23 
REVIEWS. 
the view of meeting the requirements of beginners in the 
study of chemistry. Since the author’s death the size of the 
book has increased with every new edition^ and, although this 
may he regarded as unavoidable when the vast strides which 
chemistry has made during the last few years is taken into 
consideration, it is, nevertheless, to be regretted, in some 
respects, that such augmentation should be considered 
necessary. 
While praising the book, as we can most highly and most 
conscientiously, and we do not hesitate to pronounce it, in 
its new garb, to be the best hand-book for students requiring 
a more extended knowledge of facts than can be derived from 
such a work as Dr. Roscoe’s admirable ^ Lessons in Che¬ 
mistry,’ we cannot help expressing our regret that in the 
present unsettled state of chemical nomenclature and notation, 
a greater adhesion has not been given to the system of unitary, 
and, wdiere needs be, of typical formulae. Until the majority 
of chemists have agreed upon some one systematic mode of 
naming and formulating bodies, we think it better to adopt, as 
uniformly as possible, the unitary method of notation, and, 
with certain exceptions and modifications, the old system of 
nomenclature, imperfect though it be. 
We are at a loss to understand why in classifying the 
elements Kekule’s doctrine of atomicity or quantivalence has 
not been applied to the non-metallic as well as to the metallic 
elements, especially as we find a most lucid explanation of 
this popular doctrine given at page 251. 
It seems to us that the value of the tenth edition of 
Fownes, as an introduction to philosophic chemistry, is 
lessened by this want, as well as by some other deficiencies 
in uniformity of arrangement and order of treatment. 
But the main characteristic of Fownes, and that which con¬ 
stitutes its chief value, is that facts and descriptions of 
substances are not treated as being of secondary importance 
to theories; the contrary is nearer the truth, and the require¬ 
ments of the student are thereby considered of more import- 
anee than the display of the author’s knowledge of, and love 
for, the higher branches of his scienee. There are too many 
chemieal talkers and possessors of book-knowledge at the 
present day, and too few workers in the laboratory. Any one 
