L ge J 
By viewing the quantity of each fpecies of real acid taken 
up by any particular bafis, in the firft table, it is. eafy to 
perceive that this quantity does not exactly follow the hitherto 
prefumed order of affinities between that bafis and the different 
acids, as I had ftated it to do in a prior differtation. My 
former- opinion was grounded, it-is true, on experiments, but 
thofe experiments themfelves were accompanied with inac- 
curacies unfufpected not only by myfelf but by all other 
experimenters, and moreover combined with an hypothefis relative 
to the quantity of real acid, which I have fince found to be 
fallacious. Mr. Morveau, however, in a very mafterly differ- 
tation on affinities, publifhed in the New Encyclopedie, has among 
many juft exceptions to my theory made fome few obfervations 
which do not appear to me to be well founded. As the remarks 
I have occafion.to make thereon are intimately connected with 
the fubject of this paper, and tend to illuftrate it, I hope I fhall 
need no other apology for introducing them. 
Firft, I mentioned on a former occafion, that, according to 
Mr. Bergman, alkalies took up more of the vitriolic than of 
the nitrous acid, and more of this than of the marine; but 
that, according to Mr. Wenzel and Dr. Plummer, this did not 
happen. Mr. Morveau thinks this obfervation unfounded. 
The following table will enable the reader to decide. As Dr. 
Plummer was unacquainted with fixed air, and confequently 
made no allowance for it, I fhall omit his experiments, and in 
their room exhibit thofe of Mr. Wiegleb, who being acquainted 
with 
