552 



NA TURE 



[August 9, 1^94 



■cease to bam while there is still plenty of air left. The experi- 

 ment by which Mayow shows this is so important that I will I 

 quote his words : — 



" Let a lighted candle be so placed in water that the burning | 

 wick shall rise about six fingers' breadth above the water ; then 

 let a glass vessel of sufticienl height be inverted over the candle. 

 Care must be taken that the surface of the water within the | 

 glass shall l>c equal in height to that without, which may be | 

 done by including one leg of a bent syphon within the vessel 

 while the other opens outside. The object of the syphon is | 

 that the air, enclosed by the vessel and compressed by its i 

 immersion into the water, may escape through the hollow 

 syphon. When the air ceases to issue, the syphon is imme- 

 diately withdrawn, so that no air can afterwards get into the 

 glass. In a short time you will see the water gradually rising 

 into the vessel while the candle still burns." 



In other experiments he burnt camphor and sulphur sup- 

 ported on a shelf in the inverted vessel. The water rose, he 

 says, because, owing to the disappearance of the fire-air, the 

 air left could not resist the pressure of the atmosphere outside. 

 When the combustibles were extinguished it was impossible to 

 kindle them again by means of the sun's rays concentrated on 

 them by a burning glass. The residual air was no more able 

 to support combustion than the vacuum of Boyle's engine. 

 Again, the respiration of animals in the closed space was 

 shown to diminish the air, and to render it incapable of sup- 

 porting combustion ; the fire-air was as necessary for life as for 

 flame. The larger portion of the air was something entirely 

 different from fire-air, and incapable of supporting lile or com- 

 bustion. I believe this to be the first definite statement founded 

 on enperiment that the air is cumposed of two distinct gases. 



I have ijiven the fundamental facts in chemistry we owe to 

 Mayow ; tne limits of his work are sufficiently obvious. He 

 detected the existence of what we call oxygen gas in the air, 

 and demonstrated some of its most remarkable properties. He 

 did not isolate the gas, or show what became of it in combus- 

 tion ; he did not always distinguish between the gas itself and 

 the heat produced by its action. Hut the advance he made was 

 extraordinary — not so much in the conclusions he drew as in 

 the experiments and arguments he founded them on. Com- 

 pare him for a moment with another writer who had previously 

 expressed similar views concerning the calcination of metals. 

 Jean Rey, of I'erigourd, a witty and shrewd physician, pub- 

 lished in 1630 a series of essays attributing the increase in 

 weight of metals on calcination to the fixation of the air. 

 ■' When asked," he writes, " why tin and lead increase in 

 weight on calcination, I reply and gloriously maintain that this 

 increase comes from the air, which is thickened and made 

 heavy and adhesive by the long and continued heat of the 

 futnace. This air mingles with the calx and at- 

 taches itself to the smallest particles." The reply is 

 good, but the reasons that gloriously maintain it are 

 not altogether conclusive. I can only give two of them : 

 (I) The air has vjeishl. — This is shown by the increase in 

 velocity of heavy bodies falling to the earth, because as the body 

 approaches the earth it subtends a wider angle from the centre 

 of ihe c.irth, and receives more shocks from the panicles of air. 

 Again, although the air appears to weigh nothing on the balance, 

 this is because we weigh it in the air ; it loses its weight, just as 

 water weighs nothing in water, fire has weight too, and should 

 we ever find ourselves in a region where fire is the predominant 

 element, we shall be able to prove the statement in the same 

 way. (2) I'lrt can thickm and iiitikt air hea;v. — Stanil a cannon 

 uptight and put a red-hot ball into it. You must admit that the 



air in •>. '" ■- -.. =mall in quantity that it will be healed 



to til' ■• as the ball. Nevertheless you can hold 



your I, I ri ofihegunat first, but in a short time you 



cannot do -o. Not that the air has got hotter, it is cooling all 

 the lime ; it is because the air is thickened. Now if you drop a 

 fleece of wool into the mouth, it will not descend, and if ynu 

 push it in, it will come up again, proving the air is heavier. 

 \ - .1.. .1.. 5,jf i, icen to tremble over the mouth of the gun, 

 teen through it arc blurred. This is due to the 

 ^, it cannot be due to a motion of the air ; " for I see," 

 he says, "a lady's beauty quite diilinctly through Ihe air ahe 

 flatten with her fan." 



