REFORM OF MIXERALOGICAL SYSTEMS. 34! ' 



ment of elementary substances. Such schemes exhibit rather a play 

 of the mere logical faculty, exercising itself on assumed principles, 

 than any attempt at the real interpretation of nature. Other such 

 pure chemical systems may have been published, but it is not neces- 

 sary to accumulate instances. I proceed to consider their result. 



Sect. 3. Failure of the Attempts at Systematic Reform. 



IT may appear presumptuous to speak of the failure of those whom, 

 like Berzelius and Mohs, we acknowledge as our masters, at a period 

 when, probably, they and some of their admirers still hold them to 

 have succeeded in their attempt to construct a consistent system. But 

 I conceive that my office as an historian requires me to exhibit the for- 

 tunes of this science in the most distinct form of which they admit, 

 and that I cannot evade the duty of attempting to seize the true aspect 

 of recent occurrences in the world of science. Hence I venture to 

 speak of the failure of both the attempts at framing a pure scientific 

 svstem of mineraloo-v, that founded on the chemical, and that founded 



J O* ' 



on the natural-history principle ; because it is clear that they have not 

 obtained that which alone we could, according to the views here pre- 

 sented, consider as success, a coincidence of each with the other. A 

 Chemical System of arrangement, which should bring together, in all 

 cases, the substances which come nearest each other in external pro- 

 perties ; a Natural-history System, which should be found to arrange 

 bodies in complete accordance with their chemical constitution : if 

 such systems existed, they might, with justice, claim to have succeeded. 

 Their agreement would be their verification. The interior and exterior 



O 



system are the type and the antitype, and their entire correspondence 

 would establish the mode of interpretation beyond doubt. But nothing 

 less than this will satisfy the requisitions of science. And when, 

 therefore, the chemical and the natural-history system, though evi- 

 dently, as I conceive, tending towards each other, are still far from 

 coming together, it is impossible to allow that either method has been 

 successful in regard to its proper object. 



But we may, I think, point out the fallacy of the principles, as well 

 as the imperfection of the results, of both of those methods. With 

 regard to that of Berzelius, indeed, the history of the subject obviously 

 betrays its unsoundness. The electro-positive principle was, in a very 

 short time after its adoption, proved and acknowledged to be utterly 

 untenable : what security have we that the electro-negative element is 



