摘要:

144 THE ANALYST. THE ACID OP WILLOW BARK. By D. B. Dorr. From the Phamnaceutical Journal. THE chemistry of the willow seems to have been little studied, and what attention it has received has been almost entirely devoted to its active principle, salicin. All the information I have been able to obtain regarding the constituents of the bark is very meagre, the majority of works on chemistry and materia rnedica merely mentioning that salicin is extracted therefrom ; while, curiously enough, the ‘ Pharmacographia ’ of Fluckiger and Hanbury omits all notice of the subject.Neligan states (authority not given) that the bark contains resinous matter, gum, chlorophyll, tannin, an organic salt of magnesia, and salicin; and that is as complete an account as I have found in any of the other books.When an inhsion of willow bark is made, the liquor is distinctly acid to litmus. In the preparation of salicin by Erdmann’a process this acid is neutralised by the excess of lime, and the salt thereby formed passes into solution. On evaporating to dryness and exhausting the residue with spirit the salt is redissolved and remains in the apirituous solution after the salicin has crystallized out.The salt may be obtained by distilling off the spirit and allowing the residue to crystallize. These cryatals are then purified by recrystallization from water. Thus prepared the lime-salt separates in the form of ti cauliflower-like mass composed of radiate groups of prismatic crystals, A portion of these crystals when heated fused, and inflamed, left a residue of calcic carbonate, indicating an organic salt of lime.It was found that the substance lost weight but slowly in the exsiccator, and likewise ia the water-bath. A portion of theTHE ANALYST. 145 air-dried salt was therefore dried in the air-bath at 130° C. 9.140 grs. lost 2.745 grs. = 30.03 per cent. In another determination with a different crop of crystals 7-85 grs.lost 2.275 grs.= 28.98 per cent. A quantity of the salt was then incinerated in a platinum crucible, the residue being treated with excess of sulphuric acid and the crucible again ipited. 6.41 grs. gave 4.00 grs. CaS04= 1.176 grs. Ca= 18.34 per cent. I n the second determination 6.12 grs. gave 3-82 grs. CaS04= 1-12 grs. Ca= 18.35 per cent. One or two methods for preparing the acid were tried, the following being the process finally adopted :-To a solution of the lime-salt in water solution of oxalic acid is added-not in excess.The precipitate is then separated by filtration, the filtrate concentrated and extracted with ether, which dissolves the acid. The ether being now driven off, a syrupy solution of the acid is left. A few ounces were prepared by this method and placed over sulphuric acid under a bell-glass for two days.The acid then remained in the form of a syrup, almost odourless, with an intensely sour taste. As in these respects it exactly resembled lactic acid, and seeing that the calcium salt in its crystalline form and in its percentages of HpO and Ca corresponded with calcio di-lactate, there could be little doubt that the acid under examination was lactic acid.To make more certain, however, some further tests were applied. A little was heated in a test-tube, when water and carbonic anhydride were given off, and a residue left which shortly solidified. A portion was then boiled with sulphuric acid, which liberated an inflammable gas burning with a blue flame-no doubt carbon monoxide.When a small quantity was heated with sulphuric acid and manganese dioxide, a vapour smelling like aldehyde was evolved. A portion of the acid was distilled and the fraction coming over and above 130° C. was evaporated and treated with cold alcohol, which separated small white crystals, having the form of rhomboidal plates, and in other respects resembling lac tide. From the acid as above obtained the zinc-salt was prepared by warming with excess of zinc carbonate, filtering, and allowing to crystallize.The crystals were pressed between blotting paper and exposed for a short time to the air. I n these air-dried crystals the H,O was determined by drying in the water bath; 6.065 grs. lost 1.125 grs. = 18-46 per cent. In a second determination with another crop of crystals 9.275 grs.lost 1.695 grs. = 18.27 per cent. The zinc was determined in the dry salt by ignition in the blow-pipe flame; 6.33 grs. gave 2.12 grs. ZnO = 33.49 per cent. I n another determination 7.58 grs. gave 2.55 grs. ZnO = 33.64 per cent. The above numbers are here compared with those caIculated for the normal calcium and zinc salts of lactic acid respectively- Found.per cent I. 11. mean. H,O . . . 29.22 30*03 25.98. 29.505 Ca . . . 18.34 18.34 18-35 18-345 Zn(C,H,O,), 3 H,O. Found. per cent. I. 11. mean. H,O . . . 18.33 15.4 6 18.27 18.36 ZnO , . . 33.38 33.49 33.64 33.56 The ZnO is too high, owing either t o an impurity in the salt, or t o a fault in the analysis ;146 THE ANALYST. but I had not time t o exatnine into the matter. The zinc-salt crystallized in four-sided truncated prisms, which were insoluble in alcohol. I am unable to state from what species of salix the acid was prepared, but as all the samples of bark I have examined give acid infusions, it is not improbable that lactic acid exists in all the members of the Salicacez.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8770200144

