Chemical and Minefalogical Nomenclature, l]f 



ingredients hydrogenated oxygen or oxygenated hydrogen* ; 

 and inftead of ice we are to lav decaloncaicd hydrogenated 

 oxygen, and for Jlcam, caiuricated hydrogenated oxygen. In- 

 ftead of common foap we are to fay oleaginated foda } and for 

 glaj's, Jilicited alkali, &c. 



The French chemifts it is true retain the nzmejbap, but 

 in contradiction with their own principles ; for they furely" 

 cannot in this word difcover the radicals of its compofition. 

 Nay, Lavoifier retains the old word nitre and fait petre con- 

 jointly with that of nitrat of potafh, (fee his Treatife of Che* 

 miltry, vol. I. p. 79 and 232, French) and yet they difap- 

 prove of my retaining a few of the antient denominations 

 that were as well known to all chemifts as the names foap or 

 glafs in the language of common life, fuch as Glauber, Ep- 

 Jbm, and Sylvian (rejecting only the term fait ufually tacked 

 to them; but evidently fuperfluous) ; alfo felenite, gvpfum, 

 borax and alum — >thefe I retain for two reafons; firft, becaufe 

 they exprefs their refpecYive objects by a jingle name, which 

 appears to me a considerable advantage, and fecondly, be- 

 caufe thofe names continually occur in all treatifes of che- 

 miftry publifhed before the year T790, and in many fince, 

 and consequently muft be known by all who wiffi to under- 

 ftand them. 



Mdrveau and the French fchool in general reject thenamca 

 of inventors, " as having no conformity either generic or in- 

 dividual with things :" and for the fame reafon they fhould 

 rejcft the names Alexandria and Conjlantinoplt derived from 

 the founders ; and in general, by the fame rule, all named 

 of places mould be changed for fuch as would exprefs their 

 fituatioh. Is it not therefore evident, when the fignifi- 

 cation of names is already fixed and generally known, that 

 they fliould be retainedf, the inconvenience of rejecting 

 them bein<r far fupcrior to any advantages propofed by the 

 change ? Yet, ftrange to tell, they object to a few new names 

 which I introduced in mineralogy, though exactly founded on 

 their own principles, and not attended with any inconve- 



* Fourcroy exprefsly fays wate^may be called oxyci of lyihogm. See St. 

 .John's MetIio3 of Nomenclature, p. 64. 

 t >9 R<«' P- ^74- 



Vol.. VIII. A* nience, 



