256 Elvistence of Radicals in the Amphide Salts disproved. 
being electrolyzed. If his idea of the composition of sulphate of 
copper, and the part performed by the potassa, were admitted for 
the purpose of illustration, we should, on one side of the mem- 
brane, have a row of atoms consisting of oxysulphion and copper ; 
on the other, of oxygen and hydrogen. . 
78. Recurring to Daniell’s own description of the electrolyzing 
process, above quoted, an atom of copper near the anode being 
liberated from its anion, oxysulphion, and charged with electrici- 
ty, seizes the next atom of oxysulphion, displacing and charging 
an atom of copper therewith united. ‘The cupreous atom thus 
charged and displaced, seizes a third atom of oxysulphion, ‘sub- 
jecting the copper, united with it, to the same treatment as it had 
itself previously met with. This process being repeated by a 
succession of similar decompositions and recompositions, an elec- 
trified atom of copper is evolved at the membrane, where there 
is no atom of oxysulphion. Were there no other anion to receive 
the copper, evidently the electrolyzation would not have taken 
place ; but oxygen, on the one side of the membrane, must suc- 
ceed to the office performed by oxysulphion on the other side ; 
while hydrogen, in like manner, must succeed to the office of the 
copper. 
79. Such being the inevitable conditions of the process, how 
can it be correctly alleged by Professor Daniell, the transfer of 
the copper being arrested at the membrane, that as this metal 
“can find nothing to combine with,” it gives up its electrical 
charge to the hydrogen, which proceeds to the cathode? As hy- 
drogen cannot be present, excepting as an ingredient in water, 
how can it be said that the copper can discharge itself upon the 
hydrogen, without combining with the oxygen necessarily liber- 
ated at the same time by the electrolytic process? How could 
the copper, in discharging itself to a cathion, escape a simultane-_ 
ous seizure by an anion? Would not the oxidizement of this 
metal be a step indispensable to the propagation of that electro-_ 
lytic process, by which alone the hydrogen could, as alleged, 
“‘nass to the platinode,” i. e. cathode ? r 
80. In these strictures Iam fully justified by the following. 
allegations of Faraday, which I quote from his Researches, 826, 
A single ion, i. e. one not in combination with another, will have 
no ‘tendency to pass to either of the electrodes, and will be perfectly 