出版商:RSC    

年代:1877

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

146 THE ANALYST. CORRESPONDENCE. [The Editors are not responsible for the opinions of their Correspondents.] To THE EDITOR OF “THE ANALYST.” SIq-With your kind permission, I should like to be allowed to make a few remarks on the following questions:-Firstly, as to the so-called castor oil pills. That the sale of a pill under the name of a substance of which it does not contain a trace is a fraud, and a very mischievous one, seems such an obvions truism, that one can scarcely understand how it can be disputed.Since the first prosecution regarding the sale of castor oil pills, without castor oil, has taken place, I have asked a number of persons, educated as well as uneducated, what they imagined the chief active principle of their castor oil pills to be, and was in every case informed that they bought tbem because they believed them to contain castor oil, or perhaps a concentrated extract of the oil, retaining all the active principle.The defenders of the practice of mis- naming pharmaceutical preparations, who bring forward numerous cases to prove the generality of the practice, all ignore the gravest feature of the case, independently of the fact that two wrongs do not make a right, viz., that these pills are sold as a purgative, and are sold under the name of a well-known and highly appreciated article, unfortunately, however, somewhat unpleasant to take.Persons, therefore, who like the action of the oil, but not the taking of it, buy these pills, and are miserably taken in. The proposal of some pharmacists to add a trace of castor oil, and call the pill compound castor oil pill, is so utterly contemptible, that I can only express my astonishment at the length to which some trades-people seem willing to go.Secondly, as to the question of peas coloured by copper. I must confess that I had hoped Messrs. Paul and Kingzett would of their own accord withdraw their hasty conclusions as soon as they saw the very poor show their experiments made in print.This, however, is obviously not their intention, and they actually seem to imagine that they have settled the question once for all in favour of the coloured peas. Could there be a more glaring instance of the unscientific use of the imagination. How could they venture to draw any serious conclusions from their few experiments, in which they have not even taken the trouble to estimate the total quantity of copper they took, nor the quantity of the metal passed by ths bowel, and when they know absolutely nothing about the qumtity of copper which, whem absorbed into the system, proves injurious to various constitutions ? But it is rcally waste of time to criticise such work as this, and I trust that no Public Analyst at least will be misled into the belief that peas coloured by copper have been in any way proved to be non-injurious.Copper seems to be one of those substances which, like arsenic, mercury, lead, opium, &c., &c., act with very different intensity on different constitutions, or under different conditions. Some persons can withstand the injurious effects of quantities of these substances which to others would be absolutely fatal, while some are sensitive to the action of quantities which we can only call infinitesimal.How much lead, for example, will find ite way into the system of a person exposed to the exhalations from freshly-painted surfaces for a few hours, or how much arsenic into the system of one staying for a few hours in a room, the paper of which is coloured by arsenical green ? And yet we know that both these conditions sometimes produce characteristic symptoms of lead or arsenic poisoning.Now, although copper does not seem as active under any conditions as either lead or arsenic (although even this is doubtful), many of its com- pounds are undoubtedly poisonous, and it appears to me utterly unjustifiable to defend such a practice as the colouring of peas by means of copper on the strength of a few rough experiments such as those of Messrs.Paul and Kingzett. In conclusion, a few words as to the question raised in Dr. Morgan’s letter in your last issue. I can scarcely believe that the certificate of Messrs. Bell, Bannister, and Helm has been quoted correctly. As is well known, chloride of sodium had been put into the schedule of prohibited articles in the Licensing Act of 1872.This, as was natural, created some commotion among brewers ; they petitioned Government, and, after a prolonged inquiry, the addition, or rather the presence in all, of 50 grs. of chloride of sodium per gallon was permitted. This is absolute proof that no English beer or ale of any consequence, at that time at least, contained naturally more than this proportion of common salt.It is extremely unlikely that the Burton supply has, since then, eatirely changed its character, Yours, &c., October, 1877. A. DUPRE.THE ANALYST. 147 To THE EDITOR OF ‘( THE ANALYST.” Sm,-Your letter of yesterday to our Directors has been handed to me. In answer, I assert and assure you that no ales leave this brewery containing 20 grains of salt per gallon. The waters used here contain from 6-10 grains to 5.35 grains chlorine per gall., and in no caee is their a concentration to one- half. Salt is not used, or any matters to form it. We are aware a little may be added from the malt and hops used. Consequently I cannot err much in my report of this day on a strong beer, having had more than usual amount of concentration, containing 16.60 grains per imperial gallon. I am, Sir, faithfully yours, WILLIAM EIRK, 23rd October, 1877. Chemist to the Bzcrtoa Brewery Cbmpaq.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8770200146

