DR. PROUT ON CHEMISTRY. 
449 
presenting organic action as an adaptation and extension of those 
more obvious changes constantly going on around us, it not only 
renders them legitimate objects of inquiry, but holds out the 
rational hope that, by industry, and cautiously proceeding step by 
step from the known to the unknown, we may hereafter arrive at 
the solution of many of Nature's mysteries. 
We come now, in the last place, to consider very briefly the 
modes by which chemistry can be more immediately applied to 
the purposes of physiology and pathology. 
Chemistry, like most other branches of knowledge, may be 
considered in a twofold point of view—as a science , and as an art . 
The science of chemistry may be supposed to comprehend the 
knowledge of the primary laws which influence and regulate the 
combination of bodies, without reference to their common chemi¬ 
cal properties; the art of chemistry comprehends the practical 
knowledge of what is termed the chemical properties of bodies. 
The science or philosophy of chemistry, I am sorry to say, is 
very little understood ; perhaps no science less so, considering the 
attention that has been paid to the subject. The atomic theory 
of Dalton, by connecting chemistry with quantity, was undoubt¬ 
edly the greatest step that has been made in modern times ; but 
by stopping where it did I am not sure whether, upon the whole, 
the science of chemistry has not been rather retarded by it than 
advanced : for to suit the imaginary standards of this bed of Pro¬ 
crustes, real results, I fear, have been too often extended or com¬ 
pressed beyond all legitimate bounds, and thus truth sacri¬ 
ficed to error. My notion of the atomic theory is, and always 
has been, that it does not present a just view of the laws which 
regulate the union of natural bodies, and, consequently, that it is 
inapplicable both to organic and inorganic chemistry. The light 
in which I have been always accustomed to consider it has been 
very analogous to that in which, I believe, most botanists now 
consider the Linnaean system; namely, as a conventional arti¬ 
fice, exceedingly convenient for many purposes, but which does 
not represent nature. On the continent, the modification of 
Dalton's views, proposed by Berzelius, is generally adopted ; 
but this, I fear, is still more imperfect, than our own. In spite 
of this, however, and solely from their industry and practical 
skill, the Berzelian or continental school of chemists has got the 
start of us in many respects, and by mere dint of experiment has 
succeeded in establishing the curious and important doctrines of 
isomorphism and isomerism —doctrines totally inexplicable on the 
principles of Dalton and Berzelius, but which seem to me to flow 
necessarily, in conjunction with some others, from the principles 
