ar products, such as alcohol ; but there is still great probability in its favour, and more particularly in reference to the higher organic compounds, such as albumen, fibrin, &c."
"I have quoted the whole passage from Muller because it succinctly expresses a very general conception; but the conception is, as Mulder energetically says, durchaus unchemisch " altogether unchemical." The discovery of radicals upsets the whole theory. Ether, for example, does not consist of C4H5O but of C4H5 + O,—that is to say, the four equivalents of Carbon, the five of Hydrogen, and the one of Oxygen, do not form a ternary compound, each combining with the other two ; but the Carbon and the Hydrogen combine together, forming a compound radical named Ethyl, and this afterwards combines with oxygen and forms Ether. The oxygen here introduced may be separated from the group, and sulphur, bromine, or chlorine substituted. Thus, whether we admit the theory of the existence of compound radicals, as most chemists hold it, or whether we side with those who question it,* the facts upon which the theory is built overthrow the old hypothesis of ternary combinations. Indeed, Chemical Philosophy is daily advancing more and more to a recognition of the necessary dualism of all chemical combinations.
This hypothesis of binary and ternary compounds adumbrates one portion of the truth, it points out that the combinations necessary for organic bodies are more complex than those for inorganic bodies ; or, as Mulder puts it, " if any distinction is allowable we must place it in the fact that compound radicals exist in the former, and simple radicals in the latter" The point on which chemists are agreed is one mentioned in the previous section (p. 135) viz. that organic substances differ from the inorganic in possessing higher multiples of equivalents, or in other words that the organic molecule is a greater multiple of forces than the inorganic molecule.
The first stage in our inquiry is attained. We arrive at one capital distinction between Organic and Inorganic substances, and can set forth this primary static Law.
LAW I. The elements which compose Organic substances are the same as those which compose Inorganic substances ; but in the Organic they occur as higher multiples.
In an exhaustive view all organic substances are to be considered --
1st. As to their Elements ;
2nd. As to the Synthesis of these elements, i. e. their modes of combination;
3rd. As to their Form.
Having noted the difference of elementary composition, I will now pass to the difference of Synthesis. As the letters of the alphabet acquire new significations with new arrangements, although each letter preserves throughout its integral value, so do the elements acquire new powers by new arrangements. The letters P o t nay form the word Pot, or the word Top ; so also Carbon, Hydrogen, and Oxygen, in exactly the same proportions, may form Starch or Gum, It is in consequence, however, of chemists not distinctly appreciating the difference between elementary analysis and immediate analysis (or, to reverse the problem, elementary synthesis and immediate synthesis) that so much confusion reigns in this part of science ; among other points I will notice that of the pretended impossibility of forming organic substances by artificial means, an impossibility which is at present owing to our ignorance of the proximate principles and their synthesis. In Miller's Physiology we find this note :
"Berard, Proust, Dobereiner, and Hatchett, believe that they have succeeded in producing organic compounds by artificial processes; but their results have not been sufficiently confirmed. Woehler's experiments afford the only trustworthy instances of the artificial formation of these substances. Woehler discovered that a watery solution of ammonia, after being saturated with cyanogen, contained a considerable quantity of oxalic acid. Again, in the preparation of potassium from charcoal and carbonate of potash, a black mass passes over with the metal, which, when treated with water, yields a large proportion of o