出版商:RSC    

年代:1877

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

THE ANALYST. 147 LAW REPORTS. ADULTERATION OF GIN. At Bow Street, William Birrell, landlord of the Two Brewers, 164, High Holborn, lately appeared to an adjourned summonq before Mr. Vaughan, charging him with having sold gin, which was not of tho nature, substance, and qualityof the article demanded. Mr. J. H. Jones, prosecuted, and Mr. Child, solici tor to the London Licensed Victuallers’ Protection Society, defended.The facts were these :-On the 1 lth of July last John Hoyle went to the appellant’s house, and, seeing him, asked for a bottle of gin for 2s., to which request the appellant answered that he had no bottles, that he had gin at three prices, upon which Hoylo said that he would take the cheapest, which cost 2s. Id. He then received a bottle. He then said that he was an inspector under the Sale of Food and Drugs Act, and that he had purchased the gin for the purpose of having it analysed.Opening the bottle, he divided the contents into three parts, which he poured into three smaller bottles. Having scaled these, he left one with the appellant and the other two he took away with him, One portion, which was taken to Professor Redwood for analysis, was found to be 42 under proof, or, in other words it consisted of 68 proof spirits and 42 of water.Mr. Thomas Arthur Smith, collecting clerk in the employ of Messrs. Tanqueray, gin distillers, of Vine Street, Bloomsbury, proved that the spirit when it was sent out by the firm was 17 under proof. Water and sugar were always added before the spirit was retailed.Mr. Child submitted that the question became what was the practice of the surrounding neighbourhood. If he went to Bond-street, he would expect to pay more than in Drury-lane. Mr. Vaughan said he did not see that at all--at least, not in a question of gin or gin and water. That was a contention ad abswrduin. He asked witness at what price the gin (1 7 under proof) was sold to the defendant.Witness said the price of the gin was 12s. l l d . a gallon, and there were about six bottles to the gallon; about 2s. for a pint and a-half. Mr. Child said that of course the defendant could not sell it at the same price. He must consider his expenses, the cost of preparing it, and sweetening it for the public taste. Then there was also the style of the place. Mr. Vaughau said he did not take that into consideration.Mr. Child submitted that this was a place of entertainment, open to the public, and they ought to pay fir the lights, the decorations, and the accommodation. I f he went into a very smart shop, he would know that he had to pay for the extra smartness of the place. Mr. Vaughan said he could not take into con- sideration the beauty of the barmaids, the respectability of the barmen, or the cost of the lights and decorations; all those things were for the purpose of enticing a number of flies to the place.There the lights were, and t.he people swarmed round them. The question was, was a quantity of water put in to fraudulently increase the measure of the gin. There were two ways for a publican to apt in. He could mix water to any extent that he liked, and the more water he put in, the better it would be for the public, but then he would have to say, ‘‘ This is reduced 60 per cent.; ” or he must say, “ This is a wonderful gin, not watered at all, and I shall sell it you for 2s. 6d.,” and so put his profit into his pocket that way. Then there was evidence that the gin sold at other places was not watered to the extent that the defendant’s had been.In one instance, the gin was simply 32 under, and in another 31+, but the defendant‘s was 42. Mr. Child submitted that at the price the gin was sold at, this reduction was was not to the prejudice of the purohaser. Mr. Vaughan said not to the prejudice of his stomach, no doubt, but it was to his pocket. The purchaser might sweeten and dilute his own gin to his own taste.Mr. Child had, as usual, fought the Case with great obstinacy, and said for his client everything that could ,be said ; but having carefully con- sidered the case and studied the Act of Parliament, no conclusion except one adverse to the defendant could be come to. Mr. Child submitted, in mitigation of damages, that this new application