480, PRINCIPLES OF CHEMISTRY 



some ground of experimental research, has been evolved Independently of 

 any conception as to the nature of the elements; it does not in the least 

 Originate in the idea of a unique matter ; and it has no historical connec- 

 tion with that relic of the torments of classical thought, and therefore it 

 affords no more indication of the unity of matter or of the compound character, 

 of our elements, than the law of Avogadro, or the law of specific heats, or 

 even the conclusions of spectrum analysis. None of the advocates of a 

 unique matter have ever tried to explain the law from the standpoint of ideas 

 taken from a remote antiquity when it vyas found convenient to admit the 

 existence of many gods and. of a unique matter. 



When we try to explain the origin of the idea of a unique primary 

 matter, we easily trace that in the absence of inductions from experiment it 

 derives its origin from the scientifically philosophical attempt at discovering 

 eome'kind of unity in the immense diversity of individualities which we see 

 around. In classical times such a tendency could only be satisfied by con- 

 ceptions about the immaterial world. As to the material world, our ancestors 

 were compelled to resort to some hypothesis, and they adopted the idea of 

 unity in the formative material, because they were not able to evolve the 

 conception of any other possible unity in order to connect the multifarious 

 relations of matter. Responding to the same legitimate scientific tendency, 

 natural science has discovered throughout the universe a unity of plan, a 

 unity of forces, and a unity of matter, and the convincing conclusions of 

 modern science compel every one to admit these kinds of unity. But while 

 we admit unity in many things, we none the less must also explain the 

 individuality and the apparent diversity which we cannot fail to trace every- 

 where. It has been said of old, ' Give us a fulcrum, and it will become easy to 

 displace the earth.' So also we must say, ' Give us something that is individu- 

 alised, and the apparent diversity will be easily understood.' Otherwise, how 

 could unity result in a multitude ? 



After a long and painstaking research, natural science has discovered the 

 individualities of the chemical elements, and therefore it is now capable not 

 only of analysing, but also of synthesising ; it can understand and grasp 

 generality and unity, as well as the individualised and the multifarious. 

 The general and universal, like time and space, like force and motion, vary uni- 

 formly ; the uniform admit of interpolations, revealing every intermediate 

 phase. But the multitudirious, the individualised such as ourselves, or the 

 chemical elements, or the members of a peculiar periodic function of the 

 Clements, or Dalton's multiple proportions is characterised in another 

 way : We see in it, side by side with a connecting general principle, leaps, 

 breaks of continuity, points which escape from the analysis of the infinitely 

 small an absence- of complete intermediate links. Chemistry has found an 

 answer to the question as to the causes of multitudes ; and while retaining 

 the conception of many elements, all submitted to the discipline of a general 

 law, it offers an esc.ape from the Indian Nirvana the. absorption in the 

 universal, replacing it by the individualised. However, the place for indi- 



and selenium, although nothing of the kind results from any of the different readings of 

 the law. 



