President's Address. 31 



We are now pretty well advanced on our journey, and 

 phlogiston, that enemy to progress, has well-nigh received its 

 death-blow. It was not, however, until the year 1783, when 

 Cavendish had made his discovery, that Lavoisier, in con- 

 junction with Laplace, by producing water by the direct 

 union of hydrogen and oxygen, and so confirming the results 

 obtained by Cavendish, silenced for ever the phlogistians. 



As my object in reading this paper has been simply to give 

 an outline of the early progress of chemical science, I may, 

 perhaps, be excused for passing over rather summarily the 

 description of the great dispute which took place as to whom 

 the honour was due of having first discovered oxygen — a dis- 

 pute so celebrated, that it seems almost a necessity with 

 some historians to treat of it at considerable length. There 

 cannot be the slightest doubt, I think, that Priestley was the 

 first discoverer of oxygen. Lavoisier, unfortunately in this, as 

 in at least one other case, acted a little, or, perhaps, to speak 

 more correctly, not a little dishonestly. But this, when we 

 remember what this truly great philosopher has done for our 

 science, is, to say the least, not a pleasant theme to dwell 

 upon ; and I think it will suffice if I go on simply noting as 

 I pass, that certainly Joseph Black studied the properties of 

 fixed air, and Joseph Priestley discovered oxygen, before 

 Lavoisier knew of the existence of either one or other of 

 these substances. 



My pleasant task, gentlemen, of reading these few notes 

 to you is now almost closed. In the year 1794, the great 

 Lavoisier was led to the guillotine, but he had done his work, 

 and in doing so he erected for himself a noble and lasting 

 monument, which shall hand down his justly honoured name 

 to many succeeding generations. Although I should hardly 

 care to regard Lavoisier as " the immortal father of modern 

 chemistry," as he has been styled by some of his admiring 

 and enthusiastic countrymen, I would at once agree in 

 ascribing to him the honour of making such good use of the 

 discoveries and results of experiments m.ade by other men as 

 to lay the foundation of modern chemistry. I do not wish 

 for a single moment to attempt to detract in the slightest 

 degree from the just fame of Lavoisier, and I do not think I 