of the Act of Parliament had come upon licensed victuallers by surprise.The Act formerly specifying certain things that were not to be done had been repealed, and the licensed victuallers had been throwu in the general Act that affected all the pnblic. He should also ask Mr. Vaughan to send the case by appeal to the Qudrter SeAonu, as it was a matter of great iuiportmce to publicans to have the matter decided.Mr.148 THE ANALYST. J’aughan said he did not care whether the case went to the Quarter Sessions or to one of the Superior Courts. He should have thought one of the Superior Courts would have been better, E e would grant a case for the law of the matter to be argued, or the defendant might appeal. Mr. Child decided to appeal, and said he now left the case in the hands of the magistrate.Nr. Vaughan said he entertained no doubt but that the defendant had brought himself entirely within the provisions of the Act of Parliament-that is to say, had sold an article which had been adult- erated with water to an excessive extent for the purpose of fraudulently increasing the measure of what was represented to be gin.The question really was, whether it was necessary to give the spirit a commercial character to reduce it or water it to this extent. He had no doubt but that it was not. The penalty the defendant had made himself liable to was 6;20 ; he mitigated that to $5 and costs. There was a second 8ummons for the same offence against Mrs. Hitchin, of the L6 White Hart,” 191, Drury Lane, but in this case the added water was to the extent of 48 under proof.Mr. Vaughan allowed the case to stand over till after the decision of the appeal, and said that all the publicans had to do was to label the bottle. The appeal in connection with the above case was heard on October 20, before Mr. P. H. Edlin, Q.C., the Assistant-Judge; Mr. Hughes-Hughes, Mr. D. Hill, Mr. C. H. Campbell, Mr.Walshe, Mr. Bickerataffe, Mr. Halswell, and Mr. Ritchie, M.P., Justices. Mr. Besley and Mr. Child were counsel for the appellant; Mr. Poland and Mr. Croome were counsel for the respondent. Mr. Poland, having stated the facts, argued that Hoyle had asked for gin, and obtained not gin, but gin and water, as gin so weak as this was never supplied by the rectifier to the publican.I n this case the water must have been added by the publican, who had no right whatever to dilute his gin with water and then sell the mixture under the name of gin. The distiller prepared the raw spirit, which afterwards, according to the provisions of the Act of Parliament, went into the hands of the rectifiers, who made it into the merchantable article called gin. The raw spirit was changed into the merchantable article by reducing it, mixing it with juniper berries and other ingredients, and by distilling it.The gin could be made of any strength the rectifier pleased, but it was generally 17 to 22 per cent. under proof, It would be contended that as there was no standard as to the quality of gin the publican had a right to sell weak gin, but he argued that directly the publican added water to the gin it ceased to be gin and became gin and water.When a purchaser went and asked for a certain article, he expected to get it in the same state as it was received from the manufacturer. If gin was made by the rectifiers as weak as that which had been sold in this case, it would be a different thing; but the publican was not at liberty to add water as he pleased to gin which hc intended for sale.At thc close of Mr. Poland’s opening address, John Hoyle was called to prove the purchase of the bottle of gin fiomthe appellant, and Professor Redwood to prove the analysis. I n cross-examination, the latter stated that he could not tell whether water had or had not been added after distillation, and that there was no fixed standard strength for gin, the rectifier being at liberty to reduce his spirit to any strength he pleased, Thomas Arthur Smith, in Messrs.Tanqueray’s service, gave evidence, and stated that Messrs. Tanqueray supplied the Two Brewers with gin which was 17 under proof. The quality of gin generally supplied to customers was of varying strength, from 17 under proof to 35, and sometimes under that.Gin could be supplied by Messrs. Tanqueray of any strength down to 55 per cent. under proof, and it could be called gin, though 50 under proof. Mr. Besley, for the appellant, alluded to the practice of publicans of sclling fourpenny, fivepenny, and sixpenny gin over the counter, and said that no person who went in and asked for fourpenny gin believed that he was buying gin of the same strength as that which was sold for sixpence. Adulteration, as defined by ‘‘ Richardson’s Dictionary ” was (‘ to debase by a foreign nature, to bring into it something that is not a natural ingredient, to destroy its integrity by that which sullies its purity.’’ Gin, therefore, could not be adulterated with water, which was not alien to it, and without which it could not be rendered fit for consumption.Mr. Hoyle, the purchacer. had not been prejudiced. He had not asked for gin 17 under proof or 22 under, but for the cheapest gin which was sold. H e got it, and where was there any misrepresentation ? By reference to the Spirits Act, 23 and 24 Vict., cap, 114, it was clear that while on the one hand a maximum strength could not be exceeded by distiller, rectifier, dealer, or retailer, the minimum strength was not prescribed, and quantities of not less than two gallons could be sold at any strength, The permit for larger quantities than two gallons, which on the face of it indicated the BCrength was a mere Excise regulation for the collection of duty, and did not carry with it any such consequence as that further dilution after leaving the hands of the compounder altered the character of the article.I t was quite as much gin when 42 degrees under proof as when it was 17 under proof, and unless the purchaser specifically asked for gin of a certain strength no offence could be committed. Evidence mas then given that the particular bottle of gin sold had been bought by Mr. Birrell, from his predecessor ; that he had not in any way tested it, and that, he had sold it in the same state in which he received it, believing that it was a n article of the same nature and quality as two shilling gin which was demanded.This would have been a special defence under the statute if there had been an express written warranty, but the Court intimated an opinion that in the absence of such a warrant7 the defence failed.THE ANAT,YRT.149 ~ Upon the conclusion of the came the Justices retired, and on their retorn the Assistant Judge gave judgment as follows :- ‘‘ We think this conviction should be affirmed. With regard to the questions raised by Mr. Eesley as to the construction of the sixth section of the Act, we have before us the accordant decisions of the Supreme Court upholding the convictions in two cases in which the facts were substantially the same as in the present case.I t appears that it is the practice of rectifiers to add water to the rectified spirit or compound after its manufacture, so as to reduce its alcoholic strength to the degree below proof desired by the purchasers and thus there is no precise limit to the dilution it may undergo before it leaves the rectifier, although practically 35 per cent.below proof is the lowest strength for which there is any demand. But then, there is no room for fraud or deception in this mode of dealing, inasmuch as the manufacturer or rectifier is bound to speeify in the permit which the Excise law requires him to give to the purchaser at the time of the sale the actual strength of the spirit or compound sold, and, of course, the price chraged varies according to the strength.There is no such check, however, upon the seller of a less quantity than two gallons, and if, in order to increase the bulk and measure, water be added and the gin reduced below the strength at which the cominercial article so called is ordinarily sold and which it may be reasonably expected to possess, he must be careful not t o sell the diluted compound for such article to the prejudice of the buyer, as by so doing he may incur the penalty prescribed by this enactment.No doubt, in such a case thc prite charged bas to be considered. The evidence has satisfied us that the appellant was rightly convicted of this offence.There will, therefore be judgment for the respondent with costs.” Some of our Country Magistrates hold a different view on this subject, for : At the County Petty Sessions at Stockton, Joseph