It was not likely that this new opinion of Davy should be adopted by chemists in general, without a struggle to support the old opinions. But the feebleness of the controversy which ensued, affords a striking proof how much chemistry had advanced since the days of Lavoisier, and how free from prejudices chemists had become. One would have expected that the French chemists would have made the greatest resistance to the admission of these new opinions; because they had a direct tendency to diminish the reputation of two of their most eminent chemists, Lavoisier and Berthollet. But the fact was not so: the French chemists showed a degree of candour and liberality which redounds highly to their credit. Berthollet did not enter at all into the controversy. Gay-Lussac and Thenard, in their Recherches Physico-chimiques, published in 1811, state their reasons for preferring the old hypothesis to the new, but with great modesty and fairness; and, within less than a year after, they both adopted the opinion of Davy, that chlorine is a simple substance, and muriatic acid a compound of hydrogen and chlorine. The only opponents to the new doctrine who appeared against it, were Dr. John Murray, of Edinburgh, and Professor Berzelius, of Stockholm. Dr. Murray was a man of excellent abilities, and a very zealous cultivator of chemistry; but his health had been always very delicate, which had prevented him from dedicating so much of his time to experimenting as he otherwise would have been inclined to do. The only experimental investigations into which he entered was the analysis of some mineral waters. His powers of elocution were great. He was, in consequence, a popular and very useful lecturer. He published animadversions upon the new doctrine respecting _chlorine_, in Nicholson's Journal; and his observations were answered by Dr. John Davy.