Page:Imperialdictiona03eadi Brandeis Vol3a.pdf/145

LAV of evidence is complete. In a few years the great mass of chemists have gone over to the new doctrine, which now reigns in the universities and the scientific journals. Kirwan—his defence of phlogiston fairly refuted—has the rare manliness to confess himself in the wrong. Conservative Delametherie still holds out, and hasty, indomitable Joseph Priestley, with more of valour than discretion, still defends the castle his own discoveries have undermined. But now the sixteen years' struggle brought virtually to a happy end, an attempt is made to rob Lavoisier of his well-earned glory. Chemists who had formerly opposed him, especially Fourcroy, propose that the new theory should be called the "French chemistry," or "doctrine of the French chemists," thus seeking to appropriate some share of the honour. This was doubly must, for no French chemist beside Lavoisier had taken any part in the reformation, and the sole assistance he had received came from Britain. Lavoisier accordingly protested indignantly and successfully against this stratagem, and as some say earned by so doing the lasting ill-will of Fourcroy. Had he always been just towards others, he would have had our warmer sympathy.

A nomenclature more suited to the advanced state of the science, and the newly-founded theory of combustion, was felt to be needful. This task was undertaken by Lavoisier and Guyton de Morveau, assisted by Berthollet and Fourcroy. The technical language thus constructed is, with a few modifications, still in use. So great is the honour paid to Lavoisier, that some, not content with admitting that he extended and rectified limited and imperfect views, pronounce him the very creator of chemistry, and deny to his predecessors all share of merit. This is an error: the germs of chemical science are old almost as humanity itself. Former theories were useful in their day, and have been successively moulted off like the skins of the caterpillar to accommodate its growing frame. But some ask, Is not Lavoisier the rightful heir and successor of Helmont? Why then did he not arise sooner, instead of leaving us to wander in the desert with no guides but Beccher and Stahl, men of duller vision and slower foot? A Lavoisier could not arise until a Priestley, a Black, a Cavendish, and a Scheele had supplied him with facts; until the progress of the arts had furnished him with instruments of precision. Key, Mayow, were abortive Lavoisiers; necessarily abortive, because the hour was not yet come. The world has since found that Lavoisierism, though containing much absolute truth, has in it an element of relative falsehood, in so far as it assigns an exaggerated and one-sided importance to oxygen. It is viewed as the king of elements, sole cause of acidity, and supporter of combustion, whilst the other elements are grouped according to their affinity for it. We have since found other causes of acidity; nay, with a one-sidedness less justifiable than that of Lavoisier, some have even proposed to recognize hydrogen as the sole acidifier in place of oxygen. Great and important as was the war against phlogiston, it does not comprise the whole of Lavoisier's scientific labours. As particularly deserving notice, we may mention his two elaborate papers on the combustion of the diamond, by which its chemical nature was fully demonstrated; his experiments with the great Trudaine burning-glass; his practical researches on nitrifaction, undertaken when he was placed in 1776 by the minister Turgot at the head of the government saltpetre works. Here he increased the production fourfold, although dispensing with certain methods formerly employed which were burdensome to the public. He likewise improved the gunpowder used in the French army and navy, increasing its power by nearly one-half. He further performed an important series of experiments on latent heat; on steam and vapours; and, along with Laplace, on specific heat, and on the electricity evolved when bodies are evaporated and sublimed. Further, we have a report on the sanitary state of prisons, a method for separating gold and silver, a report on the comparative value of different bodies used as fuel, and a paper detailing the results obtained by submitting various bodies to the heat of a charcoal furnace, urged by an oxygen blast. He examined likewise the gaseous products of putrefying animal matter, with a view to the disinfection of sewers and cesspools. Besides his "Elements of Chemistry," published in 1789, he produced no fewer than sixty essays and reports, which appeared in the Transactions of the Academy and in other learned journals. Meanwhile his public duties were conducted with skill, regularity, and uprightness. To the astonishment of those who believe