Tynan, William Scott, Gilbert Iving, William Walton, and Mary Scott, innkeepers at Sedgefield, were recently charged with selling adulterated gin. Mr, W. R. Fawcett, solicitor to the Stockton and District Licensed Victuallers’ Association, aFpeared for the defence.The case against Tynan was taken first. On the 15th ult., Superintendent Bell, inspector under the Food and Drugs’ Act, purchased a pint of gin at the defendant’s house, and had a poriion of it analysed by the county analyst, Mr. Edger, who certified it to be 43 under proof. Mr. Fawcett submitted that no conviction should follow if he proved that the gin in question was of the strength at which it mas usually sold in the distiict, and quoted an opinion of Mr.Justice Mellor’s in support of the contention. H e then called witness to prove that gin was bought a t 22 under proof, and that 20 per cent. of water was customarily added, this being the innkeepers’ only way of obtaining profit, The Bench dismissed the cwe and the others were withdrawn.We are glad, however, to see that this view of such glaring cases of adulteration is not general in the provinces. At the Bishop Auckland Police Court recently, Hugh Stoker, innkeeper, of Crook, was charged with selling gin which was 49 under proof, and George Knaggs of Spennymoor was charged with selling whisky which was 29 under proof.Nr. Superintendent Henderson was the prosecutor ; and Mr. Maw, was for the defence in both cases. I t appeard that the prosecutor went t~ Stoker’s house, and, after inspecting the measures, asked for a pint of gin such as they supplied to customers. Stoker drew some out of a cask they had just got in, but the superintendent declined to have any. H e pointed to a cask, and Stoker drew him a pint, and told him it was gin and water.I n the charge against Knaggs, it appeared that the innkeepers of Spennymoor, with the exception of the defendant and another, had agreed to raise the price of their spirits, and to sell a better article, in order to keep them within the law. The case against Knaggs was disrniesed; and Stoker was fined €5 and costs, and his license endorsed.How TO ADULTERATE MILx.-At the Belfast Police Court lately, John Stevenson, milk deaIer, residing at Ballymoney Townland, Falls Road, was summoned by TVilliam John Anderson, milk inspector, for selling adulterated butter milk. Mr. Coulter prosecuted, and Mr. Regan appeared for the defendant. I t appeared that the complainant purchased a sample of the defendant’s buttermilk, and forwarded it to Dr.Hodges, borough analyst, who certified that the sample contained 20 parts of water and 80 parts of milk, A witness who was produced for the defence said no water had been put in the milk; but, 011 being cross-examined, he said some water might have got in the cans before the milk was put into them. A fine of 40s. and 12s. costs was imposed on the defendant.DOCTORED BEER.-& the Stafford Petty Sessions recently, a publican was charged by the Inland Revenue authorities with having in his possedsion, and adulterating beer with, grains of paradise, whereby he had rendered himself liable to a penalty of $200. The defendant pleaded guilty, and the Bench imposed a fine of &50. The popular notion that the seeds of the Ainomutn inelegueta have a deleterous effect on the system is wholly unwarranted, the grains being a staple article of consumption on the West Coabt of Africa, and much esteemed a1 a seasoner to food. If nothing worse than grains of paradise are infused into malt liquors, the consumers of such need be under n i apprehension as to possible evil consequences. The pernicious adulteration of which the Excise and public should beware is the cocculus indicus. It is a150 THE ANALYST. significant fact that while large quantities of this poisonous berry are annually imported into this country, the ostensible use for the same is almost nil. An ointment of cocculus was o5cial in the British Pharmacopoeia of 1864 (employed in certain skin affections), but is now quite discarded. It is not used in veterinary medicine in any way, and we are forced to the conclusion that the greater part received into this country is applied to illegal purposes-to ‘I doctoring ” beer and ale.-Lafizeet.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8770200147

