OBITUARY NOTICES.WILLIAM HENRY PERKIN.”BORN MARCH ~ZTH, 1838; DIED JULY 1 4 ~ ~ , 1907.SIR WILLIAM HENRY PERKIN, whose death occurred on July 14th,1907, was born in London on March 12th, 1838. He was theyoungest son of Mr. George Fowler Perkin, a builder and con-tractor, who died in 1865 a t the age of 63. The younger Perkinreceived his early education a t a private school, and was afterwardssent to the City of London School, where it may be said that hisinborn talent for chemistry as a science first took definite formthrough the encouragement of the late Thomas Hall, who was atthat time one of the class masters in the school. Science a t thatperiod apparently did not form a recognised part of the educa-tional curriculum, since Mr. Hall had to take the time for givingtwo weekly lectures on chemistry and natural philosophy out ofthe dinner interval.The schoolboy Perkin attended these lectureswith the greatest delight, often sacrificing the midday meal inhis enthusiasm, and was soon promoted to the, to him, proudposition of being allowed to prepare the experiments, and helpMr. Hall with the demonstrations during the lectures.It is evident that in the case of Perkin, as is so generally thecase with those who leave their mark upon any branch of science,the particular specialisation of faculty and disposition indicativeof inherent ‘ability revealed itself at a comparatively early age, andit is certainly a foirtunate circumstance that a t this critical periodof his career he should have fallen under the influence of Mr.Hall, who was himself a pupil of Hofmann’s, and who, accordingto all accounts furnished by contemporaries, must have been highlyinspiring as a teacher of science.Perkin has quite recently placedupon record the history of his early life in the following passage :-“As long as I can remember, the kind of pursuit I shouldfollow during my life was a subject that occupied my thoughtsvery much. My father being a builder, the first idea was that ISociety and the Society of’ Dyers and Colourists.* This notice has been compiled from those previously published by the RoyaOBITUARY. 2215should follow in his footsteps, and I used to watch the carpentersa t work, and also tried my hand a t carpentering myself. Otherthings I noticed led me to take an interest in mechanics andengineering, and I used to pore over an old book called ‘TheArtisan,’ which referred to these subjects and also described someof the steam engines then in use, and I tried to make an enginemyself and got as far as making the patterns for casting, but Iwas unable to go any further for want of appliances.I had alwaysbeen fond of drawing, and sometimes copied plans for my father,whose ambition was that I might be an architect. This led meon to painting, and made me think I should like to be an artist,and I worked away a t oil-painting for some time. All these sub-jects I pursued earnestly and not as amusements, and the informa-tion I obtained, though very elementary, was of much value to meafterwards.But when I was between twelve and thirteen yearsof age, a young friend showed me some chemical experiments, andthe wonderful power of substances to crystallise in definite forms,and the latter especially struck’ me very much, with the resultthat I saw there was in chemistry something far beyond the otherpursuits with which I had previously been occupied. The possibilityalso of making new discoveries impressed me very much. My choicewas fixed, and I determined if possible to become a chemist, and Iimmediately commenced to accumulate bottles of chemicals andmake experiments.”It was at this period that Perkin entered the City of LondonSchool, and, as he has told us in the passage just quoted, with adistinct bias towards chemistry as a career, This decision appearsto have caused his father some disappointment, as a t that timechemistry as a profession offered but few attractions, and it wasonly through the intercession of Mr.Hall that he was allowed,a t the age of fifteen, to enter the Royal College of Chemistry asa student under Hofmann in the year 1853. His special abilitymust have revealed itself also to the eminent professor who wasat the head of that institution, for he soon passed through theordinary course of training, consisting of qualitative and quantita-tive analysis and gas analysis, and, by the end of his second year,had, under Hofmann’s guidance, carried out his first piece ofresearch work. In describing this period of his career in a speechdelivered in New York in October, 1906, Perkin significantly addedwith respect to the ordinary curriculum which all students of theRoyal College of Chemistry went through a t that time:--“ThisI looked upon only as a preliminary part of my chemical acquire-ments and not, as many used to and some still do, as a full equip-ment.Research was my ambition. . . .”VOL. XCIII. 7 2216 OBITUARY.For a youth with these proclivities, no more inspiring influenceexisted in this country than that exercised by Hofmann in theresearch laboratory in Oxford Street, and a t the age of seventeenwe find Perkin, who had by then proved his capabilities, enrolledas honorary assistant to the Professor. In that laboratory thefirst serious insight into research methods was acquired, and itis of particular interest to note that his initiatory work, instigatedby Hofmann, was in connexion with the hydrocarbon anthracene,a substance which, a few years later, served as the starting pointin one of the most brilliant synthetical achievements in scientificand industrial chemistry, with which the name of Perkin will bealways associated.No less interesting is the circumstance thatthis first research, although, for reasons which are now readilyintelligible, ending in negative results, in no way daunted theardour of the young investigator, who, in later life, frequentlydeclared that his first efforts a t getting definite products fromanthracene were of invaluable service to him when he again tookup the study of this hydrocarbon from the scientific and technicalpoint of view.The problem set by Hofmann was, in fact, not‘solved until more than a quarter of a century after Perkin’s firstattempt, and then by a very indirect method. The general subjectwhich, among others, was under investigation in the Oxford Streetlaboratory at that time was the production of organic bases fromhydrocarbons by the reduction of the nitro-derivatives. Anthracene,then known as paranaphthalene,” had not been brought withinthe range of these experiments, and the task of isolating the hydro-carbon from coal-tar pitch with the view of nitrating the puresubstance was entrusted to Perkin, whose difficulties in attemptingon a laboratory scale t o achieve a result which is only satisfactorilyaccomplished on a factory scale are readily imaginable. However,the aid of the tar distiller was invoked, and a supply of the rawanfhracene obtained from the Bethels Tar Works, but the purehydrocarbon could not be nitrated, and so the desired aminecorresponding with aniline could not be obtained.As a matterof fact, Perkin had unwittingly produced, by the action of nitricacid on anthracene, the parent substance of alizarin, anthraquinone,although his analyses failed t o reveal the nature of the compound,because a t that time an erroneous formula had been assigned tothe hydrocarbon by its discoverers, Dumas and Laurent. Other(haloid) derivatives of anthracene prepared during the researchfor a similar reason failed to give intelligible results on analysis,and the young investigator was therefore given another piece ofwork, namely, the study of the action of cyanogen chloride onnaphthylamine, this being a part of a general research on thOBITUARY. 2217action of cyanogen chloride, etc., upon organic bases, which had,for some time, been going on under the auspices of Hofmann.Thissecond investigation was brought to a successful issue and com-municated a year later to the Chemical Society of London, whichthen held its meetings a t a house in Cavendish Square.Perkin’s first successful research was thus completed in 1855and appeared in the Journal of the Chemical Society in 1856(9, 8; also Annalen, 98, 238), from which time, throughout thewhole period of his career, this Society received and publishedpractioally the whole results of his scientific labours.The compound described by Perkin in his first paper as‘‘ menaphthylamine,” in accordance with the nomenclature of theperiod, is the a-dinaphthylguanidine of modern chemistry.Butone naphthylamine was known a t that time, and the possibleexistence of a second modification could not, in the existing stateof chemical theory, have been foreseen. That the work and theworker found favour in the estimation of Hofmann is shown bythe circumstance that on its completion he was promoted fromthe position of honorary assistant and made a member of theresearch staff, his colleague being Mr., now Professor, ArthurHerbert Church, with whom Perkin formed a friendship whichlasted throughout his life.It was a t this period of his careerthat he made that discovery of the dyestuff mauve, which for atime diverted his attention from pure to applied science, although,as is now well known, the cause of pure science was advanced a ta later period by this discovery to an extraordinary degree, andin many directions quite unfpreseen a t the time. The story ofthe discovery of the first coal-tar colouring matter has been fre-quently placed upon record, and the fiftieth anniversary was madethe occasion for an international celebration in London, in July,1906, when Perkin became the central figure and received thehomage and congratulations of chemists and technologists fromevery part of the world. Seldom, if ever, in the history of sciencehas the discovery of one chemical compound of practical utilityled to results of such enormous scientific and industrial importanceas this accidental preparation of mauve in 1856.The details ofthe working out of the manufacturing process and of the methodsfor utilising the dyestuff belong to the history of applied science,but since the discovery was the outcome of purely scientific ante-cedents, and its achievement a matter which materially affectedPerkin’s career, it is necessary to recapitulate this chapter of hisactivity in the present notice.The remarkable zeal which Hofmann’s young assistant musthave thrown into his work is well revealed by the circumstance7 H 2218 OBITUARY.that even the activity of the Oxford Street laboratory failed tosatisfy his craving for research.He was a t that time kept a t workon the investigations prompted by that illustrious professor whoseresourcefulness appeared to be inexhaustible, and had little or notime for working independently. He accordingly fitted up, in 1854,a part of a room as a laboratory in his own home,* and therecarried on his researches after the day’s work a t the College wasover and during the vacation. It is of considerable interest tonote that even a t this early period his work brought him intocontact with colouring matters, for, having secured the co-operationof his colleague, Mr. Church, one of the first pieces of workwhich they took in hand was the investigation of the products ofreduction of dinitrobenzene and dinitronaphthalene.From thelatter there was obtained a coloured substance which, in accordancewith the prevailing views concerning the nature of such com-pounds, was named “ nitrosonaphthyline,” and a brief account ofit was given to the Royal Society by Hofmann on February 6th,1856 (Proc. Roy. SOC., 8, 48), the complete description being after-wards published in the names of Perkin and Church in the Journalof the Chemical Society (Quart. Journ., 1857, 9, 6). The interestattaching to this colouring matter is that it was the first repre-sentative of the large and important group of azo-dyes derivedfrom naphthalene ever manufactured, although its true nature was,of course, a t first unknown to its discoverers, and even its ultimatecomposition was not accurately established a t the time, because,seven years later, when Perkin and Church resumed the study ofthe compound, they found that it contained no oxygen, as hada t first been supposed, and that it could be made more convenientlyby the action of a nitrite on a salt of a-naphthylamine in thepresence of alkali.The substance was re-named, in accordancewith current notions, ‘‘ azodinaphthyldiamine,” and the amendedresults published by the Chemical Society (Joum. Chem. Soc., 1863,16, 207). A patent was also secured (No. 893 of 1863) f and thesubstance had a limited use as a dyestuff. The azodinaphthyl-diamine of 1863 is the a-aminoazonaphthalene of modern chemistry,and, it may be added, is of no importance in tinctorial industry a tthe present time.The discovery of a compound which happened to be a colouringmatter was a t this stage of Perkin’s career an accidental circum-stance, as was, in fact, the discovery of mauve, which was madeShadwell, E.patent is the first claiming the production of a sulphonated azo-colour.* His father’s house was a t that time known as “King David’s Fort,)’It has been pointed out by Caro (Ber., 1891, 24, Appadix, p.3) that thisThe name is still preserved in King David’s LaneOBITUARY. 2219in this same rough home laboratory about the same time, namely,the Easter vacation of 1856. In view of the widespread notionthat discoveries of industrial value are invariably the result ofresearches directed solely towards this practical end, it may beof interest to place once again upon record the statement that thefirst coal-tar colouring matter was discovered by Perkin as theoutcome of as distinct a piece of pure scientific research as waspossible in the light of the theoretical conceptions of that period.It must be borne in mind that in 1856 organic chemists hadpractically nothing to guide than in expressing the formulae ofcompounds but the ultimate composition derived from analyticalresults.It is true that the possibility of different substanceshaving the same ultimate composition had, since the time of Wohlerand Berzelius, received recognition among chemists, but these earlyideas concerning isomerism had not yet given birth to those definiteconceptions of chemical structure which at a later period resultedfrom the application of the doctrine of valency.Thus in 1856 itwas scientifically legitimate to set out from the assumption thata natural product might be synthesised if the elements composingit could be brought into combination in the right proportions.Many attempts to produce natural compounds artificially had beenmade on this principle since the fundamental synthesis of ureafrom ammonium cyanate by Wohler in 1828, and although nosuccess in the way of the desired syntheses can be recorded, therecan be no doubt that many indirect results of lasting importance tochemical science were arrived a t in this way. The discovery ofmauve by Perkin is an example of such an indirect result which a tfirst ranked as an industrial success only, and, it may now besaid fortunately, fur a time diverted the energies of its discovererfrom the field of pure science to that of chemical industry.In so far as the discovery of mauve is attributable to scientificas distinguished from purely technical research, it may be pointedout that in accordance with the prevailing belief that a syntheticalproduct, if of the same empirical formula, would prove to beidentical with the natural compoun’d, Hofmann, as far back as 1849,had, as Perkin himself indicates in the Memorial Lecture (Trans.,1896, 69,603), suggested the possibility of synthesising quinine fromnaphthalene, the ground for this suggestion being that the base“ naphthalidine ” ( = naphthylamine) was at that time supposed todiffer from quinine only by the elements of two ‘‘ equivalents ” ofwater, so that if the hydration of the base could by some meanshave been effected, quinine might be expected to be the result( ‘ I Reports of the Royal College of Chemistry,” 1849, Introduction,P a 61).Ideas of this order were prevalent in the chemical worl2220 OBITUARY.about the middle of the nineteenth century, and Perkin has toldus how, imbued with these notions, he was “ambitious enough towish to work on this subject of the artificial formation of naturalcompounds ” (Hofmann Memorial Lecture, Zoc. cit.). Followingthe method then in vogue, he came to the conclusion that the mostlikely generator of quinine would be allyltoluidine, since two“ equivalents ” of this compound, by taking up oxygen and losinghydrogen (in the form of water), would give a substance of theformula of quinine:2C,oH,,N + 30 C2oH2,N2O, + H2O.The experiment was tried, a sale of allyltoluidine being oxidisedby potassium dichromate, but, instead of quinine, a (( dirty reddish-brown precipitate ” was obtained, This result, negative in onesense, still appeared of sufficient interest to the young investigatorto be worth following up, and he repeated the experiment witha salt of the simpler base aniline, obtaining in this case a verydark-coloured precipitate, which, on further examination, was foundto be a colouring matter possessed of dyeing properties.Thus wasdiscovered the first of the coal-tar dyes, the subsequent and rapiddevelopment of which, from a laboratory curiosity into a technicalproduct, brings into strong prominence the extraordinary combina-tion of energy, skill, and resourcefulness inherent in this youth,who a t the time was not much over seventeen years of age.Thevery fact of his continuing the investigation of what the majorityof contemporary chemists would have discarded as an unpromising“ Schmier,” may be taken as an indication of his originality, forit must be remembered that, a t that time, the main object ofresearch in organic chemistry was to obtain definite crystallinecompounds, and the formation of non-crystalline, and especiallyof coloured, amorphous products was considered as an indicationof the failure of a reaction. This view of research method wasparticularly upheld in Hofmann’s laboratory, and, as has fre-quently been pointed out by many critics of the too-rigid enforce-ment of this method, there can be no doubt that the discoveryof the coal-tar dyes was considerably retarded by the liberal useof animal charcoal as a decolorising material.Hofmann himself,for example, is well known to have prepared rosaniline in 1858incidentally as a by-product in the course of his study of the reactionbetween carbon tetrachloride and aniline, although, so far as con-cerned the main objects of his research, he regarded it as animpurity. To Perkin must be given the credit of having thecourage to break through the traditional dislike of investigatingcoloured, resinous-looking products, an achievement which, in thOBITUARY.2221case of mauve, may, perhaps, be attributed to that rare omb bin at ionof the scientific and artistic faculties which he was known to possess.The fact that his new product on purification gave a compoundwhich a t that time would be considered as imparting a beautifulshade of colour to fabrics when used as a dye, may fairly beclaimed to have appealed to his aesthetic sense, and to have luredhim on with his research, independently, a t first, of immediatepractical developments. Professor A. H. Church, his colleague andco-worker, has supplied the following statement with respect tothis period of his career:“It was, I think, in October, 1853, that William Henry Perkinentered the Royal College of Chemistry, and was assigned the nextbench to mine in the front of the building, looking out upon thestreet.One year before this date I had gone through my novitiate,and had been awarded what was called a scholarship-still receiv-ing instruction and attending the lectures, but paying no fees.Indeed, I had been carrying out from time to time some minorresearches suggested by Dr. Hofmann. Perkin and I soon foundwe had several interests in common. We were both given topainting, and were amateur sketchers. I was introduced to hishome at King David’s Fort, and we began painting a picturetogether. This must have been soon after the Royal AcademyExhibition of 1854, when I had a picture hung. I was nearly fouryears Perkin’s senior, but was soon impressed by his mental activityand his devotion to work.‘‘ I remember the epoch-making experiment in which mauve wasfirst discovered.He repeated it in my presence for my particularbenefit. I distinctly recollect strongly urging him to patent hisinvention. Shortly after this date I left the college for Oxford,but Perkin and I were in frequent communication, and sometimesworked together after I had taken my degree in 1860, and until myappointment in 1863 to the chair of chemistry a t the Royal Agri-cultural College.“During the year 1855, and the spring of 1856, Perkin and Iwere no longer working in the same laboratory, for I had beengiven a bench in the professor’s private laboratory on the groundfloor, and was engaged in carrying out some of his most importantresearches of that period.”The history of the technical development of this discovery hasbeen narrated by Perkin in his Hofmann Memorial Lecture of1896, and it is only necessary to go through that account in orderto realise the magnitude of his achievement.A youth of abouteighteen, undaunted by the discouragement of his professor, thegreatest living master of organic chemistry, had determined t2222 OBITUARY.work out his discovery on a manufacturing scale, with no experienceor training as a manufacturer himself, and with no precedent toguide him in the construction of plant for carrying on operations,which had, up to that time, never been conducted on more than alaboratory scale. Hofmann’s opposition to his young assistant’sleaving the paths of pure science, and embarking upon what, nodoubt, appeared to his maturer judgment a most risky undertaking,is quite understandable, and fully justifiable. Everything in con-nexion with the new industry had to be worked out from the verybeginning-the methods for the isolation and preparation of theraw materials, as well as the manufacture of the new dyestuff,and the prejudices of the dyers and printers against innovationhad also to be overcome. With all this responsibility ahead ofhim, Perkin, encouraged, no doubt, by the favourable report con-cerning the dyeing qualities of his new product furnished by certainpractical dyers, and especially by Messrs.Pullar, of Perth, formallyresigned his position a t the Royal College of Chemistry, and boldlyentered upon his career as an industrial chemist.He has touch-ingly placed upon record his indebtedness to his father, who,although, as already stated, a t first inclined to be adverse to histaking to chemistry as an occupation, had, a t the time of thediscovery of mauve, so much confidence in his son’s ability that hethrew in his lot with the new venture, and devoted the greaterpart of his life’s savings to the building of a factory, for which asite had been secured a t Greenford Green, near Sudbury, at whichlatter place Perkin afterwards resided. His elder brother,*Thomas D. Perkin, who, during the summer vacation of 1856, hadassisted in making mauve in the laboratory on a somewhat largerscale, in order to supply specimens for testing by the dyers, alsojoined in the undertaking.A patent was secured (No. 1984,August 26th, 1856), and the building of the works commenced inJune, 1857, and six months later the new dyestuff, under the nameof “ Aniline Purple,” or “ Tyrian Purple,” was being manufacturedin sufficient quantity to supply one of the London silk dyers.tThe subsequent development of this precursor of the coal-tar dyesforms an interesting and, indeed, a romantic chapter in the historyof applied science. Its reputation spread rapidly; from silk dyeingits application was extended to cotton dyeing and to calico printing,and a t every stage of a career which may be fairly described astriumphant, the master hand of William Henry Perkin can bedetected.Now we find him working out processes for the manu-* Born 1831, died 1891.1- The name “ Mauve,” by which it was afterwards generally known, was givento the dyestuff in FrauceOBITUARY. 