In a communication published in the first volume of the Royal Institution Journal, Davy offers the following observations upon this subject: "With regard to Iodine, the first I had of it was from M. Ampère, who, before I had seen the substance, supposed that it might contain a new supporter of combustion. "Who had most share in developing the chemical history of that body, must be determined by a review of the papers that have been published upon it, and by an examination of their respective dates. When M. Clement showed Iodine to me, he believed that the hydriodic acid was muriatic acid; and M. Gay-Lussac, after his early experiments, made originally with M. Clement, formed the same opinion, and _maintained_ it, when I _first_ stated to him my belief that it was a new and peculiar acid, and that Iodine was a substance analogous in its chemical relations to Chlorine." I was very desirous of ascertaining the feeling which at present prevails amongst the French chemists upon this subject; and I therefore requested Mr. Underwood to make such enquiries as might elicit the required information. In a letter from that gentleman, dated "Paris, August 22, 1830," he says, "Though Thénard and Gay-Lussac retain great bitterness of feeling towards Davy, on account of the affair of Iodine, Chevreul and Ampère are still, as they ever were, of opinion, that such a feeling has its origin in a misconception; that what Davy did, was from the honest desire of promoting science, and not from any wish to detract from the merit of the French chemists." During his visit to Paris, Davy was not introduced to the Emperor. Lady Davy observed to me, that, although Sir Humphry felt justly grateful for the indulgence granted to him as a Philosopher, he never, for a moment, forgot the duty he owed his country as a Patriot; and that he objected to attend the levee of her bitterest enemy. On the other hand, it is said that Napoleon never expressed any wish to receive the English chemist; and those who seek in the depths for that which floats upon the surface, have racked their imaginations in order to discover the source of this mysterious indifference; but I apprehend that we have only to revert to the political state of Europe in the year 1813, and the problem will be solved. Amongst the reasons for supposing that the Emperor must have felt ill disposed towards the English philosopher, the following story has been told; which, as an anecdote, is sufficiently amusing; and I can state upon the highest authority, that it is moreover perfectly true.