摘要:

78 BODdE REMARKS ON THE PERMANGANATE PROCESS IN WATER ANALYSIS. By BERNBRD DYER, F.C.S., F.I.C. aead bgore the Society of Public Analysts, on April 18th, 1883. THE experiments about to be mentioned were made in my laboratory some years ago, soon after Dr. Tidy read before the Chemical Society a paper in which he proposed certain standards of oxygen absorbed from permanganate solution for the purpose of classifying samples of potable water, In the same paper the author condemned the free and albuminoid ammonia process of Mr. Wanklyn, as being not only uncertain and unreliable, but less delicate in its indications than the permanganate process ; and, shortly afterwards, Dr. Frankland, in his book on wrater analysis, expressed his opinion that the permanganate process was probably the best substitute for the combustion process.The ease and rapidity with which the permanganate process could be carried out led some analysts to adopt it at once, in lieu of the previously almost universal process of Mr. Wanklyn, and analyses of waters were published in the Chemical News and elsewhere, without other figures relating directly to their organic constituents than those of oxygen absorbed. The method, $8 described at the Chemical Society, although an old one, was invested with novelty in as far as its description was aeoompanied by the propod of sandards for judging the Waters teated by it, and this addition renderat3 its adoption, as a74 THE ANALYST. supposed simple and ready test for organic purity, particularly tempting to medical men and other pseudo-chemists, a8 well as to many analysts, who had hitherto been in the habit of giving reports on the results of the Wanklyn process, which involves more manipulative skill.The experiments I now quote were made with a View to showing that the free and albuminoid ammonia procesa afforded a more delicate and reliable means of judging a water than does the permanganate process, if the methods were to be regarded as alternative, and only one of them to be employed. The appointment, however, of a Water Committee ” of the Society of Public Analysts,” and the issue of the ‘‘ full instructions ” for water analyses that followed, did much to bring about a generally much fuller analysis of waters than the majority of our analysts had been in the habit of making, leaving the permanganate process to remain as one only of many items in the table of results, and I did not publish these experiments.The results of experience show us more and more the futility of trusting to anytbing short of a complete examination of waters, and recent communications to our Society demonstrate the fact that even the results of a complete examination often have their meaning wholly changed by local circumstances. In the recent paper of Dr. DuprQ and Mr. Hehner, and also in that of Dr. Ashby and Mr. Hehner, it was shown that the free wd albnminoid ammonia test in certain cases might, owing to the rapidity with whioh nitrification takes place, entirely break down. Much more confidence on the other hand, in the results of the permanganate process, was expressed during the discussion whiah followed one of the papers, which has led me-in continuance of that discussion-to look up the trials I have referred to.I regret that the permanganate experiments, having been made before the recommendations of our Water Committee, were made at the ordinary temperature of the laboratory, which, in autumn, might be from 50° to 60° Fahr., the precautiow otherwise, being those enumerated in Dr. Tidy’s description of the method. URINE AND DILJTILLED WATER. URINE OXYGEN CONBUMED (Pa& per 1,000). (Grains per gallon). One hour. Three hours. -05 * . . a ,003 . * o m *004 ‘10 .... 0005 .... 0005 .... *SO .... *021 .... *032 .*.. 1.00 . , . . *041 . . . . 0052 . . . . *25 . . b . *011 0 . 0 . *019 .... ADIMONIA (Grains per gallon).Free. Albuminaid. *Ol6 .... *006 .028 .... *021 *059 .... *045 0121 .... *lo5 *007 *003 UF€INE AND NEW RIVER WATER. URINE (Parts per 1,000). 000 .... *05 .... *10 .... *25 .... *50 .... 1-00 .... OXYGEN ABSORBED (Grains per gallon). One hour. Three hours. *016 .... *022 *019 .... -028 0020 .... *030 0026 .... 0037 *040 .... 0047 ‘059 .... 471 AXMONM (Grains per @Ion). Free. Mbuxninoid. .... -001 .... 0002 .... *006 .... *004 ...a *010 a * . . 0006 .... *021 .... 4012 .... *044 .... 0026; .... *091 .... 0054THE ANALYST. 76 (OLEAR) SEWAGE AND NEW RIVER WATER. SEWAGE OXYGEN ABSORBXD h O N I A (Part8 per 1,000). (Grains per gallon). (Grains per Gallon). none .... *017 ..... 0035 .... -000 .... *001 2.5 .... '027 .... *039 .... *005 .... *001 50 ....0029 .... *041 .... *010 .... *003 10.0 .... *032 .... *044 .... -020 .... *005 200 .... *039 .... *048 .... -038 .... a 0 1 1 500 .... *047 .... -053 .... ,092 .... *025 One hour. Three hours. Free. Albuminoid. - .... I 100.0 ...* - .. .. *074 .... The classifications which Dr. Tidy suggested by way of standards were as follows :- CLASS I. Waters of Great Organic Pu?.ity.-AII waters in whioh the oxygen absorbed does not exceed *036 grain per gallon.. CLASS 11. Waters of Medium Purity.-Waters in which the oxygen absorbed ranges from -035 to *I00 grain per gdlon. CLASS 111. Wtxteis of Doubtful Purity,-Waters in which the oxygen absorbed rangee from *lo0 grain to *150 grain per gallon. CLASS IV. Irnpure Waters.-Waters in which the oxygen absorbed exceeds *I60 grain per gallon.Looking at the foregoing results it will be seen that distilled water containing five parts of urine in 10,000, or New River water containing one part of urine in 10,000, would thus be classed as water of Great Organic Purity. New River water containing one part per 1,000 of urine, or 8s much as 10 per cent. of raw sewage, would be clasraed as of Mediwn. Purity. On the other Band the free and albuminoid ammonia results cast more than grave suspiaion on distilled water, or even on New River water contaminated with one part of urine in 10,000, and on New River water containing from half per cent. to one per cent. of sewage; while New River water containing one part of urine in 4,000, or two per cent. of sewage, was utterly cbndemned by the free and albuminoid ammonia procless.The analyses published month by month in the ANALYST of the same water supplies show how great are the periodical variations in oxygen absorbed by water from the same somes, but, at the present moment, as being more strictly comparable for the present purpose, I will refer to the results of the oxygen absorbed by New River water during one year, as shown in the analyses given by Dr, Tidy in the paper already quoted. The proportion cpf oxygen absorbed by New River water in 1878 varied from *016 gain per gallon to -058 grain per gallon. This difference would allow-judged by the oxygen test alone-an addition of one part of urine per 2,000 of water, or an addition of five per cent. of raw sewage, to pass unsuspected, and without infringing the limits of natural variation in the water itself. Presuming the absence of rapid nitrification, a very far less quantity of pollution would, as already