
          sent in it, that I may [?] away my [?] of plants
sent to you, & I know when I [?]. I wrote what I supposed
the names of many do tell if they are right.

I am now packing another box for you; but shall
wait a little for the names of those I have our of
[?], before I trouble you with it & yet I shall
not wait long. It will be a great favor to me, if
you will [talk?] to my packages very soon, & let me
know what you say.

What is the [?] 
working you all is not well somehow.

Your paper is very handsome on the Gibbsite, & I 
congratulate you as a friend. I have no [?] to
the [?], tho I regret the name was fixed as it
is. It ought to be called [Hydro?], unless some of the
[?] is [?], which I do not much [?]. Your 
paper appears [?] & I am glad but you have not
told all, & that I may yet do, if my [?] as it
promises. You talk wisely too on the term [hydrote?], &
how could you [?] me so in your letter after what you
said in your paper - but I will answer you seriously 
for [hydrote?] is horrid, & hydrous is excellent in sound
& meaning. But chromons would be the [?] of chrome,
as well as chromic, you know. If the oxyde of chrome is
in the greater proportion, call it the [?] oxyd of chrome.
If it be a mixture in nearly equal quantities, call it a new 
mineral, at least, give it a new name, as Forsyth, or 
Hobokenite, or Sillimanite, or Nuttallite. But how do
you know the chrome is in the state of an oxyd mainly 
this should first be proved. If it be so, chromate, would violate 
all nomenclature & if [?] can not say a mixture of oxyds
of iron , of chrome, [?], or say [chromed?] or some 
other horrid word.

I wish you would publish your works on Nuttall's
Hobokenism in Silliman's Journal. It ought to be there
& your other paper should[?] there.
        