出版商:RSC    

年代:1877

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

150 THE ANALYST. SOCIETY OF PUBLIC ANALYSTS. The next meeting of the Society will be held a t Burlington House, on Wednesday, evening, the 14th November, a t eight o’clockl when the gentlemen proposed a t the last meeting, will be ballotted for, and several other gentlemen will be proposed for election. Mr, W. Morgan, Ph.D., Public Analyst for the Borough of Swansea, has been appointed Public Analyst for the county of Cardigan. Mr. E. W. T. Jones, Public Analyst for South Staffordshire, the Boroughs of Wolverhampton and Kidderminster, and the City of Lichfield, has been appointed Public Analyst for the Northern Division of the County of Stafford, i n the place of Mr. W. L. Scott, resigned.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN877020150b

出版商:RSC    

年代:1877

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

THE ANALYST. 151 NOTES OF THE MONTH. ’\YE see one of our oontemporaries announces that definite steps are about to be taken with regard to the professional organisation of chemists. We thought this was done some weeks since, when application was made to the Board of Trade for a few gentlemen to have permission to register themselves as a Limited Liability Company, with special leave to omit the word ( ( Limited,’’ though it is a pity they did not propose to adopt it, for then the title would have heen unique, like the body iteclf.“The Institute of Chernistry of Grcat 13: itaiii and I r - e h d , h N x m D , ” would have had an irresistable attrac- tion for some aspiring gatlcmcn of limited practice. The Institute is to consist of only 500 members, but we do not know where they are to come from, as me should have imagined that ‘I Great Britain and Ireland ” could scarcely muster more than half that number of professional chemists, however, we suppose the number is considered unlimited.We note to9, that the organizers, ‘( generally recognised as among the heads of the profession ” have thought it necessary-in case the future members should connider that, though they (the organisers) may be nmong , they are not the heads of the profession- to appoint themselves to office for two years instead of one; we hear the appointment was unanimous.We also note that the council is t o consist of 34 members, but as it originally consisted of 51, we can only suppose that like the Kilkenny cats, they have disagreed among themselves-hence the reduction in their number.Tea analytically is corning to the fore. We not only have compressed tea guaranteed but also tea in bottles and canisters. We certainly ought now t o have the ‘‘ cup that cheers ” pure, whether the grocer uses it as a means t o the end of inebriation or not. Lord Truro’s recent letter to the Tinzes, in which he deplored the adulteration of spirits because of the insobriety t o which i t gave rise, is very aptly commented upon by Nr.Pattinson’s report, which wc print in this issue. It appears that Mr. Pattinson has given special attention to spirits, and like most other analysts he finds more than 80 per cent. adulterated, but unfortunately for Lord Trura’s theory, the adulterant is, as usual, always water. No doubt the publicans have found out that gin-and-water is less intoxica- ting tiinn gin alone, and so, in the interests of humanity, they Eel1 the latter article after reducing it to the extent thcp think desirable-or profitable.It is rather curious to note in connection with the above, that lh. Poland, the counsel selected by the trade themselves, says, that a publican is not at liberty to dilute the gin at all : i.e., if he buys at 11 u p., he must sell at 11 u.p.Rathw hard lines this for some of the St. Giles’s men, whose cellar room is limited. Why does not the hylesbury Dairy Company, or some other body of men come forward and boldly announce that the milk they sell is up to the Society’s standard. The supervision which is exercised in the large dairies is quite enough t o prevent watering, and then it must be so.Such an honourable and business-like step would be followed immciiiately by the largcr dairymen, 2nd the Inland Revenue Standard of 25 per