The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Principles of Chemistry Volume I (of 2), by Dmitry Ivanovich Mendeleyev, Edited by T. A. Lawson, Translated by George Kamensky

THE
PRINCIPLES OF CHEMISTRY

By D. MENDELÉEFF
TRANSLATED FROM THE RUSSIAN (SIXTH EDITION) BY
GEORGE KAMENSKY, A.R.S.M.
OF THE IMPERIAL MINT, ST PETERSBURG: MEMBER OF THE RUSSIAN PHYSICO-CHEMICAL SOCIETY
EDITED BY
T. A. LAWSON, B.Sc. Ph.D.
EXAMINER IN COAL-TAR PRODUCTS TO THE CITY AND GUILDS OF LONDON INSTITUTE FELLOW OF THE INSTITUTE OF CHEMISTRY
IN TWO VOLUMES
VOLUME I.
LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO
39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON
NEW YORK AND BOMBAY
1897
All rights reserved

PREFACE
TO THE
ENGLISH TRANSLATION

The first English edition of this work was published in 1891, and that a second edition is now called for is, we think, a sufficient proof that the enthusiasm of the author for his science, and the philosophical method of his teaching, have been duly appreciated by English chemists.

In the scientific work to which Professor Mendeléeff's life has been devoted, his continual endeavour has been to bring the scattered facts of chemistry within the domain of law, and accordingly in his teaching he endeavours to impress upon the student the principles of the science, the generalisations, so far as they have been discovered, under which the facts naturally group themselves.

Of those generalisations the periodic law is perhaps the most important that has been put forward since the establishment of the atomic theory. It is therefore interesting to note that Professor Mendeléeff was led to its discovery in preparing the first Russian edition of this book.

It is natural, too, that the further application and development of that generalisation should be the principal feature of this, the latest edition.

There are special difficulties in rendering the Russian language into good English, and we are conscious that these have not been entirely overcome. Doubtless also there are errors of statement which have escaped correction, but we believe that the present edition will be found better in both respects than its predecessor. We have thought it our duty as translators to give as far as possible a faithful reproduction of Professor Mendeléeff's work—the sixth Russian edition—without amplifying or modifying his statements, and in this we have the author's approval.

Although other duties have prevented Mr. Greenaway from undertaking the care of the present edition, he has been kind enough to give us the benefit of his suggestions on several points. We also wish to thank the Managers of the Royal Institution for permission to reprint the lecture delivered at the Royal Institution by Professor Mendeléeff (Appendix I.), and to the Council of the Chemical Society for permission to reprint the Faraday lecture which forms Appendix II.

In conclusion, we are indebted to Mr. F. Evershed, who has given us much valuable assistance in revising the sheets for the press.

G. K.
T. A. L.

August 1897

AUTHOR'S PREFACE
TO
THE SIXTH RUSSIAN EDITION

This work was written during the years 1868–1870, its object being to acquaint the student not only with the methods of observation, the experimental facts, and the laws of chemistry, but also with the insight given by this science into the unchangeable substratum underlying the varying forms of matter.

If statements of fact themselves depend upon the person who observes them, how much more distinct is the reflection of the personality of him who gives an account of methods and of philosophical speculations which form the essence of science! For this reason there will inevitably be much that is subjective in every objective exposition of science. And as an individual production is only significant in virtue of that which has preceded and that which is contemporary with it, it resembles a mirror which in reflecting exaggerates the size and clearness of neighbouring objects, and causes a person near it to see reflected most plainly those objects which are on the side to which it is directed. Although I have endeavoured to make my book a true mirror directed towards the whole domain of chemical changes, yet involuntarily those influences near to me have been the most clearly reflected, the most brightly illuminated, and have tinted the entire work with their colouring. In this way the chief peculiarity of the book has been determined. Experimental and practical data occupy their place, but the philosophical principles of our science form the chief theme of the work. In former times sciences, like bridges, could only be built up by supporting them on a few broad buttresses and long girders. In addition to the exposition of the principles of chemistry, it has been my desire to show how science has now been built up like a suspension bridge, supported by the united strength of a number of slender, but firmly-fixed, chains, which individually are of little strength, and has thus been carried over difficulties which before appeared insuperable. In comparing the science of the past, the present, and the future, in placing the particulars of its restricted experiments side by side with its aspirations after unbounded and infinite truth, and in restraining myself from yielding to a bias towards the most attractive path, I have endeavoured to incite in the reader a spirit of inquiry, which, dissatisfied with speculative reasonings alone, should subject every idea to experiment, encourage the habit of stubborn work, and excite a search for fresh chains of evidence to complete the bridge over the bottomless unknown. History proves that it is possible by this means to avoid two equally pernicious extremes, the Utopian—a visionary contemplation which proceeds from a current of thought only—and the stagnant realism which is content with bare facts. Sciences like chemistry, which deal with ideas as well as with material substances, and create a possibility of immediately verifying that which has been or may be discovered or assumed, demonstrate at every step that the work of the past has availed much, and that without it it would be impossible to advance into the ocean of the unknown. They also show the possibility of becoming acquainted with fresh portions of this unknown, and compel us, while duly respecting the teachings of history, to cast aside classical illusions, and to engage in a work which not only gives mental satisfaction but is also practically useful to all our fellow-creatures.[1]

Thus the desire to direct those thirsting for truth to the pure source of the science of the forces acting throughout nature forms the first and most important aim of this book. The time has arrived when a knowledge of physics and chemistry forms as important a part of education as that of the classics did two centuries ago. In those days the nations which excelled in classical learning stood foremost, just as now the most advanced are those which are superior in the knowledge of the natural sciences, for they form the strength and characteristic of our times. In following the above and chief aim, I set myself a second object: to furnish a text-book for an elementary knowledge of chemistry and so satisfy a want which undoubtedly exists among students and those who have recourse to chemistry either as a source of truth or welfare.[2] Hence, although the fundamental object of this work was to express and embrace the general chemical teaching of the present day from a personal point of view, I have nevertheless striven throughout to maintain such a level as would render the ‘Principles of Chemistry’ accessible to the beginner. Many aspects of this work are determined by this combination of requirements which frequently differ widely. An issue was only possible under one condition, i.e. not to be carried away by what appears to be a plausible theory in explaining individual facts and to always endeavour to transmit the simple truth of a given fact, extracting it from the vast store of the literature of the subject and from tried personal experience. In publishing a new edition of this work I have striven to add any facts of importance recently discovered[3] and to revise the former edition in the above spirit. With this object I have entirely gone over this edition, and a comparison of it with the former one will show that the additions and alterations have cost as much labour as many chapters of the work. I also wished to show in an elementary treatise on chemistry the striking advantages gained by the application of the periodic law, which I first saw in its entirety in the year 1869 when I was engaged in writing the first edition of this book, in which, indeed, the law was first enunciated. At that time, however, this law was not established so firmly as now, when so many of its consequences have been verified by the researches of numerous chemists, and especially by Roscoe, Lecoq de Boisbaudran, Nilson, Brauner, Thorpe, Carnelley, Laurie, Winkler, and others. The, to me, unexpectedly rapid success with which the teaching of the periodicity of the elements has spread in our science, and perhaps also, the perseverance with which I collected in this work, and upon a new plan, the most important data respecting the elements and their mutual relations, explained sufficiently the fact that the former (5th, 1889) edition of my work has been translated into English[4] and German[5] and is being translated into French.[6] Deeply touched by the favourable opinions expressed by English men of science upon my book, I ascribe them chiefly to the periodic law placed at the basis of my treatise and especially of the second part of the book, which contains a large amount of data having a special and sometimes quite unexpected, bearing from the point of view of this law. As the entire scheme of this work is subordinated to the law of periodicity, which may be illustrated in a tabular form by placing the elements in series, groups, and periods, two such tables are given at the end of this preface.

In this the sixth edition I have not altered any essential feature of the original work, and have retained those alterations which were introduced into the fifth edition.[7] I have, however, added many newly discovered facts, and in this respect it is necessary to say a few words. Although all aspects of the simplest chemical relations are as far as possible equally developed in this book, yet on looking back I see that I have, nevertheless, given most attention to the so-called indefinite compounds examples of which may be seen in solutions. I recur repeatedly to them, and to all the latest data respecting them, for in them I see a starting point for the future progress of our science and to them I affiliate numerous instances of definite compounds, beginning with alloys and silicates and ending with complex acids. There are two reasons for this. In the first place, this subject has deeply interested me from my youth; I have devoted a portion of my own researches to it, and therefore it occupied an important position even in the first edition of my book; besides which all that has been subsequently accomplished in our science, especially during the last five or six years, shows that at the present day an interest in these questions plays an important part in the minds of a large circle of contemporary workers in chemistry. This personal attachment, if I may so call it, to the question of solutions and such indefinite compounds, must involuntarily have impressed itself upon my work, and in the later editions I have even had to strive not to give this subject a greater development than previously, so great was the material accumulated, which however does not yet give us the right to consider even the most elementary questions respecting solutions as solved. Thus, we cannot yet say what a solution really is. My own view is that a solution is a homogeneous liquid system of unstable dissociating compounds of the solvent with the substance dissolved. But although such a theory explains much to me, I cannot consider my opinion as proved, and therefore give it with some reserve as one of several hypotheses.[8] As a subject yet far from solved, I might naturally have ignored it, or only mentioned it cursorily, but such a treatment of solutions, although usual in elementary treatises on chemistry, would not have answered my views upon the subject of our science, and I wished that the reader might find in my book beyond everything an expression of all that a study of the subject built up for me. If in solutions I see and can frequently prove distinct evidences of the existence of those definite compounds which form the more generalised province of chemical data, I could not refrain from going into certain details respecting solutions; otherwise, there would have remained no trace of that general idea, that in them we have only a certain instance of ordinary definite or atomic compounds, subject to Dalton's laws. Having long had this idea, I wished to impress it upon the reader of my book, and it is this desire which forms the second of those chief reasons why I recur so frequently to solutions in this work. At present, my ideas respecting solutions are shared by few, but I trust that by degrees the instances I give will pave the way for their general recognition, and it is my hope that they may find adherents among those of my readers who are in a position to work out by experiment this difficult but highly interesting problem.

In conclusion, I desire to record my thanks to V. D. Sapogenikoff, who has corrected the proofs of the whole of this edition and compiled the indexes which greatly facilitate the search for those details which are scattered throughout the work.

D. MENDELÉEFF.

Footnotes:

[1] Chemistry, like every other science, is at once a means and an end. It is a means of attaining certain practical results. Thus, by its assistance, the obtaining of matter in its various forms is facilitated; it shows new possibilities of availing ourselves of the forces of nature, indicates the methods of preparing many substances, points out their properties, &c. In this sense chemistry is closely connected with the work of the manufacturer and the artisan, its sphere is active, and is a means of promoting general welfare. Besides this honourable vocation, chemistry has another. With it, as with every other elaborated science, there are many lofty aspirations, the contemplation of which serves to inspire its workers and adherents. This contemplation comprises not only the principal data of the science, but also the generally-accepted deductions, and also hypotheses which refer to phenomena as yet but imperfectly known. In this latter sense scientific contemplation varies much with times and persons, it bears the stamp of creative power, and embraces the highest forms of scientific progress. In that pure enjoyment experienced on approaching to the ideal, in that eagerness to draw aside the veil from the hidden truth, and even in that discord which exists between the various workers, we ought to see the surest pledges of further scientific progress. Science thus advances, discovering new truths, and at the same time obtaining practical results. The edifice of science not only requires material, but also a plan, and necessitates the work of preparing the materials, putting them together, working out the plans and the symmetrical proportions of the various parts. To conceive, understand, and grasp the whole symmetry of the scientific edifice, including its unfinished portions, is equivalent to tasting that enjoyment only conveyed by the highest forms of beauty and truth. Without the material, the plan alone is but a castle in the air—a mere possibility; whilst the material without a plan is but useless matter. All depends on the concordance of the materials with the plan and execution, and the general harmony thereby attained. In the work of science, the artisan, architect, and creator are very often one and the same individual; but sometimes, as in other walks of life, there is a difference between them; sometimes the plan is preconceived, sometimes it follows the preparation and accumulation of the raw material. Free access to the edifice of science is not only allowed to those who devised the plan, worked out the detailed drawings, prepared the materials, or piled up the brickwork, but also to all those who are desirous of making a close acquaintance with the plan, and wish to avoid dwelling in the vaults or in the garrets where the useless lumber is stored.

Knowing how contented, free, and joyful is life in the realm of science, one fervently wishes that many would enter its portals. On this account many pages of this treatise are unwittingly stamped with the earnest desire that the habits of chemical contemplation which I have endeavoured to instil into the minds of my readers will incite them to the further study of science. Science will then flourish in them and by them, on a fuller acquaintance not only with that little which is enclosed within the narrow limits of my work, but with the further learning which they must imbibe in order to make themselves masters of our science and partakers in its further advancement.

Those who enlist in the cause of science have no reason to fear when they remember the urgent need for practical workers in the spheres of agriculture, arts, and manufacture. By summoning adherents to the work of theoretical chemistry, I am confident that I call them to a most useful labour, to the habit of dealing correctly with nature and its laws, and to the possibility of becoming truly practical men. In order to become actual chemists, it is necessary for beginners to be well and closely acquainted with three important branches of chemistry—analytical, organic, and theoretical. That part of chemistry which is dealt with in this treatise is only the groundwork of the edifice. For the learning and development of chemistry in its truest and fullest sense, beginners ought, in the first place, to turn their attention to the practical work of analytical chemistry; in the second place, to practical and theoretical acquaintance with some special chemical question, studying the original treatises of the investigators of the subject (at first, under the direction of experienced teachers), because in working out particular facts the faculty of judgment and of correct criticism becomes sharpened; in the third place, to a knowledge of current scientific questions through the special chemical journals and papers, and by intercourse with other chemists. The time has come to turn aside from visionary contemplation, from platonic aspirations, and from classical verbosity, and to enter the regions of actual labour for the common weal, to prove that the study of science is not only air excellent education for youth, but that it instils the virtues of industry and veracity, and creates solid national wealth, material and mental, which without it would be unattainable. Science, which deals with the infinite, is itself without bounds.

[2] I recommend those who are commencing the study of chemistry with my book to first read only what is printed in the large type, because in that part I have endeavoured to concentrate all the fundamental, indispensable knowledge required for that study. In the footnotes, printed in small type (which should be read only after the large text has been mastered), certain details are discussed; they are either further examples, or debatable questions on existing ideas which I thought useful to lay before those entering into the sphere of science, or certain historical and technical details which might be withdrawn from the fundamental portion of the book. Without intending to attain in my treatise to the completeness of a work of reference, I have still endeavoured to express the principal developments of science as they concern the chemical elements viewed in that aspect in which they appeared to me after long continued study of the subject and participation in the contemporary advance of knowledge.

I have also placed my personal views, suppositions, and arguments in the footnotes, which are chiefly designed for details and references. But I have endeavoured to avoid here, as in the text, not only all that I consider doubtful, but also those details which belong either to special branches of chemistry (for instance, to analytical, organic, physical, theoretical, physiological, agricultural, or technical chemistry), or to different branches of natural science which are more and more coming into closer and closer contact with chemistry. Chemistry, I am convinced, must occupy a place among the natural sciences side by side with mechanics; for mechanics treats of matter as a system of ponderable points having scarcely any individuality and only standing in a certain state of mobile equilibrium. For chemistry, matter is an entire world of life, with an infinite variety of individuality both in the elements and in their combinations. In studying the general uniformity from a mechanical point of view, I think that the highest point of knowledge of nature cannot be attained without taking into account the individuality of things in which chemistry is set to seek for general higher laws. Mechanics may be likened to the science of statesmanship, chemistry to the sciences of jurisprudence and sociology. The general universe could not be built up without the particular individual universe, and would be a dry abstract were it not enlivened by the real variety of the individual world. Mechanics forms the classical basis of natural philosophy, while chemistry, as a comparatively new and still young science, already strives to—and will, in the future introduce a new, living aspect into the philosophy of nature; all the more as chemistry alone is never at rest or anywhere dead—its vital action has universal sway, and inevitably determines the general aspect of the universe. Just as the microscope and telescope enlarge the scope of vision, and discover life in seeming immobility, so chemistry, in discovering and striving to discern the life of the invisible world of atoms and molecules and their ultimate limit of divisibility, will clearly introduce new and important problems into our conception of nature. And I think that its rôle, which is now considerable, will increase more and more in the future; that is, I think that in its further development it will occupy a place side by side with mechanics for the comprehension of the secrets of nature. But here we require some second Newton; and I have no doubt that he will soon appear.

[3] I was much helped in gathering data from the various chemical journals of the last five years by the abstracts made for me by Mr. Y. V. Kouriloff, to whom I tender my best thanks.

[4] The English translation was made by G. Kamensky, and edited by A. J. Greenaway; published by Longmans, Green & Co.

[5] The German translation was made by L. Jawein and A. Thillot; published by Ricker (St. Petersburg).

[6] The French translation has been commenced by E. Achkinasi and H. Carrion from the fifth edition, and is published by Tignol (Paris).

[7] The fifth edition was not only considerably enlarged, compared with the preceding, but also the foundations of the periodic system of the elements were placed far more firmly in it than in the former editions. The subject-matter was also divided into text and footnotes, which contained details unnecessary for a first acquaintance with chemistry. The fifth edition sold out sooner than I expected, so that instead of issuing supplements (containing the latest discoveries in chemistry), as I had proposed, I was obliged to publish the present entirely new edition of the work.

[8] This hypothesis is not only mentioned in different parts of this book, but is partly (from the aspect of the specific gravity of solutions) developed in my work, The Investigation of Solutions from their Specific Gravity, 1887.

TABLE I
Distribution of the Elements in Groups and Series

TABLE II
Periodic System and Atomic Weights of the Elements
(Giving the pages on which they are described)

Note.—Two lines under the elements indicate those which are very widely distributed in nature; one line indicates those which, although not so frequently met with, are of general use in the arts and manufactures.

CONTENTS
OF
THE FIRST VOLUME

PRINCIPLES OF CHEMISTRY
INTRODUCTION

The study of natural science, whose rapid development dates from the days of Galileo (†1642) and Newton (†1727), and its closer application to the external universe[1] led to the separation of Chemistry as a particular branch of natural philosophy, not only owing to the increasing store of observations and experiments relating to the mutual transformations of substances, but also, and more especially, because in addition to gravity, cohesion, heat, light and electricity it became necessary to recognise the existence of particular internal forces in the ultimate parts of all substances, forces which make themselves manifest in the transformations of substances into one another, but remain hidden (latent) under ordinary circumstances, and whose existence cannot therefore be directly apprehended, and so for a long time remained unrecognised. The primary object of chemistry is the study of the homogeneous substances[2] of which all the objects of the universe are made up, with the transformations of these substances into each other, and with the phenomena[3] which accompany such transformations. Every chemical change or reaction,[4] as it is called, can only take place under a condition of most intimate and close contact of the re-acting substances,[5] and is determined by the forces proper to the smallest invisible particles (molecules) of matter. We must distinguish three chief classes of chemical transformations.

1. Combination is a reaction in which the union of two substances yields a new one, or in general terms, from a given number of substances, a lesser number is obtained. Thus, by heating a mixture of iron and sulphur[6] a single new substance is produced, iron sulphide, in which the constituent substances cannot be distinguished even by the highest magnifying power. Before the reaction, the iron could be separated from the mixture by a magnet, and the sulphur by dissolving it in certain oily liquids;[7] in general, before combination they might be mechanically separated from each other, but after combination both substances penetrate into each other, and are then neither mechanically separable nor individually distinguishable. As a rule, reactions of direct combination are accompanied by an evolution of heat, and the common case of combustion, evolving heat, consists in the combination of combustible substances with a portion (oxygen) of the atmosphere, the gases and vapours contained in the smoke being the products of combination.

2. Reactions of decomposition are cases the reverse of those of combination, that is, in which one substance gives two—or, in general, a given number of substances a greater number. Thus, by heating wood (and also coal and many animal or vegetable substances) without access to air, a combustible gas, a watery liquid, tar, and carbon are obtained. It is in this way that tar, illuminating gas, and charcoal are prepared on a large scale.[8] All limestones, for example, flagstones, chalk, or marble, are decomposed by heating to redness into lime and a peculiar gas called carbonic anhydride. A similar decomposition, taking place, however, at a much lower temperature, proceeds with the green copper carbonate which is contained in natural malachite. This example will be studied more in detail presently. Whilst heat is evolved in the ordinary reactions of combination, it is, on the contrary, absorbed in the reactions of decomposition.

3. The third class of chemical reactions—where the number of re-acting substances is equal to the number of substances formed—may be considered as a simultaneous decomposition and combination. If, for instance, two compounds A and B are taken and they react on each other to form the substances C and D, then supposing that A is decomposed into D and E, and that E combines with B to form C, we have a reaction in which two substances A, or D E, and B were taken and two others C, or E B, and D were produced. Such reactions ought to be placed under the general term of reactions of ‘rearrangement,’ and the particular case where two substances give two fresh ones, reactions of ‘substitution.’[9] Thus, if a piece of iron be immersed in a solution of blue vitriol (copper sulphate), copper is formed—or, rather, separated out, and green vitriol (iron sulphate, which only differs from the blue vitriol in that the iron has replaced the copper) is obtained in solution. In this manner iron may be coated with copper, so also copper with silver; such reactions are frequently made use of in practice.

The majority of the chemical changes which occur in nature and are made use of technically are very complicated, as they consist of an association of many separate and simultaneous combinations, decompositions, and replacements. It is chiefly due to this natural complexity of chemical phenomena that for so many centuries chemistry did not exist as an exact science; that is so say, that although many chemical changes were known and made use of,[10] yet their real nature was unknown, nor could they be predicted or directed at will. Another reason for the tardy progress of chemical knowledge is the participation of gaseous substances, especially air, in many reactions. The true comprehension of air as a ponderable substance, and of gases in general as peculiar elastic and dispersive states of matter, was only arrived at in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and it was only after this that the transformations of substances could form a science. Up to that time, without understanding the invisible and yet ponderable gaseous and vaporous states of substances, it was impossible to obtain any fundamental chemical evidence, because gases escaped from notice between the reacting and resultant substances. It is easy from the impression conveyed to us by the phenomena we observe to form the opinion that matter is created and destroyed: a whole mass of trees burn, and there only remains a little charcoal and ash, whilst from one small seed there grows little by little a majestic tree. In one case matter seems to be destroyed, and in the other to be created. This conclusion is arrived at because the formation or consumption of gases, being under the circumstances invisible to the eye, is not observed. When wood burns it undergoes a chemical change into gaseous products, which escape as smoke. A very simple experiment will prove this. By collecting the smoke it may be observed that it contains gases which differ entirely from air, being incapable of supporting combustion or respiration. These gases may be weighed, and it will then be seen that their weight exceeds that of the wood taken. This increase in weight arises from the fact that, in burning, the component parts of the wood combine with a portion of the air; in like manner iron increases in weight by rusting. In burning gunpowder its substance is not destroyed, but only converted into gases and smoke. So also in the growth of a tree; the seed does not increase in mass of itself and from itself, but grows because it absorbs gases from the atmosphere and sucks water and substances dissolved therein from the earth through its roots. The sap and solid substances which give plants their form are produced from these absorbed gases and liquids by complicated chemical processes. The gases and liquids are converted into solid substances by the plants themselves. Plants not only do not increase in size, but die, in a gas which does not contain the constituents of air. When moist substances dry they decrease in weight; when water evaporates we know that it does not disappear, but will return from the atmosphere as rain, dew, and snow. When water is absorbed by the earth, it does not disappear there for ever, but accumulates somewhere underground, from whence it afterwards flows forth as a spring. Thus matter does not disappear and is not created, but only undergoes various physical and chemical transformations—that is to say, changes its locality and form. Matter remains on the earth in the same quantity as before; in a word it is, so far as we are concerned, everlasting. It was difficult to submit this simple and primary truth of chemistry to investigation, but when once made clear it rapidly spread, and now seems as natural and simple as many truths which have been acknowledged for ages. Mariotte and other savants of the seventeenth century already suspected the existence of the law of the indestructibility of matter, but they made no efforts to express it or to apply it to the requirements of science. The experiments by means of which this simple law was arrived at were made during the latter half of the last century by the founder of modern chemistry, Lavoisier, the French Academician and tax farmer. The numerous experiments of this savant were conducted with the aid of the balance, which is the only means of directly and accurately determining the quantity of matter.

Lavoisier found, by weighing all the substances, and even the apparatus, used in every experiment, and then weighing the substances obtained after the chemical change, that the sum of the weights of the substances formed was always equal to the sum of the weights of the substances taken; or, in other words: Matter is not created and does not disappear, or that, matter is everlasting. This expression naturally includes a hypothesis, but our only aim in using it is to concisely express the following lengthy period—That in all experiments, and in all the investigated phenomena of nature, it has never been observed that the weight of the substances formed was less or greater (as far as accuracy of weighing permits[11]) than the weight of the substances originally taken, and as weight is proportional to mass[11 bis] or quantity of matter, it follows that no one has ever succeeded in observing a disappearance of matter or its appearance in fresh quantities. The law of the indestructibility of matter endows all chemical investigations with exactitude, as, on its basis, an equation may be formed for every chemical reaction. If in any reaction the weights of the substances taken be designated by the letters A, B, C, &c., and the weights of the substances formed by the letters M, N, O, &c., then

A + B + C + ... ... ... = M + N + O + ... ... ...

Therefore, should the weight of one of the re-acting or resultant substances be unknown, it may be determined by solving the equation. The chemist, in applying the law of the indestructibility of matter, and in making use of the chemical balance, must never lose sight of any one of the re-acting or resultant substances. Should such an over-sight be made, it will at once be remarked that the sum of the weights of the substances taken is unequal to the sum of the weights of the substances formed. All the progress made by chemistry during the end of the last, and in the present, century is entirely and immovably founded on the law of the indestructibility of matter. It is absolutely necessary in beginning the study of chemistry to become familiar with the simple truth which is expressed by this law, and for this purpose several examples elucidating its application will now be cited.

1. It is well known that iron rusts in damp air,[12] and that when heated to redness in air it becomes coated with scoria (oxide), having, like rust, the appearance of an earthy substance resembling some of the iron ores from which metallic iron is extracted. If the iron is weighed before and after the formation of the scoria or rust, it will be found that the metal has increased in weight during the operation.[13] It can easily be proved that this increase in weight is accomplished at the expense of the atmosphere, and mainly, as Lavoisier proved, at the expense of that portion which is called oxygen. In fact, in a vacuum, or in gases which do not contain oxygen, for instance, in hydrogen or nitrogen, the iron neither rusts nor becomes coated with scoria. Had the iron not been weighed, the participation of the oxygen of the atmosphere in its transformation into an earthy substance might have easily passed unnoticed, as was formerly the case, when phenomena like the above were, for this reason, misunderstood. It is evident from the law of the indestructibility of matter that as the iron increases in weight in its conversion into rust, the latter must be a more complex substance than the iron itself, and its formation is due to a reaction of combination. We might form an entirely wrong opinion about it, and might, for instance, consider rust to be a simpler substance than iron, and explain the formation of rust as the removal of something from the iron. Such, indeed, was the general opinion prior to Lavoisier, when it was held that iron contained a certain unknown substance called ‘phlogiston,’ and that rust was iron deprived of this supposed substance.

Fig. 1.—Apparatus for the decomposition of red mercury oxide.

2. Copper carbonate (in the form of a powder, or as the well-known green mineral called ‘malachite,’ which is used for making ornaments, or as an ore for the extraction of copper) changes into a black substance called ‘copper oxide’ when heated to redness.[14] This black substance is also obtained by heating copper to redness in air—that is, it is the scoria or oxidation product of copper. The weight of the black oxide of copper left is less than that of the copper carbonate originally taken, and therefore we consider the reaction which occurred to have been one of decomposition, and that by it something was separated from the green copper carbonate, and, in fact, by closing the orifice of the vessel in which the copper carbonate is heated with a well-fitting cork, through which a gas delivery tube[15] passes whose end is immersed under water, it will be observed that on heating, a gas is formed which bubbles through the water. This gas can be easily collected, as will presently be described, and it will be found to essentially differ from air in many respects; for instance, a burning taper is extinguished in it as if it had been plunged into water. If weighing had not proved to us that some substance had been separated, the formation of the gas might easily have escaped our notice, for it is colourless and transparent like air, and is therefore evolved without any striking feature. The carbonic anhydride evolved may be weighed,[16] and it will be seen that the sum of the weights of the black copper oxide and carbonic anhydride is equal to the weight of the copper carbonate[17] originally taken, and thus by carefully following out the various stages of all chemical reactions we arrive at a confirmation of the law of the indestructibility of matter.

