THE CONSTITUTION OF BODY. 
539 
the atomic theory, they rather appear to be only difficulties in its application ; 
or, if they are exceptions to the general law, there is still nothing to show that 
they do not rank among that class of exceptions which proverbially prove the 
rule. For instance, let us take such a case as that of graphitic acid, where the 
combining weight of, the carbon is given as 33, i. e. as 2§ =: y atoms of carbon. 
Now, what objection is there to assuming that there may be such formula?, as 
e.g. A^BCy, or D 3 jE 2 jF n , provided we understand that these figures repre¬ 
sent only proportions, and that they should be reduced by means of a common 
denominator to integer numbers, as A n B 4 , C 3 , and D 3i) E 28 F 12ft ? or, possibly, 
it might be necessary to express them in a fractional form,"as | (A u B 4 C 5 ), 
tV (D 39 E 2 gF 12n ). However this may be, there does not seem to be any reason 
inherent in the nature of an atomic theory, why there should not be double, 
triple, quadruple, octuple, duodecimal, etc., conformations of molecules ; the 
designation, in each instance, being derived from the number required to re¬ 
duce the fractions. 
As we know nothing of the arrangement of atoms in a molecule, so we know 
of no reason why this, which might be called the fractional form of combination, 
should not be a regular law of the atomic theory,—a modification of the more 
general law of multiple proportions. With such a vast mass of evidence in 
favour of the theory, and against it only a few difficult cases, which the advent 
of more extensive knowledge may any day resolve in its favour, it would be 
most unwise to attempt to discredit or even to impugn so profoundly necessary a 
scheme. 
Hitherto, we have been engaged upon the simplicities of the science; the 
time, however, seems approaching when its complexities are about to overtake 
us. But what should we think of the geometrician, who, having hitherto been 
accustomed to deal only with the easy lines of the first and second orders, 
should, upon meeting with curves of a higher degree, turn round and assume, 
because the equations to which he had been accustomed failed to fit these more 
difficult and more complicated problems, that, therefore, these were incapable of 
being equated ? The parallel between the two cases is perfectly fair ; lines of the 
first order being analogous to the simple symbols of chemistry; those of the 
second, to simple definite combinations ; those of the third, to complicated com¬ 
binations of groups; while such formula? as C 116 H 240 N 4 PO 22 ‘(though this 
scarcely seems to rise beyond the third stage), and especially 0 72 H 113 NaN 13 SO 22 , 
with its surd (but probably inexact number, 113, query 112?) may respond to 
curves of higher orders. But, because the higher equations are more complex, 
and mount into higher powers and more numerous terms, do we therefore re¬ 
gard them as less amenable to the regular laws of equations ? There is no sci¬ 
ence, not even geometry, which can confine its dealings to regular problems. 
In truth, science would cease to be science, unless, sooner or later, it were able 
to make bye-laws for all cases, however seemingly irregular, which fall within 
its province. As our investigations extend, so as to include unstable, off-lying, 
or adventitious combinations within the sphere of research, we must expect to 
meet not only with unusual, but even with apparently anomalous formulae. 
Such cases would constitute what might be termed the casuistry of the science ; 
but none the less must they be amenable to, and be solved by its laws. It is 
not for them to cast a doubt upon the atomic theory, but for it to justify them. 
If we desired to be furnished with a measure of the relative progress which 
the science of chemistry has achieved, none more distinct and unimpeachable 
could possibly be given, than is derivable from the nature of the objections so 
fairly stated to the atomic theory. From these it is evident that chemistry is 
still in its childhood, and that, as yet, we have struggled but a very short dis¬ 
tance beyond the threshold of the science. 
§ 3. The objection of Faraday almost emulates the subtleties of the old Greek 
2 N 2 