2223facture of nitrobenzene and aniline on a scale never beforeattempted, then we learn of his introducing improvements intothe methods of silk dyeing on the large scale, and of his discoveringsuitable mordants for enabling the dyestuff to be applied to cottonfibre both by dyers and calico printers. Well may it be said inPerkin’s own words :I n spite of these splendid pioneering efforts, however, it seemsthat the recognition of the value of the product a t first took placebut slowly in this country, and it was not until it had been takenup in France that its merits for tinctorial purposes became generallyrecognised.In a private communication addressed to the writerof this notice on April 3rd, 1906, Perkin states: “The value ofthe mauve was first realised in France, in 1859. English andScotch calico printers did not show any interest in it until itappeared in French patterns, although some of them had printedcloth for me with that colour.” The ‘‘ SocidtB Industrielle de Mul-house,” it may be added, awarded him a silver medal for his dis-covery in 1859, and afterwards a gold medal.? It is of interest tonote also that a paper was read by him at the Leeds meeting of theBritish Association in 1858, under the title, “ On the Purple Dyeobtained from Coal T a r ” (Reports, 1858, p.SS), when specimensof the substance and fabrics coloured by it were exhibited. Nomore appropriate place than this town, in the centre of one of thechief seats of the tinctorial industry in Great Britain, couldpossibly have been selected for bringing the discovery under thenotice of chemists and technologists. Sir John Herschel wasPresident of the Chemical Section, and, by a remarkable coincidence,in the opening address of the President of the Association, Pro-fessor (afterwards Sir Richard) Owen, there occur the followingpassages ci propos of the general progress of organic chemicalsynthesis : “ To the power which mankind may ultimately exercisethrough the light of synthesis, who may presume to set limits? . . .Already, natural processes can be more economically replaced byartificial ones in the formation of a few organic compounds.. . . Itis impossible to foresee the extent to which chemistry may ulti-mately, in the production of things needful, supersede the presentvital agencies of nature.” This pronouncement a t the meetingwhen the first of the coal-tar colouring matters was exhibited-a“ I n fact, it was all pioneering work.” ** Speech a t the Jubilee Banquet in New York, October 6, 1906. See also theHofniann Memorial Lecture, Zuc. cit., p. 609.j. The impetus given to the new colouring matter through French influence wasalso referred to by Perkin in his reply t o Professor Haller at the Jubilee Meeting in1906 (Report, p. 11) ; see also Journ. Xocisty of Dyers and Colourists, April, 1907,p.1062224 OBITUARY.discovery which laid the foundations of an industry which nowsupplies as tar products the colouring matters of madder andindigo-may be looked upon as prophetic.The influence of this inaugural work by Perkin upon the sub-sequent history of the industry is too well known to need recapitula-tion. It is only necessary to point out that the introduction ofaniline-at that time a mixture of homologues-into the marketsoon led other investigators to enter the field of colour chemistry,and new dyestuffs made their appearance in rapid succession, themost noteworthy after mauve being magenta, which was discoveredas a technical product in 1859 by Verguin, and manufactured fora short period by his process* by the firm of Renard Frhres etFranc, of Lyons.I n fact, the stream of competition in the courseof a few years turned against the original mauve, the demand forwhich gradually fell off as other colouring matters of a similaror brighter hue were introduced. The consideration of chiefinterest in connexion with Perkin’s successful venture into thedomain of applied chemistry is, however, from the present pointof view, the influence which his work in this field exerted uponpure science. That it has exerted an enormous influence is nowgenerally recognised, and a critical examination of the course ofdevelopment of the industry will show that the gain by chemicalscience has been of a twofold character--a direct and an indirectgain.In the first place, as the direct result of introducing into com-merce in large quantities organic ohemical products which hadbefore been but laboratory curiosities, a great stimulus was givento research, and chemical workers of the highest repute took upthe investigation of the new products, both raw materials andcolouring matters. As an indirect consequence, also, many newcompounds of industrial value were discovered incidentally in thecourse of manufacturing operations conducted on the large scale,and these, with the colouring matters which from time to timeappeared as novelties, furnished endless subject matter for research,the results so obtained often proving of the greatest scientific‘importance. Not the least interesting circumstance in connexionwith this chapter of chemical history is the fact that Hofmannhimself soon entered the field of tinctorial chemistry, to which hemade many contributions of the utmost value both from thescientific and technological point of view.He was, in fact, formany years recognised as the leading scientific authority on coal-tar colouring matters, and many of his discoveries were practically* By heating crude aniline (i.e., aniline containing toluidine) with stannicchlorideOBITUARY. 2225utilised in the factories. Then, again, there can be no doubt thatthe success of the new industry and the succession of importantscientific discoveries which followed its development attracted largenumbers of students into the chemical schools, and many giftedand active workers were by this means drawn as recruits into theranks of scientific chemists.It is, indeed, not going too far to saythat the discovery of the coal-tar colouring matters brought aboutsuch a revival in the study of organic chemistry, and particularlyin that of the so-called “aromatic” series, that when the epoch-making conception concerning the constitution of these compoundshad been given to the world by Kekul6 in 1865, the rapid extensionof the “benzene theory” was enormously facilitated by theresources which the new industry had given to pure science. I f itis true that the new theory materially advanced the cause of theindustry, it is no less true that the industry contributed to theadvancement of the theory, the verification of which might havebeen delayed for a generation or more without such support.Nobetter illustration of the interdependence of science and industryhas ever been given to the world than this particular example ofthe action and reaction between theoretical and applied chemistry.*The success of the new industry not only reacted upon the scienceof chemistry in the way indicated, but it may be claimed that,contrary to Hofmann’s forebodings, it proved in the long runbeneficial in every may to Perkin himself, and through him to thatscience to which he devoted his life. He has told us that when,being fully convinced of the value of mauve, he announced hisintention of leaving the College of Chemistry and taking up themanufacture of the new colouring matter, he determined not toallow the manufacturing career to check his research work, andnobly did he adhere to his resolution.His published papers showthat in spite of all his technical work the stream of original in-vestigation was never allowed to stagnate. Only a year after thestarting of the Greenford works, namely, in 1858, in conjunctionwith Duppa, he discovered that aminoacetic acid or ‘‘ glycocoll,”a compound which up to that time had only been prepared by the* The consideration of the later important influence upon other branches ofscience arising, often in most indirect and unforeseen ways, from the applications ofcoal-tar products to such subjects as bacteriology, histology, therapeutics, photo-graphy, etc., would swell this notice t o an inordinate extent.Although resultsof incalculable value have been achieved in these fields, Perkin himself is notparticularly identified with any of the lateral developments of his initial pioneeringlabours. References to this aspect of the subject were made in some detail a t theJubilee celebration in 1906. (See the oficial Report published by the MemorialCommittee, and also a paper by Dr. Hugo Schmeitzer in Science, No. 616,October 19, 1906, p. 481.2226 OBITUARY.decomposition of natural products, could be obtained by heatingbromoacetic acid with ammonia.* A general survey of his workduring his connexion with the coal-tar colour industry, which ceasedin 1874, brings out very clearly the double line of thought whichduring that period actuated his research work.Concurrently withthe investigation of the dyestuffs, he carriad on researches in otherdepartments of organic chemistry which had a t that time no rela-tions with tinctorial chemistry. Thus we find that by 1860 he,in conjunction with Duppa, had discovered the relationshipbetween tartaric and fumaric-maleic acid, and had effected thesynthesis of racemic acid from dibromosuccinic acid, a line ofwork which was followed up with signal success (Perkin and Duppa,Annalen, 1860, 115, 105; Quart. Journ. Chem. SOC., 1860, 13, 102;Perkin, Journ. Chem. SOC., 1863, 16, 198; Perkin and Duppa,Annaten, 1864, 129, 373; Perkin, Proc., 1888, 4, 75). About 1867he must have commenced those researches on the action of aceticanhydride upon aromatic aldehydes which led to such importantdevelopments, and culminated in that beautiful method of syn-thesising unsaturated acids now known as the “ Perkin synthesis.”The first paper of this series bore the title, “On the Action ofAcetic Anhydride upon the Hydrides of Salicyl, Ethylsalicyl, &c.”(Journ.Chem. Soc., 1867, 20, 586), and as the outcome of thiswork the synthesis of coumarin, the odorous substance containedin Tonka Bean, etc., was announced the following year (“ On theArtificial Production of Coumarin and Formation of its Homo-logues,” Journ. Chem. Soc., 1868, 21, 53 and 181). The productionof a vegetable perfume from it coal-tar product was thus first madepossible by Perkin, and the continuation of this work, after hisretirement from the industry, led to his celebrhed discovery ofthe synthesis of cinnamic acid from benzaldehyde, an achieve-ment which subsequently, in the hands of Adolf v.Baeyer andH. Caro, made possible the first synthesis of indigo from tar pro-ducts.? It is of interest to note also that while still in the coal-tar colour industry he took part in the discovery of syntheticalmethods for producing glyoxylic acid from dibromoacetic and* Perkin and Duppa, Annulen, 108, 112. This discovery is specially referred to,not only as illustrating Perkin’s extraordinary activity during this busy period,but also because the compound is the type of a large group of amino-acids which oflate years have become of extreme importance owing to their relationship to theproteins, as shown by Einil Fischer and his co-workers.t “ A Preliminary Notice of the Formation of Coumarin, Cinnamic Acid, andother similar Acids,” Chem.News, 1875, 32, 258 ; ‘‘ On the Formation of Coumarinand of Cinnamic and of other Analogous Acids from the Aromatic Aldehydes,”Jmrn. Chern. Xoc., 1877, i, 388OBITUARY. 2227bromoglycollic acids, thus giving the first insight into the con-stitution of glyoxylic acid, a result of considerable significance inview of the important part attributed by many modern chemiststo this acid in the photosynthetic processes going on in growingplants (Perkin and Duppa, Journ. Chem. SOC., 1868, 21, 197).The research work done during Perkin’s colour-making periodwas carried on in a laboratory in a house just outside the Green-ford factory, where also the scientific investigations in connexionwith the colouring matters were conducted, the double line ofwork already indicated being revealed by the papers publishedduring that period.It has not been considered necessary to givea complete list of these papers in the present notice, but it willbe of interest to call attention to the fact that the purely scientificstudy of the colouring matters undertaken at this time centredround his early discoveries. It was in this new laboratory a tGreenford that he and Church continued the investigation of“ azodinaphthyldiamine ” already mentioned, and discovered amethod for resolving this compound by complete reduction, thusintroducing a process which is still the standard one for deter-mining the constitution of azo-compounds, and at the same timeleading to the isolation of the first diamine derived from naphthyl-amine (Jourm.Chenz. Soc., 1865, 18, 173). Nor did he allow hisscientific interest in his first discovered dyestuff to flag, for onepaper on mauve from the purely chemical point of view waspublished during his connexion with the industry and anotherafter his retirement in 1874.*I n 1868 it was shown by Graebe and Liebermann that thecolouring matter of the madder, alizarin, one of the most ancientof vegetable dyestuffs and a substance of immense value for tinc-torial purposes, was a derivative of the coal-tar hydrocarbonanthracene, and not, as had up to that time been believed, aderivative of naphthalene.The synthesis of this compound waseffected by Graebe and Liebermann in that year, and patents forits manufacture from anthracene secured in Germany and in GreatBritain, this being the first instance of a natural vegetable colouringmatter having been produced artificially by a purely chemicalmethod. This discovery had a great influence upon Perkin’s careeras an industrial chemist, and may, indeed, be considered to havemarked a new phase of his activity in this field. There was nc* “On Mauve Or Aniline Purple,” PTOc. Roy. sot., 1863, 12, 713 (abstract) ;186% 139 170 (full paper). ‘‘ On Msuveine and Allied Colouring Xatters,” Trans.,1879, 35, 717. In 1861 he lectured before the Chemical Society on the newcoal-tar colouring matters, on which occasion, he has told us, Faraday was amonghis auditors and eongratulated him nt the end of the lecture2228 OBITUARY.living worker in this country a t that time besides Perkin who socompletely combined in himself all the necessary qualifications fortaking advantage of such a discovery. Imbued with the spirit ofhis early ambition to produce natural compounds synthetically,with more than a decade’s experience as a manufacturer, with theresources of a factory a t his disposal, and, not least, with specialexperience of anthracene as the very substance upon which, a tHofmann’s instigation, he commenced his career in research work,it can readily be understood that Graebe and Liebermann’s resultsshould have appealed to him with special significance.The firstpatented process of the German discoverers was confessedly toocostly to hold out much hope of successful competition with themadder plant, requiring as it did the use of bromine. Perkin atonce realised the importance of cheapening the process by dis-pensing with the use of bromine, and undertook researches withthis object. As a result, the following year (1869) witnessed theintroduction of two new methods for the manufacture of artificialalizarin. I n one of these processes dichloroanthracene was thestarting point, and in the other the suIphonic acid of anthra-quinone, the first being of special value in this country owing tothe difficulty of obtaining a t that time “ fuming ” sulphuric acidin large quantities.The second process, which is the one still inuse, had quite independently been worked out in Germany by Caro,Graebe, and Liebermann, and patented in England practicallysimultaneously with Perkin’s.* The subsequent industrial develop-ment of this brilliant achievement has now become historical;’ theartificial alizarin has completely displaced the natural colouringmatter, and madder growing as an industry has become extinct.It is of interest, as showing the growth of the new industry, toreproduce Perkin’s statement in 1876 :“The quantity of madder grown in all the madder-growingcountries of the world, prior to 1868, was estimated to be 70,000tons per annum, and a t the present time the artificial colour ismanufactured to an extent equivalent to 50,000 tons, or more thantwo-thirds of the quantity grown when its cultivation had reachedits highest point ” (Presidential Address to Section B of the BritishAssociation, Glasgow, 1876, “ Reports,” p.61).The development of this branch of the coal-tar industry in theGreenford Green Factory has also been recorded by Perkin:“Before the end of the year (1869) we had produced 1 ton ofthis colouring matter in the form of paste; in 1870, 40 tons;and in 1871, 220 tons, and so on in increasing quantities year by* The patents are, Oaro, Graebe, and Liebermann, No. 1936, of June 25, 1869,and W. H. Perkin, No. 1948, of June 26, 1869OBITUARY, 2229year . . . up to the end of 1870 the Greenford Green works werethe only ones producing artificial alizarin.German manufacturersthen began to make it, first in small and then in increasing quanti-ties, but until the end of 1873 there was scarcely any competitionwith our colouring matter in this country ” (Hofmann MemorialLecture, Trans., 1896, 69, 632).This brilliant achievement in technology again served to bringout the purely scientific spirit which animated all Perkin’s work.The chemical investigation of anthracene derivatives was carriedon concurrently with the industrial development of the factoryprocess, and also after his retirement, about a dozen papers onthese compounds having been published between 1869 and 1880.The discovery of a practical process for the manufacture of alizarinthus led to the utilisation of another coal-tar hydrocarbonanthracene, which had up to that time been a waste product, andthe methods for isolating and purifying this substance had, as inthe case of benzene, etc., to be worked out in the factory.Allthe difficulties inseparable from large-scale operations with newmaterials were successfully surmounted by Perkin ; the increasingdemand for artificial alizarin taxed all the resources of the factory,and by 1873, when the necessity for introducing enlarged plantbecame imperative, advantage was taken of the opportunity fortransferring $he works to the firm of Brooke, Simpson, and Spiller,the successors to the firm of Simpson, Maule, and Nicholson, whichhad co-operated with Perkin in the early days of the mauve manu-facture.The later history of the works is referred to in the tech-nical portion of this notice.On completion of the sale of the Greenford Green Works in 1874,Perkin retired after eighteen years’ connexion with the industry.In view of the enormous development of this branch of manufac-ture in later times, it is of interest to recall the circumstancealready mentioned that the whole output of the original factory,both in number and quantity of products, would appear quitetrivial in comparison with that of one of the great German factoriesnow in existence-a fact which only serves to emphasise the extra-ordinary fertility of the seed originally planted by Perkin, whoselabours as a technologist led, as a practical issue, to the acquisitionof sufficient means to enable him to withdraw altogether from theindustrial side of chemistry at the comparatively early age of 36,while still in the prime of life.By many who have watched thedecadence of the coal-tar colour industry in this country, he has beenblamed for cutting himself so soon adrift from his own offspring.There is no doubt that the life of the industry here would havebeen prolonged if he had kept in touch with it, but it must no2230 OBITUARY.be forgotten that at the time of his retirement he left things ina very flourishing condition. Other factories had developed intosuccessful establishments, and Great Britain was well to the frontin this branch of manufacture. Neither Perkin nor his contem-poraries could have foreseen in 1874 that our position would laterbe so successfully assailed by foreign competitors. To a man withhis most moderate personal requirements, and with the ardour ofthe original investigator unquenched, the means of retirement-modest enough as compared with the fortunes accumulated bymodern successful manufacturers-simply meant the opportunityof giving practical effect to that resolution concerning his missionas a research chemist which he had formed as a youth, which hehad adhered to throughout his industrial career, and which it washis desire t o .carry out untrammelled by business distractionsthroughout the remainder of his working period.* Industry may,and no doubt did, lose by his decision, but science gained by thirtyyears of his activity from the period of his retirement down,practically, to the end of his life.The contributions to chemical science which proceeded fromPerkin’s laboratory after 1874 have, to some extent, been referredto.After his connexion with the Greenford Green Factory hadterminated, he had a new house built at Sudbury, converting tbeadjacent house in which he had previously resided into a labora-tory, and it was here that from 1875 he continued his investigationsof those colouring matters with which his manufacturing experiencehad brought him into contact, such as mauveine, the anthracenederivatives, etc. In 1881 he first drew attention to a certain physicalproperty of some of the compounds which he had prepared,namely, their magnetic rotatory power, which observation divertedhis activity into an entirely new channel.On further developmentin his hands this method became a powerful weapon in dealingwith questions of chemical constitutions, and the remainder of hislife was more or less devoted to its elaboration. As Perkin’s namemust always be intimately associated with this chapter of physicalchemistry, it will be of interest to place upon record his earliestobservation. I n a paper entitled “ On the Isomeric Acids obtainedfrom Coumarin and the Ethers of Hydride of Salicyl” (Trans.,1881, 39, 409), he describes the methyl ether of “ a-methylorthoxy-phenylacrylic acid,” which he had first prepared in 1877, and inthis paper occurs the statement:* “ The great importance of original research has been one of the things I havebeen advocating from the commencenient of my chemical career, in season and outof season.”