OF SEA-WATER. 9207 
hol had been used in large quantity, by which a portion of 
these sulphates would be dissolved, though still it is difficult 
to imagine that in this way they would be entirely abstrac- 
ted. 
Lavoister’s analysis has been considered as incorrect in two 
circumstances,—in the finding muriate of lime and sulphate of 
soda. Neither of these have been discovered by other che- 
mists ; and in a late analysis of sea-water by Vocrt and La- 
GRANGE, one of the objects of experiment was to detect their 
presence, and the conclusions drawn were, “ that sea-water 
“‘ contains no sulphate of soda,” and “no muriate of lime.” 
In this analysis the saline ingredients found in sea-water were 
the same as those assigned by Berean, with the addition of 
sulphate of magnesia. In 1000 grammes there were found 25.10 
grammes of muriate of soda, 3.5 of muriate of magnesia, 5.78 of 
~ sulphate of magnesia, 0.20 of carbonate of lime and magnesia, 
and 0.15 of sulphate of lime *. 
Some other recent analyses have been given; that by Licn- 
TENBERG is noticed by VocreL and Lacrance, from a German 
Journal, as approaching to’ their own; and that of Prarr, in 
which, as in Lavoisrer’s analysis, there is found a portion of 
muriate of lime. 
It is obvious, that there remains a degree bf uncertainty with 
regard to the ingredients of sea-water, sufficient to give interest 
to a new analysis. The principle, too, which I have illustrated 
in a preceding paper, on the analysis of Mineral Waters,— 
that the substances obtained are not always to be regarded as 
the original ingredients, but frequently as products of new 
combinations established by the analytic operations, may con- 
tribute to throw light on the conclusions to be drawn, and 
seemed 
* ‘Tuomson’s Annals, vol, iv. p. 200. 
