288 ON THE UNCOMBINED ALKALI IN ANIMAL FLUIDS. 



portion, probably not one fourth of a grain, or at most half a 

 grain of alkali, in the whole niass; and this by fusion might be 

 united to form a compound unknown. 

 Objections to To the inferences of my adversary I also object. 1. That it 

 infer^i^Je,^^ ^ is assumed, without testimony, that alcohol dissolves a large 

 proportion of muriate of potash. It is, I believe, admitted, 

 that this menstruum dissolves none at all ; but if this be an 

 errour, I demand the proof, 



2, It was not admitted, as I reasoned, that acetate of soda 

 is nondeliquescent ; and therefore the proof 1 offered of the 

 alkali being potash from the deliquescent property of tha ace- 

 tate was eagerly seized to expose my ignorance, by exultingly 

 exclaiming, that I had committed a palpable errour. I acknow- 

 ledge, ihat I had taken for granted, with most chemists, what 

 1 subsequently admitted was not a fact ; but I am now in a 

 doubtful state of mind, with regard to this property ; for professor 

 Berzeiius confidently assures me, that acetate of soda was found, 

 by repeated experiments, to be uniformly nondeliquescent : and 

 on observing, that in ray experiment I had found it otherwise, 

 we agreed, that probably the different results were owing to 

 the soda I used containing a proportion, however minute, of 

 potash, and which I could not perceive by tartaric acid, whereas 

 that he employed was exempt. If this be true, it will be a 

 stronger proof, that the alkali is potash, than the united testi- 

 monies produced to prove that it is soda. 



3. Dr. Marcet argues, that from principle it may be inferred, 

 that soda, and not potash, is the impregnating alkali, because 

 the latter attracts muriatic acid more strongly than the former. 

 This is true in the circumstance of single elective attraction j 

 but any reasoning from this law, when more than one men- 

 struum is present, and two or more bases, is fallacious ; espe- 

 cially when the different substances present are not certainly 

 known. And here I must observe, that I have never contem- 

 plated potash as existing in an uncombined state in the animal 

 fluids, but in reality in combination with a destructible acid, or 

 with animal oxide. This acid, from some trials I was inclined 

 to propose, is the malic acid ; but I did not venture to offer it 

 to notice, although I did not abandon the notion : however, I 

 find from the conversations of professor Berzeiius, now in Lon- 

 don, that he coincided with me in an analogous, if not a simi- 

 lar 