3. Red mercury oxide (which is formed as mercury rust by heating mercury in air) is decomposed like copper carbonate (only by heating more slowly and at a somewhat higher temperature), with the formation of the peculiar gas, oxygen. For this purpose the mercury oxide is placed in a glass tube or retort,[18] to which a gas delivery tube is attached by means of a cork. This tube is bent downwards, as shown in the drawing (Fig. [1]). The open end of the gas delivery tube is immersed in a vessel filled with water, called a pneumatic trough.[19] When the gas begins to be evolved in the retort it is obliged, having no other outlet, to escape through the gas delivery tube into the water in the pneumatic trough, and therefore its evolution will be rendered visible by the bubbles coming from this tube. In heating the retort containing the mercury oxide, the air contained in the apparatus is first partly expelled, owing to its expansion by heat, and then the peculiar gas called ‘oxygen’ is evolved, and may be easily collected as it comes off. For this purpose a vessel (an ordinary cylinder, as in the drawing) is filled quite full with water and its mouth closed; it is then inverted and placed in this position under the water in the trough; the mouth is then opened. The cylinder will remain full of water—that is, the water will remain at a higher level in it than in the surrounding vessel, owing to the atmospheric pressure. The atmosphere presses on the surface of the water in the trough, and prevents the water from flowing out of the cylinder. The mouth of the cylinder is placed over the end of the gas delivery tube,[20] and the bubbles issuing from it will rise into the cylinder and displace the water contained in it. Gases are generally collected in this manner. When a sufficient quantity of gas has accumulated in the cylinder it can be clearly shown that it is not air, but another gas which is distinguished by its capacity for vigorously supporting combustion. In order to show this, the cylinder is closed, under water, and removed from the bath; its mouth is then turned upwards, and a smouldering taper plunged into it. As is well known, a smouldering taper will be extinguished in air, but in the gas which is given off from red mercury oxide it burns clearly and vigorously, showing the property possessed by this gas for supporting combustion more energetically than air, and thus enabling it to be distinguished from the latter. It may be observed in this experiment that, besides the formation of oxygen, metallic mercury is formed, which, volatilising at the high temperature required for the reaction, condenses on the cooler parts of the retort as a mirror or in globules. Thus two substances, mercury and oxygen, are obtained by heating red mercury oxide. In this reaction, from one substance, two new substances are produced—that is, a decomposition has taken place. The means of collecting and investigating gases were known before Lavoisier's time, but he first showed the real part they played in the processes of many chemical changes which before his era were either wrongly understood (as will be afterwards explained) or were not explained at all, but only observed in their superficial aspects. This experiment on red mercury oxide has a special significance in the history of chemistry contemporary with Lavoisier, because the oxygen gas which is here evolved is contained in the atmosphere, and plays a most important part in nature, especially in the respiration of animals, in combustion in air, and in the formation of rusts or scoriæ (earths, as they were then called) from metals—that is, of earthy substances, like the ores from which metals are extracted.

4. In order to illustrate by experiment one more example of chemical change and the application of the law of the indestructibility of matter, we will consider the reaction between common table salt and lunar caustic, which is well known from its use in cauterising wounds. By taking a clear solution of each and mixing them together, it will at once be observed that a solid white substance is formed, which settles to the bottom of the vessel, and is insoluble in water. This substance may be separated from the solution by filtering; it is then found to be an entirely different substance from either of those taken originally in the solutions. This is at once evident from the fact that it does not dissolve in water. On evaporating the liquid which passed through the filter, it will be found to contain a new substance unlike either table salt or lunar caustic, but, like them, soluble in water. Thus table salt and lunar caustic, two substances soluble in water, produced, by their mutual chemical action, two new substances, one insoluble in water, and the other remaining in solution. Here, from two substances, two others are obtained, consequently there occurred a reaction of substitution. The water served only to convert the re-acting substances into a liquid and mobile state. If the lunar caustic and salt be dried[21] and weighed, and if about 58½ grams[22] of salt and 170 grams of lunar caustic be taken, then 143½ grams of insoluble silver chloride and 85 grams of sodium nitrate will be obtained. The sum of the weights of the re-acting and resultant substances are seen to be similar and equal to 228½ grams, which necessarily follows from the law of the indestructibility of matter.

Accepting the truth of the above law, the question naturally arises as to whether there is any limit to the various chemical transformations, or are they unrestricted in number—that is to say, is it possible from a given substance to obtain an equivalent quantity of any other substance? In other words, does there exist a perpetual and infinite change of one kind of material into every other kind, or is the cycle of these transformations limited? This is the second essential problem of Chemistry, a question of quality of matter, and one, it is evident, which is more complicated than the question of quantity. It cannot be solved by a mere superficial glance at the subject. Indeed, on seeing how all the varied forms and colours of plants are built up from air and the elements of the soil, and how metallic iron can be transformed into colours such as inks and Prussian blue, we might be led to think that there is no end to the qualitative changes to which matter is susceptible. But, on the other hand, the experiences of everyday life compel us to acknowledge that food cannot be made out of a stone, or gold out of copper. Thus a definite answer can only be looked for in a close and diligent study of the subject, and the problem has been resolved in different way at different times. In ancient times the opinion most generally held was that everything visible was composed of four elements—Air, Water, Earth, and Fire. The origin of this doctrine can be traced far back into the confines of Asia, whence it was handed down to the Greeks, and most fully expounded by Empedocles, who lived before 460 B.C. This doctrine was not the result of exact research, but apparently owes its origin to the clear division of bodies into gases (like air), liquids (like water), and solids (like the earth). The Arabs appear to have been the first who attempted to solve the question by experimental methods, and they introduced, through Spain, the taste for the study of similar problems into Europe, where from that time there appear many adepts in chemistry, which was considered as an unholy art, and called ‘alchemy.’ As the alchemists were ignorant of any exact law which could guide them in their researches, they obtained most anomalous results. Their chief service to chemistry was that they made a number of experiments, and discovered many new chemical transformations; but it is well known how they solved the fundamental problem of chemistry. Their view may be taken as a positive acknowledgment of the infinite transmutability of matter, for they aimed at discovering the Philosopher's Stone, capable of converting everything into gold and diamonds, and of making the old young again. This solution of the question was afterwards completely overthrown, but it must not, for this reason, be thought that the hopes held by the alchemists were only the fruit of their imaginations. The first chemical experiments might well lead them to their conclusions. They took, for instance, the bright metallic mineral galena, and extracted metallic lead from it. Thus they saw that from a metallic substance which is unfitted for use they could obtain another metallic substance which is ductile and valuable for many technical purposes. Furthermore, they took this lead and obtained silver, a still more valuable metal, from it. Thus they might easily conclude that it was possible to ennoble metals by means of a whole series of transmutations—that is to say, to obtain from them those which are more and more precious. Having got silver from lead, they assumed that it would be possible to obtain gold from silver. The mistake they made was that they never weighed or measured the substances used or produced in their experiments. Had they done so, they would have learnt that the weight of the lead was much less than that of the galena from which it was obtained, and the weight of the silver infinitesimal compared with that of the lead. Had they looked more closely into the process of the extraction of the silver from lead (and silver at the present time is chiefly obtained from the lead ores) they would have seen that the lead does not change into silver, but that it only contains a certain small quantity of it, and this amount having once been separated from the lead it cannot by any further operation give more. The silver which the alchemists extracted from the lead was in the lead, and was not obtained by a chemical change of the lead itself. This is now well known from experiment, but the first view of the nature of the process was very likely to be an erroneous one.[23] The methods of research adopted by the alchemists could give but little success, for they did not set themselves clear and simple questions whose answers would aid them to make further progress. Thus though they did not arrive at any exact law, they left nevertheless numerous and useful experimental data as an inheritance to chemistry; they investigated, in particular, the transformations proper to metals, and for this reason chemistry was for long afterwards entirely confined to the study of metallic substances.

In their researches, the alchemists frequently made use of two chemical processes which are now termed ‘reduction’ and ‘oxidation.’ The rusting of metals, and in general their conversion from a metallic into an earthy form, is called ‘oxidation,’ whilst the extraction of a metal from an earthy substance is called ‘reduction.’ Many metals—for instance, iron, lead, and tin—are oxidised by heating in air alone, and may be again reduced by heating with carbon. Such oxidised metals are found in the earth, and form the majority of metallic ores. The metals, such as tin, iron, and copper, may be extracted from these ores by heating them together with carbon. All these processes were well studied by the alchemists. It was afterwards shown that all earths and minerals are formed of similar metallic rusts or oxides, or of their combinations. Thus the alchemists knew of two forms of chemical changes: the oxidation of metals and the reduction of the oxides so formed into metals. The explanation of the nature of these two classes of chemical phenomena was the means for the discovery of the most important chemical laws. The first hypothesis on their nature is due to Becker, and more particularly to Stahl, a surgeon to the King of Prussia. Stahl writes in his ‘Fundamenta Chymiæ,’ 1723, that all substances consist of an imponderable fiery substance called ‘phlogiston’ (materia aut principium ignis non ipse ignis), and of another element having particular properties for each substance. The greater the capacity of a body for oxidation, or the more combustible it is, the richer it is in phlogiston. Carbon contains it in great abundance. In oxidation or combustion phlogiston is emitted, and in reduction it is consumed or enters into combination. Carbon reduces earthy substances because it is rich in phlogiston, and gives up a portion of its phlogiston to the substance reduced. Thus Stahl supposed metals to be compound substances consisting of phlogiston and an earthy substance or oxide. This hypothesis is distinguished for its very great simplicity, and for this and other reasons it acquired many supporters.[24]

Fig. 3.—Lavoisier's apparatus for determining the composition of air and the reason of metals increasing in weight when they are calcined in air.

Lavoisier proved by means of the balance that every case of rusting of metals or oxidation, or of combustion, is accompanied by an increase in weight at the expense of the atmosphere. He formed, therefore, the natural opinion that the heavier substance is more complex than the lighter one.[25] Lavoisier's celebrated experiment, made in 1774, gave indubitable support to his opinion, which in many respects was contradictory to Stahl's doctrine. Lavoisier poured four ounces of pure mercury into a glass retort (fig. [3]), whose neck was bent as shown in the drawing and dipped into the vessel R S, also full of mercury. The projecting end of the neck was covered with a glass bell-jar P. The weight of all the mercury taken, and the volume of air remaining in the apparatus, namely, that in the upper portion of the retort, and under the bell-jar, were determined before beginning the experiment. It was most important in this experiment to know the volume of air in order to learn what part it played in the oxidation of the mercury, because, according to Stahl, phlogiston is emitted into the air, whilst, according to Lavoisier, the mercury in oxidising absorbs a portion of the air; and consequently it was absolutely necessary to determine whether the amount of air increased or decreased in the oxidation of the metal. It was, therefore, most important to measure the volume of the air in the apparatus both before and after the experiment. For this purpose it was necessary to know the total capacity of the retort, the volume of the mercury poured into it, the volume of the bell-jar above the level of the mercury, and also the temperature and pressure of the air at the time of its measurement. The volume of air contained in the apparatus and isolated from the surrounding atmosphere could be determined from these data. Having arranged his apparatus in this manner, Lavoisier heated the retort holding the mercury for a period of twelve days at a temperature near the boiling point of mercury. The mercury became covered with a quantity of small red scales; that is, it was oxidised or converted into an earth. This substance is the same mercury oxide which has already been mentioned (example 3). After the lapse of twelve days the apparatus was cooled, and it was then seen that the volume of the air in the apparatus had diminished during the time of the experiment. This result was in exact contradiction to Stahl's hypothesis. Out of 50 cubic inches of air originally taken, there only remained 42. Lavoisier's experiment led to other equally important results. The weight of the air taken decreased by as much as the weight of the mercury increased in oxidising; that is, the portion of the air was not destroyed, but only combined with mercury. This portion of the air may be again separated from the mercury oxide and has, as we saw (example 3), properties different from those of air. It is called ‘oxygen.’ That portion of the air which remained in the apparatus and did not combine with the mercury does not oxidise metals, and cannot support either combustion or respiration, so that a lighted taper is immediately extinguished if it be dipped into the gas which remains in the bell-jar. ‘It is extinguished in the residual gas as if it had been plunged into water,’ writes Lavoisier in his memoirs. This gas is called ‘nitrogen.’ Thus air is not a simple substance, but consists of two gases, oxygen and nitrogen, and therefore the opinion that air is an elementary substance is erroneous. The oxygen of the air is absorbed in combustion and the oxidation of metals, and the earths produced by the oxidation of metals are substances composed of oxygen and a metal. By mixing the oxygen with the nitrogen the same air as was originally taken is re-formed. It has also been shown by direct experiment that on reducing an oxide with carbon, the oxygen contained in the oxide is transferred to the carbon, and gives the same gas that is obtained by the combustion of carbon in air. Therefore this gas is a compound of carbon and oxygen, just as the earthy oxides are composed of metals and oxygen.

The many examples of the formation and decomposition of substances which are met with convince us that the majority of substances with which we have to deal are compounds made up of several other substances. By heating chalk (or else copper carbonate, as in the second example) we obtain lime and the same carbonic acid gas which is produced by the combustion of carbon. On bringing lime into contact with this gas and water, at the ordinary temperature, we again obtain the compound, carbonate of lime, or chalk. Therefore chalk is a compound. So also are those substances from which it may be built up. Carbonic anhydride is formed by the combination of carbon and oxygen; and lime is produced by the oxidation of a certain metal called ‘calcium.’ By resolving substances in this manner into their component parts, we arrive at last at such as are indivisible into two or more substances by any means whatever, and which cannot be formed from other substances. All we can do is to make such substances combine together to act on other substances. Substances which cannot be formed from or decomposed into others are termed simple substances (elements). Thus all homogeneous substances may be classified into simple and compound substances. This view was introduced and established as a scientific fact during the lifetime of Lavoisier. The number of these elements is very small in comparison with the number of compound substances which are formed by them. At the present time, only seventy elements are known with certainty to exist. Some of them are very rarely met with in nature, or are found in very small quantities, whilst the existence of others is still doubtful. The number of elements with whose compounds we commonly deal in everyday life is very small. Elements cannot be transmuted into one another—at least up to the present not a single case of such a transformation has been met with; it may therefore be said that, as yet, it is impossible to transmute one metal into another. And as yet, notwithstanding the number of attempts which have been made in this direction, no fact has been discovered which could in any way support the idea of the complexity of such well-known elements[26] as oxygen, iron, sulphur, &c. Therefore, from its very conception, an element is not susceptible to reactions of decomposition.[27]

The quantity, therefore, of each element remains constant in all chemical changes: a fact which may be deduced as a consequence of the law of the indestructibility of matter, and of the conception of elements themselves. Thus the equation expressing the law of the indestructibility of matter acquires a new and still more important signification. If we know the quantities of the elements which occur in the re-acting substances, and if from these substances there proceed, by means of chemical changes, a series of new compound substances, then the latter will together contain the same quantity of each of the elements as there originally existed in the re-acting substances. The essence of chemical change is embraced in the study of how, and with what substances, each element is combined before and after change.

In order to be able to express various chemical changes by equations, it has been agreed to represent each element by the first or some two letters of its (Latin) name. Thus, for example, oxygen is represented by the letter O; nitrogen by N; mercury (hydrargyrum) by Hg; iron (ferrum) by Fe; and so on for all the elements, as is seen in the tables on page [24]. A compound substance is represented by placing the symbols representing the elements of which it is made up side by side. For example, red mercury oxide is represented by HgO, which shows that it is composed of oxygen and mercury. Besides this, the symbol of every element corresponds with a certain relative quantity of it by weight, called its ‘combining’ weight, or the weight of an atom; so that the chemical formula of a compound substance not only designates the nature of the elements of which it is composed, but also their quantitative proportion. Every chemical process may be expressed by an equation composed of the formulæ corresponding with those substances which take part in it and are produced by it. The amount by weight of the elements in every chemical equation must be equal on both sides of the equation, since no element is either formed or destroyed in a chemical change.

On pages [24], [25], and [26] a list of the elements, with their symbols and combining or atomic weights, is given, and we shall see afterwards on what basis the atomic weights of elements are determined. At present we will only point out that a compound containing the elements A and B is designated by the formula An Bm, where m and n are the coefficients or multiples in which the combining weights of the elements enter into the composition of the substance. If we represent the combining weight of the substance A by a and that of the substance B by b, then the composition of the substance An Bm will be expressed thus: it contains na parts by weight of the substance A and mb parts by weight of the substance B, and consequently 100 parts of our compound contain na 100 / na + mb percentage parts by weight of the substance A and mb 100 / na + mb of the substance B. It is evident that as a formula shows the relative amounts of all the elements contained in a compound, the actual weights of the elements contained in a given weight of a compound may be calculated from its formula. For example, the formula NaCl of table salt shows (as Na = 23 and Cl = 35·5) that 58·5 lbs. of salt contain 23 lbs. of sodium and 35·5 lbs. of chlorine, and that 100 parts of it contain 39·3 per cent. of sodium and 60·7 per cent. of chlorine.

What has been said above clearly limits the province of chemical changes, because from substances of a given kind there can be obtained only such as contain the same elements. Even with this limitation, however, the number of possible combinations is infinitely great. Only a comparatively small number of compounds have yet been described or subjected to research, and any one working in this direction may easily discover new compounds which had not before been obtained. It often happens, however, that such newly-discovered compounds were foreseen by chemistry, whose object is the apprehension of that uniformity which rules over the multitude of compound substances, and whose aim is the comprehension of those laws which govern their formation and properties. The conception of elements having been established, the next objects of chemistry were: the determination of the properties of compound substances on the basis of the determination of the quantity and kind of elements of which they are composed; the investigation of the elements themselves; the determination of what compound substances can be formed from each element and the properties which these compounds show; and the apprehension of the nature of the connection between the elements in different compounds. An element thus serves as the starting point, and is taken as the primary conception on which all other substances are built up.

When we state that a certain element enters into the composition of a given compound (when we say, for instance, that mercury oxide contains oxygen) we do not mean that it contains oxygen as a gaseous substance, but only desire to express those transformations which mercury oxide is capable of making; that is, we wish to say that it is possible to obtain oxygen from mercury oxide, and that it can give up oxygen to various other substances; in a word, we desire only to express those transformations of which mercury oxide is capable. Or, more concisely, it may be said that the composition of a compound is the expression of those transformations of which it is capable. It is useful in this sense to make a clear distinction between the conception of an element as a separate homogeneous substance, and as a material but invisible part of a compound. Mercury oxide does not contain two simple bodies, a gas and a metal, but two elements, mercury and oxygen, which, when free, are a gas and a metal. Neither mercury as a metal nor oxygen as a gas is contained in mercury oxide; it only contains the substance of these elements, just as steam only contains the substance of ice, but not ice itself, or as corn contains the substance of the seed, but not the seed itself. The existence of an element may be recognised without knowing it in the uncombined state, but only from an investigation of its combinations, and from the knowledge that it gives, under all possible conditions, substances which are unlike other known combinations of substances. Fluorine is an example of this kind. It was for a long time unknown in a free state, and nevertheless was recognised as an element because its combinations with other elements were known, and their difference from all other similar compound substances was determined. In order to grasp the difference between the conception of the visible form of an element as we know it in the free state, and of the intrinsic element (or ‘radicle,’ as Lavoisier called it) contained in the visible form, it should be remarked that compound substances also combine together forming yet more complex compounds, and that they evolve heat in the process of combination. The original compound may often be extracted from these new compounds by exactly the same methods as elements are extracted from their corresponding combinations. Besides, many elements exist under various visible forms whilst the intrinsic element contained in these various forms is something which is not subject to change. Thus carbon appears as charcoal, graphite, and diamond, but yet the element carbon alone, contained in each, is one and the same. Carbonic anhydride contains carbon, and not charcoal, or graphite, or the diamond.

Elements alone, although not all of them, have the peculiar lustre, opacity, malleability, and the great heat and electrical conductivity which are proper to metals and their mutual combinations. But elements are far from all being metals. Those which do not possess the physical properties of metals are called non-metals (or metalloids). It is, however, impossible to draw a strict line of demarcation between metals and non-metals, there being many intermediary substances. Thus graphite, from which pencils are manufactured, is an element with the lustre and other properties of a metal; but charcoal and the diamond, which are composed of the same substance as graphite, do not show any metallic properties. Both classes of elements are clearly distinguished in definite examples, but in particular cases the distinction is not clear and cannot serve as a basis for the exact division of the elements into two groups.

The conception of elements forms the basis of chemical knowledge, and in giving a list of them at the very beginning of our work, we wish to tabulate our present knowledge on the subject. Altogether about seventy elements are now authentically known, but many of them are so rarely met with in nature, and have been obtained in such small quantities, that we possess but a very insufficient knowledge of them. The substances most widely distributed in nature contain a very small number of elements. These elements have been more completely studied than the others, because a greater number of investigators have been able to carry on experiments and observations on them. The elements most widely distributed in nature are:—

Besides these, the following elements, although not very largely distributed in nature, are all more or less well known from their applications to the requirements of everyday life or the arts, either in a free state or in their compounds:—

The compounds of the following metals and semi-metals have fewer applications, but are well known, and are somewhat frequently met with in nature, although in small quantities:—

The following rare metals are still more seldom met with in nature, but have been studied somewhat fully:—

Besides these 66 elements there have been discovered:—Erbium, Terbium, Samarium, Thullium, Holmium, Mosandrium, Phillipium, and several others. But their properties and combinations, owing to their extreme rarity, are very little known, and even their existence as independent substances[28] is doubtful.

It has been incontestably proved from observations on the spectra of the heavenly bodies that many of the commoner elements (such as H, Na, Mg, Fe) occur on the far distant stars. This fact confirms the belief that those forms of matter which appear on the earth as elements are widely distributed over the entire universe. But we do not yet know why, in nature, the mass of some elements should be greater than that of others.[28 bis]

The capacity of each element to combine with one or another element, and to form compounds with them which are in a greater or less degree prone to give new and yet more complex substances, forms the fundamental character of each element. Thus sulphur easily combines with the metals, oxygen, chlorine, or carbon, whilst gold and silver enter into combinations with difficulty, and form unstable compounds, which are easily decomposed by heat. The cause or force which induces the elements to enter into chemical change must be considered, as also the cause which holds different substances in combination—that is, which endues the substances formed with their particular degree of stability. This cause or force is called affinity (affinitas, affinité, Verwandtschaft), or chemical affinity.[29] Since this force must be regarded as exclusively an attractive force, like gravity, many writers (for instance, Bergmann at the end of the last, and Berthollet at the beginning of this, century) supposed affinity to be essentially similar to the universal force of gravity, from which it only differs in that the latter acts at observable distances whilst affinity only evinces itself at the smallest possible distances. But chemical affinity cannot be entirely identified with the universal attraction of gravity, which acts at appreciable distances and is dependent only on mass and distance, and not on the quality of the material on which it acts, whilst it is by the quality of matter that affinity is most forcibly influenced. Neither can it be entirely identified with cohesion, which gives to homogeneous solid substances their crystalline form, elasticity, hardness, ductility, and other properties, and to liquids their surface tension, drop formation, capillarity, and other properties, because affinity acts between the component parts of a substance and cohesion on a substance in its homogeneity, although both act at imperceptible distances (by contact) and have much in common. Chemical force, which makes one substance penetrate into another, cannot be entirely identified with even those attracting forces which make different substances adhere to each other, or hold together (as when two plane-polished surfaces of solid substances are brought into close contact), or which cause liquids to soak into solids, or adhere to their surfaces, or gases and vapours to condense on the surfaces of solids. These forces must not be confounded with chemical forces, which cause one substance to penetrate into the substance of another and to form a new substance, which is never the case with cohesion. But it is evident that the forces which determine cohesion form a connecting-link between mechanical and chemical forces, because they only act by intimate contact. For a long time, and especially during the first half of this century, chemical attraction and chemical forces were identified with electrical forces. There is certainly an intimate relation between them, for electricity is evolved in chemical reactions, and has also a powerful influence on chemical processes—for instance, compounds are decomposed by the action of an electrical current. And the exactly similar relation which exists between chemical phenomena and the phenomena of heat (heat being developed by chemical phenomena, and heat being able to decompose compounds) only proves the unity of the forces of nature, the capability of one force to produce and to be transformed into others. For this reason the identification of chemical force with electricity will not bear experimental proof.[30] As of all the (molecular) phenomena of nature which act on substances at immeasurably small distances, the phenomena of heat are at present the best (comparatively) known, having been reduced to the simplest fundamental principles of mechanics (of energy, equilibrium, and movement), which, since Newton, have been subjected to strict mathematical analysis, it is quite natural that an effort, which has been particularly pronounced during recent years, should have been made to bring chemical phenomena into strict correlation with the already investigated phenomena of heat, without, however, aiming at any identification of chemical with heat phenomena. The true nature of chemical force is still a secret to us, just as is the nature of the universal force of gravity, and yet without knowing what gravity really is, by applying mechanical conceptions, astronomical phenomena have been subjected not only to exact generalisation but to the detailed prediction of a number of particular facts; and so, also, although the true nature of chemical affinity may be unknown, there is reason to hope for considerable progress in chemical science by applying the laws of mechanics to chemical phenomena by means of the mechanical theory of heat. As yet this portion of chemistry has been but little worked at, and therefore, while forming a current problem of the science, it is treated more fully in that particular field which is termed either ‘theoretical’ or ‘physical’ chemistry, or, more correctly, chemical mechanics. As this province of chemistry requires a knowledge not only of the various homogeneous substances which have yet been obtained and of the chemical transformations which they undergo, but also of the phenomena (of heat and other kinds) by which these transformations are accompanied, it is only possible to enter on the study of chemical mechanics after an acquaintance with the fundamental chemical conceptions and substances which form the subject of this book.[31]

As the chemical changes to which substances are liable proceed from internal forces proper to these substances, as chemical phenomena certainly consist of motions of material parts (from the laws of the indestructibility of matter and of elements), and as the investigation of mechanical and physical phenomena proves the law of the indestructibility of forces, or the conservation of energy—that is, the possibility of the transformation of one kind of motion into another (of visible or mechanical into invisible or physical)—we are inevitably obliged to acknowledge the presence in substances (and especially in the elements of which all others are composed) of a store of chemical energy or invisible motion inducing them to enter into combinations. If heat be evolved in a reaction, it means that a portion of chemical energy is transformed into heat;[32] if heat be absorbed in a reaction,[33] that it is partly transformed (rendered latent) into chemical energy. The store of force or energy going to the formation of new compounds may, after several combinations, accomplished with an absorption of heat, at last diminish to such a degree that indifferent compounds will be obtained, although these sometimes, by combining with energetic elements or compounds, give more complex compounds, which may be capable of entering into chemical combination. Among elements, gold, platinum, and nitrogen have but little energy, whilst potassium, oxygen, and chlorine have a very marked degree of energy. When dissimilar substances enter into combination they often form substances of diminished energy. Thus sulphur and potassium when heated easily burn in air, but when combined together their compound is neither inflammable nor burns in air like its component parts. Part of the energy of the potassium and of the sulphur was evolved in their combination in the form of heat. Just as in the passage of substances from one physical state into another a portion of their store of heat is absorbed or evolved, so in combinations or decompositions and in every chemical process, there occurs a change in the store of chemical energy, and at the same time an evolution or absorption of heat.[34]

For the comprehension of chemical phenomena as mechanical processes—i.e., the study of the modus operandi of chemical phenomena—it is most important to consider: (1) the facts gathered from stoïchiometry, or that part of chemistry which treats of the quantitative relation, by weight or volume, of the reacting substances; (2) the distinction between the different forms and classes of chemical reactions; (3) the study of the changes in properties produced by alteration in composition; (4) the study of the phenomena which accompany chemical transformation; (5) a generalisation of the conditions under which reactions occur. As regards stoïchiometry, this branch of chemistry has been worked out most thoroughly, and comprises laws (of Dalton, Avogadro-Gerhardt, and others) which bear so deeply on all parts of chemistry that at the present time the chief problem of chemical research consists in the application of general stoïchiometrical laws to concrete examples, i.e., the quantitative (volumetric or gravimetric) composition of substances. All other branches of chemistry are clearly subordinate to this most important portion of chemical knowledge. Even the very signification of reactions of combination, decomposition, and rearrangement, acquired, as we shall see, a particular and new character under the influence of the progress of exact ideas concerning the quantitative relations of substances entering into chemical changes. Furthermore, in this sense there arose a new—and, till then, unknown—division of compound substances into definite and indefinite compounds. Even at the beginning of this century, Berthollet had not made this distinction. But Prout showed that a number of compounds contain the substances of which they are composed and into which they break up, in exact definite proportions by weight, which are unalterable under any conditions. Thus, for example, red mercury oxide always contains sixteen parts by weight of oxygen for every 200 parts by weight of mercury, which is expressed by the formula HgO. But in an alloy of copper and silver one or the other metal may be added at will, and in an aqueous solution of sugar, the relative proportion of the sugar and water may be altered and nevertheless a homogeneous whole with the sum of the independent properties will be obtained—i.e., in these cases there was indefinite chemical combination. Although in nature and chemical practice the formation of indefinite compounds (such as alloys and solutions) plays as essential a part as the formation of definite chemical compounds, yet, as the stoïchiometrical laws at present apply chiefly to the latter, all facts concerning indefinite compounds suffer from inexactitude, and it is only during recent years that the attention of chemists has been directed to this province of chemistry.