-From a speech by Perkin a t the Jubilee Banquet in London, onJuly 26, 1906OBITUARY.9231‘‘ L\ determinatiou of its uiaguetic rotary power gave for theyellow ray 2.334, water being taken as 1. Test observations weremade a t the same time with water and carbon bisulphide, and gaveresults very nearly identical with those obtained by Becquerel ”(,4nn. Chim. Phys., 1877, [v], 12, 22; loc. cit., p. 411).It is not difficult to follow, a t least conjecturally, the mentalprocess by which Perkin was enabled to foresee that this propertymight be utilised for investigating the constitution or structureof chemical molecules, a subject which even a t that time wasbeginning to bristle with difficulties and ambiguous results whenhandled by purely chemical methods.He had for precedent thesuccess which had attended the study of other optical properties oforganic compounds, such as ordinary (not induced) rotatory power,dispersion, refractivity, etc., and he threw himself seriously intothis line of work, armed with the skill of an accomplished experi-menter, and with that true instinct as a chemist which enabledhim to deal with his materials in such a manner that his resultsat once commanded complete confidence, in spite of the circum-stance that this kind of work was for him a totally new departure.In 1882 he published a preliminary paper on the application of thismethod, and a complete account in 1884.”From that time onwards the Chemical Society received andpublished constant instalments of his work, the fertility of themethod being shown, not only by the long list of papers publishedin his own name, but also by the numerous observations recordedin the papers of other workers, to whose service his apparatus andhis observational powers were frequently and ungrudgingly devoted.His achievements in this field are well summarised in a letter fromProfessor J.W. Briihl, of Heidelberg, himself one of the pioneersin the application of optical methods for the determination ofchemical constitution, sent to the writer of this notice for trans-mission to Perkin on the occasion of the Jubilee celebration in1906 : “ Availing yourself of the marvellous discovery of your greatcounkryman, Michael Faraday, you undertook to investigate therelations between the chemical composition of bodies and theirmagnetic circular polarisation-that is to say, one of the generalproperties of all matter.Before you began work there was little,almost nothing, known of this subject, certainly nothing of practical* ‘‘ On Rotatory Polarisation by Chemical Substances under Magnetic Influence,”Trans., 1882, 41, 330. “On the Magnetic Rotary Polarisation of Compoundsin Relation to their Chemical Constitution ; with Observations on the Preparationand Relative Densities of the Bodies examined,” ibid., 1884, 45, 421. This lastpaper, which occupies 60 pages of the volunie, contains a full description of theapparatus and method of observation.VOL.XClII. 7 2232 OBITUARY.use to the chemist. You created a new braricli of scicllce, tauglltus how, from the magnetic rotation, conclusions can be drawn asto the chemical structure of bodies, and showed that the magneticrotation allows us to draw comprehensive and certain conclusionsas to the chemical constitution of substances, just as we may fromanother general physical property, viz., refraction and dispersion.And by showing that both these physical methods of investigationlead to completely harmonious results, you did essential serviceto both the branches of study, and also to chemistry, which theyare destined to serve.”This last statement by Bruhl, which relates to one of the mostinteresting results of the study of magnetic rotation, has referenceto a development of Perkin’s work which brought him into associa-tion with the late John Hall Gladstone, the pioneer and leadingauthority in this country a t that time on the relations betweenrefractive and dispersive power and chemical constitution.Thecorrespondence between the results arrived at by these two opticalmethods forms the subject of a joint paper by Gladstone and Perkinpublished in 1889.* Eighteen years later Perkin’s last paper, towhich attaches the melancholy interest that it was read before theChemical Society on April 18th, 1907, only a few months beforehis death, bears the title : “ The Magnetic Rotation of Hexatriene,CH,:CH*CH:CH*CH:CH,, and its Relationship to Benzene andother Aromatic Compounds : also its Refractive Power ” (Trans.,1907, 91, 806).Although, as already stated, the latter part of Perkin’s life wasdevoted mainly to his work on magnetic rotation, he published alsoduring this period a few papers relating to other subjects, amongwhich perhaps the most notable is his contribution to the subjectof low temperature combustion, entitled ‘( Some Observations onthe Luminous Incomplete Combustion of Ether and other OrganicBodies” (Trans., 1882, 41, 363).The writer of this notice wellremembers the keen interest with which the experiments were fol-lowed in the darkened meeting-room of the Chemical Society a tBurlington House when this paper was read. In view of the* “ On the Correspondence between the Magnetic Rotation and the Refractionand Dispersion of Light by Compounds containing Nitrogen,” Trans., 1889, 55,750.The correspondence between Perkin and Gladstone during this period hasbeen placed a t the disposal of the writer by Miss Gladstone. The letters areinterestiog as showing the extreme conscientiousness in every detail with whichPerkin carried out his work. The results aro embodied in the above paper, and afurther contribution by Perkin was published two years later, unddr the title, “TheRefractive Power of certain Organic Compounds a t different Temperatures,” Proc.,1891, 7, 115. In his later papers he dealt with refractivity as well as magneticrotation (Trans., 1896, 69, 1 ; ibid., 1900, 77, 267, ctc.)OBITUARY.modern revival ill the scieiitific study 01 the chemical mCchanisn1of combustion, it is of importance that Perkin’s observations shouldnot be allowed to fall into oblivion.It has been claimed in a previous part of this notice that Perkin’sentry into the domain of chemical industry was no real loss, butactually a gain to pure science.His published papers, consideredin detail, show that his contributions to ( ( colour chemistry ” are faroutweighed by his work in other fields. In fact, the extension andcompletion of the investigation of the dyestuffs of his industrialperiod is due to other workers, and Perkin’s achievements in thisdirection are, on the whole, more of a technological than of anabstract scientific character, the constitution of most of the colour-ing matters having been subsequently worked out chiefly by thegroup of brilliant Continental investigators attracted by the successof the new industry, and stimulated by the rapid development inchemical theory then going on in Germany.* But although Perkinhas overshadowed his own achievements as a ‘(colour chemist ’’ byhis subsequent career, the whole success of his life, and the inestim-able gain which chemical science has derived from his labours, mustbe directly attributed to his industrial undertakings, for it maysafely be asserted that had he not been rendered independent bythe success of the Greenford Green Factory, he would never havefound an opportunity for that continuous devotion to researchwhich is so essential for the achievement of results of lasting value.Having determined in early life t o adopt chemistry as a career, hewould of necessity have been compelled to become either a manu-facturer or to have entered an educational establishment.In theformer capacity he would, no doubt, have succeeded, but in anysubordinate post he might have spent long years before acquiringindependence. As a teacher his prospects of making a position a tthe time of his connexion with the Royal College of Chemistry weremost slender. There were but very few posts which he couldhave filled; originality its an investigator was of minor importanceas a qualification for the teaching profession, and the stamp ofuniversity training was generally considered absolutely essential forholding anyb important appointment in that profession.Perkinin any minor teaching post would have been lost to science.Happily the comparatively rapid financial success of his early dis-coveries placed him in that category which comprises such namesas Cavendish, Herschel, Joule, Murchison, Spottiswoode, Lyell, and* For example, the constitution of msuveine was established broadly by0. Fischer and Hepp about 1890 ; that of the colouring matters of the rosanilinegroup (magenta, methyl-violet, etc.), by E. and 0. Fischer, about 1878, and that ofaafranine about 1883 by Nietzki.7 1 2234 ORITUARY.Darwin-rcpreseutatives of that band of iudependent devotees ofscience who have more than any other class helped to maintain theprestige of this country.Truly may it be said that to a man ofhis temperament success as a manufacturer meant salvation as anoriginal worker.Reviewing Perkin’s scientific work as a whole, its chief charac-teristic is its solidity. His mind was not of that order whichreadily entered into the region of speculation; he was a typicalrepresentative of that school of chemists to whom the conscientiousaccuracy of experimental facts is of primary importance-theschool which has laid those solid foundations of chemical scienceupon which all superstructures of theory must be erected. It isfor this reason that it may be predicted with certainty that hiswork will live in the history of modern chemistry whatever changesin theoretical conceptions the future may have in store. He himselfwitnessed with the progress of the science radical changes in theviews of chemists concerning the mechanism of the reactions orthe nature of the compounds which he had discovered.With truephilosophic spirit he accepted the evidence of other workers andwelcomed the legitimate development of his own discoveries.Whatever modification of theory may have been rendered neces-sary by the accumulated labours of the great and ever-growingarmy of investigators which he lived to see following the trackswhich he had been the first to tread, it may be safely assertedthat his own early footprints have been, and always will be,ineffaceable.Perkin was by disposition a man of extreme modesty and of amost retiring nature.His devotion to science and the domesticityof his character accounted so completely for his time that, beyondparticipating in the administrative work of the scientific societieswith which he was connected, he took but little part in extraneousaffairs. He was not particularly of a business turn of mind inthe commercial sense, and during his industrial career his brotherThomas was the chief man of business connected with the factory.One line of work distinct from his purely scientific occupations is,however, worthy of special record, because it enabled him to exertsome influence in the cause of technical and scientih education.His family had for a long period been connected with the Leather-sellers’ Company, and through this connexion he was enabled topromote the cause of chemical research and also to become, asthe representative of his Company, a member of the governingbody of the City and Guilds of London Institute, whose meetingshe attended with considerable regularity, although, unless speciallyappealed to,,he seldom took part in the discussions at the CounciOBI’l’UAHY. 2235table.But his influence in the City of London, although un-obtrusive, was of a most beneficial character, and every movementfor’ the promotion of science and of scientific education was certainto receive his support. His special knowledge of the requirementsof the chemical technolog& and his sympathy with the teachingstaffs have contributed in no small degree to promote the causeof sound chemical education in London through the City andGuilds Institute.As an illustration of the modesty of hischaracter, it may be of interest to relate that many of his col-leagues in the City were unaware, until the Jubilee of 1906, thatthe William Perkin who sat a t their meetings was the same manwho, half a century before, had laid the foundations of a greatindustry. The‘ following details concerning his connexion with theLeathersellers have been supplied by the late Mr. W. ArnoldHepburn, the Clerk to the Company:“William Henry Perkin, son of George Fowler Perkin, wasmade free by patrimony, November 13th, 1861.“ George Fowler Perkin, son of Thomas Perkin, wits made freeby patrimony, February 4th, 1829.“ Thomas Perkin, apprenticed to Isaac Roberts, March 16th,1772, was made free by servitude, July 7th, 1790.“ William Henry Perkin served the office of Steward, 1881-2;4th Warden, 1885-6 ; second Warden, 1895-6 ; Master,“During the Mastership of Dr.Perkin in 1896 the Company,a t his instance, resolved to found a Research Fellowshipin Chemistry as applied to Manufactures, tenable a t theCentral Technical College of the City and Guilds Institute,and to grant 3150 a year in support thereof.”1896-7.A portrait of Perkin in his robe as LL.D. of the University ofSt. Andrews, painted by Henry Grant in 1898, is on the walla t the Leathersellers’ Hall in St. Helen’s Place,Although his single-minded devotion to his researches and hisretiring nature caused Perkin to remain in comparative obscurityfrom the point of view of the general public, his real worth waswell known to, and received frequent recognition from, hisscientific colleagues.I n this respect his history is that o€ themajority of active workers in the field of science in this countrywho do not wield the pen as Zittkratezm, or whose achievements arenot of a sufficiently startling kind to create public notoriety. Withthe passing of the generation which witnessed the interest arousedby the discovery of mauve, and which was fanned into temporaryexcitement by the sensational accounts circulated by the news2236 OBITUARY.papers of the period, the memory of Perkin faded from the publicmind. To most of his fellow countrymen the memorable inter-national gathering in London in 1906 came as a revelation thatthey could claim as their compatriot the man whom all the nationshad sent their representatives to honour as an individual, and incelebration of the fiftieth anniversary of the discovery of the firstof the synthetic dyestuffs.Perkin was elected into the Royal Society in 1866; he servedon the Council in 1879-81, and again in 1892-94. I n 1893-94 hewas made one of the Vice-presidents.He joined the ChemicalSociety in 1856, served on the Council in 1861-62, and in 1868-69;was Secretary from 1869 to 1883, and President from 1883 to1885. By way of academic distinctions he received the degree ofPh.D. from the University of Wurzburg in 1882; the degree ofLL.D. from the University of St. Andrews in 1891; and wasmade a D.Sc.of Victoria University in 1904. I n connexion withthe Jubilee of 1906, the University of Heidelberg conferred uponhim the degree of Ph.D., the Munich Technical High School awardedhim the diploma of Dr. Ing., and the same year the Universitiesof Oxford and Leeds gave him the degree of D.Sc. During hissubsequent visit to America in the autumn of 1906, in connexionwith the celebrations organised in that country, he received thedegree of D.Sc. from Columbia University, and LL.D. from theJohns Hopkins University, of Baltimore, the latter degree havingbeen most appropriately conferred by his chemical colleague,President I r a Remsen.He was President of the Society of Chemical Industry in1884-85, a t the time of his death was President of the Society ofDyers and Colourists,* and had recently accepted office as Presidentof the Faraday Society.I n 1884 he was made an Honorary ForeignMember of the German Chemical Society. Following the earlyrecognition of his technological work by the ‘( Soci6t6 Industriellede Mulhouse,” already referred to, he received from the RoyalSociety a Royal Medal in 1879, and the Davy Medal in 1889; fromthe Chemical Sqciety the Longstaff Medal in 1888; from theSociety of Arts the Albert Medal in 1890; from the Institutionof Gas Engineers the Birmingham Medal in 1892, and the Gold* In honour of the founder of the industry this Society has established a PerkinMedal ‘ I for inventions of striking scientific or industrial merit, applicable to, orconnected with, the tinctorial industries.” Perkin’s last official act in connexionwith this Society was t o accompany a deputation to the Dyers’ Company asking thelatter to contribute towards the foundation of a prize for the encouragement ofresearch in tinctorial chemistry.The Arnerican Memorial Committee also foundedrz Perlrin medal for American rhemists i n 1906 in ronncsioil with their. ,TnhileeCelebratioii in New T o OBITUARY. 2237Medal of the Society of Chemical Industry in 1898. A t the JubileeCelebration in 1906, Professor Emil Fischer, on behalf of theGerman Chemical Society, presented him with the Hofmann Medal,and Professor Haller, on behalf of the Chemical Society of Paris,with the Lavoisier Medal.The influence which Perkin has exerted upon this generation isnot to be measured solely by his achievements in pure and appliedchemistry.His life was noble in its simplicity, and his single-minded devotion to his work, combined with a character known tobe religious in the highest and best sense of the term, will bequeathto posterity an enduring example of humility in the face of successwhich would have marred many men of smaller moral calibre. Thefinancial success of his early manufacturing experience was turnedto account simply as a means of advancing science, and no distinc-tion which he ever gained throughout a career which culminatedin 1906, when the King conferred upon him the honour of Enight-hood, and when the nations of the world assembled to render himhomage, had the slightest influence upon the modesty and gentlenessof his disposition.It was his personality that caused him to berevered in his domestic circle, and to be beloved by all who enjoyedthe privilege of his friendship. Two of the addresses presented a tthe Jubilee meeting in 1906 give striking expression to theuniversal esteem in which he was held as a man:‘ I But however highly your technical achievements be rated, thosewho have been intimately associated with you must feel that theexample which you have set by your rectitude, as well as by yourmodesty and sincerity of purpose, is of chiefest value.” (From theaddress presented by the Chemical Society.)“You have given to science the allegiance of a noble life, andyou have not allowed the seductions of wealth to abate the loyaltyof your devotion to truth and knowledge.This is an examplefor which the age owes you unstinted thanks. . . . Amid thesevaried activities it is pleasant to know that you have cultivated thefull humanity of life. Music and a r t have found in you a devoteddisciple, and in the family and social relationship of life you haveshown that science gives a truer interpretation of, and a deepermeaning to, all that is sacred and good in the heart of man.” (Fromthe address presented by the Society of Dyers and Colourists.)Perkin was twice married, his first wife being a daughter of thelate Mr. John Lisset; some years after her death he married thedaughter of Mr. Herman Mollwo. Lady Perkin, three sons, allof whom have made their mark as chemists, and four daughterssurvive.Two of his sons, William Henry and Arthur George, wereelected into the Royal Society in 1890 and 1906 respectively, an223s OBITUARY.it was always a source of great satisfaction to him to know thatall his sons were following in his footsteps. I n his general modeof life Perkin was a man of extreme frugality, robust and activeto the last. To one of his retiring habits the strain accompanyingthe Jubilee celebrations in 1906 and the subsequent ordeal of hisAmerican tour must have been considerable, but he bore all theexcitement and fatigue without the least indication of discomfort.Literally he died in harness; a few months previously he hadread his last paper before the Chemical Society, and he waslooking forward to being able to resume his research work quietlyand uninterruptedly after the distractions of 1906.The illnesswhich brought his noble and useful life to an end, which, in viewof his activity, cannot but be regarded as premature, did not a tfirst reveal any serious symptoms. The writer of this notice waswith him a few hours before his death, and although he complainedof suffering pain he spoke hopefully of his condition and anticipatedbeing soon able to leave his room. The illness proved, however,to be more serious than he or his family were aware of; a suddenchange for the worse occurred, and on July 14th, 1907, he passedaway in perfect peace and in the full tide of well-won honour.TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF PERKIN’S DISCOVERY OF MAUVE.In dealing with the technical development of Perkin’s discoveryit is of interest to consider in the first place the state of affairswith respect to the raw materials required for the manufactureof mauve.These were benzene, nitrobenzene, and aniline.Benzene was discovered by Michael Faradag, in 1825, as a com-ponent of the liquid obtained by the compression of oil-gas. Twentyyears later Hofmann found this hydrocarbon in coal-tar, andproved its presence by preparing from it nitrobenzene and aniline,the latter being identified by the usual tests. The occurrence ofbenzene in coal-tar was thus known in 1845, and in 1848 one ofHofmann’s brilliant young students a t the Royal College ofChemistry, Charles Blachford Mansfield, a t the instigation of hisillustrious master, undertook a systematic study of coal-tar, witha view to the isolation and identification more especially of the“neutral liquid oils,” of which he tells us in his paper publishedby the Chemical Society in 1849 we had a t that time “no preciseinformation.” When Mansfield took up this work, a few definitecompounds were known to exist in this tar, notably naphthalene,which had been isolated by Garden in 1820, and certain acid andbasic substances, such as phenol (carbolic acid), aniline (kyanol),quinoline (leucol or leucoline), and pyrrole, all of which had beeOBITUARY.2239isolated by Runge in 1834. Anthracene, under the name of ‘( para-naphthaline,” was isolated by Dumas and Laurent in 1833, althoughit is now known that their original analysis, which assigned to thishydrocarbon 15 atoms of carbon, was erroneous.Chrysene andpyrene had also been indicated, but only superficially studied byLaurent in 1837. To the basic constituents,picoline was added in1846 by Anderson.Such was the state of knowledge when Hofmann set Mansfieldto work upon the coal-tar hydrocarbons. The paper embodyinghis results is entitled, “ Researches on Coal Tar. Part I.,” * and now,nearly sixty years after its publication, it can still be read withinterest and profit, I t s contents have become historic in connexionwith the colour industry, and must rank with Runge’s celebratedpapers of 1834 (Pogg. Annalen, 31, 65, 513; 32, 308, 328) amongthe most important contributions to tar chemistry that precededthe foundation of that industry.The still devised by Mansfieldfor fractionally distilling the tar oils embodied the (( reflux ”principle of our modern rectifying columns. I n the way of definiteproducts he isolated and characterised benzene with considerableprecision; he found that it could be purified by fractional dis-tillation and by crystallisation a t a low temperature. It is ofinterest to note in passing that the analysis of the hydrocarbon wasmade for him by Edward Chambers Nicholson, another ofHofmann’s pupils, who a t a later period played a very conspicuouspart in connexion with the coal-tar colour industry of this country.Of the higher boiling-point hydrocarbons, he also isolated tolueneand two of the higher homologues, which he was inclined to identifywith cumene and cymene respectively.It is now known that thefraction which he considered to be cumene was xylene, and it isvery doubtful whether cymene is contained in coal-tar a t all. Therecan be no doubt that he had not individual compounds to dealwith in the case of these higher homologues, and it was evidentlyhis intention to have continued the investigation in this direction,as the paper is entitled “ P a r t I.”Unfortunately, the author never lived to complete his work.A few years after the publication of this first paper, he met withan accident through the ignition of some hydrocarbons which hewas distilling, and was burnt so severely that he died in the thirty-fifth year of his age.The late Mr. Robert Holliday informed thewriter some years ago that Mansfield was a t that time carryingon experiments in London with coal-tar hydrocarbons for theirHe gava a general account of hiswork at a Friday evening discourse at the Royal Institution on April 27th, 1849,which was published a9 a brochure entitled, ‘‘ Reuzole : its Nature and Utility.”Quart. Joum. Chem. SOC., 1849,:1, 2442240 OBITUARYfirm in Huddersfield. The fatal accident occurred in a laboratoryin the east part of London on February 17th, 1855.