102 CHERrtCAL THEORY. 



" principal, derendreau fluide elastiquc fix6 le phlogis- 

 '' tiqiie, la matiere du feu, et de lui restituer en memc 

 '^ temps I'elasticite qui en depend*." M. Bay en pub- 

 It appears that lished his Experiments on Mercurial Precipitates, in the 

 ^'Slu ^^' Jour"- de Piiys- for 1774, from which, as far as I can 

 judge from the notes which I formerly made when I pe- 

 rused them, he drew conclusions similar to those of La- 

 voisier. Dr. Thomson in his Chemistry.!. 101, ed. 2nd, 

 says, that it was in consequence of hearing Bayen's paper 

 read that Lavoisier was induced to turn his attention to 

 the subject, which must surely be a mistake, as Lavoisier's 

 experiments + on the same subject, were printed at least 

 previous to the 7th of Dec. 1773. Dr. Thomson on ex- 

 amining the subject will I think find that he has commit- 

 ted another error in the same note. After relating in the 

 text that Lavoisier revivified the calx of mercury by heat 

 alone, he adds in the note that " this experiment was 

 " performed by Mr. Bayen.in 1774." I am led to believe 

 from my notes that Dr. T. will find that the account of 

 the experiments was at least published in 177 5, ^s you 

 state in your Journal xiv. 233, note. 

 Short remark As for the theory of Hey, I should be happy to peruse 



on Rey and j^jg book as an object of curiosity, but I do not wonder 

 Mayow. "^ •' ' 



that his opinion should have excited little attention, when 



he alledges that '^ the increase of weight arises," from 



*' the air of the vessel condensed, rendered heavy and 



'^ adhesive by the violent and long-continued heat of the 



'^ furnacej." For my opinion of Mayow I must take 



the liberty of requesting your correspondent E. D. to 



peruse my remarks on his discoveries in the Med. and 



Phys. Journ. iii. 335 §. 



I am, 



Sir, 



Your very obedient servant, 



JONATHAN STOKES. 



* Lavois. Opusc. 280. f 247. 

 \ Journ. xiii. 82. 



§ But qu. as to Hooke's claims in the theory so fully stated in his 

 Micrographia and copied in our quarto Journal ? 



IV. 