In chemical mechanics it is, from a qualitative point of view, very important to clearly distinguish at the very beginning between reversible and non-reversible reactions. Substances capable of reacting on each other at a certain temperature produce substances which at the same temperature either can or cannot give back the original substances. For example, salt dissolves in water at the ordinary temperature, and the solution so obtained is capable of breaking up at the same temperature, leaving salt and separating the water by evaporation. Carbon bisulphide is formed from sulphur and carbon at about the same temperature at which it can be resolved into sulphur and carbon. Iron, at a certain temperature, separates hydrogen from water, forming iron oxide, which, in contact with hydrogen at the same temperature, is able to produce iron and water. It is evident that if two substances, A and B, give two others C and D, and the reaction be reversible, then C and D will form A and B, and, consequently, by taking a definite mass of A and B, or a corresponding mass of C and D, we shall obtain, in each case, all four substances—that is to say, there will be a state of chemical equilibrium between the reacting substances. By increasing the mass of one of the substances we obtain a new condition of equilibrium, so that reversible reactions present a means of studying the influence of mass on the modus operandi of chemical changes. Many of those reactions which occur with very complicated compounds or mixtures may serve as examples of non-reversible reactions. Thus many of the compound substances of animal and vegetable organisms are broken up by heat, but cannot be re-formed from their products of decomposition at any temperature. Gunpowder, as a mixture of sulphur, nitre, and carbon, on being exploded, forms gases from which the original substances cannot be re-formed at any temperature. In order to obtain them, recourse must be had to an indirect method of combination at the moment of separation. If A does not under any circumstances combine directly with B, it does not follow that it cannot give a compound A B. For A can often combine with C and B with D, and if C has a great affinity for D, then the reaction of A C or B D produces not only C D, but also A B. As on the formation of C D, the substances A and B (previously in A C and B D) are left in a peculiar state of separation, it is supposed that their mutual combination occurs because they meet together in this nascent state at the moment of separation (in statu nascendi). Thus chlorine does not directly combine with charcoal, graphite, or diamond; there are, nevertheless, compounds of chlorine with carbon, and many of them are distinguished by their stability. They are obtained in the action of chlorine on hydrocarbons, as the separation products from the direct action of chlorine on hydrogen. Chlorine takes up the hydrogen, and the carbon liberated at the moment of its separation, enters into combination with another portion of the chlorine, so that in the end the chlorine is combined with both the hydrogen and the carbon.[35]

As regards those phenomena which accompany chemical action, the most important circumstance in reference to chemical mechanics is that not only do chemical processes produce a mechanical displacement (a motion of particles), heat, light, electrical potential and current; but that all these agents are themselves capable of changing and governing chemical transformations. This reciprocity or reversibility naturally depends on the fact that all the phenomena of nature are only different kinds and forms of visible and invisible (molecular) motions. First sound, and then light, was shown to consist of vibratory motions, as the laws of physics have proved and developed beyond a doubt. The connection between heat and mechanical motion and work has ceased to be a supposition, but has become an accepted fact, and the mechanical equivalent of heat (425 kilogrammetres of mechanical work correspond with one kilogram unit of heat or Calorie) gives a mechanical measure for thermal phenomena. Although the mechanical theory of electrical phenomena cannot be considered so fully developed as the theory of heat, both statical and dynamical electricity are produced by mechanical means (in common electrical machines or in Gramme or other dynamos), and conversely, a current (in electric motors) can produce mechanical motion. Thus by connecting a current with the poles of a Gramme dynamo it may be made to revolve, and, conversely, by rotating it an electrical current is produced, which demonstrates the reversibility of electricity into mechanical motion. Accordingly chemical mechanics must look for the fundamental lines of its advancement in the correlation of chemical with physical and mechanical phenomena. But this subject, owing to its complexity and comparative novelty, has not yet been expressed by a harmonious theory, or even by a satisfactory hypothesis, and therefore we shall avoid lingering over it.

A chemical change in a certain direction is accomplished not only by reason of the difference of masses, the composition of the substances concerned, the distribution of their parts, and their affinity or chemical energy, but also by reason of the conditions under which the substances occur. In order that a certain chemical reaction may take place between substances which are capable of reacting on each other, it is often necessary to have recourse to conditions which are sometimes very different from those in which the substances usually occur in nature. For example, not only is the presence of air (oxygen) necessary for the combustion of charcoal, but the latter must also be heated to redness. The red-hot portion of the charcoal burns—i.e. combines with the oxygen of the atmosphere—and in so doing evolves heat, which raises the temperature of the adjacent parts of charcoal, so that they burn. Just as the combustion of charcoal is dependent on its being heated to redness, so also every chemical reaction only takes place under certain physical, mechanical, or other conditions. The following are the chief conditions which exert an influence on the progress of chemical reactions.

(a) Temperature.—Chemical reactions of combination only take place within certain definite limits of temperature, and cannot be accomplished outside these limits. We may cite as examples not only that the combustion of charcoal begins at a red heat, but also that chlorine and salt only combine with water at a temperature below 0°. These compounds cannot be formed at a higher temperature, for they are then wholly or partially broken up into their component parts. A certain rise in temperature is necessary to start combustion. In certain cases the effect of this rise may be explained as causing one of the reacting bodies to change from a solid into a liquid or gaseous form. The transference into a fluid form facilitates the progress of the reaction, because it aids the intimate contact of the particles reacting on each other. Another reason, and to this must be ascribed the chief influence of heat in exciting chemical action, is that the physical cohesion, or the internal chemical union, of homogeneous particles is thereby weakened, and in this way the separation of the particles of the original substances, and their transference into new compounds, is rendered easier. When a reaction absorbs heat—as in decomposition—the reason why heat is necessary is self-evident.

At the present day it may be asserted upon the basis of existing data, respecting the action of high temperature, that all compound bodies are decomposed at a more or less high temperature. We have already seen examples of this in describing the decomposition of mercury oxide into mercury and oxygen, and the decomposition of wood under the influence of heat. Many substances are decomposed at a very moderate temperature; for instance, the fulminating salt which is employed in cartridges is decomposed at a little above 120°. The majority of those compounds which make up the mass of animal and vegetable tissues are decomposed at 200°. On the other hand, there is reason to think that at a very low temperature no reaction whatever can take place. Thus plants cease to carry on their chemical processes during the winter. Raoul Pictet (1892), employing the very low temperatures (as low as -200°C.) obtained by the evaporation of liquefied gases (see Chap. [II.]), has recently again proved that at temperatures below -120°, even such reactions as those between sulphuric acid and caustic soda or metallic sodium do not take place, and even the coloration of litmus by acids only commences at temperatures above -80°. If a given reaction does not take place at a certain low temperature, it will at first only proceed slowly with a rise of temperature (even if aided by an electric discharge), and will only proceed rapidly, with the evolution of heat, when a certain definite temperature has been reached. Every chemical reaction requires certain limits of temperature for its accomplishment, and, doubtless, many of the chemical changes observed by us cannot take place in the sun, where the temperature is very high, or on the moon, where it is very low.

The influence of heat on reversible reactions is particularly instructive. If, for instance, a compound which is capable of being reproduced from its products of decomposition be heated up to the temperature at which decomposition begins, the decomposition of a mass of the substance contained in a definite volume is not immediately completed. Only a certain fraction of the substance is decomposed, the other portion remaining unchanged, and if the temperature be raised, the quantity of the substance decomposed increases; furthermore, for a given volume, the ratio between the part decomposed and the part unaltered corresponds with each definite rise in temperature until it reaches that at which the compound is entirely decomposed. This partial decomposition under the influence of heat is called dissociation. It is possible to distinguish between the temperatures at which dissociation begins and ends. Should dissociation proceed at a certain temperature, yet should the product or products of decomposition not remain in contact with the still undecomposed portion of the compound, then decomposition will go on to the end. Thus limestone is decomposed in a limekiln into lime and carbonic anhydride, because the latter is carried off by the draught of the furnace. But if a certain mass of limestone be enclosed in a definite volume—for instance, in a gun barrel—which is then sealed up, and heated to redness, then, as the carbonic anhydride cannot escape, a certain proportion only of the limestone will be decomposed for every increment of heat (rise in temperature) higher than that at which dissociation begins. Decomposition will cease when the carbonic anhydride evolved presents a maximum dissociation pressure corresponding with each rise in temperature. If the pressure be increased by increasing the quantity of gas, then combination begins afresh; if the pressure be diminished decomposition will recommence. Decomposition in this case is exactly similar to evaporation; if the steam given off by evaporation cannot escape, its pressure will reach a maximum corresponding with the given temperature, and then evaporation will cease. Should steam be added it will be condensed in the liquid; if its quantity be diminished—i.e. if the pressure be lessened, the temperature being constant—then evaporation will go on. We shall afterwards discuss more fully these phenomena of dissociation, which were first discovered by Henri St. Claire Deville. We will only remark that the products of decomposition re-combine with greater facility the nearer their temperature is to that at which dissociation begins, or, in other words, that the initial temperature of dissociation is near to the initial temperature of combination.

(b) The influence of an electric current, and of electricity in general, on the progress of chemical transformations is very similar to the influence of heat. The majority of compounds which conduct electricity are decomposed by the action of a galvanic current, and as there is great similarity in the conditions under which decomposition and combination proceed, combination often proceeds under the influence of electricity. Electricity, like heat, must be regarded as a peculiar form of molecular motion, and all that refers to the influence of heat also refers to the phenomena produced by the action of an electrical current, with this difference, only that a substance can be separated into its component parts with much greater ease by electricity, since the process goes on at the ordinary temperature. The most stable compounds may be decomposed by this means, and a most important fact is then observed—namely, that the component parts appear at the different poles of electrodes by which the current passes through the substance. Those substances which appear at the positive pole (anode) are called ‘electro-negative,’ and those which appear at the negative pole (cathode, that in connection with the zinc of an ordinary galvanic battery) are called ‘electro-positive.’ The majority of non-metallic elements, such as chlorine, oxygen, &c., and also acids and substances analogous to them, belong to the first group, whilst the metals, hydrogen, and analogous products of decomposition appear at the negative pole. Chemistry is indebted to the decomposition of compounds by the electric current for many most important discoveries. Many elements have been discovered by this method, the most important being potassium and sodium. Lavoisier and the chemists of his time were not able to decompose the oxygen compounds of these metals, but Davy showed that they might be decomposed by an electric current, the metals sodium and potassium appearing at the negative pole. Now that the dynamo gives the possibility of producing an electric current by the combustion of fuel, this method of Sir H. Davy is advantageously employed for obtaining metals, &c. on a large scale, for instance, sodium from fused caustic soda or chlorine from solutions of salt.

(c) Certain unstable compounds are also decomposed by the action of light. Photography is based on this property in certain substances (for instance, in the salts of silver). The mechanical energy of those vibrations which determine the phenomena of light is very small, and therefore only certain, and these generally unstable, compounds can be decomposed by light—at least under ordinary circumstances. But there is one class of chemical phenomena dependent on the action of light which forms as yet an unsolved problem in chemistry—these are the processes accomplished in plants under the influence of light. Here there take place most unexpected decompositions and combinations, which are often unattainable by artificial means. For instance, carbonic anhydride, which is so stable under the influence of heat and electricity, is decomposed and evolves oxygen in plants under the influence of light. In other cases, light decomposes unstable compounds, such as are usually easily decomposed by heat and other agents. Chlorine combines with hydrogen under the influence of light, which shows that combination, as well as decomposition, can be determined by its action, as was likewise the case with heat and electricity.

(d) Mechanical causes exert, like the foregoing agents, an action both on the process of chemical combination and of decomposition. Many substances are decomposed by friction or by a blow—as, for example, the compound called iodide of nitrogen (which is composed of iodine, nitrogen, and hydrogen), and silver fulminate. Mechanical friction causes sulphur to burn at the expense of the oxygen contained in potassium chlorate. Pressure affects both the physical and chemical state of the reacting substances, and, together with the temperature, determines the state of a substance. This is particularly evident when the substance occurs in an elastic-gaseous form since the volume, and hence also the number of points of encounter between the reacting substances is greatly altered by a change of pressure. Thus, under equal conditions of temperature, hydrogen when compressed acts more powerfully upon iodine and on the solutions of many salts.

(e) Besides the various conditions which have been enumerated above, the progress of chemical reactions is accelerated or retarded by the condition of contact in which the reacting bodies occur. Other conditions remaining constant, the rate of progress of a chemical reaction is accelerated by increasing the number of points of contact. It will be enough to point out the fact that sulphuric acid does not absorb ethylene under ordinary conditions of contact, but only after continued shaking, by which means the number of points of contact is greatly increased. To ensure complete action between solids, it is necessary to reduce them to very fine powder and to mix them as thoroughly as possible. M. Spring, the Belgian chemist, has shown that finely powdered solids which do not react on each other at the ordinary temperature may do so under an increased pressure. Thus, under a pressure of 6,000 atmospheres, sulphur combines with many metals at the ordinary temperature, and mixtures of the powders of many metals form alloys. It is evident that an increase in the number of points or surfaces must be regarded as the chief cause producing reaction, which is doubtless accomplished in solids, as in liquids and gases, in virtue of an internal motion of the particles, which motion, although in different degrees and forms, must exist in all the states of matter. It is very important to direct attention to the fact that the internal motion or condition of the parts of the particles of matter must be different on the surface of a substance from what it is inside; because in the interior of a substance similar particles are acting on all sides of every particle, whilst at the surface they act on one side only. Therefore, the condition of a substance at its surfaces of contact with other substances must be more or less modified by them—it may be in a manner similar to that caused by an elevation of temperature. These considerations throw some light on the action in the large class of contact reactions; that is, such as appear to proceed from the mere presence (contact) of certain special substances. Porous or powdery substances are very prone to act in this way, especially spongy platinum and charcoal. For example, sulphurous anhydride does not combine directly with oxygen, but this reaction takes place in the presence of spongy platinum.[36]

The above general and introductory chemical conceptions cannot be thoroughly grasped in their true sense without a knowledge of the particular facts of chemistry to which we shall now turn our attention. It was, however, absolutely necessary to become acquainted on the very threshold with such fundamental principles as the laws of the indestructibility of matter and of the conservation of energy, since it is only by their acceptance, and under their direction and influence, that the examination of particular facts can give practical and fruitful results.

Footnotes:

[1] The investigation of a substance or a natural phenomenon consists (a) in determining the relation of the object under examination to that which is already known, either from previous researches, or from experiment, or from the knowledge of the common surroundings of life—that is, in determining and expressing the quality of the unknown by the aid of that which is known; (b) in measuring all that which can be subjected to measurement, and thereby denoting the quantitative relation of that under investigation to that already known and its relation to the categories of time, space, temperature, mass, &c.; (c) in determining the position held by the object under investigation in the system of known objects guided by both qualitative and quantitative data; (d) in determining, from the quantities which have been measured, the empirical (visible) dependence (function, or ‘law,’ as it is sometimes termed) of variable factors—for instance, the dependence of the composition of the substance on its properties, of temperature on time, of time on locality, &c.; (e) in framing hypotheses or propositions as to the actual cause and true nature of the relation between that studied (measured or observed) and that which is known or the categories of time, space, &c.; (f) in verifying the logical consequences of the hypotheses by experiment; and (g) in advancing a theory which shall account for the nature of the properties of that studied in its relations with things already known and with those conditions or categories among which it exists. It is certain that it is only possible to carry out these investigations when we have taken as a basis some incontestable fact which is self-evident to our understanding; as, for instance, number, time, space, motion, or mass. The determination of such primary or fundamental conceptions, although not excluded from the possibility of investigation, frequently does not subject itself to our present mode of scientific generalisation. Hence it follows that in the investigation of anything, there always remains something which is accepted without investigation, or admitted as a known factor. The axioms of geometry may be taken as an example. Thus in the science of biology it is necessary to admit the faculty of organisms for multiplying themselves, as a conception whose meaning is as yet unknown. In the study of chemistry, too, the notion of elements must be accepted almost without any further analysis. However, by first investigating that which is visible and subject to direct observation by the organs of the senses, we may hope that in the first place hypotheses will be arrived at, and afterwards theories of that which has now to be placed at the basis of our investigations. The minds of the ancients strove to seize at once the very fundamental categories of investigation, whilst all the successes of recent knowledge are based on the above-cited method of investigation without the determination of ‘the beginning of all beginnings.’ By following this inductive method, the exact sciences have already succeeded in becoming accurately acquainted with much of the invisible world, which directly is imperceptible to the organs of sense (for example, the molecular motion of all bodies, the composition of the heavenly luminaries, the paths of their motion, the necessity for the existence of substances which cannot be subjected to experiment, &c.), and have verified the knowledge thus obtained, and employed it for increasing the interests of humanity. It may therefore be safely said that the inductive method of investigation is a more perfect mode of acquiring knowledge than the deductive method alone (starting from a little of the unknown accepted as incontestable to arrive at the much which is visible and observable) by which the ancients strove to embrace the universe. By investigating the universe by an inductive method (endeavouring from the much which is observable to arrive at a little which may be verified and is indubitable) the new science refuses to recognise dogma as truth, but through reason, by a slow and laborious method of investigation, strives for and attains to true deductions.

[2] A substance or material is that which occupies space and has weight; that is, which presents a mass attracted by the earth and by other masses of material, and of which the objects of nature are composed, and by means of which the motions and phenomena of nature are accomplished. It is easy to discover by examining and investigating, by various methods, the objects met with in nature and in the arts, that some of them are homogeneous, whilst others are composed of a mixture of several homogeneous substances. This is most clearly apparent in solid substances. The metals used in the arts (for example, gold, iron, copper) must be homogeneous, otherwise they are brittle and unfit for many purposes. Homogeneous matter exhibits similar properties in all its parts. By breaking up a homogeneous substance we obtain parts which, although different in form, resemble each other in their properties. Glass, pure sugar, marble, &c., are examples of homogeneous substances. Examples of non-homogeneous substances are, however, much more frequent in nature and the arts. Thus the majority of the rocks are not homogeneous. In porphyries bright pieces of a mineral called ‘orthoclase’ are often seen interspersed amongst the dark mass of the rock. In ordinary red granite it is easy to distinguish large pieces of orthoclase mixed with dark semi-transparent quartz and flexible laminæ of mica. Similarly, plants and animals are non-homogeneous. Thus, leaves are composed of a skin, fibre, pulp, sap, and a green colouring matter. As an example of those non-homogeneous substances which are produced artificially, gunpowder may be cited, which is prepared by mixing together known proportions of sulphur, nitre, and charcoal. Many liquids, also, are not homogeneous, as may be observed by the aid of the microscope, when drops of blood are seen to consist of a colourless liquid in which red corpuscles, invisible to the naked eye owing to their small size, are floating about. It is these corpuscles which give blood its peculiar colour. Milk is also a transparent liquid, in which microscopical drops of fat are floating, which rise to the top when milk is left at rest, forming cream. It is possible to extract from every non-homogeneous substance those homogeneous substances of which it is made up. Thus orthoclase may he separated from porphyry by breaking it off. So also gold is extracted from auriferous sand by washing away the mixture of clay and sand. Chemistry deals only with the homogeneous substances met with in nature, or extracted from natural or artificial non-homogeneous substances. The various mixtures found in nature form the subjects of other natural sciences—as geognosy, botany, zoology, anatomy, &c.

[3] All those events which are accomplished by substances in time are termed ‘phenomena.’ Phenomena in themselves form the fundamental subject of the study of physics. Motion is the primary and most generally understood form of phenomenon, and therefore we endeavour to reason about other phenomena as clearly as when dealing with motion. For this reason mechanics, which treats of motion, forms the fundamental science of natural philosophy, and all other sciences endeavour to reduce the phenomena with which they are concerned to mechanical principles. Astronomy was the first to take to this path of reasoning, and succeeded in many cases in reducing astronomical to purely mechanical phenomena. Chemistry and physics, physiology and biology are proceeding in the same direction. One of the most important questions of all natural science, and one which has been handed down from the philosophers of classic times, is, whether the comprehension of all that is visible can be reduced to motion? Its participation in all, from the ‘fixed’ stars to the most minute parts of the coldest bodies (Dewar, in 1894 showed that many substances cooled to -180° fluoresce more strongly than at the ordinary temperature; i.e. that there is a motion in them which produces light) must now be recognised as undoubtable from direct experiment and observation, but it does not follow from this that by motion alone can all be explained. This follows, however, from the fact that we cannot apprehend motion otherwise than by recognising matter in a state of motion. If light and electricity be understood as particular forms of motion, then we must inevitably recognise the existence of a peculiar luminiferous (universal) ether as a material, transmitting this form of motion. And so, under the present state of knowledge, it is inevitably necessary to recognise the particular categories, motion and matter, and as chemistry is more closely concerned with the various forms of the latter, it should, together with mechanics or the study of motion, lie at the basis of natural science.

[4] The verb ‘to react’ means to act or change chemically.

[5] If a phenomenon proceeds at visible or measurable distances (as, for instance, magnetic attraction or gravity), it cannot be described as chemical, since these phenomena only take place at distances immeasurably small and undistinguishable to the eye or the microscope; that is to say, they are purely molecular.

[6] For this purpose a piece of iron may be made red hot in a forge, and then placed in contact with a lump of sulphur, when iron sulphide will be obtained as a molten liquid, the combination being accompanied by a visible increase in the glow of the iron. Or else iron filings are mixed with powdered sulphur in the proportion of 5 parts of iron to 3 parts of sulphur, and the mixture placed in a glass tube, which is then heated in one place. Combination does not commence without the aid of external heat, but when once started in any portion of the mixture it extends throughout the entire mass, because the portion first heated evolves sufficient heat in forming iron sulphide to raise the adjacent parts of the mixture to the temperature required for starting the reaction. The rise in temperature thus produced is so high as to soften the glass tube.

[7] Sulphur is slightly soluble in many thin oils; it is very soluble in carbon bisulphide and in some other liquids. Iron is insoluble in carbon bisulphide, and the sulphur therefore can be dissolved away from the iron.

[8] Decomposition of this kind is termed ‘dry distillation,’ because, as in distillation, the substance is heated and vapours are given off which, on cooling, condense into liquids. In general, decomposition, in absorbing heat, presents much in common to a physical change of state—such as, for example, that of a liquid into a gas. Deville likened complete decomposition to boiling, and compared partial decomposition, when a portion of a substance is not decomposed in the presence of its products of decomposition (or dissociation), to evaporation.

[9] A reaction of rearrangement may in certain cases take place with one substance only; that is to say, a substance may by itself change into a new isomeric form. Thus, for example, if hard yellow sulphur be heated to a temperature of 250° and then poured into cold water it gives, on cooling, a soft, brown variety. Ordinary phosphorus, which is transparent, poisonous, and phosphorescent in the dark (in the air), gives, after being heated at 270° (in an atmosphere incapable of supporting combustion, such as steam), an opaque, red, and non-poisonous isomeric variety, which is not phosphorescent. Cases of isomerism point out the possibility of an internal rearrangement in a substance, and are the result of an alteration in the grouping of the same elements, just as a certain number of balls may be grouped in figures and forms of different shapes.

[10] Thus the ancients knew how to convert the juice of grapes containing the saccharine principle (glucose) into wine or vinegar, how to extract metals from the ores which are found in the earth's crust, and how to prepare glass from earthy substances.

[11] The experiments conducted by Staas (described in detail in Chap. XXIV. on Silver) form some of the accurate researches, proving that the weight of matter is not altered in chemical reactions, because he accurately weighed (introducing all the necessary corrections) the reacting and resultant substances. Landolt (1893) carried on various reactions in inverted and sealed glass U-tubes, and on weighing the tubes before reaction (when the reacting solutions were separated in each of the branches of the tubes), and after (when the solutions had been well mixed together by shaking), found that either the weight remained perfectly constant or that the variation was so small (for instance, 0·2 milligram in a total weight of about a million milligrams) as to be ascribed to the inevitable errors of weighing.

[11 bis] The idea of the mass of matter was first shaped into an exact form by Galileo (died 1642), and more especially by Newton (born 1643, died 1727), in the glorious epoch of the development of the principles of inductive reasoning enunciated by Bacon and Descartes in their philosophical treatises. Shortly after the death of Newton, Lavoisier, whose fame in natural philosophy should rank with that of Galileo and Newton, was born on August 26, 1743. The death of Lavoisier occurred during the Reign of Terror of the French Revolution, when he, together with twenty-six other chief farmers of the revenue, was guillotined on May 8, 1794, at Paris; but his works and ideas have made him immortal.

[12] By covering iron with an enamel, or varnish, or with unrustable metals (such as nickel), or a coating of paraffin, or other similar substances, it is protected from the air and moisture, and so kept from rusting.

[13] Such an experiment may easily be made by taking the finest (unrusted) iron filings (ordinary filings must be first washed in ether, dried, and passed through a very fine sieve). The filings thus obtained are capable of burning directly in air (by oxidising or forming rust), especially when they hang (are attracted) on a magnet. A compact piece of iron does not burn in air, but spongy iron glows and smoulders like tinder. In making the experiment, a horse-shoe magnet is fixed, with the poles downwards, on one arm of a rather sensitive balance, and the iron filings are applied to the magnet (on a sheet of paper) so as to form a beard about the poles. The balance pan should be exactly under the filings on the magnet, in order that any which might fall from it should not alter the weight. The filings, having been weighed, are set light to by applying the flame of a candle; they easily take fire, and go on burning by themselves, forming rust. When the combustion is ended, it will be clear that the iron has increased in weight; from 5½ parts by weight of iron filings taken, there are obtained, by complete combustion, 7½ parts by weight of rust.

[14] For the purpose of experiment, it is most convenient to take copper carbonate, which may be prepared by the experimenter himself, by adding a solution of sodium carbonate to a solution of copper sulphate. The precipitate (deposit) so formed is collected on a filter, washed, and dried. The decomposition of copper carbonate into copper oxide is effected by so moderate a heat that it may be performed in a glass vessel heated by a lamp. For this purpose a thin glass tube, closed at one end, and called a ‘test tube,’ may be employed, or else a vessel called a ‘retort.’ The experiment is carried on, as described in example three on p. 11, by collecting the carbonic anhydride over water, as will be afterwards explained.

[15] Gas delivery tubes are usually made of glass tubing of various diameters and thicknesses. If of small diameter and thickness, a glass tube is easily bent by heating in a gas jet or the flame of a spirit lamp, and it may also be easily divided at a given point by making a deep scratch with a file and then breaking the tube at this point with a sharp jerk. These properties, together with their impermeability, transparency, hardness, and regularity of bore, render glass tubes most useful in experiments with gases. Naturally they might be replaced by straws, india-rubber, metallic, or other tubes, but these are more difficult to fix on to a vessel, and are not entirely impervious to gases. A glass gas delivery tube may be hermetically fixed into a vessel by fitting it into a perforated cork, which should be soft and free from flaws, and fixing the cork into the orifice of the vessel. To protect the cork from the action of gases it is sometimes previously soaked in paraffin, or it may be replaced by an india-rubber cork.

[16] Gases, like all other substances, may be weighed, but, owing to their extreme lightness and the difficulty of dealing with them in large masses, they can only be weighed by very sensitive balances; that is, in such as, with a considerable load, indicate a very small difference in weight—for example, a centigram or a milligram with a load of 1,000 grams. In order to weigh a gas, a glass globe furnished with a tight-fitting stop-cock is first of all exhausted of air by an air-pump (a Sprengel pump is the best). The stop-cock is then closed, and the exhausted globe weighed. If the gas to be weighed is then let into the globe, its weight can be determined from the increase in the weight of the globe. It is necessary, however, that the temperature and pressure of the air about the balance should remain constant for both weighings, as the weight of the globe in air will (according to the laws of hydrostatics) vary with its density. The volume of the air displaced, and its weight, must therefore be determined by observing the temperature, density, and moisture of the atmosphere during the time of experiment. This will be partly explained later, but may be studied more in detail by physics. Owing to the complexity of all these operations, the mass of a gas is usually determined from its volume and density, or from the weight of a known volume.

[17] The copper carbonate should be dried before weighing, as otherwise—besides copper oxide and carbonic anhydride—water will be obtained in the decomposition. Water forms a part of the composition of malachite, and has therefore to be taken into consideration. The water produced in the decomposition may be all collected by absorbing it in sulphuric acid or calcium chloride, as will be described further on. In order to dry a salt it must be heated at about 100° until its weight remains constant, or be placed under an air pump over sulphuric acid, as will also be presently described. As water is met with almost everywhere, and as it is absorbed by many substances, the possibility of its presence should never be lost sight of.

[18] As the decomposition of red oxide of mercury requires so high a temperature, near redness, as to soften ordinary glass, it is necessary for this experiment to take a retort (or test tube) made of hard glass, which is able to stand high temperatures without softening. For the same reason, the lamp used must give a strong heat and a large flame, capable of embracing the whole bottom of the retort, which should be as small as possible for the convenience of the experiment.

[19] The pneumatic trough may naturally be made of any material (china, earthenware, or metal, &c.), but usually a glass one, as shown in the drawing, is used, as it allows the progress of the experiment to be better observed. For this reason, as well as the ease with which they are kept clean, and from the fact also that glass is not acted on by many substances which affect other materials (for instance, metals), glass vessels of all kinds—such as retorts, test tubes, cylinders, beakers, flasks, globes, &c.—are preferred to any other for chemical experiments. Glass vessels may be heated without any danger if the following precautions be observed: 1st, they should be made of thin glass, as otherwise they are liable to crack from the bad heat-conducting power of glass; 2nd, they should be surrounded by a liquid or with sand (Fig. [2]), or sand bath as it is called; or else should stand in a current of hot gases without touching the fuel from which they proceed, or in the flame of a smokeless lamp. A common candle or lamp forms a deposit of soot on a cold object placed in their flames. The soot interferes with the transmission of heat, and so a glass vessel when covered with soot often cracks. And for this reason spirit lamps, which burn with a smokeless flame, or gas burners of a peculiar construction, are used. In the Bunsen burner the gas is mixed with air, and burns with a non-luminous and smokeless flame. On the other hand, if an ordinary lamp (petroleum or benzine) does not smoke it may be used for heating a glass vessel without danger, provided the glass is placed well above the flame in the current of hot gases. In all cases, the heating should be begun very carefully by raising the temperature by degrees.

Fig. 2.—Apparatus for distilling under a diminished pressure liquids which decompose at their boiling points under the ordinary pressure. The apparatus in which the liquid is distilled is connected with a large globe from which the air is pumped out; the liquid is heated, and the receiver cooled.

[20] In order to avoid the necessity of holding the cylinder, its open end is widened (and also ground so that it may be closely covered with a ground-glass plate when necessary), and placed on a stand below the level of the water in the bath. This stand is called ‘the bridge.’ It has several circular openings cut through it, and the gas delivery tube is placed under one of these, and the cylinder for collecting the gas over it.

[21] Drying is necessary in order to remove any water which may be held in the salts (see Note [17], and Chapter I., Notes [13] and [14]).

[22] The exact weights of the re-acting and resulting substances are determined with the greatest difficulty, not only from the possible inexactitude of the balance (every weighing is only correct within the limits of the sensitiveness of the balance) and weights used in weighing, not only from the difficulty in making corrections for the weight of air displaced by the vessels holding the substances weighed and by the weights themselves, but also from the hygroscopic nature of many substances (and vessels) causing absorption of moisture from the atmosphere, and from the difficulty in not losing any of the substance to be weighed in the several operations (filtering, evaporating, and drying, &c.) which have to be performed before arriving at a final result. All these circumstances have to be taken into consideration in exact researches, and their elimination requires very many special precautions which are impracticable in preliminary experiments.

