86 Chemical Philosophjj. 



iral salts hardly exceeded twenly. To remember 

 the names of so small a number of bodies, how- 

 ever inaccurate, or injudiciously selected, was no 

 difficult task. But when the discoveries of Half.s, 

 Black and Cavendish had laid the foundation oi 

 pneumatic chemistry, the boundaries of the science 

 began to enlarge with inconceivable rapidity, and 

 \\\^^ number of objects became, in themselves, and 

 in their combinations, little short of immense. To 

 have borne the names of all these objects in the 

 memory, without any catenation betv^ een them, 

 upon philosophic principles, without establishing 

 a system of mutual dependance and relation, more 

 simple and intelligible than had hitherto been done, 

 would have been a task beyond ordinary powers. 

 Such was the state of things, when a variety of con- 

 curring circumstances led to another and a greater 

 revolution than had before occurred. 



As early as 1782 M. de Morveau proposed a 

 general reform in the language of chemistry. At 

 that time he had undertaken the management of 

 the chemical part of the Encydopcedie Alethodigue." 

 Before entering on the execution of this great task, 

 he thought it proper to lay the outlines of his plan 

 before the most eminent chemists of France, that 

 his labours, when completed, might have the 

 stamp and authority of a national system. To this 

 end, he published a memoir, after reducing to a 

 regular form the various doctrines which had been, 

 for a number of years, maturing in the minds of 

 several of them, explaining his ideas on the sub- 

 ject of the proposed reform, exhibiting the princi- 

 ples on which he was about to proceed, and giving, 

 at the sam,e time, a new nomenclature, to which 

 he invited the attention and the criticism of the 



n Sec the Memoirs of Morveau, Lavoisier and Fourci-cy, read before the 

 Royal Academy on this subject, in St. John's Method of Chemical Nomen- 

 ciature, Xifc. 8vo. London. 1788. 



