From eighty to a hundred of
the most intelligent members of the society were present at the meeting,
when Mr. Wood stood forward to expound the principles on which the lamp
had been formed, and to describe the details of its construction.
Several questions were put, to which Mr. Wood proceeded to give replies
to the best of his knowledge. But Stephenson, who up to that time had
stood behind Wood, screened from notice, observing that the explanations
given were not quite correct, could no longer control his reserve, and,
standing forward, he proceeded in his strong Northumbrian dialect, to
describe the lamp, down to its minutest details. He then produced
several bladders full of carburetted hydrogen, which he had collected
from the blowers in the Killingworth mine, and proved the safety of his
lamp by numerous experiments with the gas, repeated in various ways; his
earnest and impressive manner exciting in the minds of his auditors the
liveliest interest both in the inventor and his invention.

Shortly after, Sir H. Davy's model lamp was received and exhibited to the
coal-miners at Newcastle, on which occasion the observation was made by
several gentlemen, "Why, it is the same as Stephenson's!"

Notwithstanding Stephenson's claim to be regarded as the first inventor
of the Tube Safety-lamp, his merits do not seem to have been generally
recognised; and Sir Humphry Davy carried off the larger share of the
_eclat_ which attached to the discovery. What chance had the unknown
workman of Killingworth with so distinguished a competitor? The one was
as yet but a colliery engine-wright, scarce raised above the
manual-labour class, pursuing his experiments in obscurity, with a view
only to usefulness; the other was the scientific prodigy of his day, the
most brilliant of lecturers, and the most popular of philosophers.

No small indignation was expressed by the friends of Sir Humphry Davy at
Stephenson's "presumption" in laying claim to the invention of the
safety-lamp. In 1831 Dr. Paris, in his 'Life of Sir Humphry Davy,' thus
wrote:--"It will hereafter be scarcely believed that an invention so
eminently scientific, and which could never have been derived but from
the sterling treasury of science, should have been claimed on behalf of
an engine-wright of Killingworth, of the name of Stephenson--a person not
even possessing a knowledge of the elements of chemistry."

But Stephenson was far above claiming for himself any inv