[23] Besides which, in the majority of cases, the first explanation of most subjects which do not repeat themselves in everyday experience under various aspects, but always in one form, or only at intervals and infrequently, is usually wrong. Thus the daily evidence of the rising of the sun and stars evokes the erroneous idea that the heavens move and the earth stands still. This apparent truth is far from being the real truth, and, as a matter of fact, is contradictory to it. Similarly, an ordinary mind and everyday experience concludes that iron is incombustible, whereas it burns not only as filings, but even as wire, as we shall afterwards see. With the progress of knowledge very many primitive prejudices have been obliged to give way to true ideas which have been verified by experiment. In ordinary life we often reason at first sight with perfect truth, only because we are taught a right judgment by our daily experience. It is a necessary consequence of the nature of our minds to reach the attainment of truth through elementary and often erroneous reasoning and through experiment, and it would be very wrong to expect a knowledge of truth from a simple mental effort. Naturally, experiment itself cannot give truth, but it gives the means of destroying erroneous representations whilst confirming those which are true in all their consequences.

[24] It is true that Stahl was acquainted with a fact which directly disproved his hypothesis. It was already known (from the experiments of Geber, and more especially of Ray, in 1630) that metals increase in weight by oxidation, whilst, according to Stahl's hypothesis, they should decrease in weight, because phlogiston is separated by oxidation. Stahl speaks on this point as follows:—‘I am well aware that metals, in their transformation into earths, increase in weight. But not only does this fact not disprove my theory, but, on the contrary, confirms it, for phlogiston is lighter than air, and, in combining with substances, strives to lift them, and so decreases their weight; consequently, a substance which has lost phlogiston must be heavier.’ This argument, it will be seen, is founded on a misconception of the properties of gases, regarding them as having no weight and as not being attracted by the earth, or else on a confused idea of phlogiston itself, since it was first defined as imponderable. The conception of imponderable phlogiston tallies well with the habit and methods of the last century, when recourse was often had to imponderable fluids for explaining a large number of phenomena. Heat, light, magnetism, and electricity were explained as being peculiar imponderable fluids. In this sense the doctrine of Stahl corresponds entirely with the spirit of his age. If heat be now regarded as motion or energy, then phlogiston also should be considered in this light. In fact, in combustion, of coals for instance, heat and energy are evolved, and not combined in the coal, although the oxygen and coal do combine. Consequently, the doctrine of Stahl contains the essence of a true representation of the evolution of energy, but naturally this evolution is only a consequence of the combination occurring between the coal and oxygen. As regards the history of chemistry prior to Lavoisier, besides Stahl's work (to which reference has been made above), Priestley's Experiments and Observations on Different Kinds of Air, London, 1790, and also Scheele's Opuscula Chimica et Physica, Lips., 1788–89, 2 vols., must be recommended as the two leading works of the English and Scandinavian chemists showing the condition of chemical learning before the propagation of Lavoisier's views, and containing also many important observations which lie at the basis of the chemistry of our times. A most interesting memoir on the history of phlogiston is that of Rodwell, in the Philosophical Magazine, 1868, in which it is shown that the idea of phlogiston dates very far back, that Basil Valentine (1394–1415), in the Cursus Triumphalis Antimonii, Paracelsus (1493–1541), in his work, De Rerum Natura, Glauber (1604–1668), and especially John Joachim Becher (1625–1682), in his Physica Subterranea, all referred to phlogiston, but under different names.

[25] An Englishman, named Mayow, who lived a whole century before Lavoisier (in 1666), understood certain phenomena of oxidation in their true aspect, but was not able to develop his views with clearness, or support them by conclusive experiments; he cannot therefore be considered, like Lavoisier, as the founder of contemporary chemical learning. Science is a universal heritage, and therefore it is only just to give the highest honour in science, not to those who first enunciate a certain truth, but to those who are first able to convince others of its authenticity and establish it for the general welfare. But scientific discoveries are rarely made all at once; as a rule, the first teachers do not succeed in convincing others of the truth they have discovered; with time, however, a true herald comes forward, possessing every means for making the truth apparent to all, but it must not be forgotten that such are entirely indebted to the labours and mass of data accumulated by many others. Such was Lavoisier, and such are all the great founders of science. They are the enunciators of all past and present learning, and their names will always be revered by posterity.

[26] Many of the ancient philosophers assumed the existence of one elementary form of matter. This idea still appears in our times, in the constant efforts which are made to reduce the number of the elements; to prove, for instance, that bromine contains chlorine or that chlorine contains oxygen. Many methods, founded both on experiment and theory, have been tried to prove the compound nature of the elements. All labour in this direction has as yet been in vain, and the assurance that elementary matter is not so homogeneous (single) as the mind would desire in its first transport of rapid generalisation is strengthened from year to year. All our knowledge shows that iron and other elements remain, even at such a high temperature as there exists in the sun, as different substances, and are not converted into one common material. Admitting, even mentally, the possibility of one elementary form of matter, a method must be imagined by which it could give rise to the various elements, as also the modus operandi of their formation from one material. If it be said that this diversitude only takes place at low temperatures, as is observed with isomerides, then there would be reason to expect, if not the transition of the various elements into one particular and more stable form, at least the mutual transformation of some into others. But nothing of the kind has as yet been observed, and the alchemist's hope to manufacture (as Berthollet puts it) elements has no theoretical or practical foundation.

[27] The weakest point in the idea of elements is the negative character of the determinative signs given them by Lavoisier, and from that time ruling in chemistry. They do not decompose, they do not change into one another. But it must be remarked that elements form the limiting horizon of our knowledge of matter, and it is always difficult to determine a positive side on the borderland of what is known. Besides, there is no doubt (from the results of spectrum analysis) that the elements are distributed as far as the most distant stars, and that they support the highest attainable temperatures without decomposing.

[28] Possibly some of their compounds are compounds of other already-known elements. Pure and incontestably independent compounds of these substances are unknown, and some of them have not even been separated, but are only supposed to exist from the results of spectroscopic researches. There can be no mention of such contestable and doubtful elements in a short general handbook of chemistry.

[28 bis] Clark in America made an approximate calculation of the amount of the different elements contained in the earth's crust (to a depth of 15 kilometres), and found that the chief mass (over 50 per cent.) is composed of oxygen; then comes silicon, &c.; while the amount of hydrogen is less than 1 per cent., carbon scarcely 0·25 per cent., nitrogen even less than 0·03 per cent. The relative masses of such metals as Cu, Ni, Au is minute. Judging from the density (see Chapter [VIII].) of the earth, a large proportion of its mass must be composed of iron.

[29] This word, first introduced, if I mistake not, into chemistry by Glauber, is based on the idea of the ancient philosophers that combination can only take place when the substances combining have something in common—a medium. As is generally the case, another idea evolved itself in antiquity, and has lived until now, side by side with the first, to which it is exactly contradictory; this considers union as dependent on contrast, on polar difference, on an effort to fill up a want.

[30] Especially conclusive are those cases of so-called metalepsis (Dumas, Laurent). Chlorine, in combining with hydrogen, forms a very stable substance called ‘hydrochloric acid,’ which is split up by the action of an electrical current into chlorine and hydrogen, the chlorine appearing at the positive and the hydrogen at the negative pole. Hence electro-chemists considered hydrogen to be an electro-positive and chlorine an electro-negative element, and that they are held together in virtue of their opposite electrical charges. It appears, however, from metalepsis, that chlorine can replace hydrogen (and, inversely, hydrogen can replace chlorine) in its compounds without in any way changing the grouping of the other elements, or altering their chief chemical properties. For instance, acetic acid in which hydrogen has been replaced by chlorine is still capable of forming salts. It must be observed, whilst considering this subject, that the explanation suggesting electricity as the origin of chemical phenomena is unsound, since it attempts to explain one class of phenomena whose nature is almost unknown by another class which is no better known. It is most instructive to remark that together with the electrical theory of chemical attraction there arose and survives a view which explains the galvanic current as being a transference of chemical action through the circuit—i.e., regards the origin of electricity as being a chemical one. It is evident that the connection is very intimate, although both phenomena are independent and represent different forms of molecular (atomic) motion, whose real nature is not yet understood. Nevertheless, the connection between the phenomena of both categories is not only in itself very instructive, but it extends the applicability of the general idea of the unity of the forces of nature, conviction of the truth of which has held so important a place in the science of the last ten years.

[31] I consider that in an elementary text-book of chemistry, like the present, it is only possible and advisable to mention, in reference to chemical mechanics, a few general ideas and some particular examples referring more especially to gases, whose mechanical theory must be regarded as the most complete. The molecular mechanics of liquids and solids is as yet in embryo, and contains much that is disputable; for this reason, chemical mechanics has made less progress in relation to these substances. It may not be superfluous here to remark, with respect to the conception of chemical affinity, that up to the present time gravity, electricity, and heat have all been applied to its elucidation. Efforts have also been made to introduce the luminiferous ether into theoretical chemistry, and should that connection between the phenomena of light and electricity which was established by Maxwell be worked out more in detail, doubtless these efforts to elucidate all or a great deal by the aid of luminiferous ether will again appear in theoretical chemistry. An independent chemical mechanics of the material particles of matter, and of their internal (atomic) changes, would, in my opinion, arise as the result of these efforts. Two hundred years ago Newton laid the foundation of a truly scientific theoretical mechanics of external visible motion, and on this foundation erected the edifice of celestial mechanics. One hundred years ago Lavoisier arrived at the first fundamental law of the internal mechanics of invisible particles of matter. This subject is far from having been developed into a harmonious whole, because it is much more difficult, and, although many details have been completely investigated, it does not possess any starting points. Newton only came after Copernicus and Kepler, who had discovered empirically the exterior simplicity of celestial phenomena. Lavoisier and Dalton may, in respect to the chemical mechanics of the molecular world, be compared to Copernicus and Kepler. But a Newton has not yet appeared in the molecular world; when he does, I think that he will find the fundamental laws of the mechanics of the invisible motions of matter more easily and more quickly in the chemical structure of matter than in physical phenomena (of electricity, heat, and light); for these latter are accomplished by particles of matter already arranged, whilst it is now clear that the problem of chemical mechanics mainly lies in the apprehension of those motions which are invisibly accomplished by the smallest atoms of matter.

[32] The theory of heat gave the idea of a store of internal motion or energy, and therefore with it, it became necessary to acknowledge chemical energy, but there is no foundation whatever for identifying heat energy with chemical energy. It may be supposed, but not positively affirmed, that heat motion is proper to molecules and chemical motion to atoms, but that as molecules are made up of atoms, the motion of the one passes to the other, and that for this reason heat strongly influences reaction and appears or disappears (is absorbed) in reactions. These relations, which are apparent and hardly subject to doubt on general lines, still present much that is doubtful in detail, because all forms of molecular and atomic motion are able to pass into each other.

[33] The reactions which take place (at the ordinary or at a high temperature) directly between substances may be clearly divided into exothermal, which are accompanied by an evolution of heat, and endothermal, which are accompanied by an absorption of heat. It is evident that the latter require a source of heat. They are determined either by the directly surrounding medium (as in the formation of carbon bisulphide from charcoal and sulphur, or in decompositions which take place at high temperatures), or else by a secondary reaction proceeding simultaneously, or by some other form of energy (light, electricity). So, for instance, hydrogen sulphide is decomposed by iodine in the presence of water at the expense of the heat which is evolved by the solution in water of the hydrogen iodide produced. This is the reason why this reaction, as exothermal, only takes place in the presence of water; otherwise it would be accompanied by a cooling effect. As in the combination of dissimilar substances, the bonds existing between the molecules and atoms of the homogeneous substances have to be broken asunder, whilst in reactions of rearrangement the formation of any one substance proceeds simultaneously with the formation of another, and, as in reactions, a series of physical and mechanical changes take place, it is impossible to separate the heat directly depending on a given reaction from the total sum of the observed heat effect. For this reason, thermochemical data are very complex, and cannot by themselves give the key to many chemical problems, as it was at first supposed they might. They ought to form a part of chemical mechanics, but alone they do not constitute it.

[34] As chemical reactions are effected by heating, so the heat absorbed by substances before decomposition or change of state, and called ‘specific heat,’ goes in many cases to the preparation, if it may be so expressed, of reaction, even when the limit of the temperature of reaction is not attained. The molecules of a substance A, which is not able to react on a substance B below a temperature t, by being heated from a somewhat lower temperature to t, undergoes that change which had to be arrived at for the formation of A B.

[35] It is possible to imagine that the cause of a great many of such reactions is, that substances taken in a separate state, for instance, charcoal, present a complex molecule composed of separate atoms of carbon which are fastened together (united, as is usually said) by a considerable affinity; for atoms of the same kind, just like atoms of different kinds, possess a mutual affinity. The affinity of chlorine for carbon, although unable to break this bond asunder, may be sufficient to form a stable compound with atoms of carbon, which are already separate. Such a view of the subject presents a hypothesis which, although dominant at the present time, is without sufficiently firm foundation. It is evident, however, that not only does chemical reaction itself consist of motions, but that in the compound formed (in the molecules) the elements (atoms) forming it are in harmonious stable motion (like the planets in the solar system), and this motion will affect the stability and capacity for reaction, and therefore the mechanical side of chemical action must be exceedingly complex. Just as there are solid, physically constant non-volatile substances like rock, gold, charcoal, &c., so are there stable and chemically constant bodies; while corresponding to physically volatile substances there are bodies like camphor, which are chemically unstable and variable.

[36] Contact phenomena are separately considered in detail in the work of Professor Konovaloff (1884). In my opinion, it must be held that the state of the internal motions of the atoms in molecules is modified at the points of contact of substances, and this state determines chemical reactions, and therefore, that reactions of combination, decomposition, and rearrangement are accomplished by contact. Professor Konovaloff showed that a number of substances, under certain conditions of their surfaces, act by contact; for instance, finely divided silica (from the hydrate) acts just like platinum, decomposing certain compound ethers. As reactions are only accomplished under close contact, it is probable that those modifications in the distribution of the atoms in molecules which come about by contact phenomena prepare the way for them. By this the rôle of contact phenomena is considerably extended. Such phenomena should explain the fact why a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen yields water (explodes) at different temperatures, according to the kind of heated substance which transmits this temperature. In chemical mechanics, phenomena of this kind have great importance, but as yet they have been but little studied. It must not be forgotten that contact is a necessary condition for every chemical reaction.

CHAPTER I
ON WATER AND ITS COMPOUNDS

Water is found almost everywhere in nature, and in all three physical states. As vapour, water occurs in the atmosphere, and in this form it is distributed over the entire surface of the earth. The vapour of water in condensing, by cooling, forms snow, rain, hail, dew, and fog. One cubic metre (or 1,000,000 cubic centimetres, or 1,000 litres, or 35·316 cubic feet) of air can contain at 0° only 4·8 grams of water, at 20° about 17·0 grams, at 40° about 50·7 grams; but ordinary air only contains about 60 per cent. of this maximum. Air containing less than 40 per cent. is felt to be dry, whilst air which contains more than 80 per cent. of the same maximum is considered as distinctly damp.[1] Water in the liquid state, in falling as rain and snow, soaks into the soil and collects together into springs, lakes, rivers, seas, and oceans. It is absorbed from the soil by the roots of plants, which, when fresh, contain from 40 to 80 per cent. of water by weight. Animals contain about the same amount of water. In a solid state, water appears as snow, ice, or in an intermediate form between these two, which is seen on mountains covered with perpetual snow. The water of rivers,[2] springs, oceans and seas, lakes, and wells contains various substances in solution mostly salt,—that is, substances resembling common table salt in their physical properties and chief chemical transformations. Further, the quantity and nature of these salts differ in different waters.[3] Everybody knows that there are salt, fresh, iron, and other waters. The presence of about 3½ per cent. of salts renders sea-water[4] bitter to the taste and increases its specific gravity. Fresh water also contains salts, but only in a comparatively small quantity. Their presence may be easily proved by simply evaporating water in a vessel. On evaporation the water passes away as vapour, whilst the salts are left behind. This is why a crust (incrustation), consisting of salts, previously in solution, is deposited on the insides of kettles or boilers, and other vessels in which water is boiled. Running water (rivers, &c.) is charged with salts, owing to its being formed from the collection of rain water percolating through the soil. While percolating, the water dissolves certain parts of the soil. Thus water which filters or passes through saline or calcareous soils becomes charged with salts or contains calcium carbonate (chalk). Rain water and snow are much purer than river or spring water. Nevertheless, in passing through the atmosphere, rain and snow succeed in catching the dust held in it, and dissolve air, which is found in every water. The dissolved gases of the atmosphere are partly disengaged, as bubbles from water on heating, and water after long boiling is quite freed from them.

In general terms water is called pure when it is clear and free from insoluble particles held in suspension and visible to the naked eye, from which it may be freed by filtration through charcoal, sand, or porous (natural or artificial) stones, and when it possesses a clean fresh taste. It depends on the absence of any taste, decomposing organic matter, on the quantity of air[5] and atmospheric gases in solution, and on the presence of mineral substances to the amount of about 300 grams per ton (or 1000 kilograms per cubic metre, or, what is the same, 300 milligrams to a kilogram or a litre of water), and of not more than 100 grams of organic matter.[6] Such water is suitable for drinking and every practical application, but evidently it is not pure in a chemical sense. A chemically pure water is necessary not only for scientific purposes, as an independent substance having constant and definite properties, but also for many practical purposes—for instance, in photography and in the preparation of medicines—because many properties of substances in solution are changed by the impurities of natural waters. Water is usually purified by distillation, because the solid substances in solution are not transformed into vapours in this process. Such distilled water is prepared by chemists and in laboratories by boiling water in closed metallic boilers or stills, and causing the steam produced to pass into a condenser—that is, through tubes (which should be made of tin, or, at all events, tinned, as water and its impurities do not act on tin) surrounded by cold water, and in which the steam, being cooled, condenses into water which is collected[7] in a receiver. By standing exposed to the atmosphere, however, the water in time absorbs air, and dust carried in the air. Nevertheless, in distillation, water retains, besides air, a certain quantity of volatile impurities (especially organic) and the walls of the distillation apparatus are partly corroded by the water, and a portion, although small, of their substance renders the water not entirely pure, and a residue is left on evaporation.[8]

For certain physical and chemical researches, however, it is necessary to have perfectly pure water. To obtain it, a solution of potassium permanganate is added to distilled water until the whole is a light rose colour. By this means the organic matter in the water is destroyed (converted into gases or non-volatile substances). An excess of potassium permanganate does no harm, because in the next distillation it is left behind in the distillation apparatus. The second distillation should take place in a platinum retort with a platinum receiver. Platinum is a metal which is not acted on either by air or water, and therefore nothing passes from it into the water. The water obtained in the receiver still contains air. It must then be boiled for a long time, and afterwards cooled in a vacuum under the receiver of an air pump. Pure water does not leave any residue on evaporation; does not in the least change, however long it be kept; does not decompose like water only once distilled or impure; and it does not give bubbles of gas on heating, nor does it change the colour of a solution of potassium permanganate.

Water, purified as above described, has constant physical and chemical properties. For instance, it is of such water only that one cubic centimetre weighs one gram at 4° C.—i.e. it is only such pure water whose specific gravity equals 1 at 4° C.[9] Water in a solid state forms crystals of the hexagonal system[10] which are seen in snow, which generally consists of star-like clusters of several crystals, and also in the half-melted scattered ice floating on rivers in spring time. At this time of the year the ice splits up into spars or prisms, bounded by angles proper to substances crystallising in the hexagonal system.

The temperatures at which water passes from one state to another are taken as fixed points on the thermometer scale; namely, the zero corresponds with the temperature of melting ice, and the temperature of the steam disengaged from water boiling at the normal barometric pressure (that is 760 millimetres measured at 0°, at the latitude of 45°, at the sea level) is taken as 100° of the Celsius scale. Thus, the fact that water liquefies at 0° and boils at 100° is taken as one of its properties as a definite chemical compound. The weight of a litre of water at 4° is 1,000 grams, at 0° it is 999·8 grams. The weight of a litre of ice at 0° is less—namely, 917 grams; the weight of the same cubic measure of water vapour at 760 mm. pressure and 100° is only 0·60 gram; the density of the vapour compared with air = 0·62, and compared with hydrogen = 9.

These data briefly characterise the physical properties of water as a separate substance. To this may be added that water is a mobile liquid, colourless, transparent, without taste or smell, &c. Its latent heat of vaporisation is 534 units, of liquefaction 79 units of heat.[11] The large amount of heat stored up in water vapour and also in liquid water (for its specific heat is greater than that of other liquids) renders it available in both forms for heating purposes. The chemical reactions which water undergoes, and by means of which it is formed, are so numerous, and so closely allied to the reactions of many other substances, that it is impossible to describe the majority of them at this early stage of chemical exposition. We shall become acquainted with many of them afterwards, but at present we shall only cite certain compounds formed by water. In order to see clearly the nature of the various kinds of compounds formed by water we will begin with the most feeble, which are determined by purely mechanical superficial properties of the reacting substances.[12]

Water is mechanically attracted by many substances; it adheres to their surfaces just as dust adheres to objects, or one piece of polished glass adheres to another. Such attraction is termed ‘moistening,’ ‘soaking,’ or ‘absorption of water.’ Thus water moistens clean glass and adheres to its surface, is absorbed by the soil, sand, and clay, and does not flow away from them, but lodges itself between their particles. Similarly, water soaks into a sponge, cloth, hair, or paper, &c., but fat and greasy substances in general are not moistened. Attraction of this kind does not alter the physical or chemical properties of water. For instance, under these circumstances water, as is known from everyday experience, may be expelled from objects by drying. Water which is in any way held mechanically may be dislodged by mechanical means, by friction, pressure, centrifugal force, &c. Thus water is squeezed from wet cloth by pressure or centrifugal machines. But objects which in practice are called dry (because they do not feel wet) often still contain moisture, as may be proved by heating the object in a glass tube closed at one end. By placing a piece of paper, dry earth, or any similar object (especially porous substances) in such a glass tube, and heating that part of the tube where the object is situated, it will be remarked that water condenses on the cooler portions of the tube. The presence of such absorbed, or ‘hygroscopic,’ water is generally best detected in non-volatile substances by drying them at 100°, or under the receiver of an air-pump and over substances which attract water chemically. By weighing a substance before and after drying, it is easy to determine the amount of hygroscopic water from the loss in weight.[13] Only in this case the amount of water must be judged with care, because the loss in weight may sometimes proceed from the decomposition of the substance itself, with disengagement of gases or vapour. In making exact weighings the hygroscopic capacity of substances—that is, their capacity to absorb moisture—must be continually kept in view, as otherwise the weight will be untrue from the presence of moisture. The quantity of moisture absorbed depends on the degree of moisture of the atmosphere (that is, on the tension of the aqueous vapour in it) in which a substance is situated. In an entirely dry atmosphere, or in a vacuum, the hygroscopic water is expelled, being converted into vapour; therefore, substances containing hygroscopic water may be completely dried by placing them in a dry atmosphere or in a vacuum. The process is aided by heat, as it increases the tension of the aqueous vapour. Phosphoric anhydride (a white powder), liquid sulphuric acid, solid and porous calcium chloride, or the white powder of ignited copper sulphate, are most generally employed in drying gases. They absorb the moisture contained in air and all gases to a considerable, but not unlimited, extent. Phosphoric anhydride and calcium chloride deliquesce, become damp, sulphuric acid changes from an oily thick liquid into a more mobile liquid, and ignited copper sulphate becomes blue; after which changes these substances partly lose their capacity of holding water, and can, if it be in excess, even give up their water to the atmosphere. We may remark that the order in which these substances are placed above corresponds with the order in which they stand in respect to their capacity for absorbing moisture. Air dried by calcium chloride still contains a certain amount of moisture, which it can give up to sulphuric acid. The most complete desiccation takes place with phosphoric anhydride. Water is also removed from many substances by placing them in a dish over a vessel containing a substance absorbing water under a glass bell jar.[14] The bell jar, like the receiver of an air pump, should be hermetically closed. In this case desiccation takes place; because sulphuric acid, for instance, first dries the air in the bell jar by absorbing its moisture, the substance to be dried then parts with its moisture to the dry air, from which it is again absorbed by the sulphuric acid, &c. Desiccation proceeds still better under the receiver of an air pump, for then the aqueous vapour is formed more quickly than in a bell jar full of air.

From what has been said above, it is evident that the transference of moisture to gases and the absorption of hygroscopic moisture present great resemblance to, but still are not, chemical combinations with water. Water, when combined as hygroscopic water, does not lose its properties and does not form new substances.[15]

The attraction of water for substances which dissolve in it is of a different character. In the solution of substances in water there proceeds a peculiar kind of indefinite combination; a new homogeneous substance is formed from the two substances taken. But here also the bond connecting the substances is very unstable. Water containing different substances in solution boils at a temperature near to its usual boiling point. From the solution of substances which are lighter than water itself, there are obtained solutions of a less density than water—as, for example, in the solution of alcohol in water; whilst a heavier substance in dissolving in water gives it a higher specific gravity. Thus salt water is heavier than fresh.[16]

We will consider aqueous solutions somewhat fully, because, among other reasons, solutions are constantly being formed on the earth and in the waters of the earth, in plants and in animals, in chemical processes and in the arts, and these solutions play an important part in the chemical transformations which are everywhere taking place, not only because water is everywhere met with, but chiefly because a substance in solution presents the most favourable conditions for the process of chemical changes, which require a mobility of parts and a possible distension of parts. In dissolving, a solid substance acquires a mobility of parts, and a gas loses its elasticity, and therefore reactions often take place in solutions which do not proceed in the undissolved substances. Further, a substance, distributed in water, evidently breaks up—that is, becomes more like a gas and acquires a greater mobility of parts. All these considerations require that in describing the properties of substances, particular attention should be paid to their relation to water as a solvent.

Fig. 14.—Method of transferring a gas into a cylinder filled with mercury and whose open end is immersed under the mercury in a bath having two glass sides. The apparatus containing the gas is represented on the right. Its upper extremity is furnished with a tube extending under the cylinder. The lower part of the vessel communicates with a vertical tube. If mercury be poured into this tube, the pressure of the gas in the apparatus is increased, and it passes through the gas-conducting tube into the cylinder, where it displaces the mercury, and can be measured or subjected to the action of absorbing agents, such as water.

It is well known that water dissolves many substances. Salt, sugar, alcohol, and a number of other substances, dissolve in water and form homogeneous liquids with it. To demonstrate the solubility of gases in water, a gas should be taken which has a high co-efficient of solubility—for instance, ammonia. This is introduced into a bell jar (or cylinder, as in fig. 14), which is previously filled with mercury and stands in a mercury bath. If water be then introduced into the cylinder, the mercury will rise, owing to the water dissolving the ammonia gas. If the column of mercury be less than the barometric column, and if there be sufficient water to dissolve the gas, all the ammonia will be absorbed by the water. The water is introduced into the cylinder by a glass pipette, with a bent end. The bent end is put into water, and the air is sucked out from the upper end. When full of water, its upper end is closed with the finger, and the bent end placed in the mercury bath under the orifice of the cylinder. On blowing into the pipette the water will rise to the surface of the mercury in the cylinder owing to its lightness. The solubility of a gas like ammonia may be demonstrated by taking a flask full of the gas, and closed by a cork with a tube passing through it. On placing the tube under water, the water will rise into the flask (this may be accelerated by previously warming the flask), and begin to play like a fountain inside it. Both the rising of the mercury and the fountain clearly show the considerable affinity of water for ammonia gas, and the force acting in this dissolution is rendered evident. A certain period of time is required both for the homogeneous intermixture of gases (diffusion) and the process of solution, which depends, not only on the surface of the participating substances, but also on their nature. This is seen from experiment. Solutions of different substances heavier than water, such as salt or sugar, are poured into tall jars. Pure water is then very carefully poured into these jars (through a funnel) on to the top of the solutions, so as not to disturb the lower stratum, and the jars are then left undisturbed. The line of demarcation between the solution and the pure water will be visible, owing to their different co-efficients of refraction. Notwithstanding that the solutions taken are heavier than water, after some time complete intermixture will ensue. Gay Lussac convinced himself of this fact by this particular experiment, which he conducted in the cellars under the Paris Astronomical Observatory. These cellars are well known as the locality where numerous interesting researches have been conducted, because, owing to their depth under ground, they have a uniform temperature during the whole year; the temperature does not change during the day, and this was indispensable for the experiments on the diffusion of solutions, in order that no doubt as to the results should arise from a daily change of temperature (the experiment lasted several months), which would set up currents in the liquids and intermix their strata. Notwithstanding the uniformity of the temperature, the substance in solution in time ascended into the water and distributed itself uniformly through it, proving that there exists between water and a substance dissolved in it a particular kind of attraction or striving for mutual interpenetration in opposition to the force of gravity. Further, this effort, or rate of diffusion, is different for salt or sugar or for various other substances.[16 bis] It follows therefore that a peculiar force acts in solution, as in actual chemical combinations, and solution is determined by a particular kind of motion (by the chemical energy of a substance) which is proper to the substance dissolved and to the solvent.

Graham made a series of experiments similar to those above described, and showed that the rate of diffusion[17] in water is very variable—that is, a uniform distribution of a substance in the water dissolving it is attained in different periods of time with different solutions. Graham compared diffusive capacity with volatility. There are substances which diffuse easily, and there are others which diffuse with difficulty, just as there are more or less volatile substances. Seven hundred cubic centimetres of water were poured into a jar, and by means of a syphon (or a pipette) 100 cub. centimetres of a solution containing 10 grams of a substance were cautiously poured in so as to occupy the lower portion of the jar. After a lapse of several days, successive layers of 50 cubic centimetres were taken from the top downwards, and the quantity of substance dissolved in the different layers determined. Thus, common table salt, after fourteen days, gave the following amounts (in milligrams) in the respective layers, beginning from the top: 104, 120, 126, 198, 267, 340, 429, 535, 654, 766, 881, 991, 1,090, 1,187, and 2,266 in the remainder; whilst albumin in the same time gave, in the first seven layers, a very small amount, and beginning from the eighth layer, 10, 15, 47, 113, 343, 855, 1,892, and in the remainder 6,725 milligrams. Thus, the diffusive power of a solution depends on time and on the nature of the substance dissolved, which fact may serve, not only for explaining the process of solution, but also for distinguishing one substance from another. Graham showed that substances which rapidly diffuse through liquids are able to rapidly pass through membranes and crystallise, whilst substances which diffuse slowly and do not crystallise are colloids, that is, resemble glue, and penetrate through a membrane slowly, and form jellies; that is, occur in insoluble forms,[18] as will be explained in speaking of silica.