indicated, be at once shown up by the increased free and albuminoid ammonia.It was at the time pointed out that the natural variation in oxygen absorbed was in the case of this, and the Thames water, unacctompanied by a similar variation in the ammonia results, and that the albuminoid ammonia varied but slightly, while the oxygen absorbed varied pari passzl with the organio oarbon and pifrogen shown76 THE ANALYST. in Dr. Frankland's analyses. I incline to the opinion that the main cause of this fad is that the greater part of the organic matter in Thames and New River water is of vegetable origin, and affects the free and albuminoid ammonia tests but slightly, these tests being far more delicate as indicators of animal than of vegetable impurity.It has been very strongly urged that the more ready oxidisability of animal matter enables us to form some discrimination between it and vegetable matter, by making two tests, as in the foregoing experiments, viz. : by allowing the permanganate to act respectively for one hour and three hours.? /This method has been, as most of us believe, improved upon still further by altering the times of action respectively to fifteen minutes and four hours, according to the suggestions first published, I believe, in the instructions of the Water Committee of the Society of Public Analysts. But it is not difficult to see- in fact it is obvious---that the deductions drawn from the comparison of such results must often be rendered almost worthless in an absolute sense, by the proportion of vegetable to animal matter present, Where the organic matter is mainly of animal origin, doubtless the high proportion of the oxygen absorbed in the shorter period to that absorbed in the longer period will be boldly shown.But the same quantity of animal matter, together with a larger proportion of vegetable matter, will not reveal itself with like delicacy. In faat, aB in ths oase of the organic carbon and nitrogen, the damnatory ratio of the two in the animal matter may be hopelessly swamped in the innocent ratio of a larger quantity of vegetable matter. No doubt general standards of all kinds in water analysis are fallacious, and the necessity of circumspection and carefully balanced judgment in framing our reports on waters becomes more and more apparent as additional experience is gathered.I do not for a moment suggest the abandonment of a factor which is of such value as the permanganate process occasionally is as a confirmatory or comparative test, any more than the authors of the recent interesting papers read before the Society would recommend the abandonment of the free and rtlbuminoid ammonia procees, because nitrification may sometimes render its results nugatory. But in the absence of very exceptional circumstances, the permanganate process affords ug, I venture 00 believe, far less information on the subject of water pollution than do the other items in our analyses, and in an absolute sense it is in the majority of cases useless. Relatively it may possess value-omasionally considerable value-and is, therefore, not to be neglected ; but except for purposes of comparison it appears to be meaningless, and is at the best, as far as I am able to judge, to be looked upon with diffidence, Dr.Dupr6 said he was very glad Mr. Dyer had at last consented to give them a paper, and he hoped that other members of the Society would take courage from that and bring their experience forward. The chief value of the Society was lost if the members did not bring their facts before it-every fact might be of value. No member should think that any fa& was too insignifieant to be brought forward. Mr. Hehner pointed out that as in one case there were five parts of urine in 100,000, Urine contained about two per cent.of urea, which furnished about half its weight of ammonia, and hence five parts of urine in 100,000 should give *035 gr. of ammonia per gallon. Mr. Dyer, however, only found *007, and he should like to know where the rest had gone to. Another point he wished to refer to was that he was firmly convinced the oxidizable part in sewage was not organised and dead, and it was the non-oxidizable part which was dangerous.THE ANALYST. 77 Dr. Dupr6 in answer to Mr. Hehner said, firstthat if perfectly fresh urine were taken no free ammonia and no albuminoid ammonia would be obtained, but after standing awhile much ammonia, was obtained by distillation ; and, secondly-that they could not judge anything as to the amount of urine added by the ammonia obtained.With reference to Mr. Dyer’s paper he (Dr. Duprd) had great faith in the permanganate test; there was n’o process like it to distinguish a deep from a shallow well water, or to distinguish whether a deep well water was contaminated with surface drainage or sewage. As soon as there was a slight amount of surfaoe contamination into the well evidenoe of it was obtained by the increased amount of oxygen absorbed. In several cases a water had been sent to him which yielded a very considerable amount of ammonia, but tested by the oxygen it absorbed he felt sure at once it could not be a polluted water. He did not consider urine one of the best substances to experiment on water with.It would seem to him from the results that Mr. Dyer was a very good worlrer with the ammonia process, but not quite so good with the oxygen process. In the case of ammonia and albuminoid ammonia the results were very fairly proportionate ; not so in the oxygen series. One process had worked well and the other not so well. In the case of the sewage which had been added to the waters it must have been very dilute sewage. He had made a great many experiments, and he found that with any- thing like five per cent. the oxygen absorbed came to 02 or -3, which was nearly fen times the amount Mr. Dyer had found with twenty parts in 1,000. Therefore, he could not help thinking that the sewage must have been very much diluted. He did not wish to imply that there was any marked superiority of the one over the other, but what he believed was that taking the two processes together they got exceedingly valuable indications, and carefully applying both they got a good idea of whether the contamination was animal or vegetable, although not by either separately. They had no means of getting at the absolute amount of organic matter present in a water. Dr. Muter said that for many years he had been a supporter of the permanganate process. Any water that would stand it was a safe water to drink or rather it was better not to drink any water that would run away with the permanganate. As a sort of empirical test it was very good indeed, and one he had always been in favour of. If he were going on a journey he would prefer to kake a bottle of perrnanganate in his pocket to judge a water by rather than anything else. After all that had been said against it h6 thought there was no more complete scheme of water analysis before the publio than that issued by the Society. Even Frankland’s process did not give them that.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN883080073b

