We will not positively assert that no one except Mr. Faraday could have written this book, but we are of opinion that there are very few chemists adequate to such a task, which has manifestly required a considerable share of practical skill, much deep and theoretical knowledge, and no small degree of patience and perseverance, more especially shown in the clearness of the details, and the perspicuous manner in which he has managed to describe prolix and difficult processes. The work moreover fills up a chasm in chemical literature, by embodying almost all that is important relating to chemical manipulation scattered through the writings of others; while the author’s extensive experience has enabled him to correct their faults, and to present the student and operator with many new and important facts and processes, by which the researches of the laboratory are most essentially facilitated. Such is our general opinion of the treatise before us, and we are persuaded that those who are capable of appreciating its merits will agree in our decision; but it is not so easy to [p276] substantiate our judgment by quotations, in consequence of the general didactic character of the book, and the mutual dependence and connexion of its different parts. We shall attempt, however, to give the general reader an outline of its contents, and point out such parts to the chemist as we conceive particularly useful and worthy attention. The importance of readiness and dexterity in the performance of experiments has been duly estimated for more than a century. The writings of Black, Cavendish, Priestley, and especially Scheele, as opposed to those of their predecessors, show that they had acquired considerable facility in attaining, by simple and economical means, those ends which had before consumed much time and much expense in their accomplishment: but it is only of late years that the refinements of manipulation have been carried towards perfection; and the researches carried on in the laboratory of the Royal Institution have been not a little conducive to this improvement: to no one, however, is this part of the science more indebted than to Dr. Wollaston, whose skill in what may be called microscopic chemistry is consummate, and who has a host of humble but industrious imitators. So essential, indeed, is the attainment of correct methods of manipulation to the progress of chemical science, that many entire trains of research are exclusively dependent upon it for success. It is true that it must always be subordinate to genius and invention; yet the person who could only devise, without knowing how to perform, would comparatively be able to lend little aid to the extension and usefulness of knowledge: and were it not an invidious task, we might be able to show that some of the greatest discoveries and improvements of the science have originated in dexterity of experiment, rather than in profundity of design. By tact, therefore,