304 BALARD’S RESEARCHES CONCERNING THE NATURE OF 
the atoms so as to form of them metallic chlorides and salts with an 
oxacid of chlorine, we shall have the following results: 
R+O0+2ClX2= RCe+CER. 
R+04+2C1X3=2RCH+ CPR. 
R+04+2C1x4=3RCE4+ CPR. 
R+042C1X5=4R C+ CPR. 
Of these different formule, the third has been preferred by chemists, 
and chlorous acid has been assimilated as to its composition to nitrous 
and phosphorous acid. But why not adopt the second, which is cer- 
tainly more simple, and in which chlorous acid is equivalent to hypo- 
sulphurous acid ? 
Omitting all experimental proof, this supposition is much more na- 
tural than the other; for the cireumstances under which chlorous acid 
is formed do not at all resemble those under which nitrous and phos- 
phorous acid &c. are obtained, whereas they are identically the same 
as those which produce hyposulphurous acid. It is well known, in 
fact, that it is by treating the alkaline oxides with sulphur and water, 
that mixtures of 1 atom of hyposulphite and 1 atom of polysulphuret 
are obtained. If on this re-action we substitute chlorine for sulphur, 
we shall have 1 atom of chlorite and 1 atom of chloride. The only dif- 
ference existing between the two cases is, that the number which ex- 
presses the chemical equivalent of chlorine being double that which re- 
presents its atom, while with sulphur these two numbers are equal, we 
shall have Cl? for the formula of chlorous acid, whilst that of sulphurous 
acid will be S*. ’ 
The supposition which contributed to the adoption of the fourth for- 
mula by chemists, is that of Davy’s protoxide of chlorine being a distinct 
compound. Butas it was very evident that it was not the acid of the chlo- 
rites, the second_[ fourth? ] formula, which led to this conclusion, was ne- 
cessarily rejected. It is only since the experiments of M. Soubeiran have 
rendered it almost certain that the supposed protoxide of chlorine is 
merely a mixture of chlorine and of deutoxide, that the true composition 
of chlorous acid could be ascertained @ prior?. What denomination ought 
now to be assigned to this compound; It is evident that the name of chlo- 
rous acid can no longer be given to it, and that it is much more proper 
to call it hypochlorous, a name which recalls its analogy of constitution 
with the hyposulphurous, hypophosphorous acids, &c., formed like it of 
one equivalent of their radical and one equivalent of oxygen. Its combi- 
nations will be called hypochlorites. If this denomination were adopted, 
* This inconsistency does not happen when the number for chlorine is doubled. 
\ 
« 
a ee te 