出版商:RSC    

年代:1883

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

THE ANALYST. 77 E8TIMATION OF HARDNESS WITHOUT SOAP SOLUTION. BY OTTO HEHNER, F.I.C. Read befor6 the Society of Pubtic Analysts, 18th April, 1883, OF all methods of which analysts are in the habit of availing themselves in judging of the quality and Bornposition of drinking water, that for the estimation of the hardness by means of soap solution is by far the most imperfect. It is objeotionable for a vaxieb of reasons.78 THE ANALYST, Fht.--It does not measure the aosp-destroying power of any water, the hardness of which exceeds 16O ; washerwomen not being in the habit of diluthg the water they haye to use by adding distilled water until the total hardness is less than 16O. Secondly.-It does not, in any caBe, measure the lime with any degree of accuracy, and in many instances will under-indicate its amount very considerably.ThirdZy.-It altogether fails in the presence of anything like considerable amounts of magnesia. .Fou.rthZy.-It lacks the most essential character indispensable to any workable volumetric method, viz., that one and the same measure of the standard solution, should, within fairly elastic limits, indicate always the same amount of the substance to be measured, it being uotorious (see Clark’s several tables) that the indioations fluctuate for equal measures by nearly 30 per cent. .FijthZy.--The directions given by the various writers on the subject as to the indica- tions given by the solutions not only disagree, but are absolutely ooutrltdictory ; and Lastly. -The soap solution, even if made with much alcohol, does not keep.Almost any one of these reasons by itself would have been sufficient to induce analysts to abandon any other volumetric method suffering from like deformities, but the ‘L soap test ” has survived in spite of them all. It follows, either that the method is so indispensable that it must be used although defective, or that its indications are accepted as merely approximate and devoid of any claims to accuracy. It is easy to show that not the former but the latter of these alternatives furnishes the true explanation. Thus, if one reads that one well-known author directs for the preparation of the Standard soap solution 10 grammea of Castile soap tobedissolved in 1 litreof alcohol and water, without any subsequent standard- king beingrequisite ; and for that of the Standard calcium solution (the use of which ie optional), 1.11 grammes of calcium chloride to be dissolved to a similar bulk ; it is evident that the faith of the eminent chemist alluded to, in either of his Standards (save the mark !), must, be remarkably small.I venture to say that not one Eiample of Castile soap of the precisely requisite composition can be found in the market, and 1 have yet to see the pure, anhydrous and non-alkaline calcium chloride fit for making a stardard aolution. Besides, not 10, but 9.82 grammes of Castile soap, containing 60 per cent. of olive oil would be theoretically required to give a, solution of the proper strength. The reaction between soap solution and calcium and ma,gnesium salts has been largely misunderstood, and a great deal of misapprehension and difficulty has been produced by the incomplete knowIedge of that reaction.If sodium oleate, and calcium and magnesium salts in their mutual action produced nothing else but calcium and magnesium oleates and neutral sodium compounds, there would be no reason whatever why waters of any hardness should not be correctly tested by the soap method, or why the presence of magnesia, should create the slightest difficulty. A very simple and striking experiment however, shows that the reaction instead of being a, mere double decomposition is a much more intricate one. If a solution of goap, which mu& be perfectly neutral to phenolphtbrtleine, be poured into distilled water containing some of that indicator, the deep violet colour produced conclusively proves the liberation of a large amount of free alkali or of a basic oleate. This reaction justifiee the statement which is commonly made in explanation of the detergent action of soap, but PO colourine;TEE ANALYST, 79 matter ilIustrates the fact so well as does phenolphthaleine, turmeric being unsuited, as it gives an alkaline reaction even with soap neutral to the phthaleine. If the neutral soap solution is poured instead into distilled water into ordinary drinking water plus phenolphthaleine, the alkaline indication becomes quite marked before there is an excess of soap; that ig to say, before a lather can be produced.Tbe natural and inevitable consequence of the presence of the free alkali is the neutralization of free and half combined carbonic acid, the precipitation of part of the calcium carbonate, and, in the presence of a saficient amount of magnesium salts, the separation of magnesium hydrate.In waters with an excess of free carbonic aaid the separation of calcium carbmate could not take place ; but, in most very hard waters, calcium oleate and calcium carbonate would be Precipitated concurrently and the hardness would be under-rated. Hence the neceuity of diluting hard water down to a very low degree. In the presence of magnesium saltg, the lather, as is well known, becomes tenaceous and devoid of lustre, According to the explandion given above, free floctculent magnesium hydrate would be the cause of this appearance. When all the lime is precipitated, a lather irJ obtained, but after a while this dis- appears, and a further quantity of soap solution is wanted, corresponding roughly with the amount of magnesia present, to produoe a permanent bright lather.I can offer no other explanation of this phenomenon but that the precipitated magnesium hydrate acts upon the soap and gradually is finally converted into the oleate. Indeed, magnesia suspended in distilled water does consume soap eolution. My explanation thus embraces the three puzzling points in the testing of the hardness by soap, viz., the impomibility of sccurately titrating hart$ waters ; the dirty appearance of the lather in magnesian waters; and the stop at which one arrives when all the lime is precipitated, the magnesia gradusllIy eoming into mtion. I think I have said enough to remove Clark’s method of bardneas estimation out of the list of tolerable volumetric methods.Its indications cannot be uniform, but are dependent upon the circumstances of each individual case. Digressing eomewhat