Dissociation into Ions, and its Consequences. 23 



come the very attraction which is the original cause of it, to 

 say nothing of the still stronger attraction which holds the 

 atoms together : induction cannot apply, as both water and 

 acid are supposed to be uncharged to start with, and even if 

 there were a contact difference of potential between these two 

 substances, it would not result in communicating both the + 

 and — charges to one only of the bodies brought into contact, — 

 the acid. 



In the second place, how can we imagine that an electric 

 charge, which we must at present regard as an affection of 

 matter, can combine with matter to produce heat and itself 

 remain in statu quo? Such a view is little less than endowing 

 the charges with some of the exclusive properties of matter, 

 and calling this new matter into existence just when and 

 where may be most convenient to the theory. 



In the third place, how can it be maintained that the 

 positive electrification of the hydrogen, and the negative 

 electrification of the chlorine, would dissolve the union between 

 them ? According to all our experience of electricity, such 

 electrification would make them cling together all the more 

 firmly. Further, if these so-called + and — charges repel 

 each other, why are they attracted by the — and + charges 

 respectively on electrodes during electrolysis ? or why, again, 

 do the similarly charged atoms not attract each other (as 

 dissimilarly charged ones are supposed to repel each other) 

 and form hydrogen and chlorine molecules ? 



That a molecule, when decomposed by some force superior 

 to the attraction of its constituent atoms, gives rise to free 

 atoms which are possessed of a certain amount of free energy, 

 and that this free energy, which we call chemical affinity, 

 may really be of the nature of an electric charge, has received the 

 support of the greatest chemists and physicists whom Science 

 has known ; but the present theory seems to have nothing in 

 common with such a view — indeed, it seems to be directly opposed 

 to it. On the old theory the atoms when separated have more 

 free energy than when combined, on the new theory they have 

 less : on the old, the electric charges are the consequence of 

 decomposition by some superior force, and form an integral 

 part of the stuff resulting from the decomposition; on the new, 

 they are the cause of this decomposition and are something 

 outside and independent of the matter itself. The old theory 

 attributes chemical affinity and combination to the existence 

 of these charges ; the new theory considers the charges to be 

 antagonistic to chemical affinity, and to be the cause of 

 chemical decomposition. 



The view has been suggested, I believe, that the supposed 



