90 Chemical Philosophy. 



that the phlogistic theory was attended with diffi- 

 culties, they expressed a fear that the antiphlogistic 

 plan was attended with as many, and of not less^ 

 magnitude. Instead of moving to reject it, how- 

 ever, thev proposed that it should be submitted 

 to the trial of time, to the test of experiments, and 

 to tJgnelucidatinQ; inlluence of contending inquiries 

 ancWpinions. This was accordingly done. The 

 Academy gave it to the world, without pronouncing 

 on its merits, and it soon became the popular sys- 

 km of France, 



The next year after the publication of the new 

 theory and nomenclature by the Royal Academy^ 

 they were exhibited in an English dress, and began 

 to be more generally studied than before by Bri- 

 tish chemists. Among these the number of con- 

 verts to the improved doctrines and language soon 

 became considerable. But this favourable recep- 

 tion was by no means universal. Dr. Black, Dr, 

 Priestley, Mr. Kirwan, and Mr. Keir, with a 

 few other conspicuous characters, took their stand 

 among the opposing party, and several of them 

 wrote largely and ably against the new opinions 

 and terms. It is obvious that any system opposed 

 by such men must have serious obstacles to en- 

 counter. But the system in question made its way 

 with wonderful success, amidst all opposition. 

 Early in the year 1791 Mr. Kirwan, after com- 

 batting in defence of phlogiston for a long time, 

 and with admirable prowess, laid down his arms, 

 and declared himself a convert to the new doc- 

 trine. In the same month Dr. Black gave up his 

 objections, and went over to the antiphlogistian 

 ranks. And among all the distinguished British 

 chemical philosophers, Dr. Priestley and Mr. 

 Keir alone adhere to the opposition with which 

 they set out. The former, especially, it must, be 

 acknowledged, has defended the phlogistic citadel 