from my subject, I should like to point out, that, quite analogous with the misconception of the soap reaction i B Clark’s idea of softening water by lime, Be directs to estimate the temporary hardness and to add an amonnt of oauatic lime equal to that present as carbonate. It is palpably evident that the temporary hardness has nothing whatever to do with the amount of lime to be added ; this depending SOZU~Y upon the quantity of free carbonic acid, which is not, in any way, regulated by the proportion of temporary hardness. Now it must be acknowledged that it is desirable to uphold the distinction of ealcium and magnesium salts as temporary ” and 6‘ permanent,” a simple gravimetrict estimation of these two bases not giving sufficient information as to the character of the water.The method which I am about to propose is not new in principle ; it is an extension of Mohr’s process of titrating alkaline carbonates in water by means of standard acid. I prepare a standard acid by diluting 20 C.C. of normal sulphuric acid (49KS0, per litre), to 2,000 c.c., and a rrolution of 1.06 of pure, freshly ignited sodium carbonate in a litre of distilled water. 1 C.C. of the wid is oapabh of neutralizing *OOP gramme of80 TEE ANALYST. OaCO,, whilst 1 C.C. of the sodium carbonate solution precipitates a like amount of CaCO, from any soluble lime salt, or an equivalent weight of magnesia.Equal volumes of the two solutions neutralize each other. 100 C.C. of any water to be tested are tinted with phenacetoline, methylorange or cochineal solution, heated nearly to boiling, and the standard acid is added to neutrality. Each C.C. used indicates one degree of temporary hardness, calculated for 100,000 parts. So €ar, Mohr’s method. To another 100 C.C. of the water a measured quantity of the sodium carbonate solution is added, a good deal more than enough to decompose the whole of the soluble (permanent) salts of lime and magnesia, Generally an amount in C.C. equal to about the proportion of total solids per 100,000 is amply sufficient. The mixed solutions are then evaporated in a platinnm basin to dryness.The residue is taken up with a little recently boiled distilled water, the solution filtered through a very little filter, the residue washed three or four times with very small amounts of water, and the alkalinity of the clear solution titrated hot by means of the standard acid. The alkali added, minus the acid used, indicates the permanent hardness, calculated as CaCO,. The evaporation must take place in platinum, glass yielding even during a, comparatively short time so considerable traces of alkali to the hot solution that the permanent hardness is much under-eatimated, It is well to evaporate to dryness, in order to render the magnesia, which at first separates as voluminous ff ocks, granular, compact and readily washable. Generally, at most 150 to 200 C.C.have to be evaporated, and this, of course, takes very little time. Of the three indicators enumerated I prefer phenacetoline. It is red in alkaline and yellow in acid solutions, methylorange being yellow in presence of alkali and red with acid. The change is sharpest with phenacetoline, but slightly less so with methylorange, and more gradual with cochineal. All three indicators are, contrary to the statements generally made in respect to them, somewhat sensitive to carbonic acid, For if a solution of sodium carbonate, tinted with one of them, be neutralised as accurately as possible with acid, and the solution then heated just to the boiling point, an alkaline reaction will again manifest itself, and a further small volume of acid will be required to render the liquid permanently neutral.Such effect of carbonic acid may not be noticeable when working with standard aolutions of ordinary strength, but it must not be neglected when milligrammes and tenths of milligrammes are to be measured. The following figures will show that, when working as described, the two solutions, Na,CO, and H$30,, very accurately neutralise each other :- PHENAOETOLINE. ME THYLORANGE. COOHINEAL. O.C. Acid. C.C. Alkali. C.C. Acid. 0.0. Alkali, C.C. Acid. 0.0. Alkali. 18.2 18.0 ...... 23. 22.5 ...... 22.2 21.7 24.3 24.3 ...... 15.8 15.3 - - 16.8 16.6 ...... 25.0 24.8 ...... - I ...... That the process (Mohr’s) of estimating alkaline carbonates in water by titration with acid is capable of giving very fair results, is generally acknowledged.I have, however, deemed it advisable to carry out some test experiments in this direction. I also append aTEE ANALYST. 81 number of analyses, in which both the temporary and the permanent hardness were titrated alkslimetrically, the amounts of lime and magnesia being likewise determined by preoipitation . Solution of Ciclcium Carbonate ,-Gravimetrically, 28.0 CaCO, per 100,000. Volu- metrically, 27.5. Magnesium Carbolzate Solution.-Contained 13.2 parts of MgO, corresponding to 53.0 of CB,CO,. I00 C.O. umd 83.5 O.C. acid. Calcium Chloride.--47*60 CaO = 85.0 CaCO,. Temporary hardness, none ; per- manent, 84.8. Magnssium 8uZphate.- 8.66 MgO, corresponding to 21 *7 of CaCO,. No temporary hardness ; permanent, 22.3. Solution containing Magnesium Chloride and Calcium Sulphate.-CaO 87.72 = 674 CaCO,. MgO 7.23 = 18.1 CaCO,. Calculated hardness, 85.5. No alkalinity. Per- manent hardness, 85.2. Water, containing 11438 CaO = 21.2 CaCO,, and 047 MgO = 1.17 CaCO,. Cdculated hardness, 22.4. Alkalinity, 18.7. Permanent hardness, 3.2. Total hardness titrated, 21.9. Water, containing 21.92 CaO = 39.1 CrtCO,, and *73 MgO = 1.7 CaCO,. Calculated hardness, 40*8, Temporary hardness (alkalinity), 23.3. Permanent, 17.4. Total found, 40.7. Water, with 8.78 Ca0=16*7 CaCO,, and 069 MgO = 1.7 &GO3. Calculated hard- ness, 17.4. Used 14-2 C.C. for temporary and 3.8 C.C. for permanent harhess. Total found, 18.0. Calculated hardness, 30.5. Used 15.7 0.0, of add for temporary hardness ; permanent, lS.6. Total found, 29.3. These test experiments, I trust, will be held to suppIy a sufficient amount of proof of the accuracy of the method proposed; they also show that it is applicable equally to lime and magnesium waters. I aincerely hope that the alkalimetric eatimlttion of both descriptions of hardness will speedily supersede the use of soap solution, which has no other recommendation than its comparative antiquity. Water, with 11.48 CaO = 20.5 CaCO,, and 4.01 MgO = 10.0 CaCO,.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8830800077

