sot balard's researches concerning the nature of 



the atoms so as to form of them metallic chlorides and salts with an 

 oxacid of chlorine, we shall have the following results : 



R + 0-f-2ClX2= RC1^ + C1«R. 

 R + O + 2 CI X 3 = 2 R CP + Cl« R. 



R + O + 2 CI X 4. = 3 R CP + C> R- 



R + O + 2 CI X 5 = 4 R Cl^ + CV R. 



Of these different formulae, the third has been preferred by chemists, 

 and chlorous acid has been assimilated as to its composition to nitrous 

 and phosphorous acid. But why not adopt the second, which is cer- 

 tainly more simple, and in which chlorous acid is equivalent to hypo- 

 sulphurous acid ? 



Omitting all experimental proof, this supposition is much more na- 

 tural than the other ; for the circumstances under which chlorous acid 

 is formed do not at all resemble those under which nitrous and phos- 

 phorous acid &c. are obtained, whereas they are identically the same 

 as those which produce hyposulphurous acid. It is well known, in 

 fact, that it is by treating the alkaline oxides with sulphur and water, 

 that mixtures of 1 atom of hyposulphite and 1 atom of polysulphuret 

 are obtained. If on this i-e-action we substitute chlorine for sulphur, 

 we shall have 1 atom of chlorite and 1 atom of chloride. The only dif- 

 ference existing between the two cases is, that the number which ex- 

 presses the chemical equivalent of chlorine being double that which re- 

 presents its atom, while with sulphur these two immbers are equal, we 

 shall have CI' for the formula of chlorous acid, whilst that of sulphurous 

 acid will be S*. 



The supposition which contributed to the adoption of the fourth for- 

 mula by chemists, is that of Davy's protoxide of chlorine being a distinct 

 compound. But as it was very evident that it Avas not the acid of the chlo- 

 rites, the second,[fourth?] formula, which led to this conclusion, was ne- 

 cessarily rejected. It is only since the experiments of M. Soubeiran have 

 rendered it almost certain that the supposed protoxide of chlorine is 

 merely a mixture of chlorine and of deutoxide, that the true composition 

 of chlorous acid could be ascertained a priori. What denomination ought 

 now to be assigned to this compound? It is evident that the name of chlo- 

 rous acid can no longer be given to it, and that it is much more proper 

 to call it hypochlorous, a name which recalls its analogy of constitution 

 with the hyposulphurous, hypophosphorous acids, &c., formed like it of 

 one equivalent of their radical and one equivalent of oxygen. Its combi- 

 nations will be called hypochlorites. If this denomination were adopted, 



♦ This inconsistency does not happen when the number for chlorine is doubled. 



