Fluoric acid 427 Carbonic 577 Sebacic 706 Muriatic 712 Oxalic 755 Phosphoric 979 Formic 988 Sulphuric 1000 Succinic 1209 Nitric 1405 Acetic 1480 Citric 1683 Tartaric 1694 2. BASES. Alumina 525 Magnesia 615 Ammonia 672 Lime 793 Soda 859 Strontian 1329 Potash 1605 Barytes 2222 To understand this table, it is only necessary to observe, that if we take the quantity of any of the acids placed after it in the table, that quantity will be exactly saturated by the weight of each base put after it in the second column: thus, 1000 of sulphuric acid will be just saturated by 525 alumina, 615 magnesia, 672 ammonia, 793 lime, and so on. On the other hand, the quantity of any base placed after its name in the second column, will be just saturated by the weight of each acid placed after its name in the first column: thus, 793 parts of lime will be just saturated by 427 of fluoric acid, 577 of carbonic acid, 706 of sebacic acid, and so on. This work of Richter was followed by a periodical work entitled "Ueber die neuern Gegenstande der Chymie" (On the New Objects of Chemistry). This work was begun in the year 1792, and continued in twelve different numbers, or volumes, to the time of his death in 1807.[8] [8] I have only seen eleven parts of this work, the last of which appeared in 1802; but I believe that a twelfth part was published afterwards. Richter's labours in this important field produced as little attention as those of Wenzel. Gehlen wrote a short panegyric upon him at his death, praising his views and pointing out their importance; but I am not aware of any individual, either in Germany or elsewhere, who adopted Richter's opinions during his lifetime, or even seemed aware of their importance, unless we are to except Berthollet, who mentions them with approbation in his Chemical Statics. This inattention was partly owing to the great want of accuracy which it is impossible not be sensible of in Richter's experiments. He operated upon too large quantities of matter, which indeed was the common defect of the times, and was first checked by Dr. Wollaston. The dispute between the phlogistians and the antiphlogistians, which was not fully settled in Richter's time, drew the attention of chemists to another branch of the subject. Richter in some measure went before the age in which he lived, and had his labours not been recalled to our recollection by the introduction of atomic theory, he would probably have been forgotten, like Hooke and Mayow, and only brought again under review after the new discoveries in the science had put it in the power of chemists in general to appreciate the value of his labours. It is to Mr. Dalton that we are indebted for the happy and simple idea from which the atomic theory originated.