出版商:RSC    

年代:1883

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

TEE ANALYST. 81 ON CONDENSED MARE’S MILK. BY DR. P. VIETH, F.C.S. WHILST cow’s milk has been condensed on a large scale since several decennaries, and this branch of industry has spread over nearly d1 the countries of Europe, nothing wag heard of condensed mare% milk until a very ehort time ago. If some rnarek milk has been condensed ah all previous to the year 1882, it certainlf was done ae a mere sxperiment and not as a matter of business, with the aim to augment the number of foods specially destined for nourishing infants and invalids by a new preparation. It was only in the last year that this subject was taken up by an English company, which established a, manufacztory of condeneed mare’s milk at Samara, in the steppes of Southern RuBsia, Condensing was executed for several months in the last autumn, untilTHE ANALYST.- ~ ~~ with the beginning of the winter the milk supply stopped. I learn that mare’s milk, condensed daring that time, is used daily in a children’s hospital in St. Petersburgh, with very satisfactory results. Bat it is not my business to speak about the effect of the preparation, especially as that would be premature, experiments with the milk having been carried on in one plsce for a proportionately short time only. I merely want t o publish the results of the examination of two samples of condensed mare’s milk from Samara, I had the opportunity of analysing lately. 1. Sample, contained in a tin, similar to those containing Condensed Swiss Milk. Colour : not quite pure white ; consistency : very thick, if taken out by means of a glass rod sticking to the same and not flowing 08; smell : sweet, aromatic, resembling that of honey ; taste : some people think it not at all objectionable, others find it disagreeable, disgusting and irritating. Qualities on the whole the same as in the previous case, but colour more yellowish, smell and taste less pure, somewhat ranaid.The condensed milk readily dissolves in warm water, yielding a liquid of milky appearanee. The composition of the two samples was found to be 8s follows :- 2. Sample, contained in a wide-necked glass bottle, corked and waxed. Sample 1. Sample 2. Water .......................... 17-90 per cent. ................ 18-80 per cent. Solids .......................... 82.10 .. ................ 81.20 .. Fat ............................ 12.07 .................. 1008 .. Proteiq ........................ 13.50 .. ................ 15.23 .. Sugar .......................... 54.88 .. ................ 54.09 .. Ash ............................ 1.66 .. ................ 1-80 .. By these figures it appears that the milk was reduced to the seventh part of its original bulk by coneentration. After having concluded my analyses, I learned that the degree of concentration was really this, and that 2.33 per cent. of cane sugar had been added to the mare’s milk. Taking in account these facts, tho composition of the milk employed would have been ZLS follows :- Sample 1. Sample 2. Water .......................... 90.39 per cent. ................ 90.52 per cent. solids ..........................9-61 .. ................ 9.48 .. Fat ............................ 1-76 .. ................ 1.47 .. Protein ........................ 1.97 .. ................ 2.23 .. Sugar .......................... 5.63 .. ................ 6.51 .. Ash ............................ 025 .. ................ 0-27 ,, Four samplerr of mare’s milk analysed by LandowBki ttnd Biel, were of the following aomposition :- Landowski. Biel. Water 89*29 per cent. .... 9 6 per cent. .. 9362 per cent. .. 90.38 pegzt. 803ids 1071 ,, .... 9.74 .. . . 9-38 ,, 0. 9.62 ,, Fat .... 1.16 .. .... 1.26 .. .. 111 ,, .. 1-56 ,, Protein 1-87 ,, .... 285 .. .. 2.78 ,, .. 2.02 )’ Sug&r.. 7-32 ,, .... 5-34 .. .. 5.21 ,y .. 5.73 ’, The large amount of milk sugar preaent in mare’s milk renders it possible to abstain from addhg a large quantity of cane sugar, and the high degree of concentration admits of the assumption that condensed mare’s milk will keep without decomposition for some length of time if contained in &=tight closed vessele, Ash .. 036 ,, .... 0.29 .. .. 028 ,) .. 0-31 ,,

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8830800081

出版商:RSC    

年代:1883

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

THE ANALYST. a8 ON TEE PRESENCE OF COPPER IN CEREALS. BY EDWAED F. WILLOU~HBY, M.B. (Lond.) FOB more than half a century a belief or suspicion has existed that bakers occasionally resorted to the use of copper sulphate with the same aim as that with which they more frequently employ alum, viz., to produce a fine looking white bread out of damp and damaged flour. That the notion has not been entirely groundless was shown by the conviction of Belgian bakers in 1848 and in 1847, and of one at Calais not long since, but there is no evidence that the fraud hag ever been perpetrated in this country ; although, if proved, it would no doubt t e punished with the utmost rigour. On the other hand it has been at various times asserted that copper is,or af least may be, present in flour as a normal, or more correctly a natural, constituent derived from the soil, and when we conaider the extreme delicacy of our tests, we must bear in mind the possibility of mistaking such quasi-normal presence for a fraudulent addition, Vauquelin, nearly sixty years ago, believed that he detected copper in the ashes of some plant, but the discovery seemed so incredible that he did not venture to publish it at the time.From 1828-1830 Meisner gave in the Journal dR Phamacis st de Chinzis the results of a series of amlyses of various plants containing copper. In 1500 grammes of wheat he found 01007, and in the same weight of flour 0*001 gi. of copper. These proportions he believed to be under the truth, sinee the process he employed involved some loss of the metal. Between 1830 and 1838 Sarzeau and Boutigny, working independently, verified the presence of copper in the proportion of 0.0046 in a kilogramme of wheat, and of 0*0006 in one of flour, They found that it resided chiefly in the bran, and that consequently the coarser and browner flours contained more than the finer, whence Sarzeau suggested that it might exist in the form of a phosphate. Chevreul cast doubts on their conclusions, since he failed to find it in some cases, and conaidered it to be an accidental contamination through careless manipulation. J.Eopff (Vackenrodsr Arch. f. Ph. LXVI., 140) had shown that plantls may be made to absorb considerable quantities of copper by watering them with s solution of the sulphate, although in so doing they lose health and ultimately perish.The presence of copper in cereals might plausibIy be attributed to the practice of washing the seed corn with copper sulphate in place of lime with a view to the destruction of vermin, but in a paper read before the Academy of Medicine in January, 1848, M. Deschamps of Avdon proved its presence in the produce of a field which had belonged to the same proprietor for forty-two years, and to which copper had never been thus applied. (Bulletin ds iYL4cad. de Med. XIII., 542). Among the results given in this paper are the detection in a kilogramme of wheat 0.004, of potatoes 0*00284, of potato starch 0*0008, and of rice 0.00613 gramme of copper. He supposes the copper in the soil to be derived either from the detrition of metalliferous primary rocks or from the decomposition of iron pyrites containing an admixture of oupric sulphides and carbonates.Analyses showed that the 6 6 calcairea a gryph6es arqudes,” the belemnitic limestones, ferruginous sands and the partic:Ics of ferroua oxide which abound in the mads overlying the first mentioned limestones all contained copper. He imagines that the copper exists in the soil for the most part as a carbonate, whicth, being soluble in ammonium oarbonate, is absorbed along with it by plants in the form of w cupric-a~monio-c~~onate, and on the breaking up of the molecule and fixation of the nitrogen in the tiseues the metal is set free. He thus accounts for04 THE ANALYST. the larger amount found in the more nitrogenous structures as the testa or bran.The use of cupric sulphate for (‘ liming ” the seed corn year after year adds enormously to the clopper, if any, originally present in the soil. Going baok to the year 1831, we find Kuhlmann contributing: to the Ann. d’Hyg. et d6 Med. leg. T. 339. “ Considerations sur I’emploi du sulphate de cuivre et de diverses matidres salines dans la fabrication du pain,” He stated that the end for which it was used was attainable by adding one part of cupric sulphate to 30,000 of flour (equal to one part of metallic, copper in 300,000 of bread) though with flour but slightly damaged one in 150,000 parts might be enough. The first named proportion could not be surpassed with impunity, for 1 in 4,000 gave a sodden bread, and 1 in 1,800 completely arrested fermentation, and imparted a greenish tinge.Kuhlmann asssrts that he had obtained from several bakers admissions as to its use, of course in the smallsr proportions, which, though they could scarcely be deemed noxious, he held to be fraudulent as permitting the use of inferior flour, though Dr. du Moulin, among others, justified the practice as a means of avoiding a diminution of the national food supply. The subject seems to have been almost entirely neglected until last year, when Ma J. Van del Berghe, director of the laboiatory of the Provincial Agricultural Laboratory of West Flanders published in the BzLlletin dt3 la Socie’ti de Me’decine de Gand, and the JOZ6mal des Connaissancw Jff?JicaZes, April 20, 1882, notes on the presence and estimation of copper in bread. Suspecting the presence of copper in the bread he used daily, he made analyses of samples from three of the best bakehouses in Ghent, and found it in each.Surprised at these results, he examined several samples of wheat which gave II very similar proportion, viz., 0*0058 grammes of sulphate in 500,000 grammes, or 9.24 in a million of metallic copper. Still thinking it might have been derived from liming,” he analysed 250 grammes of oats which he knew had not been so treated, and found 0.0034 grammes of the sulphate, or 10 3 in the million of metallic copper, a considerably larger proportion than existed in the wheat or bread. His reagents were absolutely pure, yet every sample of bread examined contained from 8 to 10 parts of copper in the million, which he concluded was not added in baking, but pre-existed in the grain. M.Van del Berghe conceives it to be of the highest importance that the amount of copper that may exist normally in wheat should be determined in the interest of the public, BB well as what amount, if added, would be injurious to health. Dr. V. Galippe has conducted like analyses on a larger scale, with the rercults shown in the following table :- Copper in a kilogramme. m e a t from Central France. ............................. 0.0100 gram. .. ,, la Chhtre (Indre) ............................ 0.0080 .. ,, .. Grancldliers (Oise) .......................... 0.0052 ,, ,, ,, American, Redwin4er ........................ 0.0085 .. . . . . California .................................. 0*0050 ,, ,, .. Native Brie ................................0.0054 ,, .. ,, American soft .............................. 0.0108 ,, . . . . Russia, htlrd Taganrog ...................... 0.0088 ,, ,, ,, Algiers, hard.. .............................. 0.0062 ,, Rye .................................................. 0.0050 ,, Oats .................................................. 0.0084 ,, Barley ............................................... 0.0108 .. Rice .................................................. 0.0016 ,, ,, ,, Michigan .................................. 00070 ,,THE ANALYST. 85 - - ~~ All the wheats except that from la Chiitre also contained manganese. The mean of Dr. Galippe’s analyses gave €or the bran 0.014 gr. per kilogramme, and for the farina 000084 of copper. He examined next the bread supplied by the poor law authorities and to the tioops : the former contained in the kilogramme mart. 0.0055, min. 0.0044, znem 0-0047 ; the latter, max. 0*0080, min. 0-0036, mean 0*0048. Various samples of the bread Bold in the shops averaged 0.0044, Rye bread, max. 0.0044, min. 0*0016, mean 0*00246. Oatmeal 0.0042 ; and, Iastly,English bread only traces. ‘Is this due to the less general use in this country of washing with sdphate of copper, or to the mere acddental selection of a sample ?