Hence, if it be desired to increase the rate of solution, recourse must be had to stirring, shaking, or some such mechanical motion. But if once a uniform solution is formed, it will remain uniform, no matter how heavy the dissolved substance is, or how long the solution be left at rest, which fact again shows the presence of a force holding together the particles of the body dissolved and of the solvent.[19]

In the consideration of the process of solution, besides the conception of diffusion, another fundamental conception is necessary—namely, that of the saturation of solutions.

Just as moist air may be diluted with any desired quantity of dry air, so also an indefinitely large quantity of a liquid solvent may be taken, and yet a uniform solution will be obtained. But more than a definite quantity of aqueous vapour cannot be introduced into a certain volume of air at a certain temperature. The excess above the point of saturation will remain in the liquid state.[20] The relation between water and substances dissolved in it is similar. More than a definite quantity of a substance cannot, at a certain temperature, dissolve in a given quantity of water; the excess does not unite with the water. Just as air or a gas becomes saturated with vapour, so water becomes saturated with a substance dissolved in it. If an excess of a substance be added to water which is already saturated with it, it will remain in its original state, and will not diffuse through the water. The quantity of a substance (either by volume with gases, or by weight with solids and liquids) which is capable of saturating 100 parts of water is called the co-efficient of solubility or the solubility. In 100 grams of water at 15°, there can be dissolved not more than 35·86 grams of common salt. Consequently, its solubility at 15° is equal to 35·86.[21] It is most important to turn attention to the existence of the solid insoluble substances of nature, because on them depends the shape of the substances of the earth's surface, and of plants and animals. There is so much water on the earth's surface, that were the surface of substances formed of soluble matters it would constantly change, and however substantial their forms might be, mountains, river banks and sea shores, plants and animals, or the habitations and coverings of men, could not exist for any length of time.[22]

Substances which are easily soluble in water bear a certain resemblance to it. Thus sugar and salt in many of their superficial features remind one of ice. Metals, which are not soluble in water, have no points in common with it, whilst on the other hand they dissolve each other in a molten state, forming alloys, just as oily substances dissolve each other; for example, tallow is soluble in petroleum and in olive oil, although they are all insoluble in water. From this it is evident that the analogy of substances forming a solution plays an important part, and as aqueous and all other solutions are liquids, there is good reason to believe that in the process of solution solid and gaseous substances change in a physical sense, passing into a liquid state. These considerations elucidate many points of solution—as, for instance, the variation of the co-efficient of solubility with the temperature and the evolution or absorption of heat in the formation of solutions.

The solubility—that is, the quantity of a substance necessary for saturation—varies with the temperature, and, further, with an increase in temperature the solubility of solid substances generally increases, and that of gases decreases; this might be expected, as solid substances by heating, and gases by cooling, approach to a liquid or dissolved state.[23] A graphic method is often employed to express the variation of solubility with temperature. On the axis of abscissæ or on a horizontal line, temperatures are marked out and perpendiculars are raised corresponding with each temperature, whose length is determined by the solubility of the salt at that temperature—expressing, for instance, one part by weight of a salt in 100 parts of water by one unit of length, such as a millimetre. By joining the summits of the perpendiculars, a curve is obtained which expresses the degree of solubility at different temperatures. For solids, the curve is generally an ascending one—i.e. recedes from the horizontal line with the rise in temperature. These curves clearly show by their inclination the degree of rapidity of increase in solubility with the temperature. Having determined several points of a curve—that is, having made a determination of the solubility for several temperatures—the solubility at intermediary temperatures may be determined from the form of the curve so obtained; in this way the empirical law of solubility may be examined.[24] The results of research have shown that the solubility of certain salts—as, for example, common table salt—varies comparatively little with the temperature; whilst for other substances the solubility increases by equal amounts for equal increments of temperature. Thus, for example, for the saturation of 100 parts of water by potassium chloride there is required at 0°, 29·2 parts, at 20°, 34·7, at 40°, 40·2, at 60°, 45·7; and so on, for every 10° the solubility increases by 2·75 parts by weight of the salt. Therefore the solubility of the potassium chloride in water may be expressed by a direct equation: a = 29·2 + 0·275t, where a represents the solubility at t°. For other salts, more complicated equations are required. For example, for nitre: a = 13·3 + 0·574t + 0·01717t² + 0·0000036t³, which shows that when t = 0° a = 13·3, when t = 10° a = 20·8, and when t = 100° a = 246·0.

Curves of solubility give the means of estimating the amount of salt separated by the cooling to a known extent of a solution saturated at a given temperature. For instance, if 200 parts of a solution of potassium chloride in water saturated at a temperature of 60° be taken, and it be asked how much of the salt will be separated by cooling the solution to 0°, if its solubility at 60° = 45·7 and at 0° = 29·2? The answer is obtained in the following manner: At 60° a saturated solution contains 45·7 parts of potassium chloride per 100 parts by weight of water, consequently 145·7 parts by weight of the solution contain 45·7 parts, or, by proportion, 200 parts by weight of the solution contain 62·7 parts of the salt. The amount of salt remaining in solution at 0° is calculated as follows; In 200 grams taken there will be 137·3 grams of water; consequently, this amount of water is capable of holding only 40·1 grams of the salt, and therefore in lowering the temperature from 60° to 0° there should separate from the solution 62·7 - 40·1 = 22·6 grams of the dissolved salt.

The difference in the solubility of salts, &c., with a rise or fall of temperature is often taken advantage of, especially in technical work, for the separation of salts, in intermixture from each other. Thus a mixture of potassium and sodium chlorides (this mixture is met with in nature at Stassfurt) is separated from a saturated solution by subjecting it alternately to boiling (evaporation) and cooling. The sodium chloride separates out in proportion to the amount of water expelled from the solution by boiling, and is removed, whilst the potassium chloride separates out on cooling, as the solubility of this salt rapidly decreases with a lowering in temperature. Nitre, sugar, and many other soluble substances are purified (refined) in a similar manner.

Although in the majority of cases the solubility of solids increases with the temperature, yet there are some solid substances whose solubilities decrease on heating. Glauber's salt, or sodium sulphate, forms a particularly instructive example of the case in question. If this salt be taken in an ignited state (deprived of its water of crystallisation), then its solubility in 100 parts of water varies with the temperature in the following manner: at 0°, 5 parts of the salt form a saturated solution; at 20°, 20 parts of the salt, at 33° more than 50 parts. The solubility, as will be seen, increases with the temperature, as is the case with nearly all salts; but starting from 33° it suddenly diminishes, and at a temperature of 40°, less than 50 parts of the salt dissolve, at 60° only 45 parts of the salt, and at 100° about 43 parts of the salt in 100 parts of water. This phenomenon may be traced to the following facts: Firstly, that this salt forms various compounds with water, as will be afterwards explained; secondly, that at 33° the compound Na₂SO₄ + 10H₂O formed from the solution at lower temperatures, melts; and thirdly, that on evaporation at a temperature above 33° an anhydrous salt, Na₂SO₄ separates out. It will be seen from this example how complicated such an apparently simple phenomenon as solution really is; and all data concerning solutions lead to the same conclusion. This complexity becomes evident in investigating the heat of solution. If solution consisted of a physical change only, then in the solution of gases there would be evolved—and in the solution of solids, there would be absorbed—just that amount of heat corresponding to the change of state; but in reality a large amount of heat is always evolved in solution, depending on the fact that in the process of solution chemical combination takes place accompanied by an evolution of heat. Seventeen grams of ammonia (this weight corresponds with its formula NH₃), in passing from a gaseous into a liquid state, evolve 4,400 units of heat (latent heat); that is, the quantity of heat necessary to raise the temperature of 4,400 grams of water 1°. The same quantity of ammonia, in dissolving in an excess of water, evolves twice as much heat—namely 8,800 units—showing that the combination with water is accompanied by the evolution of 4,400 units of heat. Further, the chief part of this heat is separated in dissolving in small quantities of water, so that 17 grams of ammonia, in dissolving in 18 grams of water (this weight corresponds with its composition H₂O), evolve 7,535 units of heat, and therefore the formation of the solution NH₃ + H₂O evolves 3,135 units of heat beyond that due to the change of state. As in the solution of gases, the heat of liquefaction (of physical change of state) and of chemical combination with water are both positive (+), therefore in the solution of gases in water a heat effect is always observed. This phenomenon is different in the solution of solid substances, because their passage from a solid to a liquid state is accompanied by an absorption of heat (negative,- heat), whilst their chemical combination with water is accompanied by an evolution of heat (+ heat); consequently, their sum may either be a cooling effect, when the positive (chemical) portion of heat is less than the negative (physical), or it may be, on the contrary, a heating effect. This is actually the case. 124 grams of sodium thiosulphate (employed in photography) Na₂S₂O₃,5H₂O in melting (at 48°) absorbs 9,700 units of heat, but in dissolving in a large quantity of water at the ordinary temperature it absorbs 5,700 units of heat, which shows the evolution of heat (about + 4,000 units), notwithstanding the cooling effect observed in the process of solution, in the act of the chemical combination of the salt with water.[25] But in most cases solid substances in dissolving in water evolve heat, notwithstanding the passage into a liquid state, which indicates so considerable an evolution of (+) heat in the act of combination with water that it exceeds the absorption of (-) heat dependent on the passage into a liquid state, Thus, for instance, calcium chloride, CaCl₂, magnesium sulphate, MgSO₄, and many other salts evolve heat in dissolving; for example, 60 grams of magnesium sulphate evolve about 10,000 units of heat. Therefore, in the solution of solid bodies either a cooling[26] or a heating[27] effect is produced, according to the difference of the reacting affinities. When they are considerable—that is, when water is with difficulty separated from the resultant solution, and only with a rise of temperature (such substances absorb water vapour)—then much heat is evolved in the process of solution, just as in many reactions of direct combination, and therefore a considerable heating of the solution is observed. Of such a kind, for instance, is the solution of sulphuric acid (oil of vitriol H₂SO₄), and of caustic soda (NaHO), &c., in water.[28]

Solution is a reversible reaction; for, if the water be expelled from a solution, the substance originally taken is obtained again. But it must be borne in mind that the expulsion of the water taken for solution is not always accomplished with equal facility, because water has different degrees of chemical affinity for the substance dissolved. Thus, if a solution of sulphuric acid, which mixes with water in all proportions, be heated, it will be found that very different degrees of heat are required to expel the water. When it is in a large excess, water is given off at a temperature slightly above 100°, but if it be in but a small proportion there is such an affinity between it and the sulphuric acid that at 120°, 150°, 200°, and even at 300°, water is still retained by the sulphuric acid. The bond between the remaining quantity of water and the sulphuric acid is evidently stronger than the bond between the sulphuric acid and the excess of water. The force acting in solutions is consequently of different intensity, starting from so feeble an attraction that the properties of water—as, for instance, its power of evaporation—are but very little changed, and ending with cases of strong attraction between the water and the substance dissolved in or chemically combined with it. In consideration of the very important significance of the phenomena, and of the cases of the breaking up of solutions with separation of water or of the substance dissolved from them, we shall further discuss them separately, after having acquainted ourselves with certain peculiarities of the solution of gases and of solid bodies.

The solubility of gases, which is usually measured by the volume of gas[29] (at 0° and 760 mm. pressure) per 100 volumes of water, varies not only with the nature of the gas (and also of the solvent), and with the temperature, but also with the pressure, because gases themselves change their volume considerably with the pressure. As might be expected, (1) gases which are easily liquefied (by pressure and cold) are more soluble than those which are liquefied with difficulty. Thus, in 100 volumes of water only two volumes of hydrogen dissolve at 0° and 760 mm., three volumes of carbonic oxide, four volumes of oxygen, &c., for these are gases which are liquefied with difficulty; whilst there dissolve 180 volumes of carbonic anhydride, 130 of nitrous oxide, and 437 of sulphurous anhydride, for these are gases which are rather easily liquefied. (2) The solubility of a gas is diminished by heating, which is easily intelligible from what has been said previously—the elasticity of a gas becomes greater, it is removed further from a liquid state. Thus 100 volumes of water at 0° dissolve 2·5 volumes of air, and at 20° only 1·7 volume. For this reason cold water, when brought into a warm room, parts with a portion of the gas dissolved in it.[30] (3) The quantity of the gas dissolved varies directly with the pressure. This rule is called the law of Henry and Dalton, and is applicable to those gases which are little soluble in water. Therefore a gas is separated from its solution in water in a vacuum, and water saturated with a gas under great pressure parts with it if the pressure be diminished. Thus many mineral springs are saturated underground with carbonic anhydride under the great pressure of the column of water above them. On coming to the surface, the water of these springs boils and foams on giving up the excess of dissolved gas. Sparkling wines and aërated waters are saturated under pressure with the same gas. They hold the gas so long as they are in a well-corked vessel. When the cork is removed and the liquid comes in contact with air at a lower pressure, part of the gas, unable to remain in solution at a lower pressure, is separated as froth with the hissing sound familiar to all. It must be remarked that the law of Henry and Dalton belongs to the class of approximate laws, like the laws of gases (Gay-Lussac's and Mariotte's) and many others—that is, it expresses only a portion of a complex phenomenon, the limit towards which the phenomenon aims. The matter is rendered complicated from the influence of the degree of solubility and of affinity of the dissolved gas for water. Gases which are little soluble—for instance, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen—follow the law of Henry and Dalton the most closely. Carbonic anhydride exhibits a decided deviation from the law, as is seen from the determinations of Wroblewski (1882). He showed that at 0° a cubic centimetre of water absorbs 1·8 cubic centimetre of the gas under a pressure of one atmosphere; under 10 atmospheres, 16 cubic centimetres (and not 18, as it should be according to the law); under 20 atmospheres, 26·6 cubic centimetres (instead of 36), and under 30 atmospheres, 33·7 cubic centimetres.[31] However, as the researches of Sechenoff show, the absorption of carbonic anhydride within certain limits of change of pressure, and at the ordinary temperature, by water—and even by solutions of salts which are not chemically changed by it, or do not form compounds with it—very closely follows the law of Henry and Dalton, so that the chemical bond between this gas and water is so feeble that the breaking up of the solution with separation of the gas is accomplished by a decrease of pressure alone.[32] The case is different if a considerable affinity exists between the dissolved gas and water. Then it might even be expected that the gas would not be entirely separated from water in a vacuum, as should be the case with gases according to the law of Henry and Dalton. Such gases—and, in general, all those which are very soluble—exhibit a distinct deviation from the law of Henry and Dalton. As examples, ammonia and hydrochloric acid gas may be taken. The former is separated by boiling and decrease of pressure, while the latter is not, but they both deviate distinctly from the law.

It will be remarked, for instance, from this table that whilst the pressure increased 10 times, the solubility of ammonia only increased 4½ times.

A number of examples of such cases of the absorption of gases by liquids might be cited which do not in any way, even approximately, agree with the laws of solubility. Thus, for instance, carbonic anhydride is absorbed by a solution of caustic potash in water, and if sufficient caustic potash be present it is not separated from the solution by a decrease of pressure. This is a case of more intimate chemical combination. A correlation less completely studied, but similar and clearly chemical, appears in certain cases of the solution of gases in water, and we shall afterwards find an example of this in the solution of hydrogen iodide; but we will first stop to consider a remarkable application of the law of Henry and Dalton[33] in the case of the solution of a mixture of two gases, and this we must do all the more because the phenomena which there take place cannot be foreseen without a clear theoretical representation of the nature of gases.[34]

The law of partial pressures is as follows:—The solubility of gases in intermixture with each other does not depend on the influence of the total pressure acting on the mixture, but on the influence of that portion of the total pressure which is due to the volume of each given gas in the mixture. Thus, for instance, if oxygen and carbonic anhydride were mixed in equal volumes and exerted a pressure of 760 millimetres, then water would dissolve so much of each of these gases as would be dissolved if each separately exerted a pressure of half an atmosphere, and in this case, at 0° one cubic centimetre of water would dissolve 0·02 cubic centimetre of oxygen and 0·90 cubic centimetre of carbonic anhydride. If the pressure of a gaseous mixture equals h, and in n volumes of the mixture there be a volumes of a given gas, then its solution will proceed as though this gas were dissolved under a pressure h × a / n . That portion of the pressure under influence of which the solution proceeds is termed the ‘partial’ pressure.

In order to clearly understand the cause of the law of partial pressures, an explanation must be given of the fundamental properties of gases. Gases are elastic and disperse in all directions. We are led from what we know of gases to the assumption that these fundamental properties of gases are due to a rapid progressive motion, in all directions, which is proper to their smallest particles (molecules).[35] These molecules in impinging against an obstacle produce a pressure. The greater the number of molecules impinging against an obstacle in a given time, the greater the pressure. The pressure of a separate gas or of a gaseous mixture depends on the sum of the pressures of all the molecules, on the number of blows in a unit of time on a unit of surface, and on the mass and velocity (or the vis viva) of the impinging molecules. The nature of the different molecules is of no account; the obstacle is acted on by a pressure due to the sum of their vis viva. But, in a chemical action such as the solution of gases, the nature of the impinging molecules plays, on the contrary, the most important part. In impinging against a liquid, a portion of the gas enters into the liquid itself, and is held by it so long as other gaseous molecules impinge against the liquid—exert a pressure on it. As regards the solubility of a given gas, for the number of blows it makes on the surface of a liquid, it is immaterial whether other molecules of gases impinge side by side with it or not. Hence, the solubility of a given gas will be proportional, not to the total pressure of a gaseous mixture, but to that portion of it which is due to the given gas separately. Moreover, the saturation of a liquid by a gas depends on the fact that the molecules of gases that have entered into a liquid do not remain at rest in it, although they enter in a harmonious kind of motion with the molecules of the liquid, and therefore they throw themselves off from the surface of the liquid (just like its vapour if the liquid be volatile). If in a unit of time an equal number of molecules penetrate into (leap into) a liquid and leave (or leap out of) a liquid, it is saturated. It is a case of mobile equilibrium, and not of rest. Therefore, if the pressure be diminished, the number of molecules departing from the liquid will exceed the number of molecules entering into the liquid, and a fresh state of mobile equilibrium only takes place under a fresh equality of the number of molecules departing from and entering into the liquid. In this manner the main features of the solution are explained, and furthermore of that special (chemical) attraction (penetration and harmonious motion) of a gas for a liquid, which determines both the measure of solubility and the degree of stability of the solution produced.

The consequences of the law of partial pressures are exceedingly numerous and important. All liquids in nature are in contact with the atmosphere, which, as we shall afterwards see more fully, consists of an intermixture of gases, chiefly four in number—oxygen, nitrogen, carbonic anhydride, and aqueous vapour. 100 volumes of air contain, approximately, 78 volumes of nitrogen, and about 21 volumes of oxygen; the quantity of carbonic anhydride, by volume, does not exceed 0·05. Under ordinary circumstances, the quantity of aqueous vapour is much greater than this, but it varies of course with climatic conditions. We conclude from these numbers that the solution of nitrogen in a liquid in contact with the atmosphere will proceed under a partial pressure of (78/100) × 760 mm. if the atmospheric pressure equal 760 mm.; similarly, under a pressure of 600 mm. of mercury, the solution of oxygen will proceed under a partial pressure of about 160 mm., and the solution of carbonic anhydride only under the very small pressure of 0·4 mm. As, however, the solubility of oxygen in water is twice that of nitrogen, the ratio of O to N dissolved in water will be greater than the ratio in air. It is easy to calculate what quantity of each of the gases will be contained in water, and taking the simplest case we will calculate what quantity of oxygen, nitrogen, and carbonic anhydride will be dissolved from air having the above composition at 0° and 760 mm. pressure. Under a pressure of 760 mm. 1 cubic centimetre of water dissolves 0·0203 cubic centimetre of nitrogen or under the partial pressure of 600 mm. it will dissolve 0·0203 × 600 / 700 or 0·0160 cubic centimetre; of oxygen 0·0411 × 160 / 760 , or 0·0086 cubic centimetre; of carbonic anhydride 1·8 × 0·4 / 760 or 0·00095 cubic centimetre: hence, 100 cubic centimetres of water will contain at 0° altogether 2·55 cubic centimetres of atmospheric gases, and 100 volumes of air dissolved in water will contain about 62 p.c. of nitrogen, 34 p.c. of oxygen, and 4 p.c. of carbonic anhydride. The water of rivers, wells, &c. usually contains more carbonic anhydride. This proceeds from the oxidation of organic substances falling into the water. The amount of oxygen, however, dissolved in water appears to be actually about ⅓ the dissolved gases, whilst air contains only ⅕ of it by volume.

According to the law of partial pressures, whatever gas be dissolved in water will be expelled from the solution in an atmosphere of another gas. This depends on the fact that gases dissolved in water escape from it in a vacuum, because the pressure is nil. An atmosphere of another gas acts like a vacuum on a gas dissolved in water. Separation then proceeds, because the molecules of the dissolved gas no longer impinge upon the liquid, are not dissolved in it, and those previously held in solution leave the liquid in virtue of their elasticity.[36] For the same reason a gas may be entirely expelled from a gaseous solution by boiling—at least, in many cases when it does not form particularly stable compounds with water. In fact the surface of the boiling liquid will be occupied by aqueous vapour, and therefore all the pressure acting on the gas will be due to the aqueous vapour. On this account, the partial pressure of the dissolved gas will be very inconsiderable, and this is the sole reason why a gas separates from a solution on boiling the liquid containing it. At the boiling point of water the solubility of gases in water is still sufficiently great for a considerable quantity of a gas to remain in solution. The gas dissolved in the liquid is carried away, together with the aqueous vapour; if boiling be continued for a long time, all the gas will finally be separated.[37]

It is evident that the conception of the partial pressures of gases should be applied not only to the formations of solutions, but also to all cases of chemical action of gases. Especially numerous are its applications to the physiology of respiration, for in these cases it is only the oxygen of the atmosphere that acts.[38]

The solution of solids, whilst depending only in a small measure on the pressure under which solution takes place (because solids and liquids are almost incompressible), is very clearly dependent on the temperature. In the great majority of cases the solubility of solids in water increases with the temperature; and further, the rapidity of solution increases also. The latter is determined by the rapidity of diffusion of the solution formed into the remainder of the water. The solution of a solid in water, although it is as with gases, a physical passage into a liquid state, is determined, however, by its chemical affinity for water; this is clearly shown from the fact that in solution there occurs a diminution in volume, a change in the boiling point of water, a change in the tension of its vapour, in the freezing point, and in many similar properties. If solution were a physical, and not a chemical, phenomenon, it would naturally be accompanied by an increase and not by a diminution of volume, because generally in melting a solid increases in volume (its density diminishes). Contraction is the usual phenomenon accompanying solution and takes place even in the addition of solutions to water,[39] and in the solution of liquids in water,[40] just as happens in the combination of substances when evidently new substances are produced.[41] The contraction which takes place in solution is, however, very small, a fact which depends on the small compressibility of solids and liquids, and on the insignificance of the compressing force acting in solution.[42] The change of volume which takes place in the solution of solids and liquids, or the alteration in specific gravity[43] corresponding with it, depends on peculiarities of the dissolving substances, and of water, and, in the majority of cases, is not proportional to the quantity of the substance dissolved,[44] showing the existence of a chemical force between the solvent and the substance dissolved which is of the same nature as in all other forms of chemical reaction.[45]

The feeble development of the chemical affinities acting in solutions of solids becomes evident from those multifarious methods by which their solutions are decomposed, whether they be saturated or not. On heating (absorption of heat), on cooling, and by internal forces alone, aqueous solutions in many cases separate into their components or their definite compounds with water. The water contained in solutions is removed from them as vapour, or, by freezing, in the form of ice,[46] but the tension of the vapour of water[47] held in solution is less than that of water in a free state, and the temperature of the formation of ice from solutions is lower than 0°. Further, both the diminution of vapour tension and the lowering of the freezing point proceed, in dilute solutions, almost in proportion to the amount of a substance dissolved.[48] Thus, if per 100 grams of water there be in solution 1, 5, 10 grams of common salt (NaCl), then at 100° the vapour tension of the solutions decreases by 4, 21, 43 mm. of the barometric column, against 760 mm., or the vapour tension of water, whilst the freezing points are -0·58°, -2·91°, and -6·10° respectively. The above figures[49] are almost proportional to the amounts of salt in solution (1, 5, and 10 per 100 of water). Furthermore, it has been shown by experiment that the ratio of the diminution of vapour tension to the vapour tension of water at different temperatures in a given solution is an almost constant quantity,[50] and that for every (dilute) solution the ratio between the diminution of vapour tension and of the freezing point is also a tolerably constant quantity.[51]

The diminution of the vapour tension of solutions explains the rise in boiling point due to the solution of solid non-volatile bodies in water. The temperature of a vapour is the same as that of the solution from which it is generated, and therefore it follows that the aqueous vapour given off from a solution will be superheated. A saturated solution of common salt boils at 108·4°, a solution of 335 parts of nitre in 100 parts of water at 115·9°, and a solution of 325 parts of potassium chloride in 100 parts of water at 179°, if the temperature of ebullition be determined by immersing the thermometer bulb in the liquid itself. This is another proof of the bond which exists between water and the substance dissolved. And this bond is seen still more clearly in those cases (for example, in the solution of nitric or formic acid in water) where the solution boils at a higher temperature than either water or the volatile substance dissolved in it. For this reason the solutions of certain gases—for instance, hydriodic or hydrochloric acid—boil above 100°.

The separation of ice from solutions[52] explains both the phenomenon, well known to sailors, that the ice formed from salt water gives fresh water, and also the fact that by freezing, just as by evaporation, a solution is obtained which is richer in salts than before. This is taken advantage of in cold countries for obtaining a liquor from sea water, which is then evaporated for the extraction of salt.

On the removal of part of the water from a solution (by evaporation or the separation of ice), a saturated solution should be obtained, and then the solid substance dissolved should separate out. Solutions saturated at a certain temperature should also separate out a corresponding portion of the substance dissolved if they be reduced, by cooling,[53] to a temperature at which the water can no longer hold the former quantity of the substance in solution. If this separation, by cooling a saturated solution or by evaporation, take place slowly, crystals of the substance dissolved are in many cases formed; and this is the method by which crystals of soluble salts are usually obtained. Certain solids very easily separate out from their solutions in perfectly formed crystals, which may attain very large dimensions. Such are nickel sulphate, alum, sodium carbonate, chrome-alum, copper sulphate, potassium ferricyanide, and a whole series of other salts. The most remarkable circumstance in this is that many solids in separating out from an aqueous solution retain a portion of water, forming crystallised solid substances which contain water. A portion of the water previously in the solution remains in the separated crystals. The water which is thus retained is called the water of crystallisation. Alum, copper sulphate, Glauber's salt, and magnesium sulphate contain such water, but neither sal-ammoniac, table salt, nitre, potassium chlorate, silver nitrate, nor sugar, contains any water of crystallisation. One and the same substance may separate out from a solution with or without water of crystallisation, according to the temperature at which the crystals are formed. Thus common salt in crystallising from its solution in water at the ordinary or at a higher temperature does not contain water of crystallisation. But if its separation from the solution takes place at a low temperature, namely below -5°, then the crystals contain 38 parts of water in 100 parts. Crystals of the same substance which separate out at different temperatures may contain different amounts of water of crystallisation. This proves to us that a solid dissolved in water may form various compounds with it, differing in their properties and composition, and capable of appearing in a solid separate form like many ordinary definite compounds. This is indicated by the numerous properties and phenomena connected with solutions, and gives reason for thinking that there exist in solutions themselves such compounds of the substance dissolved, and the solvent or compounds similar to them, only in a liquid partly decomposed form. Even the colour of solutions may often confirm this opinion. Copper sulphate forms crystals having a blue colour and containing water of crystallisation. If the water of crystallisation be removed by heating the crystals to redness, a colourless anhydrous substance is obtained (a white powder). From this it may be seen that the blue colour belongs to the compound of the copper salt with water. Solutions of copper sulphate are all blue, and consequently they contain a compound similar to the compound formed by the salt with its water of crystallisation. Crystals of cobalt chloride when dissolved in an anhydrous liquid—like alcohol, for instance—give a blue solution, but when they are dissolved in water a red solution is obtained. Crystals from the aqueous solution, according to Professor Potilitzin, contain six times as much water (CoCl₂,6H₂O) for a given weight of the salt, as those violet crystals (CoCl₂,H₂O) which are formed by the evaporation of an alcoholic solution.

That solutions contain particular compounds with water is further shown by the phenomena of supersaturated solutions, of so-called cryohydrates, of solutions of certain acids having constant boiling points, and the properties of compounds containing water of crystallisation whose data it is indispensable to keep in view in the consideration of solutions.

