2 1§ £)r. Priestley’s 'Experiments relating to the 
I find, however, that, agreeably to the experiments of Mr. 
Cavendish, phlogifticated air is decompofed in this procefs, 
when there is not enough of inflammable air to faturate the 
dephlogiftieated air; though when there is a redundancy of 
inflammable air, there is even a production of phlogifticated 
air. Putting 0,5 oz. m. of phlogifticated air to a mixture of 
two ounce meafures of inflammable air and 1.5 oz. m. of de- 
phlogifticated air, the whole was reduced by explofion to 1.05 
oz. m. of the ftandard of 1.1, with two meafures of dephlo- 
gifticated air, which appears by computation to contain no 
more than 0.388 oz. m. of phlogifticated air ; fo that 0.1 1 2 oz. 
m. had been decompofed in the procefs. When there is a fuffi- 
cient quantity of inflammable air, the phlogifticated air always 
remains unaffected in this procefs, as appears by mixing any quan- 
tity of it with the two kinds of air to be exploded, and finding 
the very fame quantity, as I have repeatedly done, in the refiduum. 
That when there was a fufficiency of inflammable air for 
the purpofe, phlogifticated air is even produced in this procefs, 
was evident from my never being able to diminifh any quan- 
tity of dephlogiftieated air by inflammable air fo far as by good 
nitrous air, and the refiduum always containing phlogifticated 
air. Having exploded two meafures of inflammable air with 
one of dephlogiftieated air, which by a mixture of two mea- 
fures of nitrous air was reduced to 0.04, there was a refiduum 
of 0.1, of the ftandard of 1.3, which appears by computation 
to contain 0.0767 oz. m. of phlogifticated air. 
The reafon why, in my former experiments, I always pro- 
cured more or lefs acid, mu ft have been that, without any in- 
tention, or fuipeCting that any thing depended upon it, I muft 
have had fome furplus of dephlogiftieated air. M. Lavoisier 
I alfo perceive to have taken it for granted; as I did, that 
after 
