14 THE ANALYST. COBBE8PONDEiVCE. [The Editors are not responsible for the opinions of their Correspondents.] To THE EDITOR OF (( THE ANALYST.” THE ‘( ORGANIZATION AMONGST CHENISTS.” SIR,-will you grant me a line of your space to ask if it be really true, as I have heard, that by the scheme, as at present proposed, all chemists now in business are not to be admitted, as a matter of course, into the new organizaticu, but that the sapient few who have nominated themselves as judges a e to select whom they please to be dubbed ti competent.” Perhaps some of the leaders of our profession, as they call themselves, will.satisfy the curiosity on this point, which is shared by many Analysts throughout England, and by none more 10 than by ONE WHO HAS BEEN IN PRACTICE FOR TWENTYEARS. To THE EDITOR OF (‘THE ANALYST.” SIR.-In order not to allow the important question raised by the letter of Dr.Lowe in the January number of The Analyst to drop, without some further discussion, 1 beg to forward the following account of my experiencc regarding the purity and strength of the drugs and medicines dispensed in London. I have, during the last five years, carefully examined 165 samples of drugs and medicines bought at the better class of chemists’ shops i n all parts of London.With very few exceptions, all these drugs were bought under the Latin name, by which they are distingnished in the British Pharmacopma (1867) or more directly still as representing the pharmacopea standard. I n many cases the bottles or packets were labelled B.P.or Brit. Pharm. ; in some the label stated contains so and so much of such and such as the case might be. If, under these conditions, the strength of the drug or medicine bought falls considerably below the standard of the Pharmacopcca, I consider the article adulterated, entirely irrespective of the intrinsic harmlessness or othemise of the substance used for adulterating, The value of a drug or medicine depends in great measure on its really being of the strength it is supposed to be7 and any material departure from such a standard is highly injurious.Well, out of the 165 samples examined no less than seventy-one were found adulterated, some to a very considerable extent. I will give a Eew examples. LIQUOR ARSENWALIS. Should contain four grains of arsenious anhydride per fluid ounce. Six samples were examined, containing the following proportions of arsenious acid; per ounce, 2 .4 3-2, 3.7, 3.75, 3.8, and 3.9. The first of these proportions presents an adulteration equal to a dilution of 60 per cent., or 100 ounces of true liquor arsenicalis had been made into 160 ounces. SCAMMONY. According to the Brit. Pharm. this should contain 80 or 90 per cent.resin soluble in ether, and should be free from carbonates and starch. Fluckiger and Hanbury give 88 to 90 and state that scammony which does not afford at least 80 per cent. of matter soluble in either, should be rojected. Six samples examined, etherial extract in five ranged between 65.2 and 70.3, in one just comes up to 80 per cent. All samples contain chalk, some more than ten per cent.; three contain starch in addition, FERRI ET QUINIB CTTBAS. Seventeen samples examined, six came up to standard, in eleven the alkaloid, not always pure quiuine, ranged between 4.1 and 10.3 per cent., the ferric oxide from 19 3 to 33 per cent. I will give the short remarks in my laboratory book with regard to two, at least, of these samples. No.19 labelled “contains 25 per cent. of citrafe of quinine” (which would be correct) contains 4.69 per cent. of quinine, and 2.35 per cent. cinchonine ; tartaric acid too much ferric oxide (24.1 per cent.) 10 per cent, carbonate of potassium in ash. Very bad sample. contains 28 per cent. of citrate of quinine ” contains 4’46 per cent. of quinine, and 0.5 per cent. of cinchonine, much tartaric acid, too much ferric oxide (22.6 per cent.) 6.9 per cent.carbonate of potassium in ash. Very bad sample, Drugs con- sisting of sugar, well defined chemical compounds, such as bromide of potassium, iodide of potassium, sulphate of quinine. &c., kc., are nearly always found pure. All such, on the other hand, as should Should contain 16 per cent. of quinine, 20 per cent, of ferric oxide.No. 20 labelled But it is useless to multiply examples. My experience may be summed up as folIows.THE ANALYST. 15 contain a certain proportion of active ingredients, or should be the more or less altered natural product, are frequently adulterated. Thus out of forty-nine samples of the first class, two only were found adulter- ated, whereas out of 116 samples of the second class no less than 69 were found adulterated.As Analyst for Westminster, I have examined 359 articles of food and drinks, viz., 135 sample8 of milk, and 224 samples of breild, tea, coffee, sugar, mustard, butter, ale, porter, gin, port wine, vinegar, pepper, jam, oatmeal, arrowroot. Out of 135 samples of milk, 40 were found adulterated with water, and 8 more had been skimmed, total48, or a little more than one-third.Itis right, however, to state that at Brst the proportion of samples found adulterated, was considerably higher, while at present, it is considerably lower. Of the remaining 224 samples, 14 only were found adulterated, and in two more adulteration waa suspected, but could not be proved; thus of the drugs, 43 per cent. were more or less adulterated, and of other articles, only w little more than 17 per cent. Comment, I think, is needless, I remain, &c., A.DUPRB Westminster Hospital, Xarch 19th, 1877. THE following correspondence between the Public Analyst for Gravesend and the Local Government Board is of such general intereet, that we reprint it for the benefit of our readers. To THE MEMBERS OF THE LOCAL GOVERNKENT BOARD.January 23rd, 1877. GmTLEMEN,-on reporting the fulfilment of my duties as Analyst during the past quarter, 1 find 1 have had to analyse water three times, and to report on the examination of meat once ; this is all. I t is not to be supposed that articles of food sold in the town are all free from adulteration, such, I know, is not the case. I t appears to be the duty of no one to bring them for examination, therefore they are not examined.I gather also that my duty docs not extend to searching for adulteration, but that I am only to examine what is brought to me by the Inspector, an official complaint having been made. Milk is almost universally sold mixed with 25 per cent. of water, and confessedly so. A large quantity of butter called “ Irish,” is also sold at Is, B pound, and I could, I believe, find other May I then ask for information on the following points? articles of the same impure character.1. Hove I the power in my own hands of directing the Inspector t o procure specimens of articles 2. Is it my duty to do this ? 3. Have I the power to direct him to procure me water from wells which are complaiaed of, or must I wait for the order of the Water Sanitary Authority, whose officer I am supposed to be, and who pays the whole of my salary ? I believe many wholesale dealers know well in what towns analysis is frequent, and act in their sales I suspect to be adulterated, and to bring them to me far examination ? accordingly I am, yours truly, J.B. GRAMSHAW, M.D., Artalyst for Gravesetad. LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD, February 6th1 1877. SXR,-I am directed by the Local Government Board to acknowledge the receipt of your letter, dated 23rd ultimo, with reference to your powers and duties as Public Analyst for the Borough of Gravesend, and in reply, I am to refer you to section 13 of the “Sale of Food and Drugs’ Act,’’ 1876, which provides for procuring samples for analysis “ under the direction of the Local Authority,” and to point out that it is by the Authority, and not by the Analyst, that the direction to procure samples must be given to the Inspector or other officer, I am, Sir, Your obedient Servant, W. BOBSON, Assistant-8ecrrtary.