VAUQUELIN, Louis Nicolas (1763-1829), French analytical chemist, was born at Saint-André-d’Hébertot in Normandy on 16th May 1763. His parents, although very poor, sent him to school to fit him for the coveted post of a gentleman’s servant at the chateau. At the age of thirteen or fourteen Vauquelin went to Rouen as laboratory boy with an apothecary. He did not remain long there; but his interest in chemistry was fairly aroused, and he began to make experiments and take notes. His master, finding him so engaged on one occasion, tore up his note-book and ordered him to keep to his menial work for the future. Vauquelin had spirit enough to resent this treatment: he borrowed six francs from a friend and walked to Paris to seek his fortune. For a time his prospects were very dark: after getting and losing two situations he became ill, was sent to the public hospital, and when convalescent found himself once more without money or friends. At length, however, he met a humane apothecary, Cheradame, who took him in and treated him with kindness. Vauquelin at once resumed his studies, and devoted every spare minute to learning. Cheradame introduced him to Fourcroy, who had himself worked his way up from poverty, and from this time Vauquelin’s fortune was made. Henceforward he devoted his attention to chemical analysis without intermission or variety until his death, which occurred at his birthplace on 14th November 1829. At first his work appeared as that of his friend and patron, then in their joint names; but in 1790 he commenced to publish on his own authority, and wrote perhaps more papers than any other chemist has ever done. Either together or successively Vauquelin held the offices of inspector of mines, professor at the School of Mines and at the Polytechnic ...School, assayer of gold and silver goods, professor of chemistry in the College of France, member of the Council of Industry and Commerce, commissioner on the pharmacy laws, examiner to the Polytechnic School, and, finally, was successor to Fourcroy himself; at this last step all the other candidates retired in his favour.
Vauquelin’s life was uneventful; his nature was quiet and retiring; he never desired to mix with the world; and even in the turmoil of the Revolution his interest centred in the laboratory. He was emphatically one who lived for his work alone. He never married. He does not appear to have communicated with his parents after he became wealthy. The one bright feature in the somewhat colourless character of his later life was the fact that he supported Fourcroy’s aged sisters after his old friend died.
As an analyst Vauquelin came at the right time. The theory of chemistry was being built afresh on a basis of experiment; all substances, natural and artificial, were being classified by their compositi .n; and it would be hard to mention any mineral or any plant or animal or product of life that Vauquelin did not examine. With Fourcroy he drove the piles on which the first theories in pure chemistry were founded; with Haüy he put mineralogy on a satisfactory footing; but he himself was neither chemist nor mineralogist. Vauquelin’s name is associated with 376 papers published between 1790 and 1833, and, with the exception of one or two criticisms and claims for priority, these were all simple records of patient and laborious analytical operations. He propounded no theories, was guided by no generalizations, and was troubled by no problems save those of his methods. Given a substance, he did his best to find its composition, devising new processes where these seemed necessary, but this was all. Considering the amount of work he did, one is surprised that only two new elements are associated with his name. He detected glucina in beryl when analysing that mineral for Haiiy, and in a red lead ore from Siberia he discovered chromium, although, strange to say, eight years elapsed between his first examination of the ore and his separation of chromic acid. It is even more extraordinary that he never suspected the existence of alkaloids in the vegetable and animal juices he was continually analysing. Cuvier in his éloge argues from this that without the concurrence of a happy chance the greatest perseverance and the most admirable patience often miss the mark; a more legitimate inference might be that work carried on “for work’s ignoble sake” is fruitless in higher results, and that perseverance apart from a definite aim can accomplish little.
[762 words — estimated reading time: 5 minutes]