References.—Biography in Larousse, “Dictionnaire Universel,” Tome XI. p. 577, and in the “Biographie Générale,” Tome XXXVI. p. 643.
A.D. 1791.—Leslie (Sir John), an able English scientist (April 1766–Nov. 1832), who, upon the death of Prof. John Playfair, was called to the Chair of Natural Philosophy in the University of Edinburgh, writes a very interesting paper entitled “Observations on Electric Theories,” which is read the following year at the meeting of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, and is published at the latter place during 1824.
According to Carnevale Antonio Arella, “Storia dell’ Elettricità,” Alessandria, 1839, Vol. I. p. 130, Sir John Leslie is the author of quite an interesting treatise on the inefficacy of lightning conductors, and the “English Cyclopædia” (Biography), Vol. III. p. 866, gives a list of many of the numerous contributions he made to the leading publications of his day, more particularly in the “Edinburgh Philos. Transactions,” the “Encyclopædia Britannica,” the “Edinburgh Review,” and “Nicholson’s Philos. Journal.” The reviewer adds, what will surprise many readers, that, although some papers by Sir John Leslie treating of physical subjects were also read before the Royal Society of London, none were ever printed in their “Philos. Transactions.”
Professor John Playfair above alluded to (1748–1819), became, during 1785, Joint Professor of Mathematics with Dr. Adam Ferguson in the University of Edinburgh and, in 1805, exchanged this for the Professorship of Natural Philosophy in the same university.
References.—Macvey Napier, “Memoir of Sir John Leslie,” 1838, which appeared in seventh edition of “Encycl. Britan.,” Vol. XIII; “Engl. Cycl.” (Biography); Rose, “New Gen. Biogr.”; Hœfer, “Nouv. Biogr. Gen.,” Paris, 1862, Vol. XXX. pp. 949–952 (giving full account of his works); “Encycl. Britan.,” ninth edition, Edinburgh, 1882, Vol. XIV. pp. 476–477; Sidney Lee, “Dict. Nat. Biogr.,” Vol. XXXIII. pp. 105–107 and Vol. XLVIII. pp. 413–414; Pierre Larousse, “Grand Dict. Univ.,” Vol. X. pp. 406–407; “Caledonian Mercury,” article of Prof. Napier summarized in the “Gentleman’s Magazine” for 1833, Vol. I. pp. 85–86. Consult also A.D. 1751 at Adanson; “Dove,” p. 256; Philosophical Magazine, Vols. XL and XLII.
A.D. 1791.—At p. 353, Chap. III of the first volume of Gmelin’s “Handbook of Chemistry,” it is stated that during 1791 James Keir (Kier) first showed, by immersing iron in a solution of nitrate of silver or fuming nitric acid, that many metals can be made to pass from their ordinary active state into a passive or electro-negative state and lose either wholly or in part their tendency to decompose acids and metallic oxides.
At pp. 167–170, Sixth Memoir, of Wm. Sturgeon’s “Scientific Researches” (Bury, 1850), treating of the application of electro-chemistry to the dissolution of simple metals in fluids, reference is made to the long line of investigations carried on by both Bergman and Keir, the last named having demonstrated that iron “acquires that altered state by the action of nitric acid which Sir John Herschel met with in his experiments, and has called prepared state, and that Schönbein and others call the peculiar or the inactive state” (Noad’s “Manual of Electricity,” London, 1859, p. 534). The iron which is active in nitric acid was called by Keir “fresh iron,” while that which became inactive he designated as “altered iron” (Sturgeon’s “Annals of Electricity,” Vol. V. p. 439).
Some remarkable phenomena in the display of which but one individual piece of metal is used, as first shown by Keir, remain, Sturgeon says, “without even an attempt at explanation by any of the philosophers under whose notice they have appeared.” Sir John Herschel pronounces them as of an “extraordinary character”; Prof. Andrews, after giving some very satisfactory explanations of several phenomena, acknowledges that he “can offer no explanation of most of the particular facts which have been described,” and Professor Schönbein “has not made public any conclusive explanation of them whatever” (Phil. Mag. for October 1837, p. 333, and for April 1838, p. 311).
This same James Keir, called by Watt “a mighty chemist” (1735–1820), has strangely by some been confounded with Robert Kerr, also a Scotchman, who was an able scientific writer and lived at about the same period (1755–1813). Kerr made valuable translations from Lavoisier and Linnæus which, during 1805, won for him a fellowship in the Edinburgh Royal Society. (Consult Sidney Lee, “Dict. of Nat. Biogr.,” London, 1892, Vol. XXI. p. 64, also the references therein given; and the article “Faraday” in the “Encycl. Britan.,” ninth edition, Edinburgh, 1879, Vol. IX. p. 30.)
References.—Mrs. Amelia Moillet, “Sketch of the Life of James Keir,” 1859; Sidney Lee, “Dict. of Nat. Biog.,” London, 1892, Vol. XXX. pp. 313–314; Annales de Chimie for October 1837; Phil. Trans. for 1790, p. 353, as well as Hutton’s abridgment of the same, Vol. XVI. p. 694; Sturgeon’s “Annals of Electricity,” Vol. V. p. 427; Gmelin’s Chemistry, pp. 367, 370.