonism did not cease till after the outbreak of the

great revolution.

It was the same in most countries of southern and central Europe. Even

in Geneva, famous for the enlightenment of its citizens, the populace

made an attempt to pull down the first lightning conductor. It was

erected, in the summer of 1771, by the celebrated naturalist, Professor

Horace de Saussure, over his own house, after directions furnished

by Dr. Franklin. But notwithstanding that the professor was himself

highly respected, his lightning conductor created general abhorrence,

and to appease it he found it necessary to issue a public address or

‘manifesto,’ as he called it, to his fellow-citizens. The address,

dated November 21, 1771, was strangely characteristic of the times. ‘I

hear with regret,’ Professor de Saussure declared, ‘that the conductor

which I have placed over my house to protect it against lightning, as

well as to observe, occasionally, the electricity of the clouds, has

spread terror among many persons, who seem to fear that by this means

I draw upon the heads of others those dangers from which I myself

wish to escape. Now, I beg you to believe that I would never have

decided upon erecting this apparatus, if I had not been fully persuaded

both of its harmlessness and its utility. There is no possibility of

its causing damage to my own house, or of doing harm to others. All

those who are now labouring under fear would be precisely of the same

opinion, if they had entered upon the same inquiries to which I am

called in the course of my studies.’ After which the professor goes

on minutely to describe the ‘electric conductor,’ which he had been

bold enough to place over his house, dwelling upon the fact of its

having protected, as he believed, already his own residence from being

struck by lightning, and of having been found, likewise, universally

efficacious in the same manner in ‘the English colonies of North

America.’ The citizens of Geneva, much given to reasoning, earnestly

read and studied the ‘manifesto’ of Professor de Saussure, and the

consequence was, not only that he was spared further attacks and

reproaches, but that there arose soon over the churches and houses of

the town some hundreds of lightning conductors.

In Italy the progress in the erection of conductors was accompanied

by some very curious incidents. The priests here, as in other Roman

Catholic countries, actively opposed their introduction, and to do

so more effectively, they craftily attached to them a stinging name,

calling them ‘heretical rods.’ As a consequence, the mob fiercely

opposed the putting-up of any such accursed pieces of metal, and

whenever the attempt was made to fasten them to houses, it met

with forcible opposition. However, some of the highly accomplished

professors of the universities of Italy, enthusiastic in their

reception of Franklin’s discovery, proved themselves victorious

over both priests and mob. They got the Grand Duke Leopold of

Tuscany--subsequently German Emperor, under the title of Leopold I.--a

man of high scientific acquirements, to place lightning conductors

over his own palace, as well as over all the powder magazines in his

dominions. Here the mob and priest rule ceased, and only silent

curses could be levelled against the ‘heretical rods.’ Another still

more important step in advance was made by the influence of the

Abbé Giuseppe Toaldo, a warm admirer of Franklin, in correspondence

with him, and author of various scientific works, among them one on

lightning conductors. He had some influence with the ecclesiastical

authorities at Siena, in Tuscany, and brought it to bear upon them by

getting them to consent to make trial, in a manner so as not to excite

public attention, of one of the ‘heretical rods,’ over the cathedral.

This was only permitted on account of the extreme danger in which the

edifice stood, having been struck several times by lightning, and

greatly damaged. Placed on the summit of the highest of the three hills

on which stands the ancient city of Siena, the cathedral was opposed

to the dangers brought in the womb of every passing thunderstorm, and

they were all the greater as the building, erected by Pisano in the

thirteenth century, was deemed to be priceless, being one of the most

magnificent structures of the kind in Italy, of red and white marble,

filled with the choicest specimens of art, statues, pictures, gold and

jewelry. It seemed well worth risking a little heresy to guard such

treasures.

Very silently, in the dark of night, the priests of the Siena

cathedral, directed by Abbé Toaldo, laid their iron rods along the

walls of the building, but inside, planting them deep into the

ground, and with the pointed summit only a few feet above the highest

point of the steeple, so as to be scarcely perceptible from below by

the naked eye. Still the secret of what had been done could not be

entirely kept from the multitude. Some of the workmen, engaged in the

operation of fixing the iron rods to the inner walls and steeple of the

cathedral, whispered about what they had been doing, trembling at the

evil consequences of their work, notwithstanding having received full

absolution from their employers. Murmurs were now heard everywhere,

and there were signs of a popular outbreak, just when one of the many

thunderstorms regularly visiting the mountain city crept over it on

April 18, 1777. Portentously the black clouds laid themselves thicker

and thicker over the high cathedral, till all the people of Siena

crept forth from their houses, awaiting in breathless expectation the

terrors to come. Then the dark masses discharged their fiery streams;

flash followed flash, till one, a long hissing tongue of flame, fell

down upon the cathedral steeple, distinctly visible to thousands

of beholders. A few minutes after, a ray of sunshine pierced the

dark clouds, and to the bewildering astonishment of the masses, the

cathedral was standing there absolutely unhurt. As if to exhibit its

wonderful power, the gilded point of the lightning conductor stood

out brilliantly in the sun, pointing in radiant silence up to heaven.