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8830800083

出版商:RSC    

年代:1883

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

THE ANALYST. 85 SELENIUM IN COMMERCIAL SULPEURIC ACIDS, AND ITS ACTION ON SHALE OILS. BY JAMES HAMILTON. IN connection with the Paper on this subject published in our last number, the following, which was lately read before the Royal Physical Society of Scotland, will be of interest :- Before entering into the subject of the action of selenium on mineral hydro-carbon oils, it may be not uninteresting if I were to give a short sketch of the production and manufacture of these oils, and the manner in which selenium would be liable to affect them. The shale from which the oil is produced is brought directly from the pits or mines where it is found to the retorts. In this state the size of the pieces of shale is very unequal, and to render them of a comparativelyequal size, and also to enable the oil vapours to escape more easily from it, the shale is put through what is known as the ( 6 breaker.” From the breaker the shale is put into the retorts.Various kinds of retorts are used, the three commonest forms being the Henderson patent, the vertical, and the Young & Beilby, all possessing attributes suitable to the different kinds of shale. In d l these retorts, steam, either superheated or @oft, is used. The products of this distillation are oil, ammonia- water and an uncondensable gas, which latter is brought back to heat the next charge of shale. The ammonia-water is separated from the oil, and by one or another means the ammonia in it is converted into sulphate of ammonia. From the receiving tank of the retorts it is pumped into a charging tank, and from this charging tank is run into stills, which are generally known as the crudes.” In this distillation, as in all3 distillations throughout the process, varying percentages of steam are used.The distillate is only slightly fraction- ated, naphtha being separated. From the receiving tank of the crude atills the oil is pumped into a “washer ”- a washer being a suitable vessel, able to contain from 500 to 2,000 gallons, the contents of which may be stirred either by air or by some mechanical means. On the oil in the washer sulphuric acid is run, and the contents agitated as long as is necessary to saturate the acid with tar. This tar is run off, and tt second quantity of acid is added. In like manner this also is agitated, allowed to gettle, and the tar run off.This process is conthued until all the tar which it is advisable to separate at this stage is carried off. At the end of the last agitation the oil is allowed to settle for about three hours, in order to allow the tar more completely to separate. After settling for this length of time, the oil is run into The oil more particularly concerns us. The oil is now known as ‘( once-run oil.”86 THE ANALYST. what is known as the (( soda washer,” where it is treated with a strong solution of caustic soda, in order toneutralize any acid which may be left in the oil, and to prepare the oil for another distillation. From the soda washer the oil is pumped, blown by means of air-pressure, or run into the second-stage boilers or stills; from these stills it is fractionated into ;t light portion, sp.gr. about -828, which contains little or no solid paraffine, and a heavier pcrtion, sp. gr. about -877, whioh at 60° Fahrenheit, is solid with paraffine. The light portion is taken and treated with acid and soda, as before, and is then again distilled. The distillate is fraotionated into 084, 4 5 oil, and oil at about 0805 sp. gr. It may be as well to mention here in order to avoid repetition, that the heavy fractions at the end of light oil distillations are mixed with the light fractions at the beginning of the distillation of the heavy portion, and thus carried on to the finished state. Thus, the -84 to .85 oil is mixed with the *84 to 085 oil from the beginning of the distillation of the heavy portion, and they are both washed together, and then form what is known under the various names of marine oil (from its application to ships’ lamps), mineral colza, or under the common-place title 840/60 oil.It is somewhat a waste product, perhaps its principal use just now being 840150 bloomlesa for the adulteration of rape and other high priced vegetable oils. If the 6805 fraction is wanted as I‘ crystal oil,” it is treated with acid and a weak solution of soda, and after washing with water it is ready for the market. If it is wanted as No. 1 burning oil, it is washed with acid and a strong solution of soda, again distilled, and without treatment it is ready for the market, This process may seem curious, but the idea is to get as good a light from the No. 1 burning oil as from crystal oil, without the same crusting of the wick occurring as in crystal oil, due to the presence of minute traces of sodium sulpho-olefines.The heavy portion, containing the solid paraflineu, is taken in a liquid state to the paraffine sheds, where paraffine of a melting point about 118O Fahrenheit is taken from it by means of a, freezing machine, filter presses, and hydraulic presses. This crude or green scale contaim about 4 per cent. oil and 2 per cent. dirt and water, and is the substance most largely used in the manufacture of paraffine candles. The oil pressed from this green scale is known as blue oil, and after the separation it is taken and treated with acid and soda as I haw previously described, From the washer it is pumped into what is known as the lubricating or (‘ lub ” stills, and is there fractionated practically into 0865 and 485 oils.1 may mention that, in order to bleach the oil it is treated with solid caustic soda in the stills-that is, solid caustic soda is hung in the still in order that it may bleach the vapor as it is formed. These 0885 and -865 oils are either washed with aeid and a weak solution of soda, and thereafter the low-meltingpoint separated, or the paraffines are first separated and they are then washed. The paraffine from the 465 oil has a melting point of about 95O Fahrenheit, and that from the 0885 oil of about loo0 Fahrenheit. In order to separate theso paraffines, the oil has to be frozen down to about ISo Fahrenheit. About two months ago a dig- coloration was noticed in some burning oil in the process of manufacture, and before long the Bame discoloration was noticed in the whole of the oils, both heavy and light.There are many things which might have caused this discoloration, among others, under treatment We now come to the action of selenium upon the oils.THE ANALYST. 87 --- with vitriol in the first stages, or vitriol which contained nitric acid as an impurity being used in the later stages. In order to prevent confusion hereafter, I will call sulphuric &oid by its commercial title, vitriol. As in our works the first of these causes was carefully noticed and prevented, this muse was at once put aside; but in regard to the latter, we were not equally certain. The vitriol from our stock gave decided traces of nitric acid, and of course we at once blamed that impurity; but as we aro supplied from two vitriol works, it could not be decided till further supplies of the acid arrived, who was the erring party.Next day two tanks of vitriol came in from the different makers. One of them showed distinct traces of nitric acid, with both the ferrous sulphate and indigo tests. The other gave the indigo, but not the iron test. They both were, of course, at oncerejected, but the second is the one with which we were more particuIarly concerned. Why it islhould give the indigo and not the iron test was rather a mystery, On receiving our notice of rejection, the makers at once sent out and sampled the acid, and thereafter sent the sample to an Edinburgh chemist, who reported that it only contained 405 per oent.of nitric acid by the nitrometer, an instrument which I had not by me at the time. This result puzzled us considerably, and we went on using the acid, attributing the bad color in the oils to a tank of the other maker’s vitriol, which by some inadvertence had been allowed to pass into therefinery. Three days were allowed to elapse, when, in place of the oil getting better in colour, it grew worse. The supply of both these makers’ acid was then stopped, and an acid which we knew to be pure used in the refinery. I told my friend, Mr. Hunter, of our difficulties with the oil, and of my opinion that there was eomething seriously wrong] with the acid which had given the indigo and not the iron reaction. He advised me to bring in a sample, and we would examine it together.One of the results of this examination was, that it contained practically no nitric acid, and yet it gave the sulphate of indigo reaction; the other result was that there was something foreign in the sulphuretted hydrogen precipitate, as it was reddened to a considerable extent. A portion of this precipitate, with gentle heating, almost completely dissolved in ammonium sulphide, leaving a very slight Mack residue, which was at the time thought, and rtfterwards proved to be, lead. Another portion was boiled with ammonium carbonate, when the yellow arsenic sulphide dissolved, and left 8 reddish-brown residue, which was reduoed by the action of stannous chloride. This strange residue was at once put down as the cause of our oil going back in colour, but we had not at that time sufficient leisure to go into the matter further.In the mean time our oil had come back to its original colour, with the acid which we knew to be free from any impurities, and this of course almost conclusively proved that there was no fault in the process. But, in order to further prove that it was the faulty acid which had done the damage, it was again allowed into the refinery, when the same symptoms were noticed. As this could not be allowed to go on, an official sample of the acid was sent to Mr. King and Mr. Hunter, when they in a few days reported that the only thing that was peculiar about the acid was the presence of an element resembling selenium, and which they thought W ~ S selenium. On further examins-’ tion the impurity was conclusively shown to be selenium, and further, that it had a very injurious action upon oils.This property of selenict acid, the state in which there can be no doubt the selenium e;giata in the vitriol, of aoting upon mineral hydro-carbon oils has, as far as I am &w&re,88 THE ANALYST. never before been noticedthe usual bugbear being nitric acid, which, in the case of this vitriol, was shown to be entirely absent. What its exact action is, is rather difficult to say. But the most likely explanation of its action is, that during the process of treating the oils with vitriol it forms a selenated olefine, which, during the washing with soda, is converted into a sodium-seleno-olefine, and this body, on exposure to air either reddens in color itself or acts on the oil in such a manner as to give it a red color.This is, we know, what happens with sulphuric acid, when the oil is over-treated. But in the case of over- treatment with sulphuric aoid the evil is completely removed in the next distillation, while with selenium it is not, as the selenium compound distils over along with the oil and dissolves in it. This was particularly noticed at the worm ends of the burning oil stills, where, when the oil should have been white, it was yellow to no inconsiderable extent. This occurrence of selenium in sulphuric acid, and its action upon oils, is as important as it has hitherto been obscure; important, in so far as by its presence thousands of gallona of oil have been practically rendered unmarketahle, and so obscure as t o have misled the foremost of our oil-works managers and the leading chemists in the oil industry.In the benefit accruing to the oil trade from this investigation, personally, I olairn but little, but, at the same time, there can be no doubt that the results are of the greatest importance, not only from an intrinsic, but also from a soientific point of view ; and if, in the credit that is going, I am only bracketed with Mr. King and Mr. Hunter, I shall be more than repaid for the part I have taken in the inquiry. FOOD ADULTERATION IN FRANCE . The following Analyses were made at the Paris Municipal Chemical Laboratory. during the month of Mareh. 1883 :- Nature of the samples Awlysed . Good . Wines .............. 79 Vinegars ............. Beers .............. 6 Ciders .............. 2 Alcohols and Liqueurs . 1 Syrups ............... Waters .............. 3 Milks .............. 26 Malt ................ 3 Butters ............ 7 Oils ................ 1 Flours .............. 22 Dough, Bread ...... 11 Sweetmeats .......... 1 Meats .............. 1 Preserves ............ 17 Salt. Pepper ........ 20 Chicory. Coffee. Tea .. 9 Chocolates .......... 14 Honeys ............ - Confitures .......... - Colouring Materials . . 1 Colonred Papers ...... 3 Tins .............. 7 parations ........ pre-) Pharmaceutical Perfumery .......... 2 Various ............ 30 TOTAL .... 271 TOYS ................ - - - .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Passable . 89 2 1 1 - . 6 116 2 . I . 3 1 1 1 1 . . . . 1 . . . . 3 3 231 m - .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. t. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 4 5 1 1 115 10 13 3 1 . . . . 1 26 12 1 . . . . . . . . 3 545 - 349 . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. * . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. * . * . .. .. . . . 6 6 . . . . . . 1 . . 5 1 . . . . 4 19 1 1 . 2 20 71 - - .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Totals . 522 2 11 8 8 1 15 257 3 19 14 25 16 1 2 23 47 11 27 1 6 19 4 8 5 7 56 1. 118 . - -

