On the present state of Chemical Science. 3.49 
Art. XVI.—On the present state of Chemical Science. By 
Denison OLMSTED, Professor of Mathematics and Natu- 
ral Philosophy in Yale College.* 
(Read before the Comnecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, Sept. 5, 1826.) 
So rapid has been the progress of chemical science during 
the last ten or fifteen years, that our elder scholars frequently _ 
complain, that it has passed almost out of their field of view, 
It is the object of the present paper to offer a sketch of the 
science, according to its latest physiognomy ; more especial 
those features, which have of late so materially altered its 
complexion. But, before we proceed to the enumeration of 
those noble and interesting contributions, which have recent- 
ly been made to this department of knowledge, let us take a 
brief survey of the logic of chemistry, the improvements in 
which do not appear to haye kept pace with the march of 
discovery. Although the field of experimental chemistry, 
has been crowded with ardent votaries, and although every 
corner of it has been hunted by competitors eager for dis- 
covery, the philosophy of chemistry appears not to h 
been cultivated with equal zeal or ability. We still need a 
Locke to settle the metaphysics of the science, and to give 
simplicity and precision to its reasonings. » Its very defini- 
tion is so far from being agreed on, that every new elemen-~ 
tarv work offers a new one, ‘differing more or less from all 
that have’ preceded it ; and it is still the most puzzling thing 
to the chemist to tell, what is chemistry? It is evidently re- 
quired _of a good definition to be discriminating and descrip- 
tive ;—to prevent the science to which it relates, from being 
confounded with any other, and to convey as mae informa- 
tion, as is possible within so small a compass, respecting Its 
own nature. The greater number of the definitions of chem- 
istry, err in not being sufficiently descriptive. | s Dr. 
Thomson defines chemistry to be, the sevence which treats of 
those events and changes in natural bodies, which are not ac- 
companied by sensible motion. This definition may seem to 
distinguish chemistry from mechanical _philosephy, but it 
gives us very little information respecting the appropriate 
business of the chemist. It is apt, moreover, to lead the be- 
ginner into misapprehension ; as whenever he perceives ma- 
* Late Professor of Chemistry in the University of North-Carolina 
