116 THE ANALYST. CORRESPONDENCE. [The Editors are not responsible for the opinions of their Correspondente.] To THE EDITOR OF L‘ THE ANALYST.” SIR,-M~ ahort ‘‘ Note on Violet Powder ” evidently contains some wholesome truths which have proved very unpalatable to various of your readers, since their anger has made them forget logic, fairness, and even ordinary propriety. With such I can of cour~e not enter into any discussion, but I would ask for space to assure your correspondents, ‘‘ The Manufacturers of the Steamer Over a Globe Violet Powder,” that I am not above learning even from manufacturers of scented selenite powder.If they will, therefore, kindly point out the fallacies and erroneous conclusions contained in my Note, I will carefully consider their statements, and should I find them correct will alter my own accordingly.I must, however, at once protest against the assertion that I have included arsenic au among the oonetiktePts of various violet powderer. I remain, yours, &o., A. DUPR6.THE ANALYST. 117 To TEE EDITOR OF “ THE ANALYST.” SIR,-AS you have called upon me to produce whatever evidence I may have relating to the nature of the 88cch81111 ’ e substances contained in malt wort, and to the detection of oane sugar in wort, will you give me space to wy that I have for a long time pa& been actively engaged in investigating the matter, and have notes of a very large number of experiments, showing, analytically, that the sugar of wort is naidtOSt?, not glucose.But, since my experiments oannot be ~ o m p ~ ~ s e d into the namw eompass of a letter, I trust to be allowed to give them at length at an early meeting of the Swiety of Public Analysts.As far as I could ascertain, the method adopted by the Somerset House chemists to determine the quantity of cane sugar in wort consists in boiling the wort for a few minuteB with a little dilute sulphuric acid, by which treatment dextrin is said not to be affected, cane sugar being converted into glucose, the increase in the amount of saccharine matter capable of reducing Fehling’s solution being calculated as cane sugar. How faulty and untrustworthy this method is, especially when only comparatively small quantities of cane sugar are in question, I tam ready to show. I remain, yours obediently, OTTO HEHNER.