n new Eudiometer . y l ^ 
difference in the diminution, according as the bottle was fhaken 
brifkly or gently, as in the former method : I found alfo nearly 
the fame difference, or perhaps rather lefs, according to the 
nature of the water employed, only it feemed to be of not 
much confequence whether the water frothed or not; but there 
feemed to be much lefs difference in the diminution, aCcordino’ 
to the time which the air took up in paffing into the bottle. 
The ulual diminution on trying common air with different 
quantities of nitrous air, when diff illed water was employed, 
was as follows : 
Common air. 
Nitrous air. 
Diminution. 
' 
.6 
•74 
.8 
.88 
I. i 
i . 
.89 
L 
i -5 
.90 
I 
It appears, therefore, that T *^ths of a meafure of nitrous is 
fufficient to produce very nearly the full diminution. I chufe, 
however, always to ufe one meafure. It appears alfo, that the 
diminution is always much lefs in this method than when the 
common air is added to the nitrous ; as in that method it was 
before faid, that the ufual diminution was 1.08. The reafon 
of this is, that when nitrous and common air are mixed toge- 
ther, the nitrous air is robbed of part of its phlogifton, and is 
thereby turned into phlogifticated nitrous acid, and is abforbed 
by the water in that ftate, and befides that, the common air is 
phlogifticated, and thereby diminifhed : fo that the whole dimi- 
nution on mixing is equal to the bulk of nitrous air, which is 
turned into acid, added to the diminution which the common 
air fuffers by being phlogifticated. Now it appears, that when 
a fmall quantity of nitrous air comes in contact with a large 
5 quantity 
