Existence of Radicals in the Amphide Salts disproved. 55 
(p.) The allegation that the copper was deposited from the 
want of an anion (oxysulphion) to combine with, is manifestly 
an error, since, had there been no anion, there could have been 
no discharge, as alleged, to hydrogen as a cathion, nor any elec- 
trolysis. 
 (q-) The hydrated oxide precipitated on the membrane, came 
from the reaction of the alkali with the sulphate of copper; the 
precipitated oxide of this metal from the oxygen of the soda act- 
ing as an anion; and the deposit of metallic copper from the so- 
lutions performing, feebly, the part of electrodes, while them- 
selves the subjects of electrolyzation. 
(r.) The so called principles of Liebig,* by which his theory 
of organic acids is preceded, are mainly an inversion of the truth, 
since they make the capacity of saturation of hydrated acids de- 
pendent on the quantity of hydrogen in their basic water, instead 
of making both the quantity of water, and, of course, the quan- 
tity of hydrogen therein, depend on their capacity. 
(s.) All that is truly said of hydrogen, would be equally true 
of any other radical, while the language employed would lead 
the student to suppose that there is a peculiar association between 
capacity of saturation, and presence of hydrogen. 
1. Some of the most distinguished European chemists, en- 
couraged by the number of instances in which the existence of. 
hypothetical radicals has been rendered probable, have lately in- 
ferred the existence of a large number of such radicals in a most 
important class of bodies, heretofore considered as compounds of 
acids and bases. It has been inferred, for instance, that sulphur, 
with four atoms of oxygen (SO*) constitutes a compound radi- 
cal, which performs in hydrous sulphuric acid, the same part as 
chlorine in chlorohydric acid. 
2. Graham has proposed sulphatoxygen as a name for this 
radical, and sulphatoxide for any of its compounds. Daniell 
has proposed oxysulphion and oxysulphionide for the same pur- 
poses. In reasoning on the subject I shall use the nomenclature 
last mentioned, not, however, with a view to sanction it, as I dis- 
approve altogether of this innovation, and deny the sufficiency of 
* Traité de Chimie Organique, tom. 1, page 7, 