From what has been slated it will be clear that the Oxford 

 School of Chemistry was a school oj research, lioyle gave no 

 instruction in the ordinary sense ; and, indeed, had no official 



NO. 11C)1. VOL. 50] 



connection with the University. But that he thought instruction 

 in chemistry should be given in the University is obvious from 

 the fact that he brought over a chemist from Strasburg, and set 

 him up as a lecturer with rooms next his own and the use of his 

 laboratory. Of these lectures we find a quaint account in 

 .Anthony Wood's diary : — 

 " An. Dom. 1663. 



" Began a course of chemistry under the noted chemist and 

 rosicrucian. Peter Slhael, of Str.asburg, brought to Oxon. by the 

 hon. Mr. Rob. Boyle, an. 1659. He took to him scholars in the 

 house of John Cross next on the w. side to University Colic 

 The club consisted of 10 at least, whereof Fr.ancis Turner of 

 New Coll. was one, Ben WoodrodT of Ch. Ch. another, and 

 John Lock of the same house, afterwards a noted writer. This 

 John Lock was a man of turbulent spirit, clamorous and never 

 contented. The club write and took notes from the mouth of 

 their master, who sat at the upper end of the table, but the said 

 J. Lock scorned to do it ; so that while every man besides were 

 writing, he would be prating and troublesome. After the 

 beginning of the year 1663 Mr. Sthael removed his elaboratory 

 to a draper's house, called John Bowell, afterwards mayor of 

 the city, situate in the parish of All Saints. He built his 

 elaboratory in an old hall in the back, for the house itself had 

 been an ancient hoslle ; therein A. W. and his fellows were in- 

 structed. The chemical club concluded, A. W. paid Mr. 

 Sthael 30 shill : having paid 30 shill : beforehand. .\. W. got 

 some knowledge and experience, but his mind still hung after 

 antiquities and musick." 



In spite of Boyle's private position, his blameless life, his de- 

 voutness, and his charity, his work aroused bitter animosity in 

 Oxford. He was attacked in the University pulpit, in public 

 orations, in private squibs ; his theories were described as 

 destructive of religion, his experiments as undermining the 

 University. But what chiefly drew the indignation of his 

 opponents was that he, a gentleman by birth and fortune, 

 should concern himself with low mechanical arts. Against 

 these attacks Boyle replied with irresistible logic. His vindi- 

 cation of the nobility of scientific work constitutes one of his 

 greatest claims on our gratitude. 



Boyle left Oxford in 166S. Mayow died in 1679. In 16S3 

 Anthony Wood informs us tha". " the Oxford elaboratory w.is 

 quite finished " ; but the impulse given to the study of 

 Chemistry in Oxford gradually died out. I do not know 

 the history of the Chair of Chemistry in Oxford (if there 

 w.as one) in the eighteenth century. Richard Krewin, of 

 Christ Church, is described as Professor of Chemistry in 

 170S. He does not seem to have taken himself too seriously 

 in this capacity. Ufl'enbach, who visited Oxford in 1710, 

 says he found the stoves in fair condition, but everything 

 else in the laboratory in dirt and disorder. Krewin himself was 

 elected Camden Professor of Ancient History in 1727. He 

 seems to have thrown himself into his new work with greater 

 ardour ; for Hearne relates that, on his election, he at once 

 bought one hundred pounds' worth of books in chronology and 

 history to fit himself for his duties. For a companion picture 

 to this we may glance at the appointment in 1764 of Richard 

 W.atson (afterwards Bishop of I.landafT) to the Chair of 

 Chemistry at Cambridge, which had been founded in 1702. 

 Or. Wat-on, we are told, knew nothing at all of chemistry ; 

 had never read a syllable nor seen a single experiment on the 

 subject. On his election he sent to Paris for an "operator,' 

 and set to work in his laboratory. In fourteen months he 

 began to lecture to a large audience. 



But Watson at Cambridge was succeeded by Wollaston. 

 We had to wail till Brodic for a successor to Boyle. 



II. 

 We have seen what a vigorous effort Chemistry made to plant 

 itself in (Jxford in the seventeenth century. If the snil had 

 been prepared the roots must have struck deep. But the 

 University paid little heed, and after a few years of prodigal 

 growth the plant withered and died out. It would seem 

 that the positions are reversed at the present day. The 

 University spends large sums for supervision and appliances ; 

 the young plants are brought here and nurtured at great 

 expense, but the fair blossoms produce little fruit. 

 iCven our best friends admit that the results are some- 

 what disappointing. If these are the facts— and I speak 

 as one wlro shares the responsibility for the present con- 

 dition of chemistry here— it is the duty of those concerned 



