O^ MURIATIC ETHEHi |g| 



ft'ear ^)0 litres of tthereoiis gas must have been produced in 



this (Experiment, and near 250 gram, of acid have disappeared N<2arly the 

 . . !. • , . , r , • , whole of the 



m the first instance, yet the whole ot the acid, except 4- gram, acid repro- 



[62 grs.] reappeared in the rcdhot tube, and were dissolved ^"c^* 



in the last two bottles of the apparatus. "^ 



Thus of all the suppositions above made, which are the The elements 



only ones that can reasonably be formed Considering the mu- therefore exist 



riaiic acid as a compound, there is only one admissible ; in the gas, if it 



which is, that the elements of the muriatic acid exist in the ^ ^ ^°'^" 



, . , . pound. 



ethereous gas combined with those of the alcohol, in the same 



manner as the elements of water, carbonic acid, ammonia, 



&LC., exist in vegetable and animal substances. 



But if we suppose the muriatic acid to be a simple sub- Supposition 

 ., • 1 ^1 ^1 that the acid 



stance, we must necessarily consider the ethereous gas as jj..^gijj^p]^gjy{^ 



formed of muriatic acid and alcohol, or as a substance de- stance, 

 rived from the decoiiiposition of the alcohol : for perhaps the 

 alcohol is decomposed when we distill it with muriatic acid, 

 at least this will easily be seen by and by. The question there- 

 fore being reduced to a choice between these two hypotheses, 

 let us endeavour as far as possible to discuss their weight. 



The latter presents us witli phenomena very diflicult to ex- Difficulties 

 plain* In fact we must suppose that the alcohol, or the prin- obSc'tecf to^it. 

 ciple it contains, acts on the muriatic acid with much more 

 energy than the strcmgest alkali ; since this alkali cannot take 

 the acid from it, and muriate of potash, as I shall hereafter 

 uhow, contains less acid than the ethereous gas. How too can 

 \ve conceive, that nitrate of silver, which takes the whole of 

 the muriatic acid from muriate of potash, cannot take any" 

 from the ethereous gas, which contains still more? 



On the other supposition, on the contrary, every thing is The other 

 naturally explained. We see why the ethereous gas does not naturally ac- 



11 ^ ■ r ■ 'T I 11T1 yv • COUntS fof 



redden the intusion or litmus; why alkalis do not aflect it ; every thing, 

 why nitrate of silver does not produce a precipitate with it; 

 and why on burning it so large a quantity of muriatic acid is 

 generated, that it appears in the surrounding air in the form of 

 vapour: in short every thing is reconcilable with the pheno- 

 mena exhibited by other substances. 



Mr. Thenard however is far from absolutely adopting one Yet it cannot 

 hypothesis and rejecting the other. Both deserve to be inves- arabsoluSy^ 



tigated decided. 