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8830800085

出版商:RSC    

年代:1883

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

THE ANALYST. 89 LAW REPORTS. Raid Cofee Dealers-Heavy Fines :- At Huddersfield, on Wednesday Feb. 7th, Edward Teal, grocer, King Street, and Alex. Wallace, grocer, Buxton Road, were charged with selling adulterated coffee, and which were adjourned from the previous Wednesday, came on again for hearing. Mr. D. F. E. Sykes appeared for both the defendants. The case of the defendant Teal was taken first. The analysis showed 50 per cent. coffee, and 50 per cent. chicory; while the defence was that the sample was sold as a mixture, that the proportions were 3 of coffee, 2 of chicory, and 1 of dandelion coffee, which was a fair mixture; and that the wrapper bore a label stating that the article was sold as a mixture, which protected the vendor under the Act. The reply was that the mixture of chicory was unreasonable in quantity, and was added to increase the bulk.-Some conversation took place between Mr.Kirk (sanitary inspector), Mr. D. F. E. Sykes, and the Bench, as to the reason why this case was adjourned for the purpose of a part of the sample being sent up to Somerset House for further analysis. Mr. Kirk said he afterwards found that the sample could only be sent through the justices, and therefore it could not be sent; but Mr. Jarmain had again analysed the sample. The Magistrates’ Clerk also said that before the sample could be sent to Somerset House application should be made to the Magistrates. -Mr. Jarmain was re-called, and said he had made a further examination of the mixture without having succeeded in obtaining results different from those obtained last week.He had examined pure chicory and pure dandelion under the microscope, and there was very little difference between the two in appearance. That difference he did not find in the sample of ooffee in question. He did not find the slightest trace of dandelion in the coffee.-Cross examined : Chicory and dandelion belonged to the same family or order of plants, and the roots were almost identical. It mieht be that he could not distinguish between chicory and dandelion in the sample ; the difference was so slight as to make it difficult to trace when the two were mixed with coffee. There could be only one-sixth dandelion, according to the evidence for the defenoe.-By the Bench : Supposing an equal bulk of chicory and dandelion root, after being roasted, were mixed together, he could not tell the exact proportion of each under the microscope.The density of the articles, in which there was very little difference, helped him in determining the quantity -By the Magistrates’ Clerk : He did not say there was no dandelion in the sample, but he had not found it. And lie used all the best means for ascertaining it.-Re-examined : He gave a penny an ounoe for the dandelion root he now produced.- Mr. Sykes said, the defendant, mixed the dandelion, knowing that it cost more than chicory or pure coffee, and intending that the dandelion should count not as chicory, but coffee ; therefore there was no fraud.-The Mayor said the Bench had considered the case fully, and had come to the conclusion that as coffee was in great consumption amongst poor people, it was necessary that they should be protected. They fined the defendant 535 and 531 8s.costs.-Tn Alexander Wallace’s case Mr. Sykes said the evidence was that the agent of Mr. Kirk went to the shop of Mr. Wallace, and asked for a quarter of a pound of 16d. coffee. On analysis it was found to contain 33 per cent. of chicory, and only 17 per cent. of coffee, and there was no label upon the packet showing that the article was sold as a, mixture of chicory and coffee. Well, it looked about as bad a case as a man could well imagine, and the analysis was so contrary to his instructions that he asked for an adjournment for further inquiry to be made into the matter, as Mr. Wallace was unwell and unable to attend. Inquiry had been made, and he should call witnesses who would give such an explanation as would leave the defendant technically guilty but morally blameless.He should prove that the defendant gave written instructions to Mr. Harrison, the manager at the shop in question, as follows:--“For sixteenpenny coffee, mix 75 per cent. of coffee and 25 per cent. of chicory’’-25 per cent. being the quantity that Mr. Jarmain considered a fair admixture.- The Bench: It is not Mr. Jarmain’s advioe.-Mr. Kirk: Oh, dear, no; it is inadmissible in law.- Mr. Sykes added that the defendant’s instructions also said that the mixture was to be wrapped in a wrapper similar to the one he (Mr. Sykes) now produced, bearing the printed label b b This is sold as a mixture of chicory and’coffee.” Had those instructions been complied with, the defendant could not have been proseouted for selling the mixture without notice to the public that it was a mixture, nor could he have been sucoessfully prosecuted for fraudulently increasing the bulk, because that was a fair mixture.The defendant had given instructions that in future all his coffee should be mixed by his son at his central establishment, and shall not be left to the manager.-The defendant and his manager gave evidence bearing out the foregoing statement, and the canister bearing the defendant’s instructions as to the mixing was produced.-The Mayor said the Bench considered this a very bad case indeed, and they could not inflict a less penalty than 310. The only question with them was whether they should not infiiat the full penalty. However, they had decided to fine him ;El0 and 31 8s.oasts.90 THE ANALYST. -- Fine for Selling Butterine as Butter. At the South Staffordshire Stipendiaxy’s Court, held at Wednesbury, several important case8 under the Sale of Bood and Drugs Act were brought forward by Mr. Horder, the inspector. The first case heard was that against Mr. J. Price, wholesale and retail grocer, of Bilston, who was summoned for selling butterine as butter. Mr. Dallow appeared for the defence. Wm. Watson stated that when going through the Bilston Market, he met Mr. Toy, assistant to Mr. Horder, who requested him to go to the defendant’s stall and ask for a pound of butter. He did as he was requested, and on arriving at the stall (which was a large one), he noticed placards on the top of the stall, ‘‘ A drop in Butter,” and “Butter down again.” He asked for a pound of butter, and tendered a half-crown in payment, receiving 1s.8d. in change. Cross-examined by Mr. Dallow : He had not yet been paid for purchasing the butter, neither was he engaged by Mr. Horder. He accidently met Toy in the Market Place, and he requested him to go and purchase the butter. He would swear most positively that he asked for butter, He did not ask the price of the article with which he was supplied. There were no tickets on the articlo. Mr. Toy stated that on receiving the article from the last witness he saw the defendant’s assistants, and informed them that he was going to have the article analysed. The article was afterwards conveyed to Mr.Jones, the county analyst, who reported that the article contained 1.0.05 per cent. of water, 212 of salt, 1.11 of curdy matter, and 86.72 of animal fat. In reply to the Stipendiary, Mr. Jones stated there was only a mere trace of butter. It was an article known as butterine and consisted chiefly of refuse animal fat. He had heard of so-called butter being made of Thames mud. He would not, however, state that the article in question was made of Thames mud. By Mr. Dallow : The article was not in any way injurious, and might not act injuriously upon a sick person. He could not positively say that butterine was an article of commerce. He did not know that there were recognised places where butterine was manufactured. He had heard of it being manufactured at Rotterdam.It was said to be made from beef fat. Mr. Dallow submitted that the article was sold as butterine, and Watson was distinctly told when hemade the purchase that the article was butterine, and not butter, and he therefore very respectfully submitted that.no case had been made out against his client. He afterwards called Thomas Price, the son of the defendant, who said he was at the stall when Watson came up to it. On th’e stall were tubs of butter and butterine. They were, however, separate. It was true that there were notices over the stall, 6‘ Butter down again,” and also “ A drop in butter.” Watson, pointing to a tub of butterine, said, 6‘ I want a pound of this.” He did not say anything about butter. By Mr. Horder : It was not possible to buy butter at 1Od.per lb. at the present time. Salt butter ranged from 1s. to Is. 4d. per lb. At this time of year, if tradesmen had large stocks of butter in their cellars, there was no doubt they would sooner sell it at a sacrifice rather than keep it, as the first loss was always the best. He was fully justified in putting up the notices which had been referred to by the witnesses, as butter was always up and down in price. The notices were, however, posted over the butter, and not over the butterine. He would swear, and most positively, that there was a large quantity of butter on the stall.-Henry James, an assistant, gave corroborative evidence, and two customers, who happened to be standing at the stdl when Watson made the purchase, stated that he distinctly asked for a pound ‘I of this.” The Stipendiary said, notwithstanding the evidence which had been called for the defence, he was convinced that in law an offence had been committed, beoause he was sure that, as Watson had a special object in view, he he would not ask for ‘‘ a pound of this,” as stated by the witnesses, but would ask for a pound of butter.He aertainly considered that butterine should be tiaketed butterine, and then there would be no mistake about it.-The defendant was fined S2 and 332 4s. costs. The Sale of Spirits under the Strength indicated on the Labels.