*The total number of definite compounds actually known orsuspected to be contained in coal-tar a t the time of Mansfield’swork was thirteen. Of these four were only conjectured to bepresent, and one, as we know, had been wrongly identified withcumene.What Mansfield did was to show conclusively that benzenecould be obtained if required in any quantity from coal-tar‘‘ naphtha,” that toluene was also a constituent of this naphtha,and that the higher homologues were there if wanted. There wassomething prophetic about this statement, which occurs in the intro-ductory portion of his paper :“ It appears somewhat strange that, in this country, where coal-tar is so exceedingly plentiful, our chemists should have been con-tented with the discovery of naphthaline, and should have allowedothers, less fortunate than ourselves in being able to commandabundance of this almost national production, to informus of the existence a t our feet of vast quantities of aniline, ofparanaphthaline (anthracene), and of other remarkable substances ;and it appears, perhaps, no less singular that we should have failedas yet in applying them, when discovered, to the practical useswhich they will no doubt some day claim.’’Mansfield went further, however, than simply isolating andcharacterising benzene and toluene.I n 1847 he described andpatented a process for preparing nitrobenzene by the action ofstrong nitric acid (1.5 sp. gr.) upon benzene in glass or earthen-ware spiral tubes or other suitable form of apparatus cooled by im-mersion in water. Nitrobenzene must have been prepared in somequantity from coal-tar benzene about that time, since Hofmann,in whose work aniline played a very important part, refers to hishaving made this material by the reduction of nitrobenzene fromthis source. In his introductory remaarks prefacing the volumeof Reports of the Royal College of Chemistry (1849), which volumecomprises Mansfield’s paper, Hofmann says with respect to this :“Nor is the sense of sight the only one which benzole promisesto serve (referring to its use as an illuminant).By treatment withnitric acid the same volatile hydrocarbon yields a fragrant oil, the* Prof. A. H. Church, F.R.S., informs the writer tliat Mansfield was then pre-paring specimens of benzena and its homologues and derivatives for the FrenchInternational Exhibition. The accounts are not inconsistent ; he may have beencarrying on both lines of work, or Read ITollidny’s speciinens may have been in-tended for the Exhibition.Unfortunately, the chief figures in this Inisfortnne haveall passed away. An obituary notice w:ts pnhli.;hed hy the Chemical Society in1555 ; 0i6cwt. JOILTX., 8, 110OBITUARY. 2241odour of which is not to be distinguished from that of Oil ofbitter almonds; so that this perfume may now be procured fromcoal-tar in tons, if required, with the greatest facility and a t atrifling cost.” As a matter of fact, nitrobenzene, under the nameof “essence de mirbane,” had been introduced into commerce byC. Collas, of Paris, as a substitute for bitter almond oil, and waschiefly used for scenting soap, but this limited application of a tarproduct, although interesting historically, was practically of noimportance from the industrial point of view.According to Bolley(Handbuch der -Chemischen Technologic, Vol. V., Part II., p. 257,1870), Collas must be credited with the use of a mixture of nitricand sulphuric acids, the modern process for nitrating benzene,although, for reasons not now obvious, he specifies the use of the(‘ monohydrated ’’ nitric acid.*The “ practical uses ” which Mansfield had predicted for thecoal-tar hydrocarbons began seriously in 185 6 with Perkin’s dis-covery of mauve, and the establishment of the Greenford Greenfactory in 1857 for the manufacture of this first of the coal-tarcolouring matters. It must not be imagined that no use for coal-tar had been found up to that date. ‘Tar distilling as an industrywas carried on extensively, but the products were entirely appliedto what may be described as coarse uses, such as timber preserving,an industry which had been founded by Bethel1 in 1838, and whichled to a large consumption of the “creosoting” oils.The(‘naphtha” also was used as a solvent or for burning in lamps,and the pitch for coating surfaces of wood or metal which requiredprotecting from corroding influences. It is interesting from thehistorical point of view to read in ‘ ( A Journey through Englandand Scotland to the Hebrides in 1784,” by a distinguished Frenchauthor, Faujas de Saint Fond, of which a revised translation hasrecently been given by ‘Sir Archibald Geikie (Glasgow: HughHopkins, 1907), the following statement relating to the use of thecrude tar for coating ships :“The harbour of Leith, when we entered it, was full of vessels,English, Scottish, American, etc.I saw several vessels belongingto Glasgow and Leith which were coated over with bitumen or tar,extracted from pit coal at the manufactories of Lord Dundonald,who has introduced the making and using of this tar on it greatscale in England. The vessels covered with it appeared of a fineshining black, which distinguished them from the others. Severalship-masters from the West Indies whom I questioned assured methat their vessels thus tarred arrived in the best possible condi-* It is ponsi1)lo that he had iu mind the old view of an acid as n comhination of;tu “ acid oxide ” with water, i hat is, nitric acicl as N,05 + H,O2242 OBITUARY.tion, and were free from worm-holes. Navigation is doubtlessmuch indebted to Lord Dundonald, who has continued with thegreatest perseverance to perfect this useful product of coal, andhas done everything to bring it into general use in the country-no easy task when it involves the change of old habits.” (Vol.II.,Even a t the time of Mansfield’s work no coal-tar hydrocarbonhad been utilised as a source of other chemical compounds, tinctorialor otherwise, and he himself, in describing the practical applica-tions of benzene, refers only to its use as a solvent or an illuminant.Perkin’s discovery thus created a demand for this hydrocarbonas a raw material in a new industry on a scale never before contem-plated. Mansfield’s experiments had prepared the way, but therehad been no demand for benzene, and the tar distillers could not a tfirst supply it in quantity or in a sufficient state of purity.It is ofinterest to know that the first supply of this material used byPerkin came froin the Scotch tar distillery of Messrs. Miller andCo., of Glasgow.Then came the difficulties connected with the nitration and thereduction of the nitrobenzene to aniline. Here, again, Mansfieldhad played the part of a pioneer, but his process was impracticable‘on the scale now required. Moreover, it was too costly, for it mustbe borne in mind that the new dye had to compete with the existingvegetable colouring matters, and on June 12th, 1856, Messrs. Pullar,of Perth, who had been testing the dyeing properties of mauve,had reported to Perkin that the discovery was a valuable one pro-vided it did not “make the goods too expensive.’’ It is needlessto say that nitric acid of the strength used by Mansfield wouldwould have been a very costly material in 1856.I n fact, nitricacid of sufficient strength to nitrate benzene could not be obtainedin quantity a t that period, and Perkin had to devise apparatusfor nitrating with a mixture of sulphuric acid and sodium nitrate.His resourcefulness is well revealed by this passage quoted fromhis Hofmann Memorial Lecture in 1896 : “ A t this time neither Inor my friends had seen the inside of a chemical works, andwhatever knowledge I had was obtained from books. This, how-ever, was not so serious a drawback as a t first it might appearto be, as the kind of apparatus required, and the character of theoperations to be performed, were so entirely different from any inuse that there was but little to copy from.“ In commencing this manufacture it was absolutely necessaryto proceed tentatively, as most of the operations required newkinds of apparatus to be devised and tried before more could beordered to carry out the work on any scale.” (Trans., 1896,69, 606.)pp.220-221.OBITUARY. 2243After the luauufacture of mauve had been started, the demandfor the new dyestuff increased to such an extent that the resourcesof the Greenford factory were taxed to their utmost, and theassistance of another firm had to be called in for supplying rawmaterials.That firm was Simpson, Maule, and Nicholson, whosefactory was a t Locksfields, in the south of London. The Nicholsonof the firm was that pupil of Hofmann’s already referred to ashaving been a co-worker with Mansfield, and, under his energeticmanagement, they not only supplied the firm of Perkin and Sonswith some of the raw materials required, but later they alsoentered the colour industry, and in 1865 established the AtlasWorks at Hackney Wick, the firm being transferred in 1868 toMessrs. Brooke, Simpson, and Spiller. Mr. William Spiller,formerly of this latter firm, has told the writer that he well re-members the early stages in the manufacture of nitrobenzene bytheir predecessors at Locksfields, where he was then working inassociation with the late Mr.E. C. Nicholson. The nitration wascarried out in large glass ‘‘ boltheads” arranged in series, as theyhad not then discovered that cast-iron vessels could be used. Thescale of working was quite small as compared with the modern out-put from a large nitrating still, and they experienced the difficultyreferred to by Perkin of obtaining a supply of pure benzene. Theoperation also was somewhat capricious, owing to the want ofuniformity in the quality of the commercial I‘ benzole,” and to theabsence of mechanical stirring. The cheapening of the process bythe introduction of cast-iron stills with mechanical stirring geardid not take place until some time after the manufacture of mauvehad been commenced in 1857.The plant in use was described andfigured by Perkin in his Cantor Lectures, delivered before theSociety of Arts in 1868, and has since been refigured in many workson technology, as it is practically the same in principle as thatnow generally in use.*The next step, the reduction to aniline, had also to be workedout on the manufacturing scale. The laboratory method thengenerally in use was Zinin’s, namely, hydrogen sulphide in presenceof ammonia, a process obviously impracticable on the large scale.The use of metals, such as tin or zinc, in combination with acids,would have been both costly and unmanageable. Fortunately,however, BBchamp, in 1854, had found that iron and acetic acid* A workman, James Underwood, in the employment of Simpson, Maule, andNicholson, at Locksfields, during the early years of the colour industry, alsoremembers this manufacture of nitroberizene in boltheads and the development tocast-iron stills.This last improvement is generally attributed to E. C. Nicholson.A figure of the earliest form of (horizontal) still is given by Perkin in his CantorLectures above referred to2244 OBITUARY.could be used for reducing nitro-compounds, and Pcrkin, who hadbeen f amiliarised with this process in Hofmann’s laboratory,applied it successfully for the manufacture of aniline.* That thiswas a task of considerable difficulty can be readily understood bythose who are familiar with the violence of such “reducing ” pro-cesses, unless properly controlled.It is, in fact, known that atfirst serious attempts were made to extract the minute quantityof aniline contained in the coal-tar oils directly by acid washing-a process which, it is needless to say, had soon to be abandonedon account of its cost and the impure state of the product. In themanufacture of aniline from nitrobenzene, the firm of Simpson,Maule, and Nicholson also co-operated with Perkin and Sons, andMr. William Spiller has given the writer a graphic description oftheir early work a t Locksfields when starting this branch of theindustry. The reduction was carried out in iron vessels with remov-able still-heads, the vessel being a t first uncovered, and the materials,nitrobenzene, iron turnings, and acetic acid, simply stirred up bya rod until the reaction showed signs of starting. The still-headwas then immediately clapped on, and a workman mounted guardwith water-hose ready t o play over the still if the contents gavesigns of boiling too violently.The cost of the acetic acid was aconsiderable item a t that time, and they had to make their ownacid by heating sodium acetate with sulpliuric acid. It was soonfound that hydrochloric acid could be used instead of acetic acid,and the introduction of stills with mechanical stirrers put thisbranch of the manufacture on it sure basis. It is perhaps hardlynecessary to point out that the “ aniline” of that period was amixture of homologues, and very impure from the modern point ofview.And so the manufacture of the first of the “ synthetic dyestuffs ”was started a t Greenford Green towards the end of the year 1857,and the genius of the founder had ample scope for exercise.Let itbe borne in mind that the raw product obtained by oxidisihg crudeaniline with sulphuric acid and potassium dichromate was whatwould now be called a “ resinous mess.” Processes for its purifica-tion had to be devised, and here again the resourcefulness ofPerkin becomes manifest. With that true scientific spirit whichdominated all his work, the investigation of his products andprocesses was always kept going. A t first the crude product wascollected on filters and washed with water to remove excess ofaniline sulphate, then dried and powdered, and extracted with coal-tar “ naphtha ” until free from resinous impurities, then dried* ‘( Had it not been for this discovery the coal-tar colour industry could not havebeen started.”-W. H.Perkin, Hofmann Memorial Lecture, loc. cit., p. 607OBITUARY. 2245agaiu alld extracted with niethylatccl spirit, aid the filtered solutiondistilled until the dyestuff separated out. This method of purifica-tion was afterwards improved and cheapened by the omission ofthe naphtha treatment, as it was found that dilute methylatedspirit extracted the colouring matter directly, and lefk the resinundissolved. The process was finally simplified by boiling out thecolouring matter with water alone, and precipitating with an alkaliso as to obtain the free base, which was then converted into acetatefor use by the dyers.The discovery and manufacture of mauve, with its train ofconsequences, must be regarded as constituting but a portion ofPerkin’s claim to our gratitude.In starting upon this work hehad, against the advice of his illustrious master, Hofrnann, brokenaway from the path of pure science and entered a field in whichhe was a novice. His ‘whole future was bound up with the successof the undertaking, for his father had placed nearly his entirecapital in the venture in order to establish the factory a t Green-ford Green. There was evidently something more to be donebesides placing the new dyestuff on the market. The dyers andprinters had to be convinced of its merits and taught how to useit. This task, by no means a light one, had also to be undertakenby Perkin, who, up t o that time, had never been brought intocontact with the tinctorial industries.It has frequently beenmentioned that Messrs. Pullar, of Perth, were the first to giveencouragement t o the young inventor so far as concerned the dyeingproperties of mauve. At their instigation it was tried for silkdyeing by Thomas Keith, silk dyer, of Bethnal Green, London,and he also reported favourably. But, as is generally the casewith new departures, the step from the experimental to the prac-tical scale was not made without encountering difficulties. It wasfound that on the large scale the dye “took on” unevenly, andcaused a patchy appearance, so that a restraining material had tobe added to the bath. The use of the soap bath for silk dyeingwas the outcome of Perkin’s association with a practical dyer, andEeith’s dyehouse was the first in which mauve was used on theindustrial scale.Then with respect to wool and cotton dyeing, the same pioneer-ing work had to be done.Perkin has told us that he and &lr.(now Sir) Robert Pullar had independently discovered the use oftannin and a metallic oxide as a mordant for cotton dyeing, and,in conjunction with Alexander Schultz, he had introduced the“ insoluble arsenite of alumina ” as a mordant. The calico printersin this country did not at first take kindly to the new colouringmatter, and Perkin has often told the writer that the impetus t2246 OBITUARY.this most important application of his discovery came from France.It appears that, owing to some technical oversight, the Frenchpatent was ineffective, and the French manufacturers accordinglybegan making the new dyestuff themselves.It was in France, infact, that the term “ mauve ” was given. With the ‘well-knownskill of the French calico printers, beautiful designs in mauve wereproduced and sent over to this country, and this was more effec-tive than any other cause in hastening the use of the dye for thispurpose over here. Had it not been for this stimulus the successof the new factory would have been doubtful, for Messrs. Pullarhad reported to Perkin that, in their opinion, unless the newdye could be used by the printers it would be questionable whether“it would be wise to erect works for the quantity dyers alone willrequire.”* I n summing up this part of his experience Perkinstated in 1896:“ Before the aniline purple could be introduced for dyeingwoollen and mixed fabrics, some weeks were also spent a t Bradfordin finding out suitable methods of applying it.“Thus it will be seen that, in the case of this new colouringmatter, not only had the difficulties incident to its manufacture tobe grappled with, and the prejudices of the consumer overcome,but, owing to the fact that it belonged to a new class of dyestuffs,a large amount of time had to be devoted to the study of itsapplications to dyeing, calico printing, etc.It was, in fact, allpioneering work-clearing the road, as it were, for the introductionof all colouring matters which followed, all the processes workedout for dyeing silk, cotton, and wool, and also for calico printing,afterwards proving suitable for magenta, Hofmann Violet, etc.”(Hofmann Memorial Lecture, Zoc.cit., p. 609.)The success of the new industry had for its natural consequencethe creation of a host of imitators. All kinds of oxidising agentswere tried upon aniline and made the subjects of rival patents.The departure from the original patent was in some cases so slightthat it is questionable whether in modern patent legislation theinventor’s claim would not be dismissed as a ((colourable imita-tion.” Tabourin and Franc Bros. claimed aniline hydrochlorideinstead of sulphate; Beale and Kirkham in England, as well asScheuret-Kestner, Depouilly and Lauth, Coblentz, and C.Phillipsin France, claimed bleaching powder ; Smith claimed chlorine* “ I distinctly remember the first time I induced a calico printer to make trialsof this colour that the only report I obtained was that it was too dear, and it wasnot until nearly two years afterwards, when French printers put aniline purple intotheir patterns, that it began to interest English printers. ”-Perkin’s Cantor Lectures,Society of Arts, December 7th, 1868, p. 9OBITUAZLT. 