336 
2dly. To state, “ the general method of 
investigation, to which alone Mr. Davy 
owes this particular result.’"¥ Upon this 
I shall not make any remark, although, 
perhaps, the word * alone,’ ought not to 
pass unnoticed, when, in the Bakerian 
lecture, it is written, that Mr. Davy was 
surprised at the result of the first expe- 
riment, in which the potash was decom- 
posed ; which he would not have been, 
had he at that time been guided by the 
“ strict” and “ perfectly correct” ana- 
logy, which Electrophilus would have us 
believe was the sole reason for Mr. Da- 
vy’s making the experiments, and, con- 
sequently, that he must have expected 
such a result. 
3dly. To give a general outline of the 
theory, which Mr. Davy has built upon 
these newly discovered electro-chenaical 
facts. This certainly was perfectly un- 
necessary for the edification of the read- 
ers of the Monthly Magazine, since so 
clear and comprehensive an analysis of 
the whole has been given in your Num- 
ber for February. (Vol. 25, p. 58.) 
These are the only reasons which ap- 
pear to have induced Electrophilus to fil 
up your pages with his communication ; 
and really, in my opinion, they are not of 
sufficient weight to warrant its insertion. 
I shall beg leave now to take this op- 
portunity of making some observations 
upon this theory; first, however, pre- 
mising, that it is far from my inten- 
tion to express any dislike or ill-will to- 
wards Mr. Davy, because from my hav- 
ing, as well as your Correspondent, at- 
tended his lectures, and known his abi- 
lities, I can appreciate and acknowledge 
his worth ; but in applying the principles 
of his theory to some of the acknow- 
ledged chemical phenomena, i have been 
unable by their means to explain them in 
a satisfactory manner. A few of these 
instances I wish, through your Magazine, 
to state to the public, because, believing, 
- as I do, that the principles are in « great 
measure correct, [ cannot but hope, that 
amore complete investigation, and a 
clearer insight into the new laws, will 
essentially tend to render our ideas of 
chemical science, more simple, and 
therefore more accordant, with the or- 
dinary course of nature.. These new 
doctrines, however, certainly want in- 
vestigation, as, in all probability, there 
will be a necessity for new-modelling my 
present ideas in some degree, before we 
shall arrive at that truth, which is so 
necessary for the establishment of gen¢~ 
ral principies. 
# 
; og 
Observations on' Professor Davy's new Theory. 
[May 1, 
In the first place, therefore, why do 
not the metals themselves, in preference 
to their oxides, unite with acids when 
presented to them? This they ought to 
do, if itis true, that the more exigen is 
contained in any substance, the more 
powerful are its negative energies; 
whereas, in reality, here are metals 
which are inflammable, and therefore 
positive, not capable of uniting with 
acids which are negative, unless a large 
dose of the negative principle be added 
to them, by which the two bodies will 
be brought nearer to each other in their 
electrical states, and therefore ought 
to become less likely to unite. 
Or why do not earths, which are posi- 
tive, unite with oxigen, which contains a 
smaller quantity of electricity (or is more 
negative), than any substance with which, 
we are acquainted; when they unite with 
acids which contain so much oxigen, as 
to be indebted for all their properties te 
the quantity of that body which enters 
into their composition? 
Or, since oils contain so much oxigen, 
as not only to be negative with regard 
to the oils, but evento the alkalis also? 
for, by the new law of bodies uniting to- 
gether more strongly in proportion to the 
opposition of their electrical. states, the 
union of oils and acids ought to be far 
stronger than that. between the oils and 
alkalis; whereas, in fact, oils and acids 
have no affinity for each other. The 
same reasoning may be applied to the 
mixture of oils and water, &c. 
After having stated these apparent 
anomalies in Mr. Davy’s theory, I 
shall refrain from mentioning many 
others, which a further examination 
would point out, being contented with 
having epened a door for discussion, 
which I hope will lead to a more com- 
plete elucidation or corection of these 
doctrines of the ingenious and learned 
professor. Your's, &e. 
Birmingham, PHILECTRON. 
March 16, 1809. ; 
a 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, : 
HALMERS, in his Life of Sir David 
Lyndsay, vol. 1. p. 49, has engraved 
an old stone, now in a farm house, at 
the Mount, with these arms, &c.—A fess 
checqué, in chief three mullets; im base, 
a heart; impaling three escutcheons, in 
fess, a thistle: on the dexter side of these 
arms are, J. L. and on the sinister, A. H, 
and at the base, 1650. 
He says, ‘it is apparent that the 
dexter,” 
