When the controversy between the relative merits of points and knobs for the terminals of lightning-conductors arose, Franklin wrote to Mr. Kinnersley:—

Here are some electricians that recommend knobs instead of points on the upper end of the rods, from a supposition that the points invite the stroke. It is true that points draw electricity at greater distances in the gradual silent way; but knobs will draw at the greatest distance a stroke. There is an experiment which will settle this. Take a crooked wire of the thickness of a quill, and of such a length as that, one end of it being applied to the lower part of a charged bottle, the upper may be brought near the ball on the top of the wire that is in the bottle. Let one end of this wire be furnished with a knob, and the other may be gradually tapered to a fine point. When the point is presented to discharge the bottle, it must be brought much nearer before it will receive the stroke than the knob requires to be. Points, besides, tend to repel the fragments of an electrical cloud; knobs draw them nearer. An experiment, which I believe I have shown you, of cotton fleece hanging from an electrized body, shows this clearly when a point or a knob is presented under it.

The following quotation from Franklin's paper on the method of securing buildings and persons from the effects of lightning is worthy of attention, for of late years a good deal of money has been wasted in providing insulators for lightning-rods. A few years ago the vicar and churchwardens of a Lincolnshire parish were strongly urged to go to the expense of insulating the conductor throughout the whole height of the very lofty tower and spire of their parish church. Happily they were wise enough to send the lightning-rod man about his business. But this is not the only case which has come under the writer's notice, showing that there is still a widespread impression that lightning-conductors should be carefully insulated. Franklin says:—

"The rod may be fastened to the wall, chimney, etc., with staples of iron. The lightning will not leave the rod (a good conductor) to pass into the wall (a bad conductor) through these staples. It would rather, if any were in the wall, pass out of it into the rod, to get more readily by that conductor into the earth."[2]

[ [2] See p. [141].

The conditions to be secured in a lightning-conductor are, firstly, a sharp point projecting above the highest part of the building, and gilded to prevent corrosion; secondly, metallic continuity from the point to the lower end of the conductor; and, thirdly, a good earth-contact. The last can frequently be secured by soldering the conductor to iron water-pipes underground. Where these are not available, a copper plate, two or three feet square, imbedded in clay or other damp earth, will serve the purpose. The method of securing a building which is erected on granite or other foundation affording no good earth-connection, will be referred to in a subsequent biographical sketch.

The controversy of points versus knobs was again revived in London when Franklin was in Paris, and the War of Independence had begun. Franklin was consulted on the subject, the question having arisen in connection with the conductor at the palace. His reply was characteristic.

"As to my writing anything on the subject, which you seem to desire, I think it not necessary, especially as I have nothing to add to what I have already said upon it in a paper read to the committee who ordered the conductors at Purfleet, which paper is printed in the last French edition of my writings.

"I have never entered into any controversy in defence of my philosophical opinions. I leave them to take their chance in the world. If they are right, truth and experience will support them; if wrong, they ought to be refuted and rejected. Disputes are apt to sour one's temper and disturb one's quiet. I have no private interest in the reception of my inventions by the world, having never made, nor proposed to make, the least profit by any of them. The king's changing his pointed conductors for blunt ones is, therefore, a matter of small importance to me. If I had a wish about it, it would be that he had rejected them altogether as ineffectual. For it is only since he thought himself and family safe from the thunder of Heaven, that he dared to use his own thunder in destroying his innocent subjects."

The paper referred to was read before "the committee appointed to consider the erecting conductors to secure the magazines at Purfleet," on August 27, 1772. It described a variety of experiments clearly demonstrating the effect of points in discharging a conductor. This was a committee of the Royal Society, to whom the question had been referred on account of Dr. Wilson's recommendation of a blunt conductor. The committee decided in favour of Franklin's view, and when, in 1777, the question was again raised and again referred to a committee of the Royal Society, the decision of the former committee was confirmed, "conceiving that the experiments and reasons made and alleged to the contrary by Mr. Wilson are inconclusive."