2247water, Greville Williams potassium perrnanganate, Kay manganesedioxide, David Price (attached to the firm of Simpson, Made, andNicholson) claimed lead peroxide, Dale and Car0 cupric chloride,Stark and Guyot red prussiate of pot’ash, and so forth. It isneedless to point out that many of the products obtained by theseinventors could not have been Perkin’s mauve a t all, and, as amatter of fact, not one of these rival processes was enabled tocompete successfully with the original “ bichromate ” method.Theyield was too small or the colour too difficult to purify, or theoxidising agent too expensive, although at that time the bichromatecost from 10d. to llcl. per pound. The only one of these processeswhich gave a good result was Dale and Caro’s, but even this couldnot be worked so economically as the original process.The introduction of mauve by the founder of, and pioneer in,this new developnient in manufacturing chemistry soon led to thefurther discovery of coal-tar colouring matters and to the establish-ment of other factories.For about a decade the manufacturingoperations a t Greenford were carried on successfully, and witlhoutany fresh discovery of very great importance, although Perkin’sactivity in the field of pure scientific investigation never ceased.Magenta was first made industrially by Verguin, in France, in1859, and the firm of Simpson, Maule, and Nicholson soon beganto manufacture this on the large scale by the arsenic acid processas well as other well-known colouring matters. Such was thedevelopment of the industry that, in 1862, the year of the Inter-national Exhibition in London, Hofmann gave a Friday eveningdiscourse at the Royal Institution (Chem. News, 6, go), fromwhich it appears that the definite compounds which had beenisolated from cod-tar, and which in Mansfield’s list of 1848 con-sisted of thirteen, had then risen to about forty.It was for that Exhi-bition that Messrs. Simpson, Maule, and Nicholson prepared a crownof magenta crystals (acetate), which Hofmann exhibited during hislecture, the title of which was I‘ Mauve and Magenta.” The sellingprice of the new dyes at that time may be gathered from thecircumstance that the purified solid mauve sold for about the sameprice as platinum, weight for weight, and the vat from which themagenta “crown” had been crystallised contained a weight ofthe acetate of that base valued at &8,000, the crystals adheringto the wire framework of the crown being valued at &loo.*The discovery and manufacture of magenta was undoubtedly,* Some of the original crystals are now in the possession of Mr.William Spiller.A trade catalogue of the firm of Simpsou, Maule, and Nicholson, placed at thewriter’s disposal by Dr. Cain, shows that in 1866 “ Pure Roseine ” was priced a t2s. 6d. per ounce.VOL. XCIII. 7 2248 OUITUARY.after the production of mauve, the most important contribution tothe industry made during the decade referred to. This discoverydid not a t first affect Perkin’s operations; mauve still held itsown, and in 1859 Perkin’s brother Thomas, the business man ofthe establishment, patented on behalf of the firm a process formaking magenta by oxidising crude aniline with mercuric nitrate.”This was an improvement upon the original stannic chloride processof Verguin, but it was dangerous, capricious, and expensive, andwas very soon displaced by Medlock’s arsenic acid process workedby Simpson, Maule, and Nicholson, and also, as the result of acelebrated lawsuit, by Messrs.Read Holliday and Sons, of Hudders-field. But although Perkin and Sons never made magenta in anyquantity, the introduction of this dyestuff led t o new and necessarydevelopments in their factory. About five years after the founda-tion of the Greenford works, Hofmann, who had then enthusiastic-ally entered the field of colour chemistry, found that magentawhen ethylated or methylated gave rise to violet colouring matters,the manufacture of which was a t once taken up by Simpson, Maule,and Nicholson.+ Hofmann’s Violets and certain phenylated ros-anilines, discovered about the same time by Girard and DeLaire, in France, and made here also by Simpson, Maule, andNicholson, soon began to enter into competition with mauve.It has not, I think, been sufficiently dwelt upon by any of thehistorians of the coal-tar colour industry that Perkin’s pioneeringdiscovery reacted upon itself, for there can be no doubt that theproduction of aniline on the large scale led to the discovery ofprocesses for the manufacture of magenta, and it was the deriva-tives of the latter that first began seriously to displace mauve.The discovery by Lauth of colouring matters, such as methyl-violet,formed by the oxidation of the alkylated anilines and manufac-tured in France about 1866, brought into the field other com-petitors with the original mauve.The newer dyes were not sofast as mauve, but they were much more brilliant, and fastnesssoon gave way to brightness. The practical effect of these laterdevelopments made itself felt in the gradual decline in the demandfor mauve, the use of which soon became very limited, and finally* “ Das Zinnchlorid wird durch das Quecksilbernitrat ersetzt, nlit dem dieFabrikation auch in Deutschland ihre ersten, kriiftigen Wurzeln fasst.”-H. Caro,Ber., 1892, 25, 1031.j- The manufacture of methyl and ethyl iodidfi on the large scale was a remark-able achievement a t the time. When the writer entered the Atlas Works, in 1877,the Hofmann Violets were still being manufactured, and the use of these colouringmatters by English dyers continued for more than twenty years after that date.Theviolet is priced in the 1866 catalogue of Simpson, Maule, and Nicholson a t 3s. perounceOBITUARY. 2249died out altogether. As a flourishing branch of the colour industryit may be said that mauve did not complete ten years of its exist-ence. But Perkin was enabled to keep the Greenford works goingsuccessfully in spite of the adverse influence of the new discoveriesand the coming into existence of other factories. He introduced,in 1864, a very ingenious method for the indirect alkylation ofmagenta, which enabled their firm to compete with the other violetcolouring matters then in the market. This method consisted inheating magenta base with methylated spirit-afterwards improvedby substituting methyl alcohgl-and the compound formed fromturpentine oil and bromine in the presence of water.This“ brominated turpentine ” had long been known to chemists, andhad been investigated by Greville Williams, but had never beforebeen used for manufacturing purposes. The dyes thus made wereintroduced under the name of Britannia Violet of different shadesof blueness, according to the degree of alkylation. It was a t firstthought that they contained the terpene radicle, although it wasafterwards considered that they were of the same type if notidentical with the Hofmann Violets, so that Perkin had reallydiscovered an indirect method of methylation of a type unknownin chemistry a t that time.Perkin’s process was very successful,although they were handicapped by having to purchase magentabase, which they did not themselves manufacture. But, on theother hand, brominated turpentine was cheaper as an alkylatingagent than the methyl iodide used in the manufacture of HofmannViolets.After eleven years’ successful working a t the Greenford Greenfactory with mauve and certain df its derivatives, the BritanniaViolets, and a few other dyes which are given in the list on p. 2253,a new impetus suddenly came through the announcement, in 1868,that Graebe and Liebermann, in Germany, had discovered thatalizarin, the colouring matter of the madder plant, was a derivativeof the coal-tar hydrocarbon, anthracene, and not, as had formerlybeen supposed, a derivative of naphthalene. The Germanchemists, both of whom are happily still with us, found also thatthe compound could be prepared from anthracene, and thus wasaccomplished the first laboratory synthesis of a natural colouringmatter.The demand for another coal-tar hydrocarbon, anthracene, inlarge quantities and in a state of purity, necessitated furtherpioneering work.Supplies of the crude material had to be pr -cured, the tar distillers had to be educated in the production ofraw anthracene, and factory methods of purification had to bedevised. All these requirements were met by the science and’ 7 K 2250 OBITUARY.skill of Perkin, then a young man just turned thirty years of age.The subsequent development of the artificial alizarin industry istoo well known to need recapitulation in this notice.But thereis one point in connexion with Perkin’s work in this field whichmust not be forgotten, and that is the great importance of thedichloroanthracene process in this country a t the outset of thenew branch of the coal-tar colour industry.The two processes discovered by Perkin were the anthraquinoneprocess and the dichloroanthracene process. I n the first of thesethe anthracene is oxidised to anthraquinone, the latter sulpho-nated by heating with strong sulphuric acid to a high temperature,and the sodium sulphonate converted into alizarin by alkalinefusion. The sulphonation by this process yields a mixture of mono-and di-sulphonic acids, and the final product is therefore a mixtureconsisting of alizarin, anthrapurpurin, and some flavopurpurin.This was the process first tried on the large scale by Perkin, aswell as by the German manufacturers.The second process, whichwas patented here by Perkin a few months after the patentingof the anthraquinone process, namely, in November, 1869, setsout from dichloroanthracene, which is sulphonated by ordinarystrong sulphuric acid and the product submitted t o alkaline fusionas before. Now dichloroanthracene sulphonates more readily thananthraquinone, and as the product consists chiefly of a disulphonicacid of anthraquinone, the ‘‘ artificial alizarin ” obtained by thisprocess consists mainly of anthrapurpurin with some alizarin andflavopurpurin. Alizarin gives bluer shades of colour than anthra-purpurin, so that although for certain purposes where bright redwas required the mixture obtained by Perkin’s second processpossessed an advantage, for the production of the bluer reds theanthraquinone product had the advantage.Perkin met this diffi-culty to some extent by devising a method for separating his“ alizarin ” into ‘ I blue shade ” and ‘ I scarlet shade,” but thismethod was not easy to carry out on the large scale, and addedto the cost of the final products.For the first few years the Baclisclie Compa.ny, which hadacquired the Caro-Graebe-Liebermann patent, worked by mutualarrangement in combination with the Greenford Green factory,the latter having the monopoly of the English markets.* TheGermans were using the anthraquinone process almost exclusively,this being the method still in use.When ordinary English oilof vitriol is used for sulphonating, a great excess of acid is neces-sary, and there is much loss owing to the high temperature, so* The amicable arraiigement hetween tho Gernian and English manufacturers wasbrought about through the riiecliation of Dr. Hugo hliiller, F.R.SOBITUARY. 2251that the dichloroanthracene process from this point of view hadthe advantage. Moreover, when anthrapurpurin was the mainobject of manufacture, it was found that the product obtained bythe dichloroanthracene process gave much purer shades than thatobtained by the anthraquinone process.* It would have naturallyoccurred to Perkin in working out this last process to try fumingsulphuric acid as a sulphonating agent, and he did so with success,but this method, although giving better results in the way ofyield and uniformity of product, was placed a t a disadvantage hereon account of the cost of the fuming acid.The advantages arisingfrom this method of sulphonating are an increased yield on accountof the lower temperature a t which the acid does its work, and aproduct which consists mainly of the monosulphonic acid, and whichtherefore gives chiefly the true “ alizarin ” on alkaline fusion. NOWGermany was, at that time, the only country in which the manu-facture of fuming sulphuric acid was carried on, and this gavethem a distinct advantage in working the anthraquinone process.Perkin has called attention more than once to the state of affairs inthis country during the early life of the artificial alizarin industry,and his own statements may be quoted here:’‘ On account of the expense and difficulty in getting Nordhausensulphuric acid imported into this country-few vessels liking itas a cargo-we commenced working with ordinary sulphuric acid.We usually employed four or five parts of this to each part ofanthraquinone and heated the mixture to 270-280° C.. . . I findwe employed this process principally in our works until the middleof June, 1870. We then began to work on a larger scale than wehad hitherto done with dichloroanthracene, and carried both pro-cesses on for a time, but finding the latter the most economical,partially on account of the ease with which it yielded the sulpho-acids with ordinary sulphuric acid, we employed it almost exclu-sively after a time, although frequently making colouring matterby the other method.“The large quantity of ordinary sulphuric acid which had tobe employed to convert anthraquinone into the sulpho-acids, andthe high temperature which had to be used, causing a certainDr.Caro informs the wiiterthat since 1870 the Badische Co. employed also the dichloroanthracene process for themanufacture of a special kind of “ alizarin,” consisting chiefly of anthrapurpurin.It may be pointed out, also, that, owing to some peculiarity in the internal adminis-tration of the German Patent Laws a t that time, the rights of Caro, Graebe, andLiebermann could not be secured in certain States, and so other manufacturers tookup the artificial alizarin industry and entered into competition with the BadischeCo.So far as the writer has been able to learn, thc anthraquinone process wasgenerally employed.* Perkin, The HGtory of Alizarin, &c., 1879, p. 262252 OBITUARY.amount of destruction to take place, evidently showed that it wasdesirable to employ fuming sulphuric acid in this process. In thiscountry we found it costly, but as it was more readily procurablein Germany, the manufacturers there used it. They were after-wards supplied with a very strong fuming acid from Bohemia, con-taining about 40 per cent. of sulphuric anhydride.” (The Elistoryof Alizarin, etc., 1879, pp.24-25.*)The same statement was repeated in substantially identical termsin 1896. Referring to the loss of anthraquinone when ordinarysulphuric acid is used, he says: “ The means of overcoming thisdifficulty was to use fuming sulphuric acid, with which anthra-quinone combined a t a much lower temperature, but the only acidof the kind then made was the old-fashioned Nordhausen acid.We imported a quantity of this, and, of course, found it to worksatisfactorily, but the difficulties and expense connected with thecarriage and transport of this substance on account of its dangerousnature-supplied as it then was in large earthenware bottles-madeit unsuitable for use in this country.“The artificial alizarin we first made was produced by theanthraquinone process, the method still used for its manufacture,but the difficulty in preparing the sulphonic acid in those earlydays just referred to caused us to turn our attention to the secondprocess I had discovered, in which dichloroanthracene was used.. . .Without this process the manufacture of artificial alizarin in thiscountry could not have been carried on with much success in theearly days of its manufacture.” (Hofmann Memorial Lecture, loc.cit., p. 631.)The “ contact,” or ‘‘ catalytic,” process for producing sulphuricanhydride, introduced about the same time in this country byMessrs. Chapman, Messel and Co., and in Germany by the lateC. Winkler, dates from 1875, so that Perkin’s share in the foundingof this great industry does not consist only in his having givenus the practical methods for realising Graebe and Liebermann’ssynthesis in the factory, but in having devised a process which,so to speak, enabled the new industry to be nursed through itsinfancy in this country and without which it would probably nothave survived that Continental competition which, as Perkin hastold us, first began to make itself seriously felt about the end of1873 (History of Alizarin, etc., 1879, p.31). By thattime it was fully realised that a complete revision of the* The use of Nordhausen acid for the anthraquinoue process in Germany beganabout 1871 ; the introduction of the stronger acid referred to by Perkin in the abovepassage is generally attributed to Koch ins1873. Dr.Car0 informs the writer that hehas been unable to find the authority for this statementOBITUARY. 2253plant at Greenford Green had become necessary. It requiredenlarging and modifying in order to meet the successful competi-tion arising from the development of the anthraquinone process inGermany, and a considerable expenditure of capital would havebeen necessary to carry out this work. But Perkin, whose ambitionit had always been to be able to devote himself to pure science,and whose personal requirements were extremely modest, foundthat his manufacturing career had by then provided him withsufficient means to enable him to retire, and, rather than incurthe responsibility of making a fresh start, he took advantage ofthe opportunity for withdrawing altogether from the industry.Hiscareer as a manufacturer terminated in 1874, the Greenford Greenworks having then been purchased by Messrs. Brooke, Simpson,and Spiller, which firm, soon afterwards, transferred them toMessrs. Burt, Bolton, and Haywood, who shifted the manufacturefrom Greenford Green to Silvertown, and ultimately from thisfirm the ‘‘ British Alizarine Company ” was developed, and is stillat work. Perkin always wished it to be known that he consideredthe Silvertown works as the lineal descendant of the first coal-tar colour factory.This sketch of the founding of the coal-tar colour industry isnecessarily limited to the history of the Greenford Green factory.These works would now appear quite insignificant in comparisonwith one of the great German establishments, and the whole out-put of dyes during the seventeen years that Perkin was connectedwith them was not very great as measured by modern standards.Nevertheless, it may fairly be said that no single factory estab-lished in this country has ever given rise to such world-widedevelopments, both scientific and industrial.When it fell to thewriter’s lot to take part in the organisation of the jubilee celebra-tion of 1906, it appeared desirable to place upon record the com-plete history of the Greenford Green factory as a colour-makingestablishment, and Sir Wm. Perkin was good enough to preparethe following list:THE PRODUCTS MANUFACTURED AT GREENFORD GREEN, 1857-1873.Mauve.-Large quantities manufactured.DahZia.-Ethylmauveine, C,,H,(C,H,)N,,HCl.Made about thesame time as Hofmann’s Violet [1863]. The colour was muchadmired, but being very expensive was not largely used (Joum.Chern. SOC., 1879, 35, 399).A &line Pink.-First found in washings from mauve, afterwardsproduced by oxidising mauve with lead peroxide. It is para2254 OBITUARY.saafranine. Made about the same time as Dahlia (Journ. Cltem. SOC.,1879, 35, 407). The researches were made many years beforepublication.Magenta.-Prepared by a mercuric nitrate under a patent inmy name; a communication from abroad. It was first obtainedin crystals in this way (Journ. C‘kem. SOC., 1862, 15, 238-240.The research was made some years before publication). Theprocess was dangerous, and not carried on very long.Arnidoazonaphthalene.--Used in a finely precipitated form as anorange, red, or scarlet pigment for calico printing, but not largely.Britannia Violet (various shades) .-Made from Magenta, thebromine compound of turpentine, and methylated spirit, or, better,purified wood spirit.A t first thought to be a turpentine deriv-ative, but afterwards found to be methylated rosanilines. Made inlarge quantities.Perkin’s Green.-This was an interesting compound made bytreating Britannia Violet (blue shade) with acetyl chloride. Thelatter was made in large quantities from phosphorus trichlorideand acetic acid. The phosphorus trichloride was made in cast-ironretorts with iron condensers from phosphorus and dry chlorine.The colouring matter was obtained in a crystalline condition, butwas not investigated as to its constitution.It was rather extensivelyused for calico printing when Iodine Greep was too expensive.‘‘ A Zizarine.”-Produced very largely, chiefly by dichloroanthra-cene process. It consisted of anthrapurpurin and alizarin, chieflyof the former. These were also separated and sold as “Blue ShadeAlizarine” and “Scarlet Shade,” but we chiefly sold the mixtureknown as “Red Shade.” Besides the above we made suitablemixtures of aniline salts, oxidising agents, and copper compoundsfor the production of Aniline Black on the fabric by calico printers.Also the colouring matters were made into “lakes ” by processesof our own for paperhangings and lithographic and other printinginks in considerable quantities.This list contains what may be regarded as Perkin’s direct con-tribution to the colour industry as a manufacturer. It may notappear very imposing to us now, but we must read into it all thatit means in order to appreciate its full significance.There mustbe taken into consideration the pioneering work in every directionthat had to be done in order to accomplish these results. It mustfurther be remembered that they were achieved a t the outset by ayouth of about 18, and brought to a successful termination inseventeen years by a young man 36 years of age, and that duringthe whole of that period, while the factory was actively a t workOBITUARY. 