the late Mr. Henry. 215 
ditable to the candour of that distinguished 
philosopher, that he was anxious to make 
them public, not only for their general merit, 
but because in one or two points the results 
disagreed with hisown. ‘ Lam much pleas- 
ed,’ Dr. Priestley replies, “‘ with the experi- 
ments mentioned in your letter, and if you 
have no objection, shall be glad to insert the 
greatest part of it in my Appendix, which 1 
am just sending to the printer’s. I the rather 
wish it, asa few of the experiments terminate 
differently from those that 1 shall publish, 
and I wish to produce all the evidence I can 
come at on both sides. The other experi- 
ments are very curious and will give much sa- 
tisfaction.”* The investigation was after- 
wards resumed by Mr. Henry, and made the 
subject of a paper, which is printed in the se- 
cond volume of the Memoirs of this Society. 
The occasion of Mr. Henry’s next appear- 
ance, as the author of a separate work, arose 
out of an accidental circumstance. He had 
found that the water of a large still tub was 
preserved sweet for several months by impreg- 
nating it with lime, though, without this pre- 
caution, it soon became extremely putrid. 
* Letter from Dr. Priestley to Mr. Henry, dated Jan. 
5, 1777. 
