CHEMICAL NEWS, } The Seven Fundamental Types of Organic Chemistry. January 31, 1879. In order to enable the reader to comprehend the full theoretical import and significance which attaches to this hypothesis of seven fundamental types, it becomes necessary for me to direct his attention to that most complex and elaborately finished specimen of molecular architecture in which the whole of our seven types are supposed to be collectively and completely represented, and to join me in a rapid survey of its general internal structure and organisation. Let it first of all be distinctly understood that in this our model-molecule, which relatively to the three conjugate axes of space is held to exhibit the most perfect symmetry of form and atomic arrangement, the primary constituent groups are placed side by side along the whole extent of one of these axes, to which I shall henceforth apply the term "Operative Axis," because it coincides with the particular line or direction in which chemically conflicting molecules are invariably brought to attack and to react upon each other. Let all this be taken for granted, and we may readily conceive the practicability of a mode and order of grouping, wherein our seven fundamental types have each one alloted to them a certain definite portion of space, within whose limits the primary groups are symmetrically distributed in obedience to their own special laws of molecular collocation and arrangement. It is further argued that the seven portions of space just alluded to, and which in their collective capacity may not inaptly be compared to a suite of conterminous closets or chambers, are each of them destined 47 to serve as repositories for the exclusive accommodation of that particular class of molecules only which bear upon them the stamp of the presiding fundamental type. It is upon the basis of this, to my mind, perfectly natural and reasonable hypothesis that I shall now proceed to expound the main features of this wonderfully simple, yet allaccomodating seven-chamber system, with the view of determining not only the exact relative position of each chamber in our model molecule, but likewise what are the most salient chemical properties and functions with which its respective occupants are more or less liberally marked and endowed. Commencing with the middle chamber, and bearing in mind that in my system the principal nucleus is invariably regarded as forming the common central point of attrac tion, towards which all the other component groups are, directly or indirectly, made to tend and to gravitate, it stands to reason that this identical nucleus is justly entitled to become the chief and only occupant of this middle chamber. The middle chamber, which is thus shown to claim for itself a prominently central position, is supposed to be flanked on the one side by the outer conjunct chamber, which I hold to be reserved for the exclusive accommodation of that particular class of molecules which were formerly described by me as components of the envelope, but for which the more appropriate term "outer conjunct molecules" will henceforth be substituted. Again, the middle chamber is supposed to be flanked on the other side by the inner conjunct chamber, which I hold to be reserved for the exclusive accommodation of that particular class of molecules which were formerly described by me priate term " Inner Conjunct Molecules" will henceforth as hydrocarbon adjuncts, but for which the more approbe substituted. Continuing our survey, the outer conjunct chamber is supposed to be flanked by the outer subjunct chamber, which I hold to be reserved for the exclusive accommodation of that particular set of substituted constituents which, from their chemical character and com. position, are denied free admission into the outer conjunct chamber. Again, the inner conjunct chamber is supposed to be flanked by the inner subjunct chamber, which I hold to be reserved for the exclusive accommodation of that particular set of substituted constituents which, from their chemical character and composition, are denied free admission into the inner conjunct chamber. Completing our survey, the outer subjunct chamber is supposed to be flanked by the outer adjunct chamber, which I hold to be reserved for the exclusive accommodation of that particular class of co-ordinately allied poly-basic and poly-acid molecules, whose parent molecule is above poly-atomic alcohol, while the inner subjun& chamber is supposed tɔ be flanked by the inner adjunct chamber, which I hold to be reserved for the exclusive accommodation of that particular class of subordinately allied poly-basic and poly. acid molecules, whose parent molecule is a pseudo-polyatomic alcohol. Having now, with the aid of our model molecule, submitted to the reader a tolerably complete general outline of the internal structure and organisation of every conceivable variety and complexity of chemical combinations, strictly so-called, I shall in the next place endeavour to explain to him the precise nature and efficacy of those three fundamental agencies or principles which are supposed to over-rule and set in motion the wonderful mechanism with which this magnificent heptarchial system of types has been so knowingly and sapiently furnished. Commencing with the nucleus type, I proceed upon the very simple and intelligible hypothesis that all the members of this class are formed by the direct union of two chemically identical but physically dissimilar elementary molecules, E2, and that these physical differences, supposed to be due to certain variations in the