‘Maraviglia, maraviglia!’ cried people and priests in chorus. High

mass was held forthwith in the wonderfully preserved cathedral, and

on the same day the magistrates of Siena went into the town hall and

had a record made in the book containing the annals of the city, to

make known to all posterity that their noble cathedral had just been

preserved from destruction by the astounding influence of an ‘heretical

rod.’ Though not in the least intended to be sarcastic, the irony could

not have been more complete.

There was a most remarkable historical concurrence between the gradual

introduction of lightning conductors into Europe and that of the art of

vaccination. Both the great scientific discoveries had the same end in

view for the benefit of mankind, the one teaching the art of drawing

the dangerous electric fire of the clouds harmlessly into the earth,

and the other that of extracting the poisonous seed of disease from

the human body. Both were brought forward with the noblest intentions;

and both encountered the most violent opposition from religious

fanatics, the same in substance, as interfering with the decrees of

Providence, and the ordained wrath of heaven. Both triumphed in the

end, and almost exactly at the same time, though the battle of the

great medical discovery lasted longer, and was more fiercely fought

than that of Franklin’s invention. To make the analogy between the

progress of lightning conductors and of vaccination complete, it so

happened that in at least one conspicuous instance the same man was

an important agent in forwarding the success of both discoveries. The

person in question was Dr. Johan Ingenhousz, a native of Breda, in the

Netherlands, born in 1730. A man of great natural gifts, he came to

England when about thirty years of age, practising as a physician, and

attending specially to the so-called Suttonian method of inoculation

against the small-pox, then an entirely new branch of medical science.

At the same time he eagerly embarked in electrical experiments, got

into correspondence with Benjamin Franklin, and, having made many

friends, was elected a fellow of the Royal Society in 1769. Recommended

to the king, Dr. Ingenhousz became a favourite at court, owing chiefly

to his perfect knowledge of German, which resulted in his being

recommended to a highly profitable as well as distinguished mission.

The famous Imperial lady, the Elizabeth of her age, Maria Theresa of

Austria, had read of the benefits of vaccination, then chiefly known in

England, and wishing to confer them on her own family and friends, she

asked King George the Third to recommend to her some able physician,

who could come to Vienna for the purpose. His Majesty at once named Dr.

Johan Ingenhousz, a recommendation warmly supported by the President of

the Royal Society, Sir John Pringle, who had taken an affection for the

young Dutch physician on account of his electrical researches, which

had resulted in the invention of a novel apparatus, subsequently known

as the plate electrical machine.

Dr. Ingenhousz set out for Vienna in 1772, was received with marked

honours by the great Empress, and having done his work, and wishing to

visit Italy, received an autograph letter of Maria Theresa to her son,

Grand Duke Leopold of Tuscany. At the court of this enlightened prince,

Dr. Ingenhousz resided for some time, practising vaccination, but also

engaged in electrical experiments, which created the greatest interest.

It was partly by his advice that the Grand Duke consented, in the

teeth of desperate priestly opposition, to erect one of Franklin’s

lightning conductors over his own palace, and to set them up likewise

for the protection of all the powder magazines in Tuscany. This done,

Dr. Ingenhousz went forward to Padua, invited by some of the professors

of the university, and by the famous senator of Venice, Angelo Querini,

who had a magnificent palace in the neighbourhood of the city. In this

palace, bearing the name of Altichiera, the ‘English doctor,’ as he

was called, was made to reside, practising vaccination, the same as

at the court of Florence, but following as a favourite occupation the

setting-up of ‘heretical rods.’ Altichiera itself had the first erected

in May 1774, and soon after Dr. Ingenhousz had the satisfaction of

planting another over the astronomical observatory of the university

of Padua, in the presence of an enormous crowd of students who lustily

applauded, and of an angry multitude, kept in the background less by

persuasion than the strong arms of the young men. As at Siena, so at

Padua, the mob became pacified not long after by seeing the lightning

fall upon the observatory, much exposed by its situation, and which had

often been struck before, without doing the least damage. From Padua,

Dr. Ingenhousz went to Venice, in company of his friend and patron,

Senator Angelo Querini. Here his efforts to spread the knowledge of

lightning conductors, together with vaccination, had the best results.

The church of St. Mark and other public buildings were surmounted

before long by the awe-striking ‘heretical rods,’ and on May 9, 1778,

the Senate of Venice issued a decree ordering the erection of lightning

conductors throughout the republic. It was the first recognition of the

value of conductors by any government of Europe, or, indeed, of the

world.

Lightning Conductors: Their History, Nature, and Mode of Application · 第 4 / 16 章