CHEMICAL AFFINITY. 141 



of course the cube will attract the third particle more strongly 

 than the tetrahedron ; that is, it will have a greater affinity for it 

 than the tetrahedron. 



But if thr particles of bodies differ from each other in figure, 

 they may differ also in density and in size : and this must also alter 

 the absolute force of affinity, even when the distances and the figure 

 of the attracting particles are the same. The first of these two 

 circumstances, indeed, may be considered as a difference in the 

 mass of the attracting bodies, and th refore may be detected by 

 the weight of the aggregate ; but the second, though also no less 

 a variation in the mass, cannot be detected by any such method, 

 though its effect upon the strength of affinity may be very con. 

 siderable. 



There is no doubt that, upon the supposition that such differ, 

 ences in the figure, density, and size of the attracting particles, 

 really exist, and it is in the highest degree probable that they do 

 exist, the variation in intensity which characterises chemical affi- 

 nity may be accounted for, without supposing the intensity of 

 affinity, as a force inherent in the ultimate particles or atoms of 

 bodies, is really different. The same thing may be applied to 

 electricity and magnetism. It is certainly possible, therefore, 

 that attraction, both sensible and insensible, may not only vary 

 at the same rate, and according to the same laws, but be abso- 

 lutely the same force inherent in the atoms of matter, modified 

 merely by the number and situation of the attracting atoms. This 

 is certainly possible ; and it must be allowed that it corresponds 

 well with those notions of the simplicity of nature, in which we 

 are accustomed to indulge ourselves. But the truth is, that we are 

 by no means good judges of the simplicity of nature ; we have 

 but an imperfect glimpse here and there through the veil with 

 which her operations are covered ; and from the few points which 

 we see, we are constantly forming conjectures concerning the 

 whole of the machinery by which these operations are carried on. 

 Superior beings smile at our theories as we smile at the reasonings 

 of an infant ; and were the veil which conceals the machine from 

 our view to be suddenly withdrawn, we ourselves, in all proba- 

 bility, would be equally astonished and confounded at the wide 

 difference between our theories and conjectures, and the real pow. 

 ert by which the machinery of the universe is moved. Let us not 

 therefore be too precipitate in drawing general conclusions ; but 