Supersaturated solutions exhibit the following phenomena:—On the refrigeration of a saturated solution of certain salts,[54] if the liquid be brought under certain conditions, the excess of the solid may sometimes remain in solution and not separate out. A great number of substances, and more especially sodium sulphate, Na₂SO₄, or Glauber's salt, easily form supersaturated solutions. If boiling water be saturated with this salt, and the solution be poured off from any remaining undissolved salt, and, the boiling being still continued, the vessel holding the solution be well closed by cotton wool, or by fusing up the vessel, or by covering the solution with a layer of oil, then it will he found that this saturated solution does not separate out any Glauber's salt whatever on cooling down to the ordinary or even to a much lower temperature; although without the above precautions a salt separates out on cooling, in the form of crystals, which contain Na₂SO₄,10H₂O—that is, 180 parts of water for 142 parts of anhydrous salt. The supersaturated solution may be moved about or shaken inside the vessel holding it, and no crystallisation will take place; the salt remains in the solution in as large an amount as at a higher temperature. If the vessel holding the supersaturated solution be opened and a crystal of Glauber's salt be thrown in, crystallisation suddenly takes place.[55] A considerable rise in temperature is noticed during this rapid separation of crystals, which is due to the fact that the salt, previously in a liquid state, passes into a solid state. This bears some resemblance to the fact that water maybe cooled below 0° (even to -10°) if it be left at rest, under certain circumstances, and evolves heat in suddenly crystallising. Although from this point of view there is a resemblance, yet in reality the phenomenon of supersaturated solutions is much more complicated. Thus, on cooling, a saturated solution of Glauber's salt deposits crystals containing Na₂SO₄,7H₂0,[56] or 126 parts of water per 142 parts of anhydrous salt, and not 180 parts of water, as in the above-mentioned salt. The crystals containing 7H₂O are distinguished for their instability; if they stand in contact not only with crystals of Na₂SO₄,10H₂O, but with many other substances, they immediately become opaque, forming a mixture of anhydrous and deca-hydrated salts. It is evident that between water and a soluble substance there may be established different kinds of greater or less stable equilibrium, of which solutions form a particular case.[57]

Solutions of salts on refrigeration below 0° deposit ice or crystals (which then frequently contain water of crystallisation) of the salt dissolved, and on reaching a certain degree of concentration they solidify in their entire mass. These solidified masses are termed cryohydrates. My researches on solutions of common salt (1868) showed that its solution solidifies when it reaches a composition NaCl + 10H₂O (180 parts of water per 58·5 parts of salt), which takes place at about -23°. The solidified solution melts at the same temperature, and both the portion melted and the remainder preserve the above composition. Guthrie (1874–1876) obtained the cryohydrates of many salts, and he showed that certain of them are formed like the above at comparatively low temperatures, whilst others (for instance, corrosive sublimate, alums, potassium chlorate, and various colloids) are formed on a slight cooling, to -2° or even before.[58] In the case of common salt, the cryohydrate with 10 molecules of water, and in the case of sodium nitrate, the cryohydrate[59] with 7 molecules of water (i.e. 126 parts of water per 85 of salt) should be accepted as established substances, capable of passing from a solid to a liquid state and conversely; and therefore it may be thought that in cryohydrates we have solutions which are not only undecomposable by cold, but also have a definite composition which would present a fresh case of definite equilibrium between the solvent and the substance dissolved.

The formation of definite but unstable compounds in the process of solution becomes evident from the phenomena of a marked decrease of vapour tension, or from the rise of the temperature of ebullition which occurs in the solution of certain volatile liquids and gases in water. As an example, we will take hydriodic acid, HI, a gas which liquefies, giving a liquid which boils at -20°. A solution of it containing 57 p.c. of hydriodic acid is distinguished by the fact that if it be heated the hydriodic acid volatilises together with the water in the same proportions as they occur in the solution, therefore such a solution may be distilled unchanged. The solution boils at a higher temperature than water, at 127°. A portion of the physical properties of the gas and water have in this case already disappeared—a new substance is formed, which has its definite boiling point. To put it more correctly, this is not the temperature of ebullition, but the temperature at which the compound formed decomposes, forming the vapours of the products of dissociation, which, on cooling, re-combine. Should a less amount of hydriodic acid be dissolved in water than the above, then, on heating such a solution, water only at first distils over, until the solution attains the above-mentioned composition; it will then distil over unaltered. If more hydriodic acid be passed into such a solution a fresh quantity of the gas will dissolve, but it passes off with great ease, like air from water. It must not, however, be thought that those forces which determine the formation of ordinary gaseous solutions play no part whatever in the formation of a solution having a definite boiling point; that they do react is shown from the fact that such constant gaseous solutions vary in their composition under different pressures.[60] It is not, therefore, at every, but only at the ordinary, atmospheric pressure that a constant boiling solution of hydriodic acid will contain 57 p.c. of the gas. At another pressure the proportion of water and hydriodic acid will be different. It varies, however, judging from observations made by Roscoe, very little for considerable variations of pressure. This variation in composition directly indicates that pressure exerts an influence on the formation of unstable chemical compounds which are easily dissociated (with formation of a gas), just as it influences the solution of gases, only the latter is influenced to a more considerable degree than the former.[61] Hydrochloric, nitric, and other acids form solutions having definite boiling points, like that of hydriodic acid. They show further the common property, if containing but a small proportion of water, that they fume in air. Strong solutions of nitric, hydrochloric, hydriodic, and other gases are even termed ‘fuming acids.’ The fuming liquids contain a definite compound whose temperature of ebullition (decomposition) is higher than 100°, and contain also an excess of the volatile substance dissolved, which exhibits a capacity to combine with water and form a hydrate, whose vapour tension is less than that of aqueous vapour. On evaporating in air, this dissolved substance meets the atmospheric moisture and forms a visible vapour (fumes) with it, which consists of the above-mentioned compound. The attraction or affinity which binds, for instance, hydriodic acid with water is evinced not only in the evolution of heat and the diminution of vapour tension (rise of boiling point), but also in many purely chemical relations. Thus hydriodic acid is produced from iodine and hydrogen sulphide in the presence of water, but unless water is present this reaction does not take place.[62]

Many compounds containing water of crystallisation are solid substances (when melted they are already solutions—i.e. liquids); furthermore, they are capable of being formed from solutions, like ice or aqueous vapour. They may be called crystallo-hydrates. Inasmuch as the direct presence of ice or aqueous vapour cannot be admitted in solutions (for these are liquids), although the presence of water may be, so also there is no basis for acknowledging the presence in solutions of crystallo-hydrates, although they are obtained from solutions as such.[63] It is evident that such substances present one of the many forms of equilibrium between water and a substance dissolved in it. This form, however, reminds one, in all respects, of solutions—that is, aqueous compounds which are more or less easily decomposed, with separation of water and the formation of a less aqueous or an anhydrous compound. In fact, there are not a few crystals containing water which lose a part of their water at the ordinary temperature. Of such a kind, for instance, are the crystals of soda, or sodium carbonate, which, when separated from an aqueous solution at the ordinary temperature, are quite transparent; but when left exposed to air, lose a portion of their water, becoming opaque, and, in the process, lose their crystalline appearance, although preserving their original form. This process of the separation of water at the ordinary temperature is termed the efflorescence of crystals. Efflorescence takes place more rapidly under the receiver of an air pump, and especially at a gentle heat. This breaking up of a crystal is dissociation at the ordinary temperature. Solutions are decomposed in exactly the same manner.[64] The tension of the aqueous vapour which is given off from crystallo-hydrates is naturally, as with solutions, less than the vapour tension of water itself[65] at the same temperature, and therefore many anhydrous salts which are capable of combining with water absorb aqueous vapour from moist air; that is, they act like a cold body on which water is deposited from steam. It is on this that the desiccation of gases is based, and it must further be remarked in this respect that certain substances—for instance, potassium carbonate (K₂CO₃) and calcium chloride (CaCl₂)—not only absorb the water necessary for the formation of a solid crystalline compound, but also give solutions, or deliquesce, as it is termed, in moist air. Many crystals do not effloresce in the least at the ordinary temperature; for example, copper sulphate, which may be preserved for an indefinite length of time without efflorescing, but when placed under the receiver of an air pump, if efflorescence be once started, it goes on at the ordinary temperature. The temperature at which the complete separation of water from crystals takes place varies considerably, not only for different substances, but also for different portions of the contained water. Very often the temperature at which dissociation begins is very much higher than the boiling point of water. So, for example, copper sulphate, which contains 36 p.c. of water, gives up 28·8 p.c. at 100°, and the remaining quantity, namely 7·2 p.c., only at 240°. Alum, out of the 45·5 p.c. of water which it contains, gives up 18·9 p.c. at 100°, 17·7 p.c. at 120°, 7·7 p.c. at 180°, and 1 p.c. at 280°; it only loses the last quantity (1 p.c.) at its temperature of decomposition. These examples clearly show that the annexation of water of crystallisation is accompanied by a rather profound, although, in comparison with instances which we shall consider later, still inconsiderable, change of its properties. In certain cases the water of crystallisation is only given off when the solid form of the substance is destroyed: when the crystals melt on heating. The crystals are then said to melt in their water of crystallisation. Further, after the separation of the water, a solid substance remains behind, so that by further heating it acquires a solid form. This is seen most clearly in crystals of sugar of lead or lead acetate, which melt in their water of crystallisation at a temperature of 56·25°, and in so doing begin to lose water. On reaching a temperature of 100° the sugar of lead solidifies, having lost all its water; and then at a temperature of 280°, the anhydrous and solidified salt again melts.[65 bis]

It is most important to recognise in respect to the water of crystallisation that its ratio to the quantity of the substance with which it is combined is always a constant quantity. However often we may prepare copper sulphate, we shall always find 36·14 p.c. of water in its crystals, and these crystals always lose four-fifths of their water at 100°, and one-fifth of the whole amount of the water contained remains in the crystals at 100°, and is only expelled from them at a temperature of about 240°. What has been said about crystals of copper sulphate refers also to crystals of every other substance, which contain water of crystallisation. It is impossible in any of these cases to increase either the relative proportion of the salt or of the water, without changing the homogeneity of the substance. If once a portion of the water be lost—for instance, if once efflorescence takes place—a mixture is obtained, and not a homogeneous substance, namely a mixture of a substance deprived of water with a substance which has not yet lost water—i.e. decomposition has already commenced. This constant ratio is an example of the fact that in chemical compounds the quantity of the component parts is quite definite; that is, it is an example of the so-called definite chemical compounds. They may be distinguished from solutions, and from all other so-called indefinite chemical compounds, in that at least one, and sometimes both, of the component parts may be added in a large quantity to an indefinite chemical compound, without destroying its homogeneity, as in solutions, whilst it is impossible to add any one of the component parts to a definite chemical compound without destroying the homogeneity of the entire mass. Definite chemical compounds only decompose at a certain rise in temperature; on a lowering in temperature they do not, at least with very few exceptions, yield their components like solutions which form ice or compounds with water of crystallisation. This leads to the assumption that solutions contain water as water,[66] although it may sometimes be in a very small quantity. Therefore solutions which are capable of solidifying completely (for instance, crystallo-hydrates capable of melting) such as the compound of 84½ parts of sulphuric acid, H₂SO₄, with 15½ parts of water, H₂O, or H₂SO₄,H₂O (or H₄SO₅), appear as true definite chemical compounds. If, then, we imagine such a definite compound in a liquid state, and admit that it partially decomposes in this state, separating water—not as ice or vapour (for then the system would be heterogeneous, including substances in different physical states), but in a liquid form, when the system will be homogeneous—we shall form an idea of a solution as an unstable, dissociating fluid state of equilibrium between water and the substance dissolved. Moreover, it should be remarked that, judging by experiment, many substances give with water not one but diverse compounds,[67] which is seen in the capacity of one substance to form with water many various crystallo-hydrates, or compounds with water of crystallisation, showing diverse and independent properties. From these considerations, solutions[68] may be regarded as fluid, unstable, definite chemical compounds in a state of dissociation.[69]

In regarding solutions from this point of view they come under the head of those definite compounds with which chemistry is mainly concerned.[70]

We saw above that copper sulphate loses four-fifths of its water at 100° and the remainder at 240°. This means that there are two definite compounds of water with the anhydrous salt. Washing soda or carbonate of sodium, Na₂CO₃ separates out as crystals, Na₂CO₃,10H₂O, containing 62·9 p.c. of water by weight, from its solutions at the ordinary temperature. When a solution of the same salt deposits crystals at a low temperature, about -20°, then these crystals contain 71·8 parts of water per 28·2 parts of anhydrous salt. Further, the crystals are obtained together with ice, and are left behind when it melts. If ordinary soda, with 62·9 p.c. of water, be cautiously melted in its own water of crystallisation, there remains a salt, in a solid state, containing only 14·5 p.c. of water, and a liquid is obtained which contains the solution of a salt which separates out crystals at 34°, which contain 46 p.c. of water and do not effloresce in air. Lastly, if a supersaturated solution of soda be prepared, then at temperatures below 8° it deposits crystals containing 54·3 p.c. of water. Thus as many as five compounds of anhydrous soda with water are known; and they are dissimilar in their properties and crystalline form, and even in their solubility. It is to be observed that the greatest amount of water in the crystals corresponds with a temperature of -20°, and the smallest to the highest temperature. There is apparently no relation between the above quantities of water and the salts, but this is only because in each case the amount of water and anhydrous salt was given in percentages; but if it be calculated for one and the same quantity of anhydrous salt, or of water, a great regularity will be observed in the amounts of the component parts in all these compounds. It appears that for 106 parts of anhydrous salt in the crystals separated out at -20° there are 270 parts of water; in the crystals obtained at 15° there are 180 parts of water; in the crystals obtained from a supersaturated solution 126 parts, in the crystals which separate out at 34°, 90 parts, and the crystals with the smallest amount of water, 18 parts. On comparing these quantities of water it may easily be seen that they are in simple proportion to each other, for they are all divisible by 18, and are in the ratio 15 : 10 : 7 : 5 : 1. Naturally, direct experiment, however carefully it be conducted, is hampered with errors, but taking these unavoidable experimental errors into consideration, it will be seen that for a given quantity of an anhydrous substance there occur, in several of its compounds with water, quantities of water which are in very simple multiple proportion. This is observed in, and is common to, all definite chemical compounds. This rule is called the law of multiple proportions. It was discovered by Dalton, and will be evolved in further detail subsequently in this work. For the present we will only state that the law of definite composition enables the composition of substances to be expressed by formulæ, and the law of multiple proportions permits the application of whole numbers as coefficients of the symbols of the elements in these formulæ. Thus the formula Na₂CO₃,10H₂O shows directly that in this crystallo-hydrate there are 180 parts of water to 106 parts by weight of the anhydrous salt, because the formula of soda, Na₂CO₃, directly answers to a weight of 106, and the formula of water to 18 parts, by weight, which are here taken 10 times.

In the above examples of the combinations of water, we saw the gradually increasing intensity of the bond between water and a substance with which it forms a homogeneous compound. There is a series of such compounds with water, in which the water is held with very great force, and is only given up at a very high temperature, and sometimes cannot be separated by any degree of heat without the entire decomposition of the substance. In these compounds there is generally no outward sign whatever of their containing water. A perfectly new substance is formed from an anhydrous substance and water, in which sometimes the properties of neither one nor the other substance are observable. In the majority of cases, a considerable amount of heat is evolved in the formation of such compounds with water. Sometimes the heat evolved is so intense that a red heat is produced and light is emitted. It is hardly to be wondered at, after this, that stable compounds are formed by such a combination. Their decomposition requires great heat; a large amount of work is necessary to separate them into their component parts. All such compounds are definite, and, generally, completely and clearly definite. The number of such definite compounds with water or hydrates, in the narrow sense of the word, is generally inconsiderable for each anhydrous substance; in the greater number of cases, there is formed only one such combination of a substance with water, one hydrate, having so great a stability. The water contained in these compounds is often called water of constitution—i.e. water which enters into the structure or composition of the given substance. By this it is desired to express, that in other cases the molecules of water are, as it were, separate from the molecules of that substance with which it is combined. It is supposed that in the formation of hydrates this water, even in the smallest particles, forms one complete whole with the anhydrous substance. Many examples of the formation of such hydrates might be cited. The most familiar example in practice is the hydrate of lime, or so-called ‘slaked’ lime. Lime is prepared by burning limestone, by which the carbonic anhydride is expelled from it, and there remains a white stony mass, which is dense, compact, and rather tenacious. Lime is usually sold in this form, and bears the name of ‘quick’ or ‘unslaked’ lime. If water be poured over such lime, a great rise in temperature is remarked either directly, or after a certain time. The whole mass becomes hot, part of the water is evaporated, the stony mass in absorbing water crumbles into powder, and if the water be taken in sufficient quantity and the lime be pure and well burnt, not a particle of the original stony mass is left—it all crumbles into powder. If the water be in excess, then naturally a portion of it remains and forms a solution. This process is called ‘slaking’ lime. Slaked lime is used in practice in intermixture with sand as mortar. Slaked lime is a definite hydrate of lime. If it is dried at 100° it retains 24·3 p.c. of water. This water can only be expelled at a temperature above 400°, and then quicklime is re-obtained. The heat evolved in the combination of lime with water is so intense that it can set fire to wood, sulphur, gunpowder, &c. Even on mixing lime with ice the temperature rises to 100°. If lime be moistened with a small quantity of water in the dark, a luminous effect is observed. But, nevertheless, water may still be separated from this hydrate.[71] If phosphorus be burnt in dry air, a white substance called ‘phosphoric anhydride’ is obtained. It combines with water with such energy, that the experiment must be conducted with great caution. A red heat is produced in the formation of the compound, and it is impossible to separate the water from the resultant hydrate at any temperature. The hydrate formed by phosphoric anhydride is a substance which is totally undecomposable into its original component parts by the action of heat. Almost as energetic a combination occurs when sulphuric anhydride, SO₃, combines with water, forming its hydrate, sulphuric acid, H₂SO₄. In both cases definite compounds are produced, but the latter substance, as a liquid, and capable of decomposition by heat, forms an evident link with solutions. If 80 parts of sulphuric anhydride retain 18 parts of water, this water cannot be separated from the anhydride, even at a temperature of 300°. It is only by the addition of phosphoric anhydride, or by a series of chemical transformations, that this water can be separated from its compound with sulphuric anhydride. Oil of vitriol, or sulphuric acid, is such a compound. If a larger proportion of water be taken, it will combine with the H₂SO₄; for instance, if 36 parts of water per 80 parts of sulphuric anhydride be taken, a compound is formed which crystallises in the cold, and melts at +8°, whilst oil of vitriol does not solidify even at -30°. If still more water be taken, the oil of vitriol will dissolve in the remaining quantity of water. An evolution of heat takes place, not only on the addition of the water of constitution, but in a less degree on further additions of water.[72] And therefore there is no distinct boundary, but only a gradual transition, between those chemical phenomena which are expressed in the formation of solutions and those which take place in the formation of the most stable hydrates.[73]

We have thus considered many aspects and degrees of combination of various substances with water, or instances of the compounds of water, when it and other substances form new homogeneous substances, which in this case will evidently be complex—i.e. made up of different substances—and although they are homogeneous, yet it must be admitted that in them there exist those component parts which entered into their composition, inasmuch as these parts may be re-obtained from them. It must not be imagined that water really exists in hydrate of lime, any more than that ice or steam exists in water. When we say that water occurs in the composition of a certain hydrate, we only wish to point out that there are chemical transformations in which it is possible to obtain that hydrate by means of water, and other transformations in which this water may be separated out from the hydrate. This is all simply expressed by the words, that water enters into the composition of this hydrate. If a hydrate be formed by feeble bonds, and be decomposed even at the ordinary temperature, and be a liquid, then the water appears as one of the products of dissociation, and this gives an idea of what solutions are, and forms the fundamental distinction between them and other hydrates in which the water is combined with greater stability.

Footnotes:

[1] In practice, the chemist has to continually deal with gases, and gases are often collected over water; in which case a certain amount of water passes into vapour, and this vapour mixes with the gases. It is therefore most important that he should be able to calculate the amount of water or of moisture in air and other gases. Let us imagine a cylinder standing in a mercury bath, and filled with a dry gas whose volume equals v, temperature t°, and pressure or tension h mm. (h millimetres of the column of mercury at 0°). We will introduce water into the cylinder in such a quantity that a small part remains in the liquid state, and consequently that the gas will be saturated with aqueous vapour; the volume of the gas will then increase (if a larger quantity of water be taken some of the gas will he dissolved in it, and the volume may therefore he diminished). We will further suppose that, after the addition of the water, the temperature remains constant; then since the volume increases, the mercury in the cylinder falls, and therefore the pressure as well as the volume is increased. In order to investigate the phenomenon we will artificially increase the pressure, and reduce the volume to the original volume v. Then the pressure or tension will be greater than h, namely h + f, which means that by the introduction of aqueous vapour the pressure of the gas is increased. The researches of Dalton, Gay-Lussac, and Regnault showed that this increase is equal to the maximum pressure which is proper to the aqueous vapour at the temperature at which the observation is made. The maximum pressure for all temperatures may be found in the tables made from observations on the pressure of aqueous vapour. The quantity f will be equal to this maximum pressure of aqueous vapour. This may be expressed thus: the maximum tension of aqueous vapour (and of all other vapours) saturating a space in a vacuum or in any gas is the same. This rule is known as Dalton's law. Thus we have a volume of dry gas v, under a pressure h, and a volume of moist gas, saturated with vapour, under a pressure h + f. The volume v of the dry gas under a pressure h + f occupies, from Boyle's law, a volume vh / h + f consequently the volume occupied by the aqueous vapour under the pressure h + f equals v - vh / h + f , or vf / h + f . Thus the volumes of the dry gas and of the moisture which occurs in it, at a pressure h + f, are in the ratio f : h. And, therefore, if the aqueous vapour saturates a space at a pressure n, the volumes of the dry air and of the moisture which is contained in it are in the ratio (n - f) : f, where f is the pressure of the vapour according to the tables of vapour tension. Thus, if a volume N of a gas saturated with moisture be measured at a pressure H, then the volume of the gas, when dry, will be equal to N H - f / H . In fact, the entire volume N must be to the volume of dry gas x as H is to H - f; therefore, N : x = H : H - f, from which x = N H - f / H . Under any other pressure—for instance, 760 mm.—The volume of dry gas will be xH / 760 , or H - f / 760 , and we thus obtain the following practical rule: If a volume of a gas saturated with aqueous vapour be measured at a pressure H mm., then the volume of dry gas contained in it will be obtained by finding the volume corresponding to the pressure H, less the pressure due to the aqueous vapour at the temperature observed. For example, 37·5 cubic centimetres of air saturated with aqueous vapour were measured at a temperature of 15·3°, and under a pressure of 747·3 mm. of mercury (at 0°). What will be the volume of dry gas at 0° and 760 mm.?

The pressure of aqueous vapour corresponding to 15·3° is equal to 12·9 mm., and therefore the volume of dry gas at 15·3° and 747·3 mm. is equal to 37·5 × 747·3 - 12·9 / 747·3 ; at 760 mm. it will be equal to 37·5 × 734·4 / 760 ; and at 0° the volume of dry gas will be 37·5 × 734·4 / 760 × 273 / 273 + 15·3 = 34·31 c.c.

From this rule may also be calculated what fraction of a volume of gas is occupied by moisture under the ordinary pressure at different temperatures; for instance, at 30° C. f = 31·5, consequently 100 volumes of a moist gas or air, at 760 mm., contain a volume of aqueous vapour 100 × 31·5 / 760 , or 4·110; it is also found that at 0° there is contained 0·61 p.c. by volume, at 10° 1·21 p.c., at 20° 2·29 p.c., and at 50° up to 12·11 p.c. From this it may be judged how great an error might be made in the measurement of gases by volume if the moisture were not taken into consideration. From this it is also evident how great are the variations in volume of the atmosphere when it loses or gains aqueous vapour, which again explains a number of atmospheric phenomena (winds, variation of pressure, rainfalls, storms, &c.)

If a gas is not saturated, then it is indispensable that the degree of moisture should be known in order to determine the volume of dry gas from the volume of moist gas. The preceding ratio gives the maximum quantity of water which can be held in a gas, and the degree of moisture shows what fraction of this maximum quantity occurs in a given case, when the vapour does not saturate the space occupied by the gas. Consequently, if the degree of moisture equals 50 p.c.—that is, half the maximum—then the volume of dry gas at 760 mm. is equal to the volume of dry gas at 760 mm. multiplied by h - 0·5f / 760 , or, in general, by h - rf / 760 where r is the degree of moisture. Thus, if it is required to measure the volume of a moist gas, it must either be thoroughly dried or quite saturated with moisture, or else the degree of moisture determined. The first and last methods are inconvenient, and therefore recourse is usually had to the second. For this purpose water is introduced into the cylinder holding the gas to be measured; it is left for a certain time so that the gas may become saturated, the precaution being taken that a portion of the water remains in a liquid state; then the volume of the moist gas is determined, from which that of the dry gas may be calculated. In order to find the weight of the aqueous vapour in a gas it is necessary to know the weight of a cubic measure at 0° and 760 mm. Knowing that one cubic centimetre of air in these circumstances weighs 0·001293 gram, and that the density of aqueous vapour is 0·62, we find that one cubic centimetre of aqueous vapour at 0° and 760 mm. weighs 0·0008 gram, and at a temperature t° and pressure h the weight of one cubic centimetre will be 0·0008 × h / 760 × 273 / 273 + t . We already know that v volumes of a gas at a temperature t° pressure h contain v × f / h volumes of aqueous vapour which saturate it, therefore the weight of the aqueous vapour held in v volumes of a gas will be

v x 0·0008 × f / 760 × 273 / 273 + t

Accordingly, the weight of water which is contained in one volume of a gas depends only on the temperature and not on the pressure. This also signifies that evaporation proceeds to the same extent in air as in a vacuum, or, in general terms (this is Dalton's law), vapours and gases diffuse into each other as if into a vacuum. In a given space, at a given temperature, a constant quantity of vapour enters, whatever be the pressure of the gas filling that space.

From this it is clear that if the weight of the vapour contained in a given volume of a gas be known, it is easy to determine the degree of moisture r = p / v × 0·0008 × 760 / t × 273 + t / 273 . On the is founded the very exact determination of the degree of moisture of air by the weight of water contained in a given volume. It is easy to calculate from the preceding formula the number of grams of water contained at any pressure in one cubic metre or million cubic centimetres of air saturated with vapour at various temperatures; for instance, at 30° f = 31·5, hence p = 29·84 grams.

The laws of Mariotte, Dalton, and Gay-Lussac, which are here applied to gases and vapours, are not entirely exact, but are approximately true. If they were quite exact, a mixture of several liquids, having a certain vapour pressure, would give vapours of a very high pressure, which is not the case. In fact the pressure of aqueous vapour is slightly less in a gas than in a vacuum, and the weight of aqueous vapour held in a gas is slightly less than it should be according to Dalton's law, as was shown by the experiments of Regnault and others. This means that the tension of the vapour is less in air than in a vacuum. The difference does not, however, exceed 5 per cent. of the total pressure of the vapours. This decrement in vapour tension which occurs in the intermixture of vapours and gases, although small, indicates that there is then already, so to speak, a beginning of chemical change. The essence of the matter is that in this case there occurs, as on contact (see preceding footnote), an alteration in the motions of the atoms in the molecules, and therefore also a change in the motion of the molecules themselves.

In the uniform intermixture of air and other gases with aqueous vapour, and in the capacity of water to pass into vapour and form a uniform mixture with air, we may perceive an instance of a physical phenomenon which is analogous to chemical phenomena, forming indeed a transition from one class of phenomena to the other. Between water and dry air there exists a kind of affinity which obliges the water to saturate the air. But such a homogeneous mixture is formed (almost) independently of the nature of the gas in which evaporation takes place; even in a vacuum the phenomenon occurs in exactly the same way as in a gas, and therefore it is not the property of the gas, nor its relation to water, but the property of the water itself, which compels it to evaporate, and therefore in this case chemical affinity is not yet operative—at least its action is not clearly pronounced. That it does, however, play a certain part is seen from the deviation from Dalton's law.

[2] In falling through the atmosphere, water dissolves the gases of the atmosphere, nitric acid, ammonia, organic compounds, salts of sodium, magnesium, and calcium, and mechanically washes out a mixture of dust and microbes which are suspended in the atmosphere. The amount of these and certain other constituents is very variable. Even in the beginning and end of the same rainfall a variation which is often very considerable may be remarked. Thus, for example, Bunsen found that rain collected at the beginning of a shower contained 3·7 grams of ammonia per cubic metre, whilst that collected at the end of the same shower contained only O·64 gram. The water of the entire shower contained an average of 1·47 gram of ammonia per cubic metre. In the course of a year rain supplies an acre of ground with as much as 5½ kilos of nitrogen in a combined form. Marchand found in one cubic metre of snow water 15·63, and in one cubic metre of rain water 10·07, grams of sodium sulphate. Angus Smith showed that after a thirty hours' fall at Manchester the rain still contained 34·3 grams of salts per cubic metre. A considerable amount of organic matter, namely 25 grams per cubic metre, has been found in rain water. The total amount of solid matter in rain water reaches 50 grams per cubic metre. Rain water generally contains very little carbonic acid, whilst river water contains a considerable quantity of it. In considering the nourishment of plants it is necessary to keep in view the substances which are carried into the soil by rain.

River water, which is accumulated from springs and sources fed by atmospheric water, contains from 50 to 1,600 parts by weight of salts in 1,000,000 parts. The amount of solid matter, per 1,000,000 parts by weight, contained in the chief rivers is as follows:—the Don 124, the Loire 135, the St. Lawrence 170, the Rhone 182, the Dnieper 187, the Danube from 117 to 234, the Rhine from 158 to 317, the Seine from 190 to 432, the Thames at London from 400 to 450, in its upper parts 387, and in its lower parts up to 1,617, the Nile 1,580, the Jordan 1,052. The Neva is characterised by the remarkably small amount of solid matter it contains. From the investigations of Prof. G. K. Trapp, a cubic metre of Neva water contains 32 grams of incombustible and 23 grams of organic matter, or altogether about 55 grams. This is one of the purest waters which is known in rivers. The large amount of impurities in river water, and especially of organic impurity produced by pollution with putrid matter, makes the water of many rivers unfit for use.