2255a continuous stream of scientific research was kept going in hislaboratory.The stupendous consequences of the initiation of thisindustry must also be borne in mind, and then the extent of ourindebtedness to him will be fully realised.By many who regard manufacturing industry from a narrowpoint of view, Perkin, as already stated in the previous part ofthis notice, has been censured for withdrawing so soon fromthe scene of his industrial operations. The reply to this chargeis obvious. He had made a sufficient fortune for his modest re-quirements, and the seeds which he had sown were developingrapidly in this country. At that time (1874) German competitionwas only just beginning to make itself felt. The industry wasflourishing here, and with respect to France it may be said thatwithin a very short period of the founding of the Greenford Greenfactory, and especially from the time of the discovery of magenta,the industry was also in a prosperous condition. How thoroughlythis branch of manufacture had its head centre in England duringthe few years following the opening of the Greenford works may beinferred from the fact that such men as Maule and (especially)E.C. Nicholson, both pupils of Hofmann’s, had entered theindustry; that in Manchester the firm of Roberts, Dale and Co.had secured the services of men like Car0 and Martius, who laterbecame pioneers in the German colour-making industry. Or, ifwe turn to the actual products, we find that in addition to thoseemanating from the firm of Perkin and Sons, Simpson, Maule, andNicholson had secured the first really valuable process for makingmagenta, namely, the arsenic acid process of Medlock; that theyhad also secured the beautiful process of Girard and De Lairefor phenylating magenta so as to convert it into blue and violetcolouring matters, and that Nicholson, by his discovery of themethod of sulphonation, had developed these into what were formany years the most important of all the coal-tar colouring matters.This firm had also introduced aniline-yellow (aminoazobenzene), theprecursor of the basic azo-dyes, and phosphine (chrysaniline),* thefirst member of the acridine series.They were, moreover, the onlymanufacturers of the alkylated rosanilines under Hofmann’s patent.Then the firm of Roberts, Dale and Co. were making picric acid,and had, through Caro, given t o the industry the first indulineobtained from aniline-yellow and aniline, as well as Manchesterbrown or Bismarck brown.This firm had also, through Martius,* In the 1866 catalogue of this firm, already referred to, Aniline-yellow is priceda t 2s. and “Phosphine” a t 3s. per ounce. The Nicholson Blues were, at that time,sold only in solution, the price ranging, according t o the brand, from 15s. to 30s.per gallon. Solid “Regina Purple” is priced at 15s. per ounce2256 OBITUARY.given us the dinitronaphthol known as Manchester yellow. Cyanine,or quinoline blue, the first representative of a group of colouringmatters which have since become of great importance as specialsensitisers for photographic purposes, was discovered the same yearas mauve (1856) by Greville Williams, who was for some timechemist a t the Perkin’s factory, and who afterwards, with Messrs.E.Thomas and J. Dower, started the Star Chemical Works at Brent-ford. This country may also claim to have been the pioneer,through Crace-Calvert and Lowe, of Manchester, in the technicalproduction of highly purified phenol.” The first successful methodfor printing on the fabric with aniline-black was discovered andpatented in 1863 by John Lightfoot, of Accrington.This was the state of affairs during Perkin’s connexion with theindustry, and, superadded to this manufacturing activity, was thesupremely important fa,ct that, until 1865, the great master,Hofmann, was among us, and that his laboratory at the RoyalCollege of Chemistry had become a centre of active research inthe chemistry of colouring matters which stimulated the industryand supplied chemists for the fact0ries.f Nor must it be forgottenthat Peter Griess, the founder of diazo-chemistry, was working overhere during the greater part of the same period. It cannot be saidthat Perkin abandoned the ship in a sinking condition; on thecontrary, she was steaming full speed ahead! For any scuttlingthat may have afterwards occurred he can in no way be heldresponsible.ADDENDUM.As the introduction of fuming sulphuric acid played such animportant part in the early history of the artificial alizarinindustry, it is of interest to append the following account kindlyfurnished by Hofrath Dr.Caro. It may be pointed out that thecontact ” process for producing sulphuric acid dates from 1875,;and therefore subsequently to Perkin’s retirement, so that it was* The state of the industry here and in France five years after its inauguration a tGreenford Green can be ascertained from Hofmann’s report ou the chemical exhibitsa t the International (London) Exhibition of 1862. It is not going too far to saythat during its early years the coal-tar colour industry was essentially English andFrench.From that time until the creation of the Chairof Organic Chemistry a t Owens College, Manchester, in 1874, to which Schorlemmerwas appointed, there was no Professorship in thiv departmelit of the science in thiscountry.$ The patent of Messrs.Chapman ant1 Messel is dated September 18th, 1875.Winkler’s process was described in Dinglar’s Polytechnisches Journal for October,1575. Dr. Messcl gave a description of their process before the Chemical Society inApril, 1876, but the paper was not published by the Society.j. Hofmann left London in 1865OBITUARY. 2257his successors who had the advantage of this new branch of manu-facture :Previously to the publication of Clemens Winkler, the entire‘ Nordhausen Fuming Sulphuric Acid ’ was manufactured by JohnDavid Starck in Bohemia (in several works near Pilsen), and waslargely imported into England. It originally contained about20 per cent. of the free anhydride. This acid was employed byPerkin in his first experimental manufacture in 1869 for sulpho-nating anthraquinone, and was afterwards in 1870 exchanged forordinary sulphuric acid,* while we (the Badische Co.) commenceda t this same period with the ordinary acid and gradually went onincreasing its strength by adding fuming acid containing about24 per cent.of free anhydride. I recollect that in 1873 we usedchiefly a mixture of two parts of the said fuming acid with onepart of the monohydrate. At the same time we studied carefullythe effect of the increased strength of the sulphonating agent uponthe separate production of the mono- and di-sulpho-acids of anthra-quinone, and I believe that a t the same time (1873) similar experi-ments were made by all German alizarin makers, particularly byGebruder Gessert and Co., a t Elberfeld, and that in consequence ofthe superior results obtained by the action of stronger acid a t acorresponding lower temperature a demand was created for fumingsulphuric acid of greater strengths than hitherto supplied.ThusJohn David Stsrck was led to manufacture the solid fuming sul-phuric acid containing about 45 per cent. of the free anhydride.This was, I think, in 1873 or 1874. In 1875 we employed regularlythe fuming acid of 45-50 per cent. of anhydride. In 1877 we wentfurther in increasing the energy of the sulphonating action by theemployment of fuming acid of from 68 to 72 per cent. of freeanhydride, which we prepared by distilling the anhydride from oneportion of fuming acid into another portion of fuming acid contain-ing 45-50 per cent.of free anhydride. We also distilled theanhydride into the sulphonating mixture of anthraquinonewith fuming acid. Immediately after the publication ofWinkler, in 1875, we commenced experimenting with hissynthetical process, and after having many times changedour experimental plant, we succeeded in manufacturing thefuming acid on a very large scale from 1877. At aboutthe same time other manufacturers started the manufacture offuming acid by the synthetical process.’’R. MELDOLA.* See Perkin’s statement (nnte) quoted from his History of Alieari?t, 18792258 OBlTUAItY.ROBERT WARINGTON.BORN AUGUST 22ND, 1838; DIED MARCH 20TH, 1907.THE name of Robert Warington will ever be associated with oneof the most important advances in the agricultural chemistry ofthe latter half of the nineteenth century, although his classical workon nitrification, which may be regarded as his life-work, bears buta small proportion to the total of that accomplished by him.He,no doubt, owed his chemical proclivities to his father-a RobertWarington also-who was a prominent figure amongst the chemistsof earlier days. The elder Warington was one of the first chemicalassistants a t University College, and was subsequently appointedchemical operator to the Society of Apothecaries. He also was aFellow of the Royal Society, and published several papers onchemical subjects; yet chemistry is more indebted to him for thepart which he took in founding the Chemical Society than for theextent of his own original work.It was through his zeal andpowers of organisation that this Society was founded in 1841, andthe work which he did for it as its secretary during the subsequentten years helped in no small measure to launch i t on its prosperouscareer.Robert, his eldest son, was born on August 22nd, 1838, in theparish of Spitalfields. His mother was a daughter of GeorgeJackson, M.R.C.S., to whom science is indebted for several improve-ments in microscopes which have not yet been superseded, as wellas for the invaluable ruled glass micrometer. The original dividingmachine made by him for ruling the lines was still being used bya well-known optician in 1899, and is probably in use a t thepresent time.Very early in young Warington’s life his parents took up theirresidence a t the Apothecaries’ Hall, and it was here, in the un-congenial atmosphere of the City, that he spent his childhood andyouth.His constitution was naturally feeble, and a life in the heartof London, with but little exercise, and no companions of his ownage to assort with, did not tend to strengthen it. All through lifehe had to contend with a lack of bodily vigour, which renderedhis work doubly laborious to him. For his education he seems tohave been chiefly indebted to his parents. While still quite younghe studied chemistry in his father’s laboratory, and had the advan-tage of attending lectures by Faraday, Brande and Hofmann.I n consequence of the unsatisfactory state of young Warington’shealth, his father sought to get him some employment in thecountry, and, with that object in view, applied to Mr.Lawes, witOBITUARY. 2259whom he was acquainted, and for whom he had done some pro-fessional work. The outcome of this was that in January, 1859, theyouth went to work in the Rothamsted Laboratory as Lawes’unpaid assistant. Here he remained for one year, devoting allhis time to ash analyses, of which he had had no previous experi-ence, and examining various methods for obtaining the most satis-factory results. Dr. Pugh and Mr. 3’. R. Segeleke were also workingin the laboratory at that time, and they gave Warington valuableassistance in his work. Of the two series of analyses eventuallycompleted, the first comprised those of the ashes of grass grownunder different mftnurial treatment, the results of which were pub-lished in Lawes and Gilbert’s “ Report of Experiments withDifferent Manures on Permanent Meadow Land ” ( J .Roy. Agric.SOC., 1859, 20, 407), the second series was that of the ash ofgrain from Broadbalk Field. These latter analyses were neverpublished, their place having been taken by more complete workon the same subject by Richter.Although Warington left the Rothanisted Laboratory inJanuary, 1860, his interest in the work there never ceased, and,until he resumed his connexion with Lawes a few years later, hedevoted much of his time to studying the Rothamsted results, andwas a frequent visitor to the laboratory.His health having been somewhat re-established by his year’sresidence in the country, he returned to town, and continued toreside with his parents until 1862, spending his days a t South Ken-sington, where he worked under Dr.Frankland as research assistant.But a t the end of this period a further breakdown in healthforced him again to seek a country life, and he betook himselfto the Royal Agricultural College a t Cirencester. Here heremained for four and a-half years, the first nine months of whichwere spent in doing analyses for Dr. A. Voelcker, and the remainderof the time in fulfilling the duties of teaching assistant underProfessor Church.It was during his residence a t Cirencester that Warington pub-lished the first papers on scientific subjects which appear underhis name.These were printed in the Journal of the ChemicalSociety. The earliest of them (1863) dealt with the quantitativedetermination of phosphoric acid. This was followed by two othershort communications on kindred subjects, which preceded and pre-pared the way for his first work of importance-an investigationinto the part played by ferric oxide and alumina in decomposingsoluble phosphates and other salts, and retaining them in the soil.The results of this investigation are embodied in it series of fourpapera read before the Chemical Society, and are typical example2260 OBITUARY.of the careful work and close reasoning which characterised allWarington’s researches. That ferric oxide acted as a fixing agent,for soluble substances applied to a soil was already known, butthe aktion was attributed to an indefinable physical attraction,which explained nothing.Warington proved, first by experimentswith pure ferric oxide, and then with ordinary soil, that the actionin the case of calcium phosphate was simply one of chemical de-composition, resulting in the formation of ferric phosphate, whilstin the case of other salts, such as carbonates, sulphates, nitrates,etc., the chemical character of the action was indicated by thefact that the iron did not retain the salt as a whole, but partiallydecomposed it, retaining the basic portion in excess over the acidportion.Warington did not allow his work a t Cirencester to sever hisconnexion with Rothamsted, and he offered to analyse three ofthe most important of the animal ashes which had been preparedthere, on the condition that he might make use of the results thusobtained. He consequently received mixed ashes representing thewhole bodies of a fat ox, a fat sheep, and a fat pig, and anabstract of the analyses made by him appeared in an article whichhe wrote for the second supplement to “Watts’s Dictionary ofChemistry.” The analyses, together with others by Richter, werealso published by Lawes and Gilbert in the Phd.Trans., 1883.I n 1864 Warington co-nzmenced lecturing to the students a tCirencester on the Rothamsted experiments, and went systematicallythrough all the work which had already been published, togetherwith many additions of as yet unpublished results which had beencommunicated to hini by Lawes and Gilbert.A desire was ex-pressed a t Cirencester that these lectures should be published, andnegotiations to that end were, consequently, opened with Lawesand Gilbert. The outcome of these was that Warington was towrite a book on the Rothamsted investigations, Lawes guaranteeinghim from pecuniary loss, but offering no remuneration. Lawesalso reserved to himself the right to supply a preface to the book,on the ground that there would be previously unpublished matterincorporated therein. The writing of this book involved a largeamount of labour, especially as, in studying the effect of manuresin different seasons, Warington was led to recognise the almostparamount influence of the rainfall on the results, and its actionin washing the nitrates out of the soil, an action up to that timeunrecognised.For the purpose of examining this action moreclosely, he compared the results from the plots a t Rothamsted withthe temperatures and rainfalls supplied to him by Glaisher; a tthe same time he applied to Gilbert to furnish him with unpublisheORITUARY. 2261data respecting the Rothamsted hay crops. Gilbert, however,objected to what now appeared to him in the light of a publica-tion of Rothamsted results by others than Lawes and himself.Discussions ensued, the upshot of which was that the book remainedin manuscript, and the seeds of an unfortunate dissension betweenGilbert and Warington were sown. Some 120 pages of this bookwere written (and are still in existence), but Warington declinedthe pecuniary compensation which Lawes offered to him for hislabour.Leaving Cirencester in June, 1867, he became chemist to Lawes’smanure and tartaric and citric acid factories at Millwall, wherehe remained until 1876.During these years he generally had along conversation every week with Lawes on those problems inagricultural chemistry which happened to be under investigation.a t the time, and which were evidently more congenial subjects ofdiscussion to both of them than the problems arising in the factory.Even these, however, were by no means lacking in interest, anda t the conclusion of his enpgement at Millwall in 1874, Waringtonremained in the laboratory there for two years longer, workingon citric and tartaric acids, and ultimately publishing his resultsin a paper of 70 pages in the Journal of the Chemical Society.This paper was published with Lawes’s approval, and it is note-worthy for the opinion expressed therein, that ( ( the large amountof information acquired in the laboratories of our great manu-facturing concerns might well be published without any injury tothe individual manufacturer.” Eighteen years later, whenWarington had for a second time gone to work in Lawes’s tartaricand citric acid factory, he published another paper dealing withthese acids, and with the detection of the presence of lead in them.With this solitary exception, all Warington’s subsequent work wason agricultural chemistry, and all of it was done in the Rothamstedlaboratory.While still a t Millwall he had been writing a good deal on agri-cultural subjects-several articles for (( Watts’s Dictionary ” andfor the Agricultural and Horticultural Co-operation Association-and he had, moreover, as already mentioned, been in continua1consultation with Lawes as to the Rothamsted results; he wasnaturally, therefore, prepared to receive Lawes’s suggestion thathe should go and work in the Rothamsted laboratory.The termswere all settled, and had readily been assented to by Warington;for, although they had involved a reduction of salary to two-thirdsof that which he had been receiving a t Millwall, he obtained acertain amount of freedom by way of compensation. He was tobe at liberty to publish his own work in his own name, provide2262 OBITUARY.that it made its appearance as Rothamsted work; but in caseswhere the work dealt with subjects which had already occupiedthe Rothamsted investigators, it was to be published in the jointnames of Lawes, Gilbert and Warington.This arrangement, how-ever, owing to some unforeseen difficulties, was not carriedout; and it was not until after a delay of two years that Waringtonwent to Rothamsted (in 1876), under an agreement for a yearonly, to work simply as Lawes’s private assistant. The engagementwas subsequently extended, and all his results were published,either in his own name or in the names of Lawes, Gilbert andWaring ton.Before removing to Harpenden he went to work at the laboratorya t South Kensington in order to learn water and gas analysisunder Frankland’s assistant, some of the Rothamsted soils beingsent to him for practising determinations of nitrogen. While therehe devised a method of extracting soils by the vacuum pump,which method has since been largely used a t Rothamsted.I n theautumn of the same yea$r (1876) he made a short tour among theGerman experimental stations, and then took up his residence forgood at Harpenden.The construction of a gas analysis apparatus (under Frankland’sdirection) for the Rothamsted laboratory, occupied a considerabletime, and, pending its completion, Warington made a study of theindigo method of determining nitric acid. This method, asgenerally used, he found to be full of sources of error.Theprincipal of these he succeeded in correcting, and, with the methodof determination thus rendered trustworthy, he proceeded to deter-mine regularly the nitrates in the drainage-water from the variouswheat plots in Broadbalk field. The chlorides were determineda t the same time. No such systematic work had been previouslydone, whilst the methods of sampling which had been adoptedwhen any analysis had to be made had been faulty. Waringtonnow altered these methods, so that the samples analysed shouldfaithfully represent the average composition of the drainage-waters.Having examined the indigo method for determining nitric acid,he next examined the Crum-Frankland method by agitation withmercury, and subsequently the method of Schlcesing, modified,however, in such a way that the nitric oxide produced was deter-mined by gas analysis.The exhaustive examination of thesemethods of analysis are described in a series of papers publishedin his own name in the Journal of the Chemical Society and else-where, extending down to 1882. The modified Schlcesing methodwas the one which he finally adopted, and with it he began it lonORITTJART. 2263series of determinations of nitrates in soils, and iu mmgels, swedesand potatoes.Having satisfied himself as to the methods of nitrogcn detler-mination, he next t,urncd his attention to those for the estrimatlionof carbon, and having examined the permanganate and theclichromate methods, and found them wanting, he finally adoptedthe comb~st~ion method, which proved to be thoroughly satisfact,ory,provided that carbonates were entirely removed by prolongedtreatment with sulphurous acid.I n this work lie was assist,etiby Mr. W. A. Peake, and the results were brought before tllcChemical Society in the names of Warington and Peake.Warington’s results from the examination of the rain anddrainage water, together with results previously obtained at,Rothamsted, formed the subject of a very long report publishedin the names of the three investigators in the Journal of t$hcRoyal Agricultural Society for 1882. The subject, however, con-tinued to occupy Warington’s attention long after this date, andwe find a report on the subject in the three joint names in 1883,and papers by Warington alone in 1889 and 1887.The last-mentioned paper is an important contribution (Trans., 1887, 51,500) to the study of well-waters, and deals with the wells in thechalk formation on which Harpenden is situated. I n later years(1904) Warington was enabled to give these results a practicalbearing on the supposed contamination of the Harpenden watersupply, and he saved the community, a t any rate, for a time, fromadopting an expensive and, apparent,ly, quite unnecessary systemof sewerage.So far Warington’s work, as here described, consisted largely ofexamining and perfecting methods of anaIysis for use in agri-cultural research. For this work the precision of his nature, andthe carefulness of his manipulation, pre-eminently fitted him, andmost of the methods of analysis which he elaborated have beenaccepted as standard methods, which promise to remain in usefor many years to come.The remainder of his work, however,is that by which he made his name, and if a strictly chronologicalsequence of events, had been followed it should have been men-tioned earlier in this notice, for it was in 1877 that he began t)ostudy nitrification, and this subject occupied the foremost placein his mind until 1891, when his opportunities for pursuing thesubject ceased. During this period he published about ten paperson the subject, all in his own name, the principal of which werefour communications to the Chemical Society, bearing the title“On Nitrification,” Parts I to IV.That the natural conversion of ammonia into nitric acid wasVOL.XCIII. 