ceut., water diqroved. If the Dairyman’s Association try it they will succecd.152 THE ANALYST. Waxed rice seems a curious thing, yet strange to say, it is now in the market. It appears that one or two per cent.of wax adds a peculiar lustre to rice, and makes it look BO pretty, that the Dutch are profiting much by preparing it for the English to use. Prussian Blue is aaid to be added, and certainly the appearance of some samples bears out this statement. The Pharmnceutical Journal waxes wroth, because the dictum of Messrs. Paul and Kingaett, as to the non-injurious effects of copper in peas is disputed.Analysts when they view the matter from one point of view only are apt to fall into such errom as those we criticised in our last number. We wonder whether even these gentlemen themselves would accept as a suitable beverage a drinking water containing copper. We are surprised to find the same journal, expressing regret that there ia no good method of butter analysis.It certainly cannot be held, that becausc the chemists at Somerset House fail in the manipulation of a process somewhat too delicate for them, it is a total failure. On the contrary, in good hands the fatty acids process always succeeds. RECENT CHEMICAL PATENTS. The following specifications have been published during the past month, and can be obtained from the Great Seal Office, Southampton Row, Chancery Lane, London. 1876.Name of Patentee. Title of Patent. Price. NO. 691 J. C. L. Loeffler and R. W. Higgs Electric Telegraphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IS. 766 M. P. W. Boulton . . . . . . . . . 700 A. Dudgeon . . . . . . . . . . . . Applying Asbestos for Packing Boiler Lining, &c. ... Gd. or Vapours . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 1Od. 818 H. J. Hargreaves ... ... Manufacture of Sulphates of Soda and Potaasa 6d. Producing Heat by Combustion of inflammable Gases ... 827 G, Du Vallon and J. Csete ... Refrigerating Liquids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6d. 835 G. Alsing . . . . . . . . . . . . Treating Sewage, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2d. 846 V. Collyer . . . . . . . . . .. Preserving Raw Meat, Lard, &c. . . . . . . . . . 2d. 850 C. Pieper . . . . . . . . . . . Filter Presses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8d. 863 H. Parkes . . . . . . . . . . . Obtaining Nickel from Ores . . . . . . . . . . . . 4d. 860 J. Hanson . . . . . . . . . . . . Treating of Sewage, &c. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2d. 879 S. B. Bowen . . . . . . . . . Manufacture of Salphate of Iron from “Pickle” ...4d. 1022 G. Gould . . . . . . . . . . . . Liquid Composition for Embalming, Disinfecting, &c. 4d. 1034 H. & J. Bell and J. J. Coleman ... Refrigerative Processes for Preserving Food . . . . . . 6d. 1056 W. Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . Treating Fabrics Printed with Analine Colors ... 2d. 1064 W. R. Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . Treating Sewage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6d. 1116 W. B. Brain . . . . . . . . . Electric Batteries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4d. 11 20 J. Waddington and B. Longbottom Condensers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2d. Mr. C. O’Sullivan, Chemist to Messrs. Bass & Go., writes to us to inquire whether Dr. Morgan would inform him what he (Dr. Morgan) means by the ‘‘ salt ” he finds in beer, and how he estimates it.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8770200151

出版商:RSC    

年代:1877

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

152 THE ANALYST. BOOES, &c., RECEIVED. The Chemist and Druggist; The Brewers’ Guardian; The British Medical Journal; The Medical Examiner ; The Medical Times and Gazette ; The Pharmaceutical Journal ; The Sanitbry Kecord ; The Medical Record ; The Miller ; The Anti-Adulteration Review ; Principles of Theoretical Chemistry, by Ira Remson, M.D. ; Supplement for 1876-77 to Bernsrd Quaritch’s General Catalogue of Books ; Journal of Applied Science; The Country Brewers’ Gazette.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN877020152b

出版商:RSC    

年代:1877

数据来源: RSC