The chief part of the soluble substances in river water consists of the calcium salts. 100 parts of the solid residues contain the following amounts of calcium carbonate—from the water of the Loire 53, from the Thames about 50, the Elbe 55, the Vistula 65, the Danube 65, the Rhine from 55 to 75, the Seine 75, the Rhone from 82 to 94. The Neva contains 40 parts of calcium carbonate per 100 parts of saline matter. The considerable amount of calcium carbonate which river water contains is very easily explained from the fact that water which contains carbonic acid in solution easily dissolves calcium carbonate, which occurs all over the earth. Besides calcium carbonate and sulphate, river water contains magnesium, silica, chlorine, sodium, potassium, aluminium, nitric acid, iron and manganese. The presence of salts of phosphoric acid has not yet been determined with exactitude for all rivers, but the presence of nitrates has been proved with certainty in almost all kinds of well-investigated river water. The quantity of calcium phosphate does not exceed 0·4 gram in the water of the Dnieper, and the Don does not contain more than 5 grams. The water of the Seine contains about 15 grams of nitrates, and that of the Rhone about 8 grams. The amount of ammonia is much less; thus in the water of the Rhine about 0·5 gram in June, and 0·2 gram in October; the water of the Seine contains the same amount. This is less than in rain water. Notwithstanding this insignificant quantity, the water of the Rhine alone, which is not so very large a river, carries 16,245 kilograms of ammonia into the ocean every day. The difference between the amount of ammonia in rain and river water depends on the fact that the soil through which the rain water passes is able to retain the ammonia. (Soil can also absorb many other substances, such as phosphoric acid, potassium salts, &c.)

The waters of springs, rivers, wells, and in general of those localities from which it is taken for drinking purposes, may be injurious to health if it contains much organic pollution, the more so as in such water the lower organisms (bacteria) may rapidly develop, and these organisms often serve as the carriers or causes of infectious diseases. For instance, certain pathogenic (disease-producing) bacteria are known to produce typhoid, the Siberian plague, and cholera. Thanks to the work of Pasteur, Metchnikoff, Koch, and many others, this province of research has made considerable progress. It is possible to investigate the number and properties of the germs in water. In bacteriological researches a gelatinous medium in which the germs can develop and multiply is prepared with gelatin and water, which has previously been heated several times, at intervals, to 100° (it is thus rendered sterile—that is to say, all the germs in it are killed). The water to be investigated is added to this prepared medium in a definite and small quantity (sometimes diluted with sterilised water to facilitate the calculation of the number of germs), it is protected from dust (which contains germs), and is left at rest until whole families of lower organisms are developed from each germ. These families (colonies) are visible to the naked eye (as spots), they may be counted, and by examining them under the microscope and observing the number of organisms they produce, their significance may be determined. The majority of bacteria are harmless, but there are decidedly pathogenic bacteria, whose presence is one of the causes of malady and of the spread of certain diseases. The number of bacteria in one cubic centimetre of water sometimes attains the immense figures of hundreds of thousands and millions. Certain well, spring, and river waters contain very few bacteria, and are free from disease-producing bacteria under ordinary circumstances. By boiling water, the bacteria in it are killed, but the organic matter necessary for their nourishment remains in the water. The best kinds of water for drinking purposes do not contain more than 300 bacteria in a cubic centimetre.

The amount of gases dissolved in river water is much more constant than that of its solid constituents. One litre, or 1,000 c.c., of water contains 40 to 55 c.c. of gas measured at normal temperature and pressure. In winter the amount of gas is greater than in summer or autumn. Assuming that a litre contains 50 c.c. of gases, it may be admitted that these consist, on an average, of 20 vols. of nitrogen, 20 vols of carbonic anhydride (proceeding in all likelihood from the soil and not from the atmosphere), and of 10 vols. of oxygen. If the total amount of gases be less, the constituent gases are still in about the same proportion; in many cases, however, carbonic anhydride predominates. The water of many deep and rapid rivers contains less carbonic anhydride, which shows their rapid formation from atmospheric water, and that they have not succeeded, during a long and slow course, in absorbing a greater quantity of carbonic anhydride. Thus, for instance, the water of the Rhine, near Strasburg, according to Deville, contains 8 c.c. of carbonic anhydride, 16 c.c. of nitrogen, and 7 c.c. of oxygen per litre. From the researches of Prof. M. R. Kapoustin and his pupils, it appears that in determining the quality of a water for drinking purposes, it is most important to investigate the composition of the dissolved gases, more especially oxygen.

[3] Spring water is formed from rain water percolating through the soil. Naturally a part of the rain water is evaporated directly from the surface of the earth and from the vegetation on it. It has been shown that out of 100 parts of water falling on the earth only 36 parts flow to the ocean; the remaining 64 are evaporated, or percolate far underground. After flowing underground along some impervious strata, water comes out at the surface in many places as springs, whose temperature is determined by the depth from which the water has flowed. Springs penetrating to a great depth may become considerably heated, and this is why hot mineral springs, with a temperature of up to 30° and higher, are often met with. When a spring water contains substances which endow it with a peculiar taste, and especially if these substances are such as are only found in minute quantities in river and other flowing waters, then the spring water is termed a mineral water. Many such waters are employed for medicinal purposes. Mineral waters are classed according to their composition into—(a) saline waters, which often contain a large amount of common salt; (b) alkaline waters, which contain sodium carbonate; (c) bitter waters, which contain magnesia; (d) chalybeate waters, which hold iron carbonate in solution; (e) aërated waters, which are rich in carbonic anhydride; (f) sulphuretted waters, which contain hydrogen sulphide. Sulphuretted waters may be recognised by their smell of rotten eggs, and by their giving a black precipitate with lead salts, and also by their tarnishing silver objects. Aërated waters, which contain an excess of carbonic anhydride, effervesce in the air, have a sharp taste, and redden litmus paper. Saline waters leave a large residue of soluble solid matter on evaporation, and have a salt taste. Chalybeate waters have an inky taste, and are coloured black by an infusion of galls; on being exposed to the air they usually give a brown precipitate. Generally, the character of mineral waters is mixed. In the table below the analyses are given of certain mineral springs which are valued for their medicinal properties. The quantity of the substances is expressed in millionths by weight.

I. Sergieffsky, a sulphur water, Gov. of Samara (temp. 8° C.), analysis by Clause. II. Geléznovodskya water source No. 10, near Patigorsk, Caucasus (temp. 22·5°), analysis by Fritzsche. III. Aleksandroffsky, alkaline-sulphur source, Patigorsk (temp. 46·5°), average of analyses by Herman, Zinin and Fritzsche. IV. Bougountouksky, alkaline source, No. 17, Essentoukah, Caucasus (temp. 21·6°), analysis by Fritzsche. V. Saline water, Staro-Russi, Gov. of Novgorod, analysis by Nelubin. VI. Water from artesian well at the factory of state papers, St. Petersburg, analysis by Struve. VII. Sprüdel, Carlsbad (temp. 83·7°), analysis by Berzelius. VIII. Kreuznach spring (Elisenquelle), Prussia (temp. 8·8°), analysis by Bauer. IX. Eau de Seltz, Nassau, analysis by Henry. X. Vichy water, France, analysis by Berthier and Puvy. XI. Paramo de Ruiz, New Granada, analysis by Levy; it is distinguished by the amount of free acids.

[4] Sea water contains more non-volatile saline constituents than the usual kinds of fresh water. This is explained by the fact that the waters flowing into the sea supply it with salts, and whilst a large quantity of vapour is given off from the surface of the sea, the salts remain behind. Even the specific gravity of sea water differs considerably from that of pure water. It is generally about 1·02, but in this and also in respect of the amount of salts contained, samples of sea water from different localities and from different depths offer rather remarkable variations. It will be sufficient to point out that one cubic metre of water from the undermentioned localities contains the following quantity in grams of solid constituents:—Gulf of Venice, 19,122; Leghorn Harbour 24,312; Mediterranean, near Cetta, 37,665; the Atlantic Ocean from 32,585 to 35,695,; the Pacific Ocean from 35,233 to 34,708. In closed seas which do not communicate, or are in very distant communication, with the ocean, the difference is often still greater. Thus the Caspian Sea contains 6,300 grams; the Black Sea and Baltic 17,700. Common salt forms the chief constituent of the saline matter of sea or ocean water; thus in one cubic metre of sea water there are 25,000–31,000 grams of common salt, 2,600–6,000 grams of magnesium chloride, 1,200–7,000 grams of magnesium sulphate, 1,500–6,000 grams of calcium sulphate, and 10–700 grams of potassium chloride. The small amount of organic matter and of the salts of phosphoric acid in sea water is very remarkable. Sea water (the composition of which is partially discussed in Chapter [X].) contains, in addition to salts of common occurrence, a certain and sometimes minute amount of the most varied elements, even gold and silver, and as the mass of water of the oceans is so enormous these ‘traces’ of rare substances amount to large quantities, so that it may be hoped that in time methods will be found to extract even gold from sea water, which by means of the rivers forms a vast reservoir for the numerous products of the changes taking place on the earth's surface. The works of English, American, German, Russian, Swedish, and other navigators and observers prove that a study of the composition of sea water not only explains much in the history of the earth's life, but also gives the possibility (especially since the researches of C. O. Makaroff of the St. Petersburg Academy) of fixing one's position in the ocean in the absence of other means, for instance, in a fog, or in the dark.

[5] The taste of water is greatly dependent on the quantity of dissolved gases it contains. These gases are given off on boiling, and it is well known that, even when cooled, boiled water has, until it has absorbed gaseous substances from the atmosphere, quite a different taste from fresh water containing a considerable amount of gas. The dissolved gases, especially oxygen and carbonic anhydride, have an important influence on the health. The following instance is very instructive in this respect. The Grenelle artesian well at Paris, when first opened, supplied a water which had an injurious effect on men and animals. It appeared that this water did not contain oxygen, and was in general very poor in gases. As soon as it was made to fall in a cascade, by which it absorbed air, it proved quite fit for consumption. In long sea voyages fresh water is sometimes not taken at all, or only taken in a small quantity, because it spoils by keeping, and becomes putrid from the organic matter it contains undergoing decomposition. Fresh water may he obtained directly from sea-water by distillation. The distilled water no longer contains sea salts, and is therefore fit for consumption, but it is very tasteless and has the properties of boiled water. In order to render it palatable certain salts, which are usually held in fresh water, are added to it, and it is made to flow in thin streams exposed to the air in order that it may become saturated with the component parts of the atmosphere—that is, absorb gases.

[6] Hard water is such as contains much mineral matter, and especially a large proportion of calcium salts. Such water, owing to the amount of lime it contains, does not form a lather with soap, prevents vegetables boiled in it from softening properly, and forms a large amount of incrustation on vessels in which it is boiled. When of a high degree of hardness, it is injurious for drinking purposes, which is evident from the fact that in several large cities the death-rate has been found to decrease after introducing a soft water in the place of a hard water. Putrid water contains a considerable quantity of decomposing organic matter, chiefly vegetable, but in populated districts, especially in towns, chiefly animal remains. Such water acquires an unpleasant smell and taste, by which stagnant bog water and the water of certain wells in inhabited districts are particularly characterised. Water of this kind is especially injurious at a period of epidemic. It may be partially purified by being passed through charcoal, which retains the putrid and certain organic substances, and also certain mineral substances. Turbid water may be purified to a certain extent by the addition of alum, which aids, after standing some time, the formation of a sediment. Condy's fluid (potassium permanganate) is another means of purifying putrid water. A solution of this substance, even if very dilute, is of a red colour; on adding it to a putrid water, the permanganate oxidises and destroys the organic matter. When added to water in such a quantity as to impart to it an almost imperceptible rose colour it destroys much of the organic substances it contains. It is especially salutary to add a small quantity of Condy's fluid to impure water in times of epidemic.

The presence in water of one gram per litre, or 1,000 grams per cubic metre, of any substance whatsoever, renders it unfit and even injurious for consumption by animals, and this whether organic or mineral matter predominates. The presence of 1 p.c. of chlorides makes water quite salt, and produces thirst instead of assuaging it. The presence of magnesium salts is most unpleasant; they have a disagreeable bitter taste, and, in fact, impart to sea water its peculiar taste. A large amount of nitrates is only found in impure water, and is usually injurious, as they may indicate the presence of decomposing organic matter.

[7]

Fig. 4.—Distillation by means of a metallic still. The liquid in C is heated by the fire F. The vapours rise through the head A and pass by the tube T to the worm S placed in a vessel R, through which a current of cold water flows by means of the tubes D and P.

Distilled water may be prepared, or distillation in general carried on, either in a metal still with worm condenser (fig. [4]) or on a small scale in the laboratory in a glass retort (fig. [5]) heated by a lamp. Fig. [5] illustrates the main parts of the usual glass laboratory apparatus used for distillation. The steam issuing from the retort (on the right-hand side) passes through a glass tube surrounded by a larger tube, through which a stream of cold water passes, by which the steam is condensed, and runs into a receiver (on the left-hand side).

Fig. 5.—Distillation from a glass retort. The neck of the retort fits into the inner tube of the Liebig's condenser. The space between the inner and outer tube of the condenser is filled with cold water, which enters by the tube g and flows out at f.

[8] One of Lavoisier's first memoirs (1770) referred to this question. He investigated the formation of the earthy residue in the distillation of water in order to prove whether it was possible, as was affirmed, to convert water into earth, and he found that the residue was produced by the action of water on the sides of the vessel containing it, and not from the water itself. He proved this to be the case by direct weighing.

[9] Taking the generally-accepted specific gravity of water at its greatest density—i.e. at 4° as one—it has been shown by experiment that the specific gravity of water at different temperatures is as follows:

A comparison of all the data at present known shows that the variation of the specific gravity S_t with the temperature t (determined by the mercurial thermometer) maybe expressed (Mendeléeff 1891) by the formula

S_t = 1 - (t - 4)² / (94·1 + t) (703·51 - t) 1·9

If the temperature be determined by the hydrogen thermometer, whose indications between 0° and 100° are slightly lower than the mercurial (for example, about 0·1° C. at 20°), then a slightly smaller sp. gr. will be obtained for a given t. Thus Chappuis (1892) obtained 0·998233 for 20°. Water at 4° is taken as the basis for reducing measures of length to measures of weight and volume. The metric, decimal, system of measures of weights and volumes is generally employed in science. The starting point of this system is the metre (39·37 inches) divided into decimetres (= 0·1 metre), centimetres (= 0·01 metre), millimetres (= 0·001 metre), and micrometres (= one millionth of a metre). A cubic decimetre is called a litre, and is used for the measurement of volumes. The weight of a litre of water at 4° in a vacuum is called a kilogram. One thousandth part of a kilogram of water weighs one gram. It is divided into decigrams, centigrams, and milligrams (= 0·001 gram). An English pound equals 453·59 grams. The great advantage of this system is that it is a decimal one, and that it is universally adopted in science and in most international relations. All the measures cited in this work are metrical. The units most often used in science are:—Of length, the centimetre; of weight, the gram; of time, the second; of temperature, the degree Celsius or Centigrade. According to the most trustworthy determinations (Kupfer in Russia 1841, and Chaney in England 1892), the weight of a c. dcm. of water at 4° in vacuo is about 999·9 grms. For ordinary purposes the weight of a c. dcg. may be taken as equal to a kg. Hence the litre (determined by the weight of water it holds) is slightly greater than a cubic decimetre.

[10] As solid substances appear in independent, regular, crystalline forms which are dependent, judging from their cleavage or lamination (in virtue of which mica breaks, up into laminae, and Iceland spar, &c., into pieces bounded by faces inclined to each other at angles which are definite for each substance), on an inequality of attraction (cohesion, hardness) in different directions which intersect at definite angles the determination of crystalline form therefore affords one of the most important characteristics for identifying definite chemical compounds. The elements of crystallography which comprise a special science should therefore he familiar to all who desire to work in scientific chemistry. In this work we shall only have occasion to speak of a few crystalline forms, some of which are shown in figs. [6] to [12].

[11] Of all known liquids, water exhibits the greatest cohesion of particles. Indeed, it ascends to a greater height in capillary tubes than other liquids; for instance, two and a half times as high as alcohol, nearly three times as high as ether, and to a much greater height than oil of vitriol, &c. In a tube one mm. in diameter, water at 0° ascends 15·3 mm., measuring from the height of the liquid to two-thirds of the height of the meniscus, and at 100° it rises 12·5 mm. The cohesion varies very uniformly with the temperature; thus at 50° the height of the capillary column equals 13·9 mm.—that is, the mean between the columns at 0° and 100°. This uniformity is not destroyed even at temperatures near the freezing point, and hence it may be assumed that at high temperatures cohesion will vary as uniformly as at ordinary temperatures; that is, the difference between the columns at 0° and 100° being 2·8 mm., the height of the column at 500° should be 15·2 - (5 × 2·8) = 1·2 mm.; or, in other words, at these high temperatures the cohesion between the particles of water would he almost nil. Only certain solutions (sal ammoniac and lithium chloride), and these only with a great excess of water, rise higher than pure water in capillary tubes. The great cohesion of water doubtless determines many of both its physical and chemical properties.

The quantity of heat required to raise the temperature of one part by weight of water from 0° to 1°, i.e. by 1° C., is called the unit of heat or calorie; the specific heat of liquid water at 0° is taken as equal to unity. The variation of this specific heat with a rise in temperature is inconsiderable in comparison with the variation exhibited by the specific heats of other liquids. According to Ettinger, the specific heat of water at 20° = 1·016, at 50° = 1·039, and at 100° = 1·073. The specific heat of water is greater than that of any other known liquid; for example, the specific heat of alcohol at 0° is 0·55—i.e. the quantity of heat which raises 55 parts of water 1° raises 100 parts of alcohol 1°. The specific heat of oil of turpentine at 0° is 0·41, of ether 0·53, of acetic acid 0·5274, of mercury 0·033. Hence water is the best condenser or absorber of heat. This property of water has an important significance in practice and in nature. Water prevents rapid cooling or heating, and thus tempers cold and heat. The specific heats of ice and aqueous vapour are much less than that of water; namely, that of ice is 0·504, and of steam 0·48.

With an increase in pressure equal to one atmosphere, the compressibility of water (see Note [9]) is 0·000047, of mercury 0·00000352, of ether 0·00012 at 0°, of alcohol at 13° 0·000095. The addition of various substances to water generally decreases both its compressibility and cohesion. The compressibility of other liquids increases with a rise of temperature, but for water it decreases up to 53° and then increases like other liquids.

The expansion of water by heat (Note [9]) also exhibits many peculiarities which are not found in other liquids. The expansion of water at low temperatures is very small compared with other liquids; at 4° it is almost zero, and at 100° it is equal to 0·0008; below 4° it is negative—i.e. water on cooling then expands, and does not decrease in volume. In passing into a solid state, the specific gravity of water decreases; at 0° one c.c. of water weighs 0·999887 gram, and one c.c. of ice at the same temperature weighs only 0·9175 gram. The ice formed, however, contracts on cooling like the majority of other substances. Thus 100 volumes of ice are produced from 92 volumes of water—that is, water expands considerably on freezing, which fact determines a number of natural phenomena. The freezing point of water falls with an increase in pressure (0·007° per atmosphere), because in freezing water expands (Thomson), whilst with substances which contract in solidifying the melting point rises with an increase in pressure; thus, paraffin under one atmosphere melts at 46°, and under 100 atmospheres at 49°.

When liquid water passes into vapour, the cohesion of its particles must be destroyed, as the particles are removed to such a distance from each other that their mutual attraction no longer exhibits any influence. As the cohesion of aqueous particles varies at different temperatures, the quantity of heat which is expended in overcoming this cohesion—or the latent heat of evaporation—will for this reason alone be different at different temperatures. The quantity of heat which is consumed in the transformation of one part by weight of water, at different temperatures, into vapour was determined by Regnault with great accuracy. His researches showed that one part by weight of water at 0°, in passing into vapour having a temperature t°, consumes 606·5 + 0·305t units of heat, at 50° 621·7, at 100° 637·0, at 150° 652·2, and at 200° 667·5. But this quantity includes also the quantity of heat required for heating the water from 0° to t°—i.e. besides the latent heat of evaporation, also that heat which is used in heating the water in a liquid state to a temperature t°. On deducting this amount of heat, we obtain the latent heat of evaporation of water as 606·5 at 0°, 571 at 50°, 534 at 100°, 494 at 150°, and only 453 at 200°, which shows that the conversion of water at different temperatures into vapour at a constant temperature requires very different quantities of heat. This is chiefly dependent on the difference of the cohesion of water at different temperatures; the cohesion is greater at low than at high temperatures, and therefore at low temperatures a greater quantity of heat is required to overcome the cohesion. On comparing these quantities of heat, it will be observed that they decrease rather uniformly, namely their difference between 0° and 100° is 72, and between 100° and 200° is 81 units of heat. From this we may conclude that this variation will be approximately the same for high temperatures also, and therefore that no heat would be required for the conversion of water into vapour at a temperature of about 400°. At this temperature, water passes into vapour whatever be the pressure (see Chap. [II]. The absolute boiling point of water, according to Dewar, is 370°, the critical pressure 196 atmospheres). It must here be remarked that water, in presenting a greater cohesion, requires a larger quantity of heat for its conversion into vapour than other liquids. Thus alcohol consumes 208, ether 90, turpentine 70, units of heat in their conversion into vapour.

The whole amount of heat which is consumed in the conversion of water into vapour is not used in overcoming the cohesion—that is, in internal accomplished in the liquid. A part of this heat is employed in moving the aqueous particles; in fact, aqueous vapour at 100° occupies a volume 1,659 times greater than that of water (at the ordinary pressure), consequently a portion of the heat or work is employed in lifting the aqueous particles, in overcoming pressure, or in external work, which may be usefully employed, and which is so employed in steam engines. In order to determine this work, let us consider the variation of the maximum pressure or vapour tension of steam at different temperatures. The observations of Regnault in this respect, as on those preceding, deserve special attention from their comprehensiveness and accuracy. The pressure or tension of aqueous vapour at various temperatures is given in the adjoining table, and is expressed in millimetres of the barometric column reduced to 0°.

The table shows the boiling points of water at different pressures. Thus on the summit of Mont Blanc, where the average pressure is about 424 mm., water boils at 84·4°. In a rarefied atmosphere water boils even at the ordinary temperature, but in evaporating it absorbs heat from the neighbouring parts, and therefore it becomes cold and may even freeze if the pressure does not exceed 4·6 mm., and especially if the vapour be rapidly absorbed as it is formed. Oil of vitriol, which absorbs the aqueous vapour, is used for this purpose. Thus ice may be obtained artificially at the ordinary temperature with the aid of an air-pump. This table of the tension of aqueous vapour also shows the temperature of water contained in a closed boiler if the pressure of the steam formed be known. Thus at a pressure of five atmospheres (a pressure of five times the ordinary atmospheric pressure—i.e. 5 × 760 = 3,800 mm.) the temperature of the water would be 152°. The table also shows the pressure produced on a given surface by steam on issuing from a boiler. Thus steam having a temperature of 152° exerts a pressure of 517 kilos on a piston whose surface equals 100 sq. cm., for the pressure of one atmosphere on one sq. cm. equals 1,033 kilos, and steam at 152° has a pressure of five atmospheres. As a column of mercury 1 mm. high exerts a pressure of 1·35959 grams on a surface of 1 sq. cm., therefore the pressure of aqueous vapour at 0° corresponds with a pressure of 6·25 grams per square centimetre. The pressures for all temperatures may be calculated in a similar way, and it will be found that at 100° it is equal to 1,033·28 grams. This means that if a cylinder be taken whose sectional area equals 1 sq. cm., and if water be poured into it and it be closed by a piston weighing 1,033 grams, then on heating it in a vacuum to 100° no steam will be formed, because the steam cannot overcome the pressure of the piston; and if at 100° 534 units of heat be transmitted to each unit of weight of water, then the whole of the water will be converted into vapour having the same temperature; and so also for every other temperature. The question now arises, to what height does the piston rise under these circumstances? that is, in other words, What is the volume occupied by the steam under a known pressure? For this we must know the weight of a cubic centimetre of steam at various temperatures. It has been shown by experiment that the density of steam, which does not saturate a space, varies very inconsiderably at all possible pressures, and is nine times the density of hydrogen under similar conditions. Steam which saturates a space varies in density at different temperatures, but this difference is very small, and its average density with reference to air is 0·64. We will employ this number in our calculation, and will calculate what volume the steam occupies at 100°. One cubic centimetre of air at 0° and 760 mm. weighs 0·001293 gram, at 100° and under the same pressure it will weigh 0·001293 / 1·368 or about 0·000946 gram, and consequently one cubic centimetre of steam whose density is 0·64 will weigh 0·000605 gram at 100°, and therefore one gram of aqueous vapour will occupy a volume of about 1·653 c.c. Consequently, the piston in the cylinder of 1 sq. cm. sectional area, and in which the water occupied a height of 1 cm., will be raised 1,653 cm. on the conversion of this water into steam. This piston, as has been mentioned, weighs 1,033 grams, therefore the external work of the steam—that is, that work which the water does in its conversion into steam at 100°—is equal to lifting a piston weighing 1,033 grams to a height of 1,653 cm., or 17·07 kilogram-metres of work—i.e. is capable of lifting 17 kilograms 1 metre, or 1 kilogram 17 metres. One gram of water requires for its conversion into steam 534 gram units of heat or 0·534 kilogram unit of heat—i.e. the quantity of heat absorbed in the evaporation of one gram of water is equal to the quantity of heat which is capable of heating 1 kilogram of water 0·534°. Each unit of heat, as has been shown by accurate experiment, is capable of doing 424 kilogram-metres of work. Hence, in evaporating, one gram of water expends 424 × 0·534 = (almost) 227 kilogram-metres of work. The external work was found to be only 17 kilogram-metres, therefore 210 kilogram-metres are expended in overcoming the internal cohesion of the aqueous particles, and consequently about 92 p.c. of the total heat or work is consumed in overcoming the internal cohesion. The following figures are thus calculated approximately:—

The work necessary for overcoming the internal cohesion of water in its passage into vapour decreases with the rise in temperature—that is, corresponds with the decrease of cohesion; and, in fact, the variations which take place in this case are very similar to those which are observed in the heights to which water rises in capillary tubes at different temperatures. It is evident, therefore, that the amount of external—or, as it is termed, useful—work which water can supply by its evaporation is very small compared with the amount which it expends in its conversion into vapour.

In considering certain physico-mechanical properties of water, I had in view not only their importance for theory and practice, but also their purely chemical significance; for it is evident from the above considerations that even in a physical change of state the greatest part of the work done is employed in overcoming cohesion, and that an enormous amount of internal energy must be expended in overcoming chemical cohesion or affinity.

[12] When it is necessary to heat a considerable mass of liquid in different vessels, it would be very uneconomical to make use of metallic vessels and to construct a separate furnace for each; such cases are continually met with in practice. Steam from a boiler is introduced into the liquid, or, in general, into the vessel which it is required to heat. The steam, in condensing and passing into a liquid state, parts with its latent heat, and as this is very considerable a small quantity of steam will produce a considerable heating effect. If it be required, for instance, to heat 1,000 kilos of water from 20° to 50°, which requires approximately 30,000 units of heat, steam at 100° is passed into the water from a boiler. Each kilogram of water at 50° contains about 50 units of heat, and each kilogram of steam at 100° contains 637 units of heat; therefore, each kilogram of steam in cooling to 50° gives up 587 units of heat, and consequently 52 kilos of steam are capable of heating 1,000 kilos of water from 20° to 50°. Water is very often applied for heating in chemical practice. For this purpose metallic vessels or pans, called ‘water-baths,’ are made use of. They are closed by a cover formed of concentric rings lying on each other. The vessels—such as beakers, evaporating basins, retorts, &c.—containing liquids, are placed on these rings, and the water in the bath is heated. The steam given off heats the bottom of the vessels to be heated, and thus effects the evaporation or distillation.

[13]

Fig. 13.—Drying oven, composed of brazed copper. It is heated by a lamp. The object to be dried is placed on the gauze inside the oven. The thermometer indicates the temperature.

In order to dry any substance at about 100°—that is, at the boiling point of water (hygroscopic water passes off at this temperature)—an apparatus called a ‘drying-oven’ is employed. It consists of a double copper box; water is poured into the space between the internal and external boxes, and the oven is then heated over a stove or by any other means, or else steam from a boiler is passed between the walls of the two boxes. When the water boils, the temperature inside the inner box will be approximately 100° C. The substance to be dried is placed inside the oven, and the door is closed. Several holes are cut in the door to allow the free passage of air, which carries off the aqueous vapour by the chimney on the top of the oven. Often, however, desiccation is carried on in copper ovens heated directly over a lamp (fig. [13]). In this case any desired temperature may be obtained, which is determined by a thermometer fixed in a special orifice. There are substances which only part with their water at a much higher temperature than 100°, and then such air baths are very useful. In order to determine directly the amount of water in a substance which does not part with anything except water at a red heat, the substance is placed in a bulb tube. By first weighing the tube empty and then with the substance to be dried in it, the weight of the substance taken may be found. The tube is then connected on one side with a gas-holder full of air, which, on opening a stop-cock, passes first through a flask containing sulphuric acid, and then into a vessel containing lumps of pumice stone moistened with sulphuric acid. In passing through these vessels the air is thoroughly dried, having given up all its moisture to the sulphuric acid. Thus dry air will pass into the bulb tube, and as hygroscopic water is entirely given up from a substance in dry air even at the ordinary temperature, and still more rapidly on heating, the moisture given up by the substance in the tube will be carried off by the air passing through it. This damp air then passes through a U-shaped tube full of pieces of pumice stone moistened with sulphuric acid, which absorbs all the moisture given off from the substance in the bulb tube. Thus all the water expelled from the substance will collect in the U tube, and so, if this be weighed before and after, the difference will show the quantity of water expelled from the substance. If only water (and not any gases) come over, the increase of the weight of the U tube will be equal to the decrease in the weight of the bulb tube.