7 8264 OBITUARY.the work of an organism had been suggested by A. Muller asearly as 1873, but it had been reserved for Schlaesing and Miintzto establish definitely that this was the case. I n 1877 they showedthat, when sewage was allowed to percolate through a column ofsand and limestone, the nitrification which occurred during itspassage could be prevented by the presence of a sterilising agent,such as chloroform vapour, and after such sterilisation, the activityof the sand could be resuscitated by inoculating it with a fewparticles of vegetable mould. Questions affecting the problems con-nected with nitrr>gen in the soil had naturally been amongst thoseto which the Rothamsted investigators had, from the first, devotedthemselves, and, consequently, they a t once set to work to examinesuch an important observation as that of Schlcesing and Muntz.A complete verification of it was obtained by Warington, operatingwith garden soil only, and using a solution of ammonium chlorideinstead of sewage; and he was enabled to add the additional in-formation that nitrification occurred only in the dark.This paperappeared within a year of that of Schloesing and Munt z. Two anda-half years later he published a second paper, which added consider-ably to the facts already established. He showed that the nitrifyingorganism, besides requiring darkness in order to do its work, mustalso be supplied with food for its growth-potash, lime andphosphorus-and, moreover, that all liberation of free acid mustbe prevented, by the presence of some salifiable base, such as calciumcarbonate.He found, also, that after the introduction of a smallquantity of active soil or solution into a liquid capable of nitrifica-tion, no action occurred until a certain time had elapsed, this periodof incubation being probably due to the organisms having tomultiply to a certain extent before they become sufficientlynumerous to produce recognisable results. An increase of tem-perature was found to favour the action up to a certain point, andit was shown that various vegetable moulds and known bacteriawere not the organisms to which nitrification could be attributed.Many difficulties, however, still remained to be cleared up, notablythe want of uniformity of the action, which resulted in the pro-duction of nitrates in some instances, and nitrites in others. Wenow know that the process is performed by two quite distinctorganisms, and that their nutrition is, in some respects, whollydifferent from that of any other organism hitherto studied; butuntil this knowledge had been gained, work on the subject wassingularly difficult, and the results were very perplexing.Warington’s third paper on nitrification added considerably toour knowledge of the circumstances attending the action, andestablished the fact that the organisms are almost entirely confineOBITUARY.2265to the first nine inches of ordinary soil. The distribution of theorganism in the soil was dealt with still more exhaustively in asubsequent communication in 1887.The prize coveted by the workers on this subject was, however,the isolation of the organism itself; and to prepare himself forthis task, Warington went to London for a time, in 1886, to learnbacteriology under Dr.Klein a t the Brown Institution. FromDr. Klein he obtained a large number of pure cultures of variousbacteria, and all the’se, as well as others obtained from his OWKIexperiments with soils, he examined as to their behaviour towardsammonia and nitrates, and also as to their mode of growth onskim-milk. The results were brought before the Chemical Society,and proved that none of the bacteria, except the nitrifyingorganism itself, possessed any appreciable power of nitrification.The majority of the organisms examined, however, were activedenitrifiers. Denitrification-w hereby nitrates are converted intonitrites, oxides of nitrogen, or even nitrogen gas-was, at this time,a well recognised work of micro-organisms, but was one whichnaturally enhanced to a considerable extent the difficulties met inelucidating the reverse phenomenon of nitrification. Warington’swork added a good deal to our knowledge of the subject, and showedthat denitrification is a property actively exhibited by a largenumber, but by no means by all, micro-organisms, and that in asoil it becomes complete, before the nitrifying organisms begiutheir task of reversing the reaction.An excellent account of thcdenitrification of farmyard manure was subsequently written forthe Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society (1897, 8, Part IV).Warington’s work on nitrification was amply sufficient to establishthe fact that the oxidation of ammonia in the soil was the workof an organism, but that organism seems to have been isolated firstby Schlcesing and Muntz in 1879, although the method which theyadopted left, a t the time, considerable doubt as to its real identity.But even the isolation of this organism did not solve the wholeproblem : there was still the independent formation of nitritesand nitrates to be accounted for ; and it was here that Warington’swork was most conducive to a solution of the difficulties, for liesucceeded in proving that one organism alone could not be heldaccountable for the various phenomena observed, and that twodifferent organisms must be concerned in the process of nitrificrt-tion.His success all lay in the chemical aspects of the subject.He was the first to obtain (1879) liquid cultures which convcrtcdammonia into a nitrite, and preserved this power in all sub-cultures,but which was incapable of producing any nitrate; and shortlyafterwards (1881) he obtained cultures which were able to convertVOL. XCIII. 7 32266 OBITUARY.nitrites into nitrates, but were unable to oxidise ammonia. Thiswas a practical separation of two distinct organisms, but a t thetime Warington did not grasp the true meaning of his results, andhe associated the change from nitrites into nitrates with a whitegrowth which appeared floating in the liquid, but which really hadnothing to do with it.I n 1890, after the work of others had resulted in the isolationof the nitrous organism (that which converted ammonia intonitrites), Warington returned to the subject; and found that thewhite surface organism could not be held accountable for the con-version of the nitrites into nitrates.He eventually succeeded inisolating the organism which really produces this change, andobtained a nearly pure culture of the nitric organism. A t thesame time he showed that organic carbon is not necessary for thegrowth of these organisms, as he had previously imagined, but thatthey can obtain their carbon from carbonates. These results werepublished in his fourth paper on nitrification (1891), and werecommunicated to the Chemical Society only a few days beforeWinogradski made a similar communication to the French Academy.Winogradski, however, had pushed the matter somewhat further,having obtained the organisms in bodily form, and having shownhow they could be cultivated on solid media, a problem which hadbaffled Warington and other investigators.Warington, therefore,had to share his final hard-won success with another.The practical results of nitrification in the soil were beinginvestigated while the search for the organism was still in progress,and Warington began a long series of determinations of nitratesin the Rothamsted soil, the first results of which were published asa lecture given before the Society of Arts, for which he was awardeda silver medal.The quarrels even of eminent men are generally better left tobury themselves in oblivion, but we should hardly be doing justiceto Warington if we were to pass over in silence the circumstanceswhich made his work so arduous to him, and finally brought it toa premature conclusion.Indeed, there is so much that is pathetic,and even grand, in the unfortunate disagreement which arose andbecame intensified between Gilbert and Warington, that a briefallusion to the subject cannot lessen our appreciation of either ofthem. That two of the greatest of England's agricultural chemistsshould be at variance.with each other may afford no subject forwonder, but what must surprise the layman is that in spite ofthis strong personal disagreement these two should for years con-tinue to work under the same roof, on the same subjects, publishORITUARY.2267ing their results as joint productions. No mere forbearance (ofwhich there was much), no mere love of gain (of which there wasnone), could have effected this; it was the love of science, pure,simple and unselfish, which could alone accomplish such a task,and obtain a mastery over the more human passions.m7hen, in 1889, %awes resigned his active control to the presentCommittee of Management, it was evident that the work of thestation could no longer be carried on in this painful state of tension,and, all attempts a t accommodation having failed, the Committeewere reluctantly forced to decide that Warington’s work theremust terminate.This was in June, 1890, and it was arranged thatlie was to leave in the following January. Having, however, inthe meantime, reached a very interesting stage in his work onthe nitrifying organism, he petitioned to be allowed to stay on,without remuneration, until June of 1891. This petition wasgranted, and before that date he succeeded in bringing the workon hand to a successful termination.Throughout all the trying circumstances of these years Lawesshowed an undeviating friendship towards Warington, andWarington’s feelings towards Lawes were those of love andveneration. Perhaps, however, the highest tribute which couldhave been paid to his rectitude and disinterestedness was paidwhen the Royal Society requested him t o undertake the obituarynotice of Gilbert.A t first he declined, and ultimately consented,only on the understanding that what he wrote should be revisedby those who could have no personal bias in the matter, his onefear being-as he told the present writer in the last conversationwhich he had with him-that his own feelings might unconsciouslylead him to do insufficient justice to his subject. That the per-formance of this kindly office inust have gone far to soften therecollection of past animosities we may feel assured, and beforethe end came there was but little of bitterness left in the mindof the survivor. All three great workers now lie at rest in thesame quiet country churchyard, their united work in the causeof scientific agriculture forming the most fitting and enduringmonument of their labours, for its importance becomes every daymore and more evident with the development of the superstructurewhich is being raised upon it.Although Warington’s original work in agricultural chemistrywas brought to a close on his severance from Rothamsted, muchuseful work remained for him to do.The Committee of Manage-ment appointed him American lecturer under the Lawes TrLlst, andhe consequently proceeded to the United States to perform hisfunctions. The six lectures which he there delivered dealt chiefly7 M 2268 OBITUARY.with the subject of nitrification, illustrated by his own work a tRothamsted. They were published by the United States Depart-ment of Agriculture.On his return to England, Sir John Lawes invited him to carryout an investigation a t his tartaric and citric acid factory atMillwall, on the contamination of these acids by the lead of thcvessels used in their preparation.This Warington undertook, a i dhe succeeded in finding a method for obviating the evil. Heobtained, in addition, an excellent method for the accurate volu-iiietric determination of lead in the acid. This formed the subjectof a communication to the Society of Chemical Industry in 1893,the last communication of any investigation made by him.I n 1894 he was appointed one of the examiners in Agricultureunder the Science and Art Department, and in the summer of thcsame year he was elected Sibthorpian Professor of Rural Economya t Oxford for three years.The papers, other than those on original investigations, whichWarington wrote, are numerous, and are all characterised by alucidity of expression and precision of argument which rendersthem specially valuable.One of the most useful of his writingsis, undoubtedly, a little volume entitled " The Chemistry of theFarm." The amount of appreciation with which it has been re-ceived, and the good which it has done, may be measured by thefact that it is now in its fifteenth edition, and is accepted as thetext-book on the subject throughout the world, and as a model ofwhat a text-book of that sort should be.Hishabits and tastes did not predispose him to take any active partiir village management, but whenever he thought that his know-ledge might be of service to the community, he did not hesitate togive what assistance he could.Educational or charitable work, however, always enlisted hissympathies and engaged his active support ; whilst his strongreligious convictions, guided by his clear judgment and absolutesincerity, rendered his church and philanthropic work peculiarlyvaluable.I l e certainly had an unusually high sense of publicduty, and persistently throughout life did what he could to makcliis f cllow-creatures better and happier. Missionary work alwaysheld a prominent place in his heart, as also did the training ofthe young, whether in religious or secular subjects, and during thelast few years of his life much of his time and care was devotedt o the Church day-schools.He was greatly interested in all workamongst the poor and needy, and was a liberal supporter of anywganised charity which appealed to his judgment. Partly owingWarington continued to reside in Harpenden until the endOBITUARY. 2269to his isolated boyhood and youth, and partly to his lack of robusthcalth, life went harder with him than it otherwise would bavedone, for the characteristics thus developed stood in his way, andoften prevented liis gaining the sympathy and appreciation whichhe was so ready to give to others.Warington was elected to the Chemical Society in 1863, and t’othe Royal Society in 1886. He served for two periods on theCouncil of the Chemical Society, and for one period as vice-president.For many years he was on the Library‘ Comniittee oftJiis Society, and did much useful work for the Fellows during thereorganisation and cataloguing of the books. For this his exten-sive acquaintance with chemical literature rendered him speciallyfitted.His first wife was a daughter ofG. H. Makins, M.R.C.S., formerly chief Assayer to the Bank, andone of the Court of Assistants a t the Society of Apothecaries. Hissecond wife was a daughter of Dr. F. R. Spackman, who had formany years been medical practitioner a t Harpenden. He has leftfive daughters by his first wife. I n 1906 his health gave way, andhe had a serious illness which necessitated a very difficult anddangerous operation. For this he prepared with singularequanimity and courage.The operation was successful; butthough he nominally recovered from it, he never regained hisstrength, and eleven months afterwards (March 20t11, 1907) hepassed sway.Warington was married twice.SPENCER U. PICKERTNG.AUGUST DUPRE.BORN SEPT. GTH, 1835; DIED JULY 15TH, loo’i.AUGUST DLTRI:: was born at Mainz on September Gth, 1835, anddied a t liis residence, Mount Edgcumbe, Sutton, Surrey, aftersome weeks’ illness, on JU~Y 15th, 1907, in his seventy-second year.He was the second son of J. F. Dupr6, a merchant and citizen ofthe then Freie Reichsstadt of Frankfurt-am-Main, and his birthwas entered in the register of the “ Freie Franzosische Gemeinde”of that city. On his father’s side Dupr6 traces his descent in adirect line from Cornelius Dupr6, a French Huguenot who leftFrance in 1685, after the suspension of the Edict of Nantes, andsettled in the Palatinate, and who distinguished himself later asan officer in the army of Prince Eugene.Dupr6’s mother was alsoof Huguenot descent. His family was, therefore, originally French2270 OBITUARY.but by intermarriage had become practically German in the courseof a hundred and fifty years.Dupr6 had a somewhat varied school education, which he com-pleted a t the Polytechnic schools of Giessen and Darmstadt, andentered as a student of the University of Giessen in 1852, a t theage of seventeen. There he studied chemistry under ProfessorWill, also attending the lectnres of Kopp and others. FromGiessen he proceeded to Heidelberg in 1554, Bunsen and Kirchhoffbeing among his teachers, and there he finally took his degree ofDoctor of Philosophy in 1855, being barely twenty years old.Itis interesting tlo note that fifty years later, in 1905, the Universityrenewed his Diploma (Goldenes Doctor-Jubilaum) in recognition ofhis scientific work. Among his fellow students at Giessen andHeidelberg who became famous in later life were Harley,Matthiessen, Roscoe, and Volhard.I n the autumn of 1855 Dupr6 proceeded to London and becameassistant to Odling, whom he accompanied to Guy’s Hospital,remaining with him until 1863.I n 1864 he was appointed Lecturer on Chemistry and Toxicologya t the Westminster Hospital Medical School, in succession to hiselder brother, Dr.F. W. Dupr6, who had given up the appointmentin order to take up mining in the then recently discovered saltdeposits a t Stassfurt, in connexion with which he is now so wellknown.August Dupr6 remained in London for the rest of his life, andbecame a naturalised English subject in 1866. He resigned hisappointment at the Westminster Medical School in 1897, afterthirty-three years’ tenure, but during the last ten years, owingto pressure of consulting work, he had practically handed overthe lectureship to the writer, who was associated with him asAssistant-Lecturer from 1885. From 1897 until his death in 1907he continued to practise as consulting chemist, both privately andin connexion with several Government Departments, a t his privatelaboratory in Edinburgh Mansions, Westminster.Soon after he left the University Dupr6 began to publish variousscientific papers, and, owing doubtless to this fact and the reputa-tion for ability which he enjoyed in his own immediate circle, itwas not long before he obtained several other public appointmentsin addition to the lectureship at Westminster.Thus in 1871 he wits appointed Chemical Referee to the LocalGovernment Board, and about this time he was first consulted bySir Vivian Majendie, then Colonel Majendie, Chief Inspector in theExplosives Department of the Home Office, to which Departmenthe shortly after became permanently attached aa ConsultinORITU.4RY. 227 1Chemist.In 1873 he became Public Analyst for Westminsbr,which post he held until 1901.In 1874 he was appointed Lectureron Toxicology a t the London School of Medicine for Women, anappointment in which he always showed the keenest interest andwhich he held until 1901.He was also consulted by the Board of Trade, the Treasury, andtjhe late Metropolitan Board of Works.I n all these appointments and consultations he may be said tohave distinguished himself brilliantly by his rapid and thoroughgrasp of the problems in hand, his marked originality, his extremeconscientiousness, his intense enthusiasm, and his infinite capacityfor taking trouble.In 1875 he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society. In 1877he became President of the Society of Public Analysts. From1871 to 1874 he sat on the Council of the Chemical Society. In1885 he was made a Vice-president of the Institute of Chemistry.I n 1886 he was elected Examiner in Chemistry to the Royal Collegeof Physicians, and again in 1892.I n 1888 he was appointed a Member of the War Office Committeeon Explosives, in 1891 an Associate Member of the OrdnanceCommittee, and in 1906 a Member of the Ordnance ResearchBoard.His earlier work for the Local Government Board, beginning in1871, was largely analytical, but in 1884, 1885, and 1887 he madea series of investigations in connexion with the purification ofwater sup-plies by agration and by the agency of bacteria, whichmust certainly rank as original researches of high merit and whichundoubtedly have assisted greatly in the evolution of the mostmodern methods of treating sewage.They are published in theMedical Officers' Reports of the above dates, but are probably notwidely known in the present day.I n conjunction with Abel, Dibdin, Eeates, Odling, and Voelckerhe advised the late Metropolitan Board of Works as t o the condi-tion of the Thames in 1878, 1882, and 1883, and in 1884 madenumerous experiments in conjunction with Mr. Dibdin on thetreatment of London sewage on a large scale. This work is referredto a t great length in the Report of the Royal Commission onMetropolitan Sewage Discharge in 1884. He was a Member ofthe Departmental Committee on White Lead in 1893, and gaveevidence before numerous other Royal Commissions.Of all this Government work, it was the Home Office appoint-ment which mainly occupied him.When, in 1871, he was firstconsulted by the Explosives Department, the manufacture in Eng-land of dynamite and guncotton had but recently commenced,He rapidly rose to eminence2272 OBITUARY.and these two were practically the only high explosives known antthat time. Much had to be done on the part of the Government’in connexion with t,he safe manufacture, storage, transport, anduse of these explosives, and the rapid development of the industrynecessitated the introduction of the Explosives Act of 1875. I n1876 the authorised list of explosives comprised twelve kinds only,but in 1907 it had risen to 182. I n addition, during this period,108 explosives had been passed by the Home Office after examina-tion by Dupr6, and over one hundred had been rejected by hisadvice.He thus investigated, during a period of thirty-six years,nearly four hundred entirely new explosives of the most variedcomposition, and further examined, a t frequent intervals, allexplosives imported into England as to safety. In the course ofthis work he had often to evolve original methods of analysis orof testing for safety, and in this latter direction especially herendered great services to the Government and, indirectly, to thepublic.It was also part of his duty to assist H.M. Inspectors in investi-gating the causes of various accidental explosions in factories andelsewhere, which occurred from time to time. His work, therefore,involved heavy responsibilities, and sometimes serious personalrisks, notably during the Fenian outrages in 1882-83, when hehad to examine several “infernal machines,” and on the occasionof the Birmingham scare in 1883, when he superintended andhimself assisted in the conversion of several hundred pounds ofimpure nitro-glycerine (which had been secretly manufactured inthe heart of Birmingham) into dynamite, and so averted whatmight have been a terribly disastrous explosion.He was highlycommended in the House of Commons by Sir William Harcourt,then Home Secretary, in connection with this “prompt andcourageous action,” and by Sir Vivian Majendie in the 8th AnnualReport of the Inspectors of Explosives in 1883. As late as 1907he devised a new method of testing for infinitesimal traces of mer-cury in explosive compounds.His private consulting work was alsoconsiderable, and he was engaged in many important law casesas a scientific witness.It might well be supposed that these responsible undertakingsengrossed him entirely, but this was far from being the case.During the first twenty years of his appointment a t the WestminsterHospital Medical School he gave great attention to his lecturesand to the practical teaching of chemistry. His lectures werealways very fully illustrated with experiments, which year afteryear seemed to give him renewed pleasure to perform, and althoughnot very easy to follow, he was always extremely interesting owinOBITUARY. 