vibratory movements of their constituent atoms, are held to constitute an efficient cause for their coalition into a molecule of double the atomic weight. The class of molecules before us will, therefore, be expressed by the general symbol 2E2; and 48 The Seven Fundamental Types of Organic Chemistry. {January, 31, 1879. undue weight and preponderance. t is of importance to bear in mind that the two thus firmly | sophy most wrongfully insisted upon attaching such an welded and interlaced molecules have now as a whole become endowed with sundry very marked and tangible chemical properties and functions. Turning from this to the second or outer conjunct type, it is conjectured that all the members of this class owe their origin and formation to the union of two not differently but similarly modified elementary molecules, E2. These molecules will therefore likewise be expressed by the general symbol 2E2; but from the peculiar conditions of their generation, which invariably require the presence and co-operation of an over-ruling nucleus, it follows that, whereas the nucleus molecules possess in a high degree the character of consistency and stability, the outer conjunct molecules are, on the contrary, entirely destitute of these qualities. Hence it becomes impossible for them to exist apart from the dominating nucleus, to which alone they are indebted for their seeming firmness and ready associability. It is clear, therefore, that, in the act of being withdrawn from under the constraining influence of that powerful centre of attraction, the liberated molecules will instantly become re-converted again into molecules of the nucleus type, from which they are understood to have originally sprung, or else into molecules of the inner conjunct type, provided always that the chemical nature of their constituent atoms is not opposed to this species of molecular metamorphosis. It is, moreover, worthy of note that, while and so long as the molecules under consideration continue to subsist in the aforesaid compulsory state of bondage and confinement, they seem to be destitute of any special chemical properties and functions, whereas these same molecules, after their conversion into the corresponding subjunct molecules, are destined to play a very prominent part in the molecular economy by cooperating with the principal nucleus towards the proper conduction and consummation of that identical process of molecular substitution which, as already pointed out on a former page, became so unduly magnified and so unwisely selected by our leading theorists as an all-sufficient ground for the erection of a solid and comprehensive chemical theory. As regards the inner conjunct type, which falls next to be considered, I have come to the conclusion that all the members of this class require for their realisation the joint action of neither more nor less than four primary and chemically identical hydrocarbon molecules, as expressed by the general formula H2pC29 (p and q=0, 1, 2, 3, 4, &c.), a formula which is seen to include likewise the exceptional cases, when pure hydrogen or pure carbon are made to play the part of inner conjunct molecules. The cementing agent is again believed to be the physical principle which, by causing one of these molecules to become differently modified from the remainder, determines their coalition into one single and four times heavier molecule with the general formula 4H2C2q. I may observe, in addition, that the resulting simple hydrocarbon molecules share with those of the nucleus type the character of great consistency and stability, while, in complete analogy with the members of the outer conjunct type, these same hydrocarbon molecules, from the simplest to the most complex, are capable of entering into direct chemical union with a given principal nucleus, no matter whether that nucleus happens to be presented to them from without, or whether, as is frequently the case, it has first of all been moulded out of one or other of their own component hydrogen or carbon molecules. A second very striking and remarkable feature which the inner conjunct molecules share with those of the outer conjunct chamber consists in the cir cumstance that, thanks to their direct chemical union with a principal nucleus, the component hydrogen and carbon molecules have now acquired the singular power and faculty of co-operating with the said nucleus towards the proper conduction and consummation of that identical process of molecular substitution to which—I repeat it with emphasis the founder of our modern school of philo. As regards the two types which follow next in the list, namely, the outer and inner subjunct types, their origin and mode of formation have already to a certain extent been traced and foreshadowed in my closing remarks on the preceding types. The presiding agency is supposed to be the principle of calority or thermal principle, and the entire process of molecular substitution, which is the outcome of the practical application of that principle to molecular statics and dynamics, will be best understood from a descriptive analysis of its three principal stages. In the first stage, the particular outer or inner conjunct molecule which is destined for conversion in the corresponding subjunct molecule is first of all made to part company with the principal nucleus, and becoming instantly subjected to the powerful influence of the ever-present physical principle, it is speedily brought to remerge under the more permanent typical form of an ordinary nucleus. In this act of dissociation the newly generated subjunct molecule