26 Mr. J. Brown on the Electrification of the 



16i +85. 



18 + 13. Gas now fizzing off well from local action at upper 



zinc. 

 22 —22. Cell has changed sign of electrification. 



25 i— 62. Limit of negative deflexion. Action again reverses 



from effect of locally formed ZnCl 2 on upper zinc 

 combined with that in contact with lower zinc. 



26 -50. 



27-i- 0. Cell again changes sign of electrification. 



28 +43. 



30 +193. 



31 + 290. 



Whether these conditions be considered a sufficiently near 

 approximation to those involved in the hypothesis of § 3 or 

 no, it is at all events improbable that the electrification of 

 the gas is due to any effect of " contact " in its nascent state 

 with either solids or liquids. Its electrification is rather 

 connected, in an as yet somewhat obscure but interesting way, 

 with the particular molecular arrangement in the voltaic 

 action by which it is evolved. 



12. Some experiments were now made in the hope of 

 deciding whether it be the gas itself that is electrified, or if 

 the charge be on something like spray carried up with the 

 gas. The effluvium experimented on was that from zinc 

 dissolving in hydrochloric acid, which, as is well known, 

 contains much foggy matter. This may be of the nature of 

 fine spray, but it comes up with the gas in the bubbles as 

 they rise through the liquid, and is probably formed at, or 

 nearly at, the same time and place as the gas itself. It is 

 distinct from the larger droplets thrown off from the free 

 surface of the liquid by the effervescence. There was some 

 doubt whether it should be called spray or fog. The latter 

 word has been decided on as best describing its appearance 

 without reference to its origin or actual constitution. 



13. A beaker was fitted with a paper hood so as to deflect 

 the issuing gas and direct it upon the jets of an insulated 

 water-dropping funnel, whose drops fell into a separate insu- 

 lated vessel connected with the electrometer. Now, if the 

 charge were on spray-drops which would adhere to the funnel 

 and so communicate their positive charge to it, the drops 

 falling from it would carry down some of this charge to the 

 receiver and the electrometer would accordingly be affected. 

 The experiment was repeated, with modifications, a number of 

 times, but the results were not uniform, and were apparently 

 complicated by imperfect insulation of the funnel (which was 

 supported on a paraffin bar) permitting negative electricity 



