Dr. Hare on the Salt Radical Theory. 381 
of a chloro-acid, and combining with a chloro-base, the resulting 
combination may be correctly called the chlorohy deste” of the 
chloride of acetyl. 
27. In the next place let attention be given to the inquiries 
contained in the following language of Liebig. 
“ But how, we may ask, are these so-called anhydrous acids 
known ? Can we exhibit them without this water of hydration ? 
The following strange answer is returned to this question by the 
adherents of this theory :—the innumerable acids which we call 
anhydrous, exist only in vale aaa they are quite unknown ; 
they cannot be shown to you.” 
28. Although agreeably to Liebig’s work upon organic chem- 
istry, nature is prolific of compound radicals, which for the most 
part have never been isolated, although none of those whose ex- 
istence is assumed by the salt radical theory have been isolated, 
yet agreeably to his language above given, the fact that some of 
the anhydrous oxacids cannot be isolated, is treated as an objec- 
tion fatal to their existence altogether. 
29. The decomposition of chlorate of potash in aqueous solu- 
tion, by sulphate of the protoxide of iron, is represented as a case 
in which protoxide of iron overcomes the affinity of potassium 
for oxygen, treating the paramount affinity of chlorine for that 
metal as a consideration which could only be insisted on “ for the 
sake of argument.’ 
30. Agreeably to the salt radical theory, in each of the oxy- 
salts, of which the reaction is the subject of the preceding para- 
graph, there is a salt radical, (oxysulphion in the sulphate, oxy- 
chlorion in the chlorate,) yet chloride of potassium is the result 
of the process, no less than if potash were subjected to muriatic 
acid. Admitting that in the reaction of this last mentioned acid, 
the formation of the resulting chloride is due to hydrogen, how 
comes it that notwithstanding the absence of this capacity giving 
element, we obtain a chloride of potassium? What indication is 
there of the presence of oxychlorion or oxysulphion ? 
31. The resolution of sulphate of potash and cyanide of po- 
~ tassium, when fused together, into cyanate of potash and sulphu- 
ret of potassium, is by Liebig mentioned as an instance in which 
“ potassium reduces potash,” an inference which is erroneous: 
first, because potassium cannot take oxygen from its own pro- 
toxide; secondly, because the affinity of the sulphur for that 
Srconp Serres, Vol. I, No. 3.—May, 1846. 49 