that a man of genius is unfit for business, he soon earned the respect of his colleagues. His official accounts were kept with the utmost precision. With the profound insight of a true financier, he urged the reduction of various taxes, maintaining that such a step, instead of diminishing, would increase the revenue. It is to him that the Jews of Mentz owe the abolition of a most odious impost, an old remnant of barbarous ages. He was consulted by the national convention on the best method of manufacturing assignats, so as to increase the difficulty of forgery. Between 1778 and 1785 he allotted two hundred and forty aspents of land in the Vendomais to experimental agriculture, and increased the ordinary produce by one half. In 1790 he was nominated a member of the celebrated commission of weights and measures. In the following year the constituent assembly requested him to draw up a plan for simplifying the collection of taxes. His report on this subject, entitled "Territorial Riches of France," was considered excellent, and was published at the national expense. So far the career of Lavoisier had been eminently prosperous. As a philosopher, as a public character, and as a private man, he has been uniformly happy and successful. But evil days are at hand. The Revolution has taken a darker and fiercer aspect; Robespierre is in power, and eminence, of what kind soever, is perilous. Lavoisier appears to have felt some presentiment of evil; he expected to be stript of his fortune, and told Lalande that in such a case he should follow the business of an apothecary. Meantime he did not desist from his researches. Along with Seguin he undertook an examination of the phenomena of perspiration. This investigation was never completed, and we owe an account of it to his assistant Seguin. He concluded that the average weight of matter expelled by perspiration was 52·89 ounces every twenty-four hours; that the amount is increased by drink, but not by solid food, and that perspiration is at its minimum immediately after a meal, and reaches its maximum during digestion. He undertook also a collected edition of his papers. Of this work the second volume is perfect; the first and third had not issued from the press when their further progress, and the life of their illustrious author, were cut short by the same blow. On the 2nd of May, 1794, a member of the convention named Dupin, formerly a clerk in the employment of M. Paulze, Lavoisier's father-in-law, brought before this assemblage a general charge against all the fermiers-généraux, including Lavoisier. In a few days Fouquier-Tinville, the accuser-general, is charged to lay a formal act of accusation before the revolutionary tribunal. For some time Lavoisier knew not where to seek shelter. He was at last concealed by his friend Lucas in the offices formerly occupied by the Academy of Sciences, now abolished. Here he passed a day or two; when learning that his colleagues and his father-in-law were already arrested, he quitted his retreat, and of his own accord surrendered himself a prisoner. This step has been regarded as a heroic self-sacrifice. Had he by thus delivering himself up been able to save any of his friends, or effect any good purpose whatever, our applause should not be wanting; but as the only result which he could expect was to add his illustrious name to the sad catalogue of victims, we cannot but regard it as an error. He was brought to trial, if we may so term the sanguinary farce, on May 6th, and in common with all his colleagues condemned to death. It is significant that he was not judged as Antoine Lavoisier, but merely as "fermier-général. No. 5," his eminent merit and reputation being thus studiously, or perhaps rather contemptuously, kept out of sight. The sentence runs:—"Condemned to death, as convicted of being author of, or accomplice in, a plot which has existed against the French nation, tending to favour the success of the enemies of France; especially by exercising every kind of exaction and concussion (i.e. plunder of public money) against the said French nation, to wit, by adding to tobacco water and  ingredients hurtful to the health of the citizens who made use thereof!" It is well known that a certain quantity of water is necessary in the manufacture of tobacco. No proof was offered that this necessary quantity was exceeded, or that any noxious drugs were added. However, in those days the nature of an accusation, and the amount of proof by which it was supported, were things of utter indifference. Had the unfortunate fermiers-généraux been charged with cannibalism or witchcraft, the result would have been the same. Most of them were wealthy, and this no doubt was the real cause of their death.

A variety of incidents are related concerning the last days of