--Strange Decision :- At theKing’sLynnPetty Sessions, on the 16th April, Messrs. Ladyman& Co., grocers, agents for Messrs. W. & A. Gilbey, were summoned before the magistrates for selling three samples of spirits not of the nature, substance and quality demanded. The charge was brought by Mr.Ware, the superintendent of police, and inspector under the Act. Mr. Ware conducted the prosecution ; Mr. Poland, barrister of London appeared for the defendants. Sergt. Taylor stated that, on the 15th March, he went to Ladyman & Co’s. for a bottle of rum, for which he paid 2s. 3d. The rum supplied, the assistant directed his attention to the label on the bottle, which stated-“ The strength being 33 per cent. under proof by distillation, it is suitable either for mixing with water, or as a digestive or stimulrtnt with dilution.” Witness also bought a bottle of gin from a rack labelled “ Gin,” which was described as “ household gin, unsweetened; the strength being half strength (50 per cent.under proof) by distillation,” and a bottle of Scotch whiskey, labelled as ‘‘ Proof.” Mr. Ware said the next evidence was simply to put in the Analyst's certificates. Mr. Poland objecting, referred the magistrates to the 21st section of the Act, and as thatTHE ANALYST. 91 requirement had been made, the certificates were not evidence without the Analyst being called. Mr. Johnstone said he was Analyst for the borough, and on the 15th of last month the Inspector arranged to send him samples of spirits for analysis, and the same day he received three bottles marked ‘‘ Rum, Gin, and Scotch Whiskey ” from Sergt. Taylor, and he declared the results of the analysis to be, Rum 35.90 degrees under proof, Gin 52.30 degrees under proof, and the Whiskey 4.45 degrees under proof.On crosa-examination, as to the process which he adopted for testing the spirits, he declined to enter into any explanation of the methods he employed, or to describe processes of analysis. Mr. Poland then addressed the Bench for the defence, stating that the case was one of much importance to the real defendants, Messrs. Gilbey, and that there had not been a conviction recorded against them in the course of their business, at the same time remarking that he was rather surprised that the Lynn Analyst should not have readily understood what proof spirit was (Mr. Johnstone: It is not what you think it is) ; it was notorious what proof spirit was, and it was not mere obstinacy on the part of the Analyst, but it was a degree of ignorance to say that proof spirit was not half pure spirit, and half distilled water by weight, tested by Sykes’ hydrometer.Mr. Tyler, of the firm of Charles W. Tyler &:Go., wine testers, was next called, and stated that the Public Test OBce was in Little Tower Street, City, and that he had made a careful analysis of the three samples by means of Sykes’ hydrometer, and that his results were Rum 37’4 under proof, Gin 608 under proof, Whiskey 3-2 under proof, and that the testing of the liquors was very simple. After several other witnesses were called, the magistrates retired to consider their deoision, and returning into court, the Mayor said : In this case themagistrates consider the charge against Mr. Ladyman as to theRum and Gin be r?ismissed, but with regard to the Whiskey we consider the variancetoo great, and convict Mr.Ladyman in the penalty of 40s. and costs. Mr. Poland gave notice of appeal to the Court of Quarter Sessions at Lynn, and asked the court to fix the recognisances required. The Mayor said he would accept Mr. Ladyman in SlOO and two sureties of $50. Milk and Fiftg per cent. of Added Water. David Barnard, a dairy farmer, of Oaks Farm, Chigwell, was summoned at the Stratford Police aourt, at the instance of Captain Rittoe, an inspector under the Food and Drugs Act, for having, through his nephew, sold a pint of milk which, upon analysis, proved to be adulterated. Mr. Willis appeared for the prosecution, and said this was one of the very worst cases that had ever come before the bench.Captain Rittoe stated that on January 6th last he met the defendant’s nephew at the Ohigwell Lane Station, having in his possession a quantity of milk consigned to a Mr. Abbot, of Leytonstone. Witness purchased a pint for 3d., and divided it into three parts, one of which, upon being sent to the Public Analyst, was certified toihaving been adulterated to the extent of:50 per cent. of added water. Mr. Atkinson said that the defendant on his advice would plead guilty, but he wished a few facts to be taken into consideration. Mr. Barnard had a cow that was addicted to kicking, and it had on several occasions upset some milk. A lad was dirccted to tie the cow’s legs, but he did not do so, and the animal kicked over more milk, whereupon the lad, afraid of ‘getting into trouble, made up the quantity with water. The lad WRS called and proved this, and in cross-examination said he got the water from one of the pumps, which were b b dl over the yard.” The bench thought this a very bad case, and imposed a fine of $7 108.and costs, $7 19s. in all. The money was paid. RECENT CEEMICAL PATENTS. The following specifications have been recently published, and can be obtained from the Great Seal Office, Curdtor Street, Chancery Lme, London. NO. 1883 Name of Patentee. 2512 E. W. Beckinsale . . 3705 3. L Somoff . . . . 3713 E.G.Brewer .. + b 8766 T. J. Handford . . . . $770 L.Epsteh . . . . 3779 B. J.Milla .. b & 8789 E.A. Brydges . . . . 3802 C. T. Kingaett .* .. 3812 J. 8. Beeman, W. Taylor andF, King . . . . 8814 H, J. Haddan .. . . 5773 J.Imray .. d o 0. TitIe of Patent. Incantlescent Electric Lamps . . . . . . Electrio Lamp.. . . . . . . . . . . Electrio Arc, Lamps . . . . . . . . . . Dynamo or Magneto Eleotric Machines . . . . Preparation of Lead for Secondary Battery Cells Sulphites and Biaulphites for Bleaohing Purposes Eleobic Lamps . . . . . . . . . . Oxidising Alcohols, &c. . . . . . . . . Seoondary Batteries . . . . . . . . . . Secondary Batteries . . . . . . . . . . Eleotrio Lamp Apparatus . . . . . . . . Prim. * b 4 . 2db .. +. 4a. .. * + s 8a. . . . . 6db . . . . 4a. . . . . 8a. .. ,. 4d. - 0 b. 6d. .. b. aa. . . . . 6a. .* C . 6a.931 ’IcbB ANALYST . NO . i88a 3821 3822 5825 3835 3856 3861 3869 3891 3893 3606 3941 3950 3955 3961 3961 3975 3976 3977 3991 3999 4017 4046 4057 4079 4066 4084 4107 4131 4144 4178 4180 4186 4224 4226 4238 4250 4254 4266 4303 4376 4717 Nfbme of Patentee .F . Mori . . . . . . Ditto . . . . . . S . H . Emmens P . & I? . M . Spence . . W.R. Lake . . . . G . Pfannkuche and A . A . Dixon . . . . . . E . Desfoss6 . . . . H . Ulsmann . . . . H . J.Haddan . . . . W.R.Lake . . . . N . C . Cookson S . G . De Ferranti and A . Thompson . . . . T . J . Handford . . . . Ditto . . . . . . H . T . Barnett . . . . J . E . T . Woods . . . . T . J . Handford D . Urquhmt . . . . T . 6 . Handford . . . . G . Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . H . J.Eaddan .* .. J . D . Mackenzie . . . . E . P . Alexander . . . . L . H . M . Somz6e . . C . S . Snell . . . . P.R.BLlen . . . . C.F. Clans . . . . Ditto . . .. . . W.L. Wise . . . . D . G . Fitzgerald and T . J . Jones . . . . . . J . Jameson . . . . L . Hartmann . . . . W.L.Lake . . . . W . Green . . . . . . W . Crookes . . . . T . Donnithorne . . . . F . W . Durham . . . . T . $later . . . . . . E. Frankland . . . . M . Deprez . . . . J . Gordon and J . Gray . . Title of Patent . Electric Lamps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Batteries for Storage of Electricity Electric Motors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Alum and other Salts of Alumina . . . . . . . . . . Electric Lamps or Lighting Apparatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ElectricIncandescent Lamps . . . . . . . . . . Dynamo Electrie Motor Machine . . . . . . . . . . Secondary or Storage Batteries . . . . . . . . . . Electric Lamps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Secondary Batteries .. . . . . . . . . . . . . Manufacture of Basic Fireproof Materials from Alkaline Earths Dynamo Electric Machines . . . . . . . . . . . . Incandescing Electric Lamps . . . . . . . . . . Secondary Batteries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Secondary Batteries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Secondary Batteries and Electric Accumulators . . . . . . Eleotric Lights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Manufacture of Ammonia and Purification of Shale Oils . . Incandescing Conductors for Electric Lamps . . . . . . Recovery of Caustic Soda or Potash. Employed for Extraction of Arsenic from Copper Precipitates Manufacture of Hydrabe of Glucose from Starch . . . Electric Arc Lamps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Manufaeture of Ammonia and Bone Black Becondary Batteries . . . . . . .. . . . . . . Electric Lamps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Arc Electric Lamps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Manufacture of White Pigments. Alkalies. &(2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Manufacture of Silicate of Zinc. Lead. Baryta. and Strontia, . . Priad 4a. 2a. 4a. 2d. 2d. 2d. 4d. 2d. 6d. 2d. 6d. 6d. 6d. 4d. 6d. 4d. 4d. 2d. 6a . 6d. 6d. 2d. 6a . 4d. 4d. 4a. 6a. 4a . Manufacture of Caustic Potash and Sods .. Secondary or Storage Batteries . . . . . . Carbons for Ineandescteat Electric Lamps . . . . Construction of Voltaic Batteries . . . . . . Manufacture of Starch . . . . . . . . Manufacture and Treatment of Soaps . . . . Incandescent Lamps . . . . . . . . . . Dynamo Magneto Electric Machines . . . . Voltaic Batteries . . . . . . . . . . Storing Electric Energy . . . . . . . . Electricd Btorage Batteries . . . . . . . . Dynamo Electric Machines . . . . . . . . Disc Dynamo and Magneto Electric Machines . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4d . .. 4a . .. 2a . .. 4d . .. 6d . .. 4d . 0 . 6d .. 2d . .. 2d . .. sa . .. 4a . .. 4a . .. 6a . BOOKS. &c., RECEIVED . The Chemist and Druggist ; The Brewers’ Guardian ; The British Medical Journal ; The Medioal Press ; The Pharmaceutical Journal ; The Sanitary Record ; The Miller ; The Provisioner ; The Practitioner ; New Remedies ; Proceedings of the American Chemical Society ; Le Practicien ; The Inventor& Record ; New York Public Health ; The Scientifio American ; Society of A r t s Journal ; Sanitary Engineer of New York ; The Chemists’ Journal ; Weekly Drug News ; Sugar Cane ; Country Brewers’ Gazette ; The Medied Reaord ; The Grocers’ Gamtte ; Loadon Water Supply. by Crookes. Odhg and Tidy ; Chemical Beview .

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8830800089

出版商:RSC    

年代:1883

数据来源: RSC