6 M. Berzelius on ihe Theory of Substitutions of M. Dumas. 



to isolate it from other analogous combinations, and on its 

 account to imagine new views contrary to the general system 

 of chemical knowledge. 



The chloric aether of M. Malaguti may be considered in two 

 different points of view. As obtained directly with aether and 

 chlorine, it is very probable that it is composed, as above men- 

 tioned, of an atom of acetic acid and of two atoms of chloride 

 of carbon, corresponding lo the radical of this acid. But 

 when, for example, benzoate of ethyle is decomposed by chlo- 

 rine, it appears that the substance produced, and which re- 

 mains in combination with the benzoic acid, has the formula 

 which I gave in a preceding letter, 



C2H«0,+ 2CC1. 



I will also add some examples of combinations of oxichlo- 

 rides with other bodies; but they are confined to the oxi- 

 chlorides of carbon. For the sake of brevity, 



E will be = C^H'", ethyle; 



Me = C- H^ methyle ; 



F = C-' H% formyle. 



(C CP+ C) + (S CIH S) A. Marcet and myself (sulphuret 



of carbon treated with nitro- 

 muriatic acid). 



(C CP+ C) + E C Dumas (chloroxicarbonic aether). 



(C CP + C) + Me C Do. (chlorocarbonate of methyle). 



(CClf+C) + FCl_ (Chloral). 



(C CIHC) + F^^ a Kane (methylic chloral). 



In the last the radical may also be considered as C^ H*, 

 that is to say, that of the citric, tartaric and succinic acids. 



In order then to avoid the revolution which threatens elec- 

 tro-chemical views, it will be seen we have only to place the 

 symbols of the formula of chloracetic acid in an order 

 rather different from that of M. Dumas ; and by this slight 

 change the new combination is placed in a class of pre- 

 viously known bodies. An epoch has arrived in which a 

 glimpse of a chemical theory of organic combinations has 

 been perceived ; but if instead of allowing it to develop as 

 experience extends, it is wished to base it upon isolated facts, 

 viewed without regard to their relations with the system of 

 general knowledge, and on explanations which do not har- 

 monize with the principles of the science ; and if, besides, it be 