[14] Instead of under a glass bell jar, drying over sulphuric acid is often carried on in a desiccator consisting of a shallow wide-mouthed glass vessel, closed by a well-fitting ground-glass cover. Sulphuric acid is poured over the bottom of the desiccator, and the substance to be dried is placed on a glass stand above the acid. A lateral glass tube with a stop-cock is often fused into the desiccator in order to connect it with an air pump, and so allow drying under a diminished pressure, when the moisture evaporates more rapidly. The fact that in the usual form of desiccator the desiccating substance (sulphuric acid) is placed beneath the substance to be dried has the disadvantage that the moist air being lighter than dry air distributes itself in the upper portion of the desiccator and not below. Hempel, in his desiccator (1891), avoids this by placing the absorbent above the substance to be dried. The process of desiccation can be further accelerated by cooling the upper portion of the desiccator, and so inducing ascending and descending currents of air within the apparatus.

[15] Chappuis, however, determined that in wetting 1 gram of charcoal with water 7 units of heat are evolved, and on pouring carbon bisulphide over 1 gram of charcoal as much as 24 units of heat are evolved. Alumina (1 gram), when moistened with water, evolves 2½ calories. This indicates that in respect to evolution of heat moistening already presents a transition towards exothermal combinations (those evolving heat in their formation).

[16] Strong acetic acid (C₂H₄O₂), whose specific gravity at 15° is 1·055, does not become lighter on the addition of water (a lighter substance, sp. gr. = 0·999), but heavier, so that a solution of 80 parts of acetic acid and 20 parts of water has a specific gravity of 1·074, and even a solution of equal parts of acetic acid and water (50 p.c.) has a sp. gr. of 1·065, which is still greater than that of acetic acid itself. This shows the high degree of contraction which takes place on solution. In fact, solutions—and, in general, liquids—on mixing with water, decrease in volume.

[16 bis] Graham, in the jelly formed by gelatine, and De Vries in gelatinous silica (Chapter XVIII.) most frequently employed coloured (tinted) substances, for instance, K₂Cr₂O₇, which showed the rate of diffusion with very great clearness. Prof. Oumoff employed the method described in Chapter X., Note [17], for this purpose.

[17] The researches of Graham, Fick, Nernst, and others showed that the quantity of a dissolved substance which is transmitted (rises) from one stratum of liquid to another in a vertical cylindrical vessel is not only proportional to the time and to the sectional area of the cylinder, but also to the amount and nature of the substance dissolved in a stratum of liquid, so that each substance has its corresponding co-efficient of diffusion. The cause of the diffusion of solutions must be considered as essentially the same as the cause of the diffusion of gases—that is, as dependent on motions which are proper to their molecules; but here most probably those purely chemical, although feebly-developed, forces, which incline the substances dissolved to the formation of definite compounds, also play their part.

[18]

Fig. 15.—Dialyser. Apparatus for the separation of substances which pass through a membrane from those which do not. Description in text.

The rate of diffusion—like the rate of transmission—through membranes, or dialysis (which plays an important part in the vital processes of organisms and also in technical processes), presents, according to Graham's researches, a sharply defined change in passing from such crystallisable substances as the majority of salts and acids to substances which are capable of giving jellies (gum, gelatin, &c.) The former diffuse into solutions and pass through membranes much more rapidly than the latter, and Graham therefore distinguishes between crystalloids, which diffuse rapidly, and colloids, which diffuse slowly. On breaking solid colloids into pieces, a total absence of cleavage is remarked. The fracture of such substances is like that of glue or glass. It is termed a ‘conchoidal’ fracture. Almost all the substances of which animal and vegetable bodies consist are colloids, and this is, at all events, partly the reason why animals and plants have such varied forms, which have no resemblance to the crystalline forms of the majority of mineral substances. The colloid solid substances in organisms—that is, in animals and plants—almost always contain water, and take most peculiar forms, of networks, of granules, of hairs, of mucous, shapeless masses, &c., which are quite different from the forms taken by crystalline substances. When colloids separate out from solutions, or from a molten state, they present a form which is similar to that of the liquid from which they were formed. Glass may he taken as the best example of this. Colloids are distinguishable from crystalloids, not only by the absence of crystalline form, but by many other properties which admit of clearly distinguishing both these classes of solids, as Graham showed. Nearly all colloids are capable of passing, under certain circumstances, from a soluble into an insoluble state. The best example is shown by white of eggs (albumin) in the raw and soluble form, and in the hard-boiled and insoluble form. The majority of colloids, on passing into an insoluble form in the presence of water, give substances having a gelatinous appearance, which is familiar to every one in starch, solidified glue, jelly, &c. Thus gelatin, or common carpenter's glue, when soaked in water, swells up into an insoluble jelly. If this jelly be heated, it melts, and is then soluble in water, but on cooling it again forms a jelly which is insoluble in water. One of the properties which distinguish colloids from crystalloids is that the former pass very slowly through a membrane, whilst the latter penetrate very rapidly. This may be shown by taking a cylinder, open at both ends, and by covering its lower end with a bladder or with vegetable parchment (unsized paper immersed for two or three minutes in a mixture of sulphuric acid and half its volume of water, and then washed), or any other membranous substance (all such substances are themselves colloids in an insoluble form). The membrane must be firmly tied to the cylinder, so as not to leave any opening. Such an apparatus is called a dialyser (fig. [15]), and the process of separation of crystalloids from colloids by means of such a membrane is termed dialysis. An aqueous solution of a crystalloid or colloid, or a mixture of both, is poured into the dialyser, which is then placed in a vessel containing water, so that the bottom of the membrane is covered with water. Then, after a certain period of time, the crystalloid passes through the membrane, whilst the colloid, if it does pass through at all, does so at an incomparably slower rate. The crystalloid naturally passes through into the water until the solution attains the same strength on both sides of the membrane. By replacing the outside water with fresh water, a fresh quantity of the crystalloid may be separated from the dialyser. While a crystalloid is passing through the membrane, a colloid remains almost entirely in the dialyser, and therefore a mixed solution of these two kinds of substances may be separated from each other by a dialyser. The study of the properties of colloids, and of the phenomena of their passage through membranes, should elucidate much respecting the phenomena which are accomplished in organisms.

[19] The formation of solutions may be considered in two aspects, from a physical and from a chemical point of view, and it is more evident in solutions than in any other department of chemistry how closely these provinces of natural science are allied together. On the one hand solutions form a particular case of a physico-mechanical interpenetration of homogeneous substances, and a juxtaposition of the molecules of the substance dissolved and of the solvent, similar to the juxtaposition which is exhibited in homogeneous substances. From this point of view this diffusion of solutions is exactly similar to the diffusion of gases, with only this difference, that the nature and store of energy are different in gases from what they are in liquids, and that in liquids there is considerable friction, whilst in gases there is comparatively little. The penetration of a dissolved substance into water is likened to evaporation, and solution to the formation of vapour. This resemblance was clearly expressed even by Graham. In recent years the Dutch chemist, Van't Hoff, has developed this view of solutions in great detail, having shown (in a memoir in the Transactions of the Swedish Academy of Science, Part 21, No. 17, ‘Lois de l'équilibre chimique dans l'état dilué, gazeux ou dissous,’ 1886), that for dilute solutions the osmotic pressure follows the same laws of Boyle, Mariotte, Gay-Lussac, and Avogadro-Gerhardt as for gases. The osmotic pressure of a substance dissolved in water is determined by means of membranes which allow the passage of water, but not of a substance dissolved in it, through them. This property is found in animal protoplasmic membranes and in porous substances covered with an amorphous precipitate, such as is obtained by the action of copper sulphate on potassium ferrocyanide (Pfeffer, Traube). If, for instance, a one p.c. solution of sugar he placed in such a vessel, which is then closed and placed in water, the water passes through the walls of the vessel and increases the pressure by 50 mm. of the barometric column. If the pressure be artificially increased inside the vessel, then the water will be expelled through the walls. De Vries found a convenient means of determining isotonic solutions (those presenting a similar osmotic pressure) in the cells of plants. For this purpose a portion of the soft part of the leaves of the Tradescantis discolor, for instance, is cut away and moistened with the solution of a given salt and of a given strength. If the osmotic pressure of the solution taken be less than that of the sap contained in the cells they will change their form or shrink; if, on the other hand, the osmotic pressure be greater than that of the sap, then the cells will expand, as can easily be seen under the microscope. By altering the amount of the different salts in solution it is possible to find for each salt the strength of solution at which the cells begin to swell, and at which they will consequently have an equal osmotic pressure. As it increases in proportion to the amount of a substance dissolved per 100 parts of water, it is possible, knowing the osmotic pressure of a given substance—for instance, sugar at various degrees of concentration of solution—and knowing the composition of isotonic solutions compared with sugar, to determine the osmotic pressure of all the salts investigated. The osmotic pressure of dilute solutions determined in this manner directly or indirectly (from observations made by Pfeffer and De Vries) was shown to follow the same laws as those of the pressure of gases; for instance, by doubling or increasing the quantity of a salt (in a given volume) n times, the pressure is doubled or increases n times. So, for example, in a solution containing one part of sugar per 100 parts of water the osmotic pressure (according to Pfeffer) = 58·5 cm. of mercury, if 2 parts of sugar = 101·6, if 4 parts = 208·2 and so on, which proves that the ratio is true within the limits of experimental error. (2) Different substances for equal strengths of solutions, show very different osmotic pressures, just as gases for equal parts by weight in equal volumes show different tensions. (3) If, for a given dilute solution at 0°, the osmotic pressure equal p°, then at t° it will be greater and equal to p°(1 + 0·00367t), i.e. it increases with the temperature in exactly the same manner as the tension of gases increases. (4) If in dilute solutions of such substances as do not conduct an electric current (for instance, sugar, acetone, and many other organic bodies) the substances be taken in the ratio of their molecular weights (expressed by their formulæ, see Chapter [VII].), then not only will the osmotic pressure be equal, but its magnitude will be determined by that tension which would be proper to the vapours of the given substances when they would be contained in the space occupied by the solution, just as the tension of the vapours of molecular quantities of the given substances will be equal, and determined by the laws of Gay-Lussac, Mariotte, and Avogadro-Gerhardt. Those formulæ (Chapter VII., Notes [23] and [24]) by which the gaseous state of matter is determined, may also be applied in the present case. So, for example, the osmotic pressure p, in centimetres of mercury, of a one per cent. solution of sugar, may be calculated according to the formula for gases:

Mp = 6200s(273 + t),

where M is the molecular weight, s the weight in grams of a cubic centimetre of vapour, and t its temperature. For sugar M = 342 (because its molecular composition is C₁₂H₂₂O₁₁). The specific gravity of the solution of sugar is 1·003, hence the weight of sugar s contained in a 1 per cent. solution = 0·01003 gram. The observation was made at t = 14°. Hence, according to the formula, we find p = 52·2 centimetres. And experiments carried on at 14° gave 53·5 centimetres, which is very near to the above. (5) For the solutions of salts, acids, and similar substances, which conduct an electric current, the calculated pressure is usually (but not always in a definite or multiple number of times) less than the observed by i times, and this i for dilute solutions of MgSO₄ is nearly 1, for CO₂ = 1, for KCl, NaCl, KI, KNO₃ greater than 1, and approximates to 2, for BaCl₂, MgCl₂, K₂CO₃, and others between 2 and 3, for HCl, H₂SO₄, NaNO₃, CaN₂O₆, and others nearly 2 and so on. It should be remarked that the above deductions are only applicable (and with a certain degree of accuracy) to dilute solutions, and in this respect resemble the generalisations of Michel and Kraft (see Note [44]). Nevertheless, the arithmetical relation found by Van't Hoff between the formation of vapours and the transition into dilute solutions forms an important scientific discovery, which should facilitate the explanation of the nature of solutions, while the osmotic pressure of solutions already forms a very important aspect of the study of solutions. In this respect it is necessary to mention that Prof. Konovaloff (1891, and subsequently others also) discovered the dependence (and it may be a sufficient explanation) of the osmotic pressure upon the differences of the tensions of aqueous vapours and aqueous solutions; this, however, already enters into a special province of physical chemistry (certain data are given in Note [49] and following), and to this physical side of the question also belongs one of the extreme consequences of the resemblance of osmotic pressure to gaseous pressure, which is that the concentration of a uniform solution varies in parts which are heated or cooled. Soret (1881) indeed observed that a solution of copper sulphate containing 17 parts of the salt at 20° only contained 14 parts after heating the upper portion of the tube to 80° for a long period of time. This aspect of solution, which is now being very carefully and fully worked out, may be called the physical side. Its other aspect is purely chemical, for solution does not take place between any two substances, but requires a special and particular attraction or affinity between them. A vapour or gas permeates any other vapour or gas, but a salt which dissolves in water may not be in the least soluble in alcohol, and is quite insoluble in mercury. In considering solutions as a manifestation of chemical force (and of chemical energy), it must be acknowledged that they are here developed to so feeble an extent that the definite compounds (that is, those formed according to the law of multiple proportions) formed between water and a soluble substance dissociate even at the ordinary temperature, forming a homogeneous system—that is, one in which both the compound and the products into which it decomposes (water and the aqueous compound) occur in a liquid state. The chief difficulty in the comprehension of solutions depends on the fact that the mechanical theory of the structure of liquids has not yet been so fully developed as the theory of gases, and solutions are liquids. The conception of solutions as liquid dissociated definite chemical compounds is based on the following considerations: (1) that there exist certain undoubtedly definite chemical crystallised compounds (such as H₂SO₄,H₂O; or NaCl,2H₂O; or CaCl₂,6H₂O; &c.) which melt on a certain rise of temperature, and then form true solutions; (2) that metallic alloys in a molten condition are real solutions, but on cooling they often give entirely distinct and definite crystallised compounds, which are recognised by the properties of alloys; (3) that between the solvent and the substance dissolved there are formed, in a number of cases, many undoubtedly definite compounds, such as compounds with water of crystallisation; (4) that the physical properties of solutions, and especially their specific gravities (a property which can be very accurately determined), vary with a change in composition, and in such a manner as would be required by the formation of one or more definite but dissociating compounds. Thus, for example, on adding water to fuming sulphuric acid its density is observed to decrease until it attains the definite composition H₂SO₄, or SO₃ + H₂O, when the specific gravity increases, although on further diluting with water it again falls. Moreover (Mendeléeff, The Investigation of Aqueous Solutions from their Specific Gravities, 1887), the increase in specific gravity (ds), varies in all well-known solutions with the proportion of the substance dissolved (dp), and this dependence can be expressed by a formula ( ds / dp = A + Bp) between the limits of definite compounds whose existence in solutions must be admitted, and this is in complete accordance with the dissociation hypothesis. Thus, for instance, from H₂SO₄ to H₂SO₄ + H₂O (both these substances exist as definite compounds in a free state), the fraction ds / dp = 0·0729 - 0·000749p (where p is the percentage amount of H₂SO₄). For alcohol C₂H₆O, whose aqueous solutions have been more accurately investigated than all others, the definite compound C₂H₆O + 3H₂O, and others must be acknowledged in its solutions.

The two aspects of solution above mentioned, and the hypotheses which have as yet been applied to the examination of solutions, although they have somewhat different starting points, will doubtless in time lead to a general theory of solutions, because the same common laws govern both physical and chemical phenomena, inasmuch as the properties and motions of molecules, which determine physical properties, depend on the motions and properties of atoms, which determine chemical reactions. For details of the questions dealing with theories of solution, recourse must now be had to special memoirs and to works on theoretical (physical) chemistry; for this subject forms one of special interest at the present epoch of the development of our science. In working out chiefly the chemical side of solutions, I consider it to be necessary to reconcile the two aspects of the question; this seems to me to be all the more possible, as the physical side is limited to dilute solutions only, whilst the chemical side deals mainly with strong solutions.

[20] A system of (chemically or physically) re-acting substances in different states of aggregation—for instance, some solid, others liquid or gaseous—is termed a heterogeneous system. Up to now it is only systems of this kind which can be subjected to detailed examination in the sense of the mechanical theory of matter. Solutions (i.e. unsaturated ones) form fluid homogeneous systems, which at the present time can only be investigated with difficulty.

In the case of limited solution of liquids in liquids, the difference between the solvent and the substance dissolved is clearly seen. The former (that is, the solvent) may be added in an unlimited quantity, and yet the solution obtained will always be uniform, whilst only a definite saturating proportion of the substance dissolved can be taken, We will take water and common (sulphuric) ether. On shaking the ether with the water, it will be remarked that a portion of it dissolves in the water. If the ether be taken in such a quantity that it saturates the water and a portion of it remains undissolved, then this remaining portion will act as a solvent, and water will diffuse through it and also form a saturated solution of water in the ether taken. Thus two saturated solutions will be obtained. One solution will contain ether dissolved in water, and the other solution will contain water dissolved in ether. These two solutions will arrange themselves in two layers, according to their density; the ethereal solution of water will be on the top. If the upper ethereal solution be poured off from the aqueous solution, any quantity of ether may be added to it; this shows that the dissolving substance is ether. If water be added to it, it is no longer dissolved in it; this shows that water saturates the ether—here water is the substance dissolved. If we act in the same manner with the lower layer, we shall find that water is the solvent and ether the substance dissolved. By taking different amounts of ether and water, the degree of solubility of ether in water, and of water in ether, may be easily determined. Water approximately dissolves ¹⁄₁₀ of its volume of ether, and ether dissolves a very small quantity of water. Let us now imagine that the liquid poured in dissolves a considerable amount of water, and that water dissolves a considerable amount of the liquid. Two layers could not be formed, because the saturated solutions would resemble each other, and therefore they would intermix in all proportions. This is, consequently, a case of a phenomenon where two liquids present considerable co-efficients of solubility in each other, but where it is impossible to say what these co-efficients are, because it is impossible to obtain a saturated solution.

[21]

Fig. 16.—Bunsen's absorptiometer. Apparatus for determining the solubility of gases in liquids.

The solubility, or co-efficient of solubility, of a substance is determined by various methods. Either a solution is expressly prepared with a clear excess of the soluble substance and saturated at a given temperature, and the quantity of water and of the substance dissolved in it determined by evaporation, desiccation, or other means; or else, as is done with gases, definite quantities of water and of the soluble substance are taken and the amount remaining undissolved is determined.

The solubility of a gas in water is determined by means of an apparatus called an absorptiometer (fig. [16]). It consists of an iron stand f, on which an india-rubber ring rests. A wide glass tube is placed on this ring, and is pressed down on it by the ring h and the screws i i. The tube is thus firmly fixed on the stand. A cock r, communicating with a funnel r, passes into the lower part of the stand. Mercury can be poured into the wide tube through this funnel, which is therefore made of steel, as copper would be affected by the mercury. The upper ring h is furnished with a cover p, which can be firmly pressed down on to the wide tube, and hermetically closes it by means of an india-rubber ring. The tube r r can be raised at will, and so by pouring mercury into the funnel the height of the column of mercury, which produces pressure inside the apparatus, can be increased. The pressure can also be diminished at will, by letting mercury out through the cock r. A graduated tube e, containing the gas and liquid to be experimented on, is placed inside the wide tube. This tube is graduated in millimetres for determining the pressure, and it is calibrated for volume, so that the number of volumes occupied by the gas and liquid dissolving it can be easily calculated. This tube can also be easily removed from the apparatus. The lower portion of this tube when removed from the apparatus is shown to the right of the figure. It will be observed that its lower end is furnished with a male screw b, fitting in a nut a. The lower surface of the nut a is covered with india-rubber, so that on screwing up the tube its lower end presses upon the india-rubber, and thus hermetically closes the whole tube, for its upper end is fused up. The nut a is furnished with arms c c, and in the stand f there are corresponding spaces, so that when the screwed-up internal tube is fixed into stand f, the arms c c fix into these spaces cut in f. This enables the internal tube to be fixed on to the stand f. When the internal tube is fixed in the stand, the wide tube is put into its right position, and mercury and water are poured into the space between the two tubes, and communication is opened between the inside of the tube e and the mercury between the interior and exterior tubes. This is done by either revolving the interior tube e, or by a key turning the nut about the bottom part of f. The tube e is filled with gas and water as follows: the tube is removed from the apparatus, filled with mercury, and the gas to be experimented on is passed into it. The volume of the gas is measured, the temperature and pressure determined, and the volume it would occupy at 0° and 760 mm. calculated. A known volume of water is then introduced into the tube. The water must be previously boiled, so as to be quite freed from air in solution. The tube is then closed by screwing it down on to the india-rubber on the nut. It is then fixed on to the stand f, mercury and water are poured into the intervening space between it and the exterior tube, which is then screwed up and closed by the cover p, and the whole apparatus is left at rest for some time, so that the tube e, and the gas in it, may attain the same temperature as that of the surrounding water, which is marked by a thermometer k tied to the tube e. The interior tube is then again closed by turning it in the nut, the cover p again shut, and the whole apparatus is shaken in order that the gas in the tube e may entirely saturate the water. After several shakings, the tube e is again opened by turning it in the nut, and the apparatus is left at rest for a certain time; it is then closed and again shaken, and so on until the volume of gas does not diminish after a fresh shaking—that is, until saturation ensues. Observations are then made of the temperature, the height of the mercury in the interior tube, and the level of the water in it, and also of the level of the mercury and water in the exterior tube. All these data are necessary in order to calculate the pressure under which the solution of the gas takes place, and what volume of gas remains undissolved, and also the quantity of water which serves as the solvent. By varying the temperature of the surrounding water, the amount of gas dissolved at various temperatures may be determined. Bunsen, Carius, and many others determined the solution of various gases in water, alcohol, and certain other liquids, by means of this apparatus. If in a determination of this kind it is found that n cubic centimetres of water at a pressure h dissolve m cubic centimetres of a given gas, measured at 0° and 760 mm., when the temperature under which solution took place was t°, then it follows that at the temperature t the co-efficient of solubility of the gas in 1 volume of the liquid will be equal to m / n × 760 / h .

This formula is very clearly understood from the fact that the co-efficient of solubility of gases is that quantity measured at 0° and 760 mm., which is absorbed at a pressure of 760 mm. by one volume of a liquid. If n cubic centimetres of water absorb m cubic centimetres of a gas, then one cubic centimetre absorbs m / n . If m / n c.c. of a gas are absorbed under a pressure of h mm., then, according to the law of the variation of solubility of a gas with the pressure, there would he dissolved, under a pressure of 760 mm., a quantity varying in the same ratio to m/n as 760 : h. In determining the residual volume of gas its moisture (note [1]) must be taken into consideration.

Below are given the number of grams of several substances saturating 100 grams of water—that is, their co-efficients of solubility by weight at three different temperatures:—

Sometimes a substance is so slightly soluble that it may be considered as insoluble. Many such substances are met with both in solids and liquids, and such a gas as oxygen, although it does dissolve, does so in so small a proportion by weight that it might be considered as zero did not the solubility of even so little oxygen play an important part in nature (as in the respiration of fishes) and were not an infinitesimal quantity of a gas by weight so easily measured by volume. The sign ∞, which stands on a line with sulphuric acid in the above table, indicates that it intermixes with water in all proportions. There are many such cases among liquids, and everybody knows, for instance, that spirit (absolute alcohol) can be mixed in any proportion with water.

[22] Just as the existence must he admitted of substances which are completely undecomposable (chemically) at the ordinary temperature—and of substances which are entirely non-volatile at such a temperature (as wood and gold), although capable of decomposing (wood) or volatilising (gold) at a higher temperature—so also the existence must be admitted of substances which are totally insoluble in water without some degree of change in their state. Although mercury is partially volatile at the ordinary temperature, there is no reason to think that it and other metals are soluble in water, alcohol, or other similar liquids. However, mercury forms solutions, as it dissolves other metals. On the other hand, there are many substances found in nature which are so very slightly soluble in water, that in ordinary practice they may be considered as insoluble (for example, barium sulphate). For the comprehension of that general plan according to which a change of state of substances (combined or dissolved, solid, liquid, or gaseous) takes place, it is very important to make a distinction at this boundary line (on approaching zero of decomposition, volatility, or solubility) between an insignificant amount and zero, but the present methods of research and the data at our disposal at the present time only just touch such questions (by studying the electrical conductivity of dilute solutions and the development of micro-organisms in them). It must be remarked, besides, that water in a number of cases does not dissolve a substance as such, but acts on it chemically and forms a soluble substance. Thus glass and many rocks, especially if taken as powder, are chemically changed by water, but are not directly soluble in it.

[23] Beilby (1883) experimented on paraffin, and found that one litre of solid paraffin at 21° weighed 874 grams, and when liquid, at its melting-point 38°, 783 grams, at 49°, 775 grams, and at 60°, 767 grams, from which the weight of a litre of liquefied paraffin would be 795·4 grams at 21° if it could remain liquid at that temperature. By dissolving solid paraffin in lubricating oil at 21° Beilby found that 795·6 grams occupy one cubic decimetre, from which he concluded that the solution contained liquefied paraffin.

[24] Gay-Lussac was the first to have recourse to such a graphic method of expressing solubility, and he considered, in accordance with the general opinion, that by joining up the summits of the ordinates in one harmonious curve it is possible to express the entire change of solubility with the temperature. Now, there are many reasons for doubting the accuracy of such an admission, for there are undoubtedly critical points in curves of solubility (for example, of sodium sulphate, as shown further on), and it may be that definite compounds of dissolved substances with water, in decomposing within known limits of temperature, give critical points more often than would be imagined; it may even be, indeed, that instead of a continuous curve, solubility should be expressed—if not always, then not unfrequently—by straight or broken lines. According to Ditte, the solubility of sodium nitrate, NaNO₃, is expressed by the following figures per 100 parts of water:—

In my opinion (1881) these data should be expressed with exactitude by a straight line, 67·5 + 0·87t, which entirely agrees with the results of experiment. According to this the figure expressing the solubility of salt at 0° exactly coincides with the composition of a definite chemical compound—NaNO₃,7H₂O. The experiments made by Ditte showed that all saturated solutions between 0° and -15·7° have such a composition, and that at the latter temperature the solution completely solidifies into one homogeneous whole. Between 0° and -15·7° the solution NaNO₃,7H₂O does not deposit either salt or ice. Thus the solubility of sodium nitrate is expressed by a broken straight line. In recent times (1888) Étard discovered a similar phenomenon in many of the sulphates. Brandes, in 1830, shows a diminution in solubility below 100° for manganese sulphate. The percentage by weight (i.e. per 100 parts of the solution, and not of water) of saturation for ferrous sulphate, FeSO₄, from -2° to +65° = 13·5 + 0·3784t—that is, the solubility of the salt increases. The solubility remains constant from 65° to 98° (according to Brandes the solubility then increases; this divergence of opinion requires proof), and from 98° to 150° it falls as = 104·35 - 0·6685t. Hence, at about +156° the solubility should = 0, and this has been confirmed by experiment. I observe, on my part, that Étard's formula gives 38·1 p.c. of salt at 65° and 38·8 p.c. at 92°, and this maximum amount of salt in the solution very nearly corresponds with the composition FeSO₄,14H₂O, which requires 37·6 p.c. From what has been said, it is evident that the data concerning solubility require a new method of investigation, which should have in view the entire scale of solubility—from the formation of completely solidified solutions (cryohydrates, which we shall speak of presently) to the separation of salts from their solutions, if this is accomplished at a higher temperature (for manganese and cadmium sulphates there is an entire separation, according to Étard), or to the formation of a constant solubility (for potassium sulphate the solubility, according to Étard, remains constant from 163° to 220° and equals 24·9 p.c.) (See Chapter XIV., note [50], solubility of CaCl₂.)

[25] The latent heat of fusion is determined at the temperature of fusion, whilst solution takes place at the ordinary temperature, and one must think that at this temperature the latent heat would be different, just as the latent heat of evaporation varies with the temperature (see Note [11]). Besides which, in dissolving, disintegration of the particles of both the solvent and the substance dissolved takes place, a process which in its mechanical aspect resembles evaporation, and therefore must consume much heat. The heat emitted in the solution of a solid must therefore be considered (Personne) as composed of three factors—(1) positive, the effect of combination; (2) negative, the effect of transference into a liquid state; and (3) negative, the effect of disintegration. In the solution of a liquid by a liquid the second factor is removed; and therefore, if the heat evolved in combination is greater than that absorbed in disintegration a heating effect is observed, and in the reverse case a cooling effect; and, indeed, sulphuric acid, alcohol, and many liquids evolve heat in dissolving in each other. But the solution of chloroform in carbon bisulphide (Bussy and Binget), or of phenol (or aniline) in water (Alexéeff), produces cold. In the solution of a small quantity of water in acetic acid (Abasheff), or hydrocyanic acid (Bussy and Binget), or amyl alcohol (Alexéeff), cold is produced, whilst in the solution of these substances in an excess of water heat is evolved.

The relation existing between the solubility of solid bodies and the heat and temperature of fusion and solution has been studied by many investigators, and more recently (1893) by Schröder, who states that in the solution of a solid body in a solvent which does not act chemically upon it, a very simple process takes place, which differs but little from the intermixture of two gases which do not react chemically upon each other. The following relation between the heat of solution Q and the heat of fusion p may then be taken: P / T₀ = Q / T = constant, where T₀ and T are the absolute (from -273°) temperatures of fusion and saturation. Thus, for instance, in the case of naphthalene the calculated and observed magnitudes of the heat of solution differ but slightly from each other.

The fullest information concerning the solution of liquids in liquids has been gathered by W. T. Alexéeff (1883–1885); these data are, however, far from being sufficient to solve the mass of problems respecting this subject. He showed that two liquids which dissolve in each other, intermix together in all proportions at a certain temperature. Thus the solubility of phenol, C₆H₆O, in water, and the converse, is limited up to 70°, whilst above this temperature they intermix in all proportions. This is seen from the following figures, where p is the percentage amount of phenol and t the temperature at which the solution becomes turbid—that is, that at which it is saturated:—