2273to the mass of information he had ever ready to hand. I n 18%he published, in conjunction with the writer, then recentllyappointed Assistant-TAectrurer, ‘‘ A Manual of Inorganic Chemistry,”wllich had some success, and which reached its third edition in 1901.This book was dedicated t o Professor Will, of Giessen, whom healways spoke of with the highest admiration and reverence as agreat teacher.The subject of toxicology, on which, as already said, he alsolectured both a t Westminster and a t the London School of Medi-cine for Women, had always specially interested him, and 1 1 ~became known and was not unfrequently consulted as a toxicologist.IIe was brought into particular prominence in connexion with thccelebrated Lamson case in 1881..As an instance of the thoroughness of his work, the writer wellremembers Dupr6 tasting sixteen quinine powders which hadbeen prepared for the unfortunate victim in this case, and hisalmost immediately experiencing the now familiar and somewhatalarming physiological effect of the aconitine which he found inthe last powder.He was associated in this case’with Sir ThomasStevenson.It has already been mentioned that very soon after leavingthe University Dupr6 began t o publish scientific papers, and itseems surprising that amid such varied occupations he found timeto work out so many original problems. His papers amount tono less than thirty-four in number between 1855 and 1902. Ofthese, five papers are included in the Proceedings and Transactionsof the Royal Society between 1866 and 1872. The first, in 1866,with Dr.Bence Jones, on “Animal Quinoidine,” may be said tohave anticipated the later important researches of Selmi and otherson Ptomaines. Another, in 1871, dealt ably with the Eliminationof Alcohol in the human subject, a problem then arousing mucliinterest. The remaining four papers, published between 1868 and1872, some of the work being done in conjunction with the lateMr. F. J. M. Page, rank, perhaps, as his best efforts, treating ofthe specific heat and other characters of various aqueous mixturesand solutions, nota.bly of mixtures of ethyl alcohol and water, inthe course of which he made the remarkable observation that mix-tures of these last two substances up to 36 per cent. of ethyl alcoholhad a specific heat sensibly higher than that of water itself.I n the Journal of the Chemical Society are found eight papersbetween 1867 and 1880.One on the Synthesis of Formic andSulphurous Acids, four on the Various Constituents of Wine, includ-ing compound ethers, one on the Estimation of Urea with Hypo-lwomite by means of an ingenious apparatus DOW so universally em2374 OR1 TU A RY.ployed, and two, in conjunction with the writer, on a New Methodof Estimating Minute Quantities of Carbon, which was includedby the late Dr. E. Frankland in his well-known work on WaterAnalysis.Between 1877 and 1883 he read no less than thirteen papersbefore the Society of Public Analysts dealing with the analysis offoods or water, and most of the methods evolved by him in thesepublications are still used or have given rise to improved operations,notably those dealing with butter fat, fuse1 oil in whiskey and otherspirits, alum in flour and bread, foreign colouring matters in wine,and methods of water analysis.He published only two papers on Explosives, tlo which he hadgiven such great attention, before the Society of Chemical Industry,and these as late as 1902. As a matter of fact, however, muchoriginal work was done by him in this branch of chemistry, someof which appears in the Annual Reports of H.M.Inspectors ofExplosives, while again much could not be put forward owing tohis official connexion with the Home Office.His earliest papers, published between, 1855 and 1862, are six innumber, and deal with volumetric methods and spectrum analysis(conjointly with his brother, Dr.F. W. DuprB), the iodic test formorphia, and the presence of copper in plant and animal tissues,this last in conjunction with Odling.To the chemistry of wine, as will be seen from the above sum-mary, he devoted a good deal of attention, and was joint authorwith Dr. Thudichuin of .a work entitled I‘ On the Origin, Nature,and Varieties of Wine,’’ published in 1872, in which a considerableamount of original analytical work is embodied.Dupr6 married, in 1876, Miss Florence Marie Robberds, of Man-Chester, and leaves a family of one daughter and four sons, twoof whom, Frederick and Percy, are now carrying on his work forthe Home Office. He was of a striking personality, of mediumheight, but very powerfully built, with a massive head and brow,and must have possessed an iron constitution. As a young manhe was a skiIled fencer and swimmer.He was of somewhat excitabletemperament, but had a most kindly disposition. Although not afluent speaker, he was impressive from his obvious sincerity, andthe thorough knowledge he displayed. He therefore made an excel-lent expert witness, and was more than once complimented in Courton his straightforward evidence. I n controversy he was unsparingwhere facts were concerned, and a t times intensely sarcastic.Although almost wholly devoted to chemistry, his mind foundmany other outlets. He was a great student of history, and hisquite remarkable memory was frequently exemplified in conversaOR1 TU AR P .2275tion on this subject. He was also exceptionally well read in generalas well as in scientific literature, both English and German, andamassed a large collection of books. Among other hobbies hepursued astronomy and photography. His mind, indeed, seemsrarely to have been idle; he had a perfect passion for work, and,except for a few weeks' holiday annually, he never relaxed. Thereis little doubt that a t one time, about 1591, he overstrained hisbrain, and was obliged for some months to take a complete rest,which, fortunately, restored him to renewed energy. Like manygreat men, he was of a modest and retiring nature, and probably butfew of his contemporaries have realised the magnitude and varietyof the work he accomplished during fifty years of almost unceasingac tivi t y .H.T\'ILSON HARE.JOHN CLARK, PH.D., F.I.C.EORN 1844; DIED JULY ~ T H , 1907.DR. CLARK was born in 1844, being the only son of John Clark, asolicitor of eminence in the City of Glasgow. He received hiseducation in the classics a t Glasgow University, and during hisperiod of study there acquired a taste for chemistry and becamea pupil in the laboratory of the late Dr. Frederick Penny, who wassuccessor to Graham., Ure, and Gregory in the Chair of Chemistryof Anderson's College, now incorporated in the Glasgow and Westof Scotland Technical College. He subsequently proceeded t o theUniversity of GBttingen, where he worked with Fittig andWohler, gaining the degree of Doctor of Philosophy for a disserta-tion on amidovalerianic acid. He also studied for a session a tHeidelberg under Bunsen, and afterwards worked in Paris for ninemonths in the laboratory of Prof.Payen a t the Conservatoiredes Arts et Metiers. At the still early age of twenty-three hereturned to Glasgow, where he was for three years senior assistanta t the Andersonian College to his old teacher, Penny, acting as hissubstitute during the illness which ended in Penny's death. I n1870 he joined his friends, Mr. Tatlock and the late Dr. Wallace, informing the widely-known firm of Wallace, Tatlock and Clark, who,in addition to their analytical practice, carried on a very successfulprivate school of technical chemistry. For some years Dr. Clarkalso lectured on chemistry in the Medical School of the RoyalInfirmary a t Glasgow.I n 1888 the original partnership was dis-solved by the retirement from the firm of Mr. Tatlock, who estala2276 0 RITU A R V.lished the separate practice which he still carries on in conjunctionwitlli Nr. R. T. Thomson; and the deatlh of Dr. Wallace left Dr.Clark in sole chargc of the laboratory of the original firm a t 138,Bath Street, until his son and survivor, Mr. R. M. Clark, hecnnicqualified, a few years since, to join his father in partnership.Dr. Clark’s contributions to chemical literature were many, beingalmost wholly directed to the practical advancement of analyticalchemistry. I n the AnuZ?j.st only one paper appears to have beenpublished, namely, one on the “ Composition of Dutch Butter,” 1901.I n the Journal of the Chemical Society he published the follow-ing papers : -‘( Estlimation of Phosphoric Acid with Nitrate ofSilver,” 1888 ; Separation of Arsenic, Antimony, and Tin,” 1892 ;“The Use of Sodium Peroxide as an Analytical Reagent,” 1893;Fleitman’s Test with Arsenic Acid,” 1893 ; ‘ I Improvements inReinsch’s Test for Arsenic,” 1893.In the Journal of the Society of Chemical Industry : - f f Com-position of Tobacco,” 1884 ; “ New Method of Estimating Sulphurin Pyrites,” 1885; “New Method of Estimating Arsenic inPyrites,” 1887 ; ‘( Alloys of Aluminium,” 1887 and 1891 ; “ Trans-vaalite, a New Cobalt Mineral,” 1890; ‘‘ Analysis of Copper, &c.,”1900 ; “ Separation of Bismuth from Lead,” 1900 ; “ Direct Estima-tion of Arsenic in Minerals, Metals, &c.,” 1891 ; “Estimation ofChromium in Steel,” 1892 ; ‘‘ Estimation of Chromium in Ferro-Chromium and Steel,” 1892 ; “ Determirmtion of Arsenic in Alka-line Solution,J’ 1893; ‘( Estimation of Nickel and Zinc asPhosphate,” 1896 ; ‘‘ Estimation of Antimony in Ores andMetals,” 1896.I n the Journal of the Philosophical Society of Glasgow : -“ Action of Phosphuretted Hydrogen on the Animal Organisms,”1879; “Volumetric Process for the Estimation of Cobalt andNickel,” 1883; ‘‘ A New Process for the Estimation of Nickel andCobalt,” 1883.I n the Chemical News :-(‘ Estimation of Chromium,” 1871.Among the public appointments he held were the Public Analyst-ships for the counties of Lanark and Renfrew, and the burghs ofAyr, Kilmarnock, Girvan, Dumbarton, Kinning Park, Motherwell,Partick, Barrhead, Paisley, Renfrew, and Dornoch, and for theCity of Glasgow, the last-named appointment being held con jointlywith Mr. Tatlock and Mr.Harris.A t the time of his death Dr. Clark was President of the Associa-tion of Public Analysts of Scotland, as well as of the parent Societyof Public Analysts, and a member of the Council of the Instituteof Chemistry, and he had filled the office of Chairman of tlheScottish Section of the gociety of Chemical IndustryOBITUARY. 2277His acquisition of French and German a t an early age enabledhim t o read, write, and speak these languages with facility, and tokeep himself abreast of. the chemical literature of the Continent.Although fully occupied in his professional life, he found timeand opportunity for physical recreation of various kinds, golfing,bowling, and angling, in all of which he excelled, and in thiscapacity received presidential honours from the clubs and associa-tions with which he was connected. During his German Universitystudent days he was a sufficiently orthodox student to earn thereputation of a keen duellist, and in moments of early reminiscencehe was still proud of the scars which constituted the lastingtrophies of this mimic but sanguinary warfare.His adventures inthis direction must be put down to his love of sport rather than t oany natural tendency to quarrel, for his disposition was one of thekindliest and most genial, and his bright face and physically hand-some presence will be long missed in the circles in which he per-sonally moved.Few, probably, have gained greater respect thanhc commanded, both within his profession and in the eye of thcpublic, and the loss of his friendship, as well as of his ever-readyadvice and assistance, will be widely felt.R. R. TATLOCK.FREDERICK JAMES MONTAGUE PAGE.BOJiK JUNE 27’I’H, 1848 ; DIED AUG. 1 6 ~ ~ , 1907.FREDE~ZICK JAMES MONTAGUE PAGE was born a t Chelmsford 011June 27th, 1848, being an only child. When he was eight yearsold he came to London with his parents, and in due course enteredthe City of London School, at that time in Milk Street. Whilethere, he carried off many prizes and medals, and obtained the‘’ John Carpenter ” Scholarship.In 1866, when eighteen years ofagc, he gained an exhibition to the ’Royal School of Mines, wherclie studied under Huxley, Tyndall, Frankland, and Percy. Thcfollowing year he was first in chemistry and in physics, and a t thcclosc of his three years’ training, 1869, he took the associateshipof the Royal School of Mines, again passing first in chemistry andiirst; in physics. He took his final B.Xc. London in the same year,having passed the preliminary’ (first class) in 1868 with honours inchemistry and ‘‘ natural philosophy.”His first appointment on leaving the Royal School of Mines wasthat of assistant gas examiner to the Corporation of the City o fLondon, but in 1870 he went to Dr. Thudichuiii as his assistant,where he was occupied for about three years in chemid researc2278 OBITUARY,undertaken for the Medical Department of the Privy Council.I n1873 he left Dr. Thudichum to become the assistant of Dr. BurdonSanderson, first at the Brown Institute and subsequently atUniversity College, remaining with him until the year 1883, whenhe was appointed lecturer in physics and demonstrator in prac-tical chemistry to the London Bospital-appointments he held a tthe time of his death. During the winter of 1879 and 1880 hedelivered courses of lectures on physics and chemistry a t theRoyal Gardens, Kew, and from 1880 to 1906 he gave lectures onchemistry and physics at the establishment of the well-knowntutors, Messrs. Wren and Gurney. He was for two years assistantexaminer in physiology at London University, and also held anexaminership a t the Society of Apothecaries.Page was with the writer of this obituary at the Birminghammeeting of the Society of Chemical Industry in July, 1907, and thenseemed to be in bad health, but put aside the suggestion that heshould consult a medical man.I n August he went to Weymouthfor a holiday, and, being an excellent swimmer and fond of thesport, he went into the sea, but became unconscious and wasbrought ashore. He was attended by three resident physicians,and his colleague, Dr. Head, of the London Hospital, also camedown to see him, but he never recovered consciousness, and died ofcerebral hzmorrhage on August 16tb, 1907, ten days after theattack.His contributions to science were more pliysiological thancheinical; amongst them are a paper “ On the Specific Heats ofMixtures of Ethyl Alcohol and Water,” published in the I’hiZ.Tj-am., 1869, p.591, in collaboration with Dr. A. Dupr6; one “ Onthe Influence of Surrounding Temperature on the Discharge ofCarbonic Acid in the Dog ” ; and four papers in conjunction withSir Burdon Sanderson, one being “On Mechanical Effects and onthe Electrical Disturbance Consequent on Excitation of the Leafof Dionaa m,uscipula,” Proc. Roy. Soc., 1877, 25, 4, and the otherspublished in Yroc. Roy. Soc., 1877, 25, 411; 1878, 27, 410; 1880,30, 373; and in J . Physiol., 2, p. 384, “ On Escitatory Processeson the Ventricle of the Heart of the Frog.” His only contribu-tion to our Journal was in 1876, i, p.24, describing a simple gasregulator for thermostats. I n conjunction with Dr. Luff he pro-duced a “Manual of Chemistry” and also a text-book on‘’ Elementary Physics.’’He served on t%e Council of the Chemical Society, and five timeson the Council of the Institute of Chemistry. He was also amember of the Society of Chemical Industry and of thePliysiological SocietyOBITUARY. 2279He was an enthusiastic musician, no mean performer on thepiano, and in his younger days had a fine tenor voice-this wassweet and sympathetic even up to the time of his decease.He was a staunch Churchman, and member formerly of thechoir of St. Martin’s-in-the-Fields, and subsequently of St. Peter’s,Eaton Square. He loved (( part singing,” and was for many yearsa member of the well-known “Moray Minstrels” and also of the“City Glee Club,” of which he had been elected president shortlybefore his death. He was a member of the John Carpenter Club,holding the office of president in 1902.As a man, all those who knew him well held him in highesteem, he was ever ready to do a kindness, and that not merely tohis intimate friends; his genial manner, ready wit, and sterlinggood sense will long live in the memory of many of us.C. E. G.SIR DAVID GAMBLE, BART., K.C.B.BORN YEB. 3RD, 1823 ; DIED FEB. 4TH, 1907.SIR DAVID GAMBLE, Bart,, E.C.B., was born on February 3rd,1823, in Dublin. His father, Josias Christopher Gamble, wasdescended from an Ayrshire family, which removed to Lisbellaw,near Enniskillen, in 1620. Jos. C. Gamble removed with his familyt n Lancashire in 1828 to find a suitable site for chemical works.This lie found a t St. Helens, on the banks of the St. Helens Canal.David Gamble went to school a t Cowley Hill, St. Helens, kept bya Mr, Morley, and afterwards a t Runcorn. On leaving school hestudied chemistry a t University College, London, under ThomasGraham, and afterwards a t the Andersonian Institution, Glasgow.While ig Glasgow he niade the acquaintance of the Tennant family,with whom the firm had business relations. In 1842, a t the age ofnineteen, he joined his father’s firm, which then became Jos. C .Gamble & Son.Mr. Gamble was preparing bleach at the Gerards Bridge Works,but the anxieties connected with the disputed validity of one ofhis patents, added to the claims continually made by landownersand agriculturists on account of damage done by escaping hydro-chloric acid, had so told on his health that David on coming intothe firm almost immediately assumed charge. I n 1846 the firm wasGamble, Son and Sinclair, and very soon afterwards became againJos. C. Gamble & Son. A t this time they manufactured alum, aswell as the products usually made at alkali works. The firm wasone of the first and largest to manufacture Epsom salts on a larg2280 OBITUA BYscale from carbonate of magnesia imported from Greece. Thiswas, about the 'sixties, much used for weighting calico.David Gamble married Elizabeth Haddock, in 1847, and residednear to the works, ultimately building the mansion " Windlehurst "in 1860. His eldest son, Josias Christopher Gamble, the secondbaronet, who died soon after succeeding to the title, joined thefirm in 1867, which was a t that time the first to carry outWeldon's process for the recovery of manganese on a largeindustrial scale. The firm was now Jos. C. Gamble & Son.They were also one of the first to make potassium chlorate on alarge scale, and about 1869 they bought the I'iardshaw BrookWorks, where they manufactured chiefly saltcake, bleach, andpotassium chlorate. They also manufactured for a short timechlorates of barium, aluminium, etc. The firm carried on operationson a very large and important scale with increasing success, andwhen the United Alkali Co., Ltd., was formed, in 1890, there wassome difficulty in inducing Messrs. Jos. C. Gamble and Son to join.However, in 1891 they joined the United Alkali Co., which thussecured a practical monopoly in Great Britain of alkali manufac-ture and kindred industries.Sir David Gamble was one of the most active members of thecommittee which raised funds for the establishment of the Volun-teer force in St. Helens in 1859 and 1860. He was captain of thefirst company, and as the force grew he was promoted to be major,in which capacity he served so earnestly and with so much skill thatthis force became one of the best equipped and trained units inthe country. Ultimately he became 1ieut.-colonel. It was hisgcnerosity which provided a drill-hall and parade-ground ; inshort, he provided in every way for the efficiency of the 47thLancashire Volunteers during the twenty-seven years that he was itscommanding officer. He retired in 1887, becoming honorarycolonel. He was also very fond of the sea, which he enjoyed inhis own yacht. He was a leading member of the Royal MerseyYacht Club for forty-nine years, becoming vice-commodore in 1873and commodore in 1882, a position which he retained until hisdeath in 1907. Residing as he did near St. Helens, in the midstof a community almost entirely engaged in manufactures, he paid agreat deal of attention to organising and improving the conditioiiof the town and its inhabitants. Taking a leading part in obtain-ing the Improvement Act, 1845, he became Chairman of thcImproveiiient Commissioners, and when in 1868 St. Helens wasincorporated, Colonel Gamble became fhc first mayor, a position towhich he was re-elected twice in successive years. He was alsowayor iu 1882-3, and again in 1886-7OBITUARY. 2281On the occasion of Queen Victoria’s Jubilee in 1887 he was madeCommander of the Bath. He was created a baronet in 1897 andK.C.B. in 1904.Sir David Gamble took a leading part in the foundation of theUniversity College, Liverpool, which afterwards became theUniversity of Liverpool. He not only contributed liberally andrepeatedly to its funds, but devoted time and attention to itsinterests as a member of the Court of Governors as well asprivately. His interests were not confined to the Chemical Depart-ment, although to it he was on many occasions a good friend. Hewas always willing in the most courteous way to listen to appeals,whether for help or advice, and many important advances weredue in great measure to his wisdom, his sympathy, and hisgenerosity.In 1868 Sir D. Gamble built the Windle Schools a t Cowley Hill,St. Helens. He was a governor of Cowley Schools, and promotedthe extension of these schools, and also built and equipped a high-class technical school and free libray for St. Helens, known as theGamble Institute.During sixty-four years of active industrial and public life, SirDavid Gamble was characterised by the great consideration andcourtesy which he extended to everyone with whom he had to doeither in a public or private capacity. Possessed of great ability,he spent his energies more for others than for himself. Histhoughtful care for the workpeople around him led him intoschemes for their benefit far too many to be enumerated. Hiswork and gifts were bestowed in the most unostentatious manner.Besides his activity in the public service as a magistrate and other-wise, his business ability made him a valued director of Parr’s Bankfrom its foundation, and of other companies. He was a partner iniron works at Ditton. He and Mr. Henry Deacon built and startedthe works a t Widnes which became the Tharsis Sulphur and Copperworks there.And when, on February 4th, 1907, the day after his eighty-fourthbirthday, he passed away full of years and still active, the wholecommunity of St. Helens, the County of Lancashire, and innumer-able friends far beyond the boundaries of the county felt that theyhad suffered an irreparable loss.J. CAMPBELL BROWN