ON THE ANIMAL FLUIDS.* g^ 



VII. 



A Rejoinder to a Paper published in the Philosophical 

 Journal, by Dr. Marcet, on the Animal Fluids. Bif 

 George Pearson, M D. F. R.S. y Sfc. 



To W. NICHOLSON, Esq. 

 SIR, 



JOV a severe aeddent I have been prevented from writing 

 the paper, which I proposed in the communication honour- 

 ably inserted in your Journal for February last. Meanwhile 

 am answer has been published by Dr. Marcet*. 



• Before I redeem my pledge of offering some remarks on Reply to Dr. 

 Dr. Marcet's Memoir, the subject of my former communi- Marcet « 

 cation, I feel myself called upon by what I consider to be • 

 the true interests of science, to reply to his intervening an- 

 swer. This gentleman cannot be more averse from polemi- 

 cal writing than I am, nor have more powerful motives of 

 private advantage by being otherwise employed : but unless 

 I were to avail myself of the plea of a celebrated philoso- 

 pher, who asserted, that his regard for truth was so great, 

 that he would not part with it, lest it should be ill treated by 

 mankind, I have no option consistent with public duty. 

 The feelings of either party must however regulate their 

 future conduct. For myself I can only promise, that I 

 shall not consider it as a point of honour to contend for the 

 last word. 



In the answer, which has been addressed to me, Dr. Whether the 

 Marcet has set forth evidence from his memoir, still under J"^™ 8 ^ 8 ^/ 

 examination, to maintain, that soda in an uncombined state, or potash, 

 and not potash, exists in the animal fluids, as I trust I have wncombined. 

 legitimately proved according to facts hitherto discovered. 

 As my honourable Opponent has not contravened the most 

 decisive parts of the evidence in support of my allegations, 

 I am spared the pains of again displaying it ; so thai I have 

 only to comment on the evidence he brings forward in justi« 



• See the Fhilos. Journal for March last. 



ficaticw. 



