298 



Notices respecting New Booh. 



hydrogen and carbon only are the roots of other bodies ; the author 

 then gives a " Table showing the possible derivation of the Simple 

 Bodies of Chemistry from common roots." This table shows the as- 

 sumed composition of fifty-five bodies, at present considered as ele- 

 mentary. It will be useless to give the whole of this, the extreme 

 absurdity of it will be sufficiently illustrated by showing the compo- 

 sition of ten simple bodies. 



1. 2. 3. 4. 



Simple Bodies. 



1. Hydrogen 



2. Carbon 



3. Oxygen 



4- Nitrogen 



5. Phosphorus .... 



Or, 



6. Sulphur 



7. Selenium 



8. Tellurium 



9. Fluorine 



10. Chlorine 



Combining 

 weights deter- 

 mined by expe 

 riment. 



1 



604 

 8-01 

 1419 

 1572 

 31-44 

 16-12 

 39-63 

 64-25 

 18-74 

 35-47 



Combining 



weights, the 



roots being 



H, C 



1 



604 

 8-04 

 14-08 

 15-08 

 31-16 

 16-08 

 39-16 

 64-32 

 18-08 

 35-16 



We shall now allude to some statements which occur in the Pro- 

 fessor's account of what he terms (by a misnomer according to his 

 " induction ") the " simple bodies of chemistry," which we presume 

 is given to help to make up a book ; for the properties of these bodies 

 have nothing whatever to do with his reasoning ; he had merely to 

 find their atomic weights and calculate what quantities of oxygen, 

 hydrogen, and carbon, or of hydrogen and carbon would make them 

 up. There are, however, several statements in this part of the work 

 on which, could we afford space, we should offer some observations, 

 but we shall be content with two or three. 



We are told that " hydrogen gas, being the lightest of all known 

 bodies, it is exceedingly convenient to adopt it as the standard by 

 which the combining weight of other bodies is estimated." Now the 

 selection of hydrogen for this purpose had nothing whatever to do 

 with its lightness, for that circumstance does not in the slightest 

 degree affect the question ; if it did, then nitrogen should be repre- 

 sented by a lower number than oxygen instead of a higher one, in 

 the proportion of 14 to 8 ; the reason for selecting hydrogen is the 

 smallness of its combining weight compared with that of other bodies. 



In treating of oxygen the Professor concludes with the following 

 most extraordinary opinion : — " If we suppose nitrogen to be a com- 

 pound body, we must, by a parity of reasoning, suppose oxygen to 

 be so ; for there is no such difference in the chemical characters of 

 the two bodies, as can allow us to assume that the one is derivative 

 and the other simple." 



Now what are the differences in the chemical characters of these 

 two bodies ? Let the Professor speak for himself. Of oxygen he says, 



