»g$ On the preduQion of Azote from heated Water, 



I formed various conjeftures, which experiment proved to be falfe, and had entirely re- 

 nounced this refeareh in defpair, when the difpute which was agitated concerning the 

 azote obtained from the vapour of water again excited my attention. This difpute is not 

 yet terminated, notwithftanding what has been faid for and againft the change of water 

 into gas by Goetling, Wlegleb, Von Hauch, Weftrumb, Achardj^Wurzer, Juch, Van 

 Mons, Pacts Van Trooftwyclc, and Dieman. It appears to me that this famous difpute 

 has much analogy with feveral other controverfies mentioned in the annals of our fcience, 

 and by which the moft important points of chemical theory have been fixed. Such was 

 the difpute refpe£ling the exiftence or non-exiftence of the carbonic acid in chalk, which 

 engaged all the chemifts of Europe ; fuch was the difpute refpeding the exiftence or non- 

 cxiftence of oxigen in the red oxide of mercury : a difpute in which I was myfelf engaged, 

 and ill-treated by the German chemifts, particularly Gren, who was eafily put out of 

 temper *. 



Wiegleb, Goettling, Von Crell, maintained : 



1 . That the vapours of water in their paflage through ignited tubes are changed into 

 azote ; 



2. That this change always happens, and in all circumftances, provided that vapours of 

 the water are brought into conta£l: with red hot bodies ; 



3. That water is changed into azotic gas by combining with caloric ; 



4. That water is the ponderable bafis of azote gas, and every other gas. 



5. That, confequently, the theory of Lavoifier, is falfe. 



The Dutch chemifts, as well as Meffrs. Von Hauch, Juch, Van Mons, &c. main- 

 tained : 



1. That the vapours of water in paffing through red hot tubes are never, and in no cafe, 

 converted into azote gas ;. 



2. And that it is only by error that azote gas has been obtained, becaufe it was not 

 a product of water, but part of the atmofpheric air which paffed through the tubes ; 



3. That, confequently, the theory of Lavoifier remains unlhakcn, and the theory of 

 phlogifton, or that of water being the bafe of all the gafes, is erroneous. 



I was very much interefted in this difpute, of which I very attentively followed the 

 progrefs. But I was forry to obferve that the fpirit of party mixed in the difcuffion; that 

 harflinefs prevailed on both fides ; that the difpute was not for the acquifition of truth, 

 but vi£lory, and the enquirers had previoufly decided to find only fuch fadls as their 

 theories required; and, confequently, that their difcernment, even in matters of fafl, 

 became impaired. Experiments were multiplied ; the truth of the narratives was on both 

 fides difputed ; refults were found abfolutely contrary to each other ; and the parties, 



• Out of all the opinions which Gren has fupported, there is not one in which he has been in the right : 

 but he poffefles the merit of having written his Syftematifches Handbuch, which is an excellent compilation. 

 The hands of Gren were of more value than his head ; he compiled well, but his meditatipns poffefled ho 

 forcei G. 



inftead 



