Experiments and Observations on Different Kinds of AirPriestley, Joseph
History
Experiments and Observations on Different Kinds of Air
Priestley, Joseph
Air -- Early works to 1800; Chemistry -- Early works to 1800
I was particularly surprised, to meet with such an opinion as this, in a
book inscribed to yourself, who have so clearly explained the great
mischief of such a situation, in your excellent treatise _on the
diseases of the army_. On this account, I have thought it not improper,
to address to you the following observations and experiments, which I
think clearly demonstrate the fallacy of Dr. Alexander's reasoning,
indisputably establish your doctrine, and indeed justify the
apprehensions of all mankind in this case.
I think it probable enough, that putrid matter, as Dr. Alexander has
endeavoured to prove, will preserve other substances from putrefaction;
because, being already saturated with the putrid effluvium, it cannot
readily take any more; but Dr. Alexander was not aware, that air thus
loaded with putrid effluvium is exceedingly noxious when taken into the
lungs. I have lately, however, had an opportunity of fully ascertaining
how very noxious such air is.
Happening to use at Calne, a much larger trough of water, for the
purpose of my experiments, than I had done at Leeds, and not having
fresh water so near at hand as I had there, I neglected to change it,
till it turned black, and became offensive, but by no means to such a
degree, as to deter me from making use of it. In this state of the
water, I observed bubbles of air to rise from it, and especially in one
place, to which some shelves, that I had in it, directed them; and
having set an inverted glass vessel to catch them, in a few days I
collected, a considerable quantity of this air, which issued
spontaneously from the putrid water; and putting nitrous air to it, I
found that no change of colour or diminution ensued, so that it must
have been, in the highest degree, noxious. I repeated the same
experiment several times afterwards, and always with the same result.
After this, I had the curiosity to try how wholesome air would be
affected by this water; when, to my real surprise, I found, that after
only one minute's agitation in it, a candle would not burn in it; and,
after three or four minutes, it was in the same state with the air,
which had issued spontaneously from the same water.
I also found, that common air, confined in a glass vessel, in _contact_
only with this water, and without any agitation, would not admit a
candle to burn in it after two days.
These facts certainly demonstrate, that air which either arises from
stagnant and putrid water, or which has been for some time in contact
with it, must be very unfit for respiration; and yet Dr. Alexander's
opinion is rendered so plausible by his experiments, that it is very
possible that many persons may be rendered secure, and thoughtless of
danger, in a situation in which they must necessarily breathe it. On
this account, I have thought it right to make this communication as
early as I conveniently could; and as Dr. Alexander appears to be an
ingenuous and benevolent man, I doubt not but he will thank me for it.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account