428 Observations on Organic Chemistry. 



All that belongs to the phenomena of motion, to the form of the organs, 

 their formation and development, the processes of absorption and secre- 

 tion, have been ascertained by physiologists and anatomists, with a 

 sagacity and with an expenditure of labour which must excite the great- 

 est admiration. But the greater is the contrast when we compare 

 therewith their explanation of the most simple chemical processes. 



Chemistry inquires for the causes of fermentation, putrefaction, and 

 decay, processes of gradual resolution of the higher order of atoms into 

 the more and more simple, and finally into the original forms of these 

 atoms, by the combination of which the most complex atom was form- 

 ed. Chemistry here meets, in its way, with physiology, which attempts 

 to solve the same problem by its own peculiar method. The physio- 

 logist discovers in fermenting fluids formations similar to the lower 

 species of plants ; he finds in putrefying matters a world of animalculse; 

 without entering upon any further inquiries, he assumes the mere con- 

 comitants of these processes to be their real causes. But is not this 

 precisely analogous to the old phlogiston hypothesis? According to 

 the physiologist, fermentation and putrefaction are effected by the de- 

 velopment of fungi and infusorial animalculae. But does this assump- 

 tion render the process itself a whit the more intelligible? If the spores 

 of fungi had generally the property of inducing fermentation in fluids, 

 such a view would have some foundation, but such a property has not 

 hitherto been observed by any one, nor has any attempt been made to 

 prove its existence. When chemistry proves that in many processes of 

 fermentation and decay, the resolution of complex atoms into simpler 

 ensues without the presence of vegetable or animal beings, it is certain- 

 ly most reasonable to suppose that the presence of these creatures, in 

 the few instances where they are found, is purely accidental. If they were 

 really the cause of the processes they ought to be found in all cases. 

 I have elsewhere (Introductory Address, No. 10, Lancet, p. 395,) com- 

 pared these notions with that of a child who attributes the flow of the 

 Rhine to the water-mills at Mayence. 



If the fungus be the cause of the destruction of the oak tree, and the 

 microscopic animal the cause of the putrefaction of the dead elephant, 

 what then causes the putrefaction and decay of the fungi and the ani- 

 malculae? They ferment and decay exactly in the same manner as the 

 tree and the elephant ; nothing remains of them but their non-volatile 

 and earthy constituents. 



Is it conceivable that plants and animals should be the causes of such 

 effects as fermentation and putrefaction ; that is, the destroyers and 

 annihilators of organic bodies, parts of plants and animals, when they 