is supposed to move away from the principal nucleus, without, however, passing beyond the critical point where, at a high temperature, the simultaneously formed thermal bond, as I will call it, and which is now destined to serve as the only cementing link between the principal nucleus and its similarly constituted subjunct, becomes suddenly and forcibly torn asunder, It is, of course, impossible to determine à priori the exact number and degree of elasticity of the various kinds of thermal bonds by means of which subjunct nuclei may remain attached to their principal nucleus. There exists, however, abundance of valuable experimental evidence to prove that in this first stage of the process certain outer subjunct nuclei, like chlorine and its congeners, remain attached to the principal nucleus by means of one thermal bond only; others, again, like oxygen and sulphur, by means of two thermal bonds; while a third class of outer subjunct nuclei, like nitrogen and phosphorus, remain attached thereto by means of three thermal bonds, that being the highest number, so far as my system is concerned, which suffices for the complete elucidation and analysis of this interesting and instructive order of chemical phenomena. There exists, morever, abundance of valuable experimental evidence to prove that inner subjunct nuclei with hydrogen for their component element remain attached to the principal nucleus by means of one thermal bond only; while subjunct nuclei, with carbon for their component element, remain attached thereto by two thermal bonds, and not at all by means of four thermal bonds, as is still persistently taught and maintained on the other side. (To be continued). THE CULTIVATION OF CHEMISTRY." By F. W. CLARKE, S.B., ONCE a year it is our pleasure and our privilege to meet together, for the interchange of views upon the questions of chemical science; for the comparison of notes in our various lines of research; for mutual help, sympathy, and improvement. It is also, I suppose, a part of our work to attract public attention to the subjects that interest us, and to do what we can to secure for chemistry a wider appreciation and greater means for development. No branch of science has done more for civilisation than Old industries have been revolutionised, and new ones created; things which were once the luxuries of the few have been made the daily necessities of the many; all arts and all manufactures owe tribute to the chemist. A comparatively small number of men, a majority of them ours. * Address before the Permanent Sub-section of Chemistry of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, at the teachers, working only in their intervals of leisure, established the principles which have brought about these wonderful results. If small means, widely scattered and unsystematically used, have wrought such marvels, what may we not expect from the greater opportunities which a more general comprehension of the value of our labours must eventually bring? To the members of this sub-section, the economical achievements of chemistry are familiar as household words. As we look about us in our daily lives, we see in every direction the fruits of chemical investigations. Every scrap of metal; all paints, varnishes, fats, oils, and fertilisers; every bit of glass or porcelain; every cake of soap or box of matches, embodies some improvement which chemistry has made. Our linen is bleached and our outer garments are dyed with the products of the laboratory. Whether we burn candles, gas, or kerosene, we still have chemistry to thank for nearly all there is of cleanliness, convenience, brilliancy, purity, and cheapness in the light. In many articles of food, and in a long list of medicines; in the photograph and the galvanic battery; by the conversion of waste rubbish into articles of beauty and usefulness; in short, through a vast network of improvements and discoveries, our still infant science has established its claims to recognition as a benefactor of mankind. Would that the multitudes who have enjoyed these benefits might see their sources as clearly as we do! Then would science be fostered and encouraged, where now it struggles feebly to secure a grudging and scanty support. A single discovery of the chemist may work peaceful revolutions in many departments of labour. Pardon me if I pause to illustrate this truism by a very familiar example. Even for us it is not a waste of time to look backward occasionally, and to consider the consequences developed from one great research or invention. Such considerations may well strengthen us in our hopes for the future of chemistry. Nearly ninety years ago, Le Blanc discovered his famous process for converting common salt into soda. No pro- | cess could be much simpler than this, and yet in its ramifications it has affected every branch of civilised society. In the first place, it widened the field of labour. Certain materials were needed at the start, namely: salt itself, charcoal, limestone, and sulphuric acid; and many workmen found employment in their production. By the new demand for sulphuric acid, this important compound was rendered cheaper, and every other chemical industry was thus directly facilitated. If the familiar saying be true that the degree of civilisation to which any country has attained may be measured by the amount of sulphuric acid it consumes, then the importance of this single item can scarcely be over-estimated. Passing from the materials employed to the process itself, we find that incidentally, as a by-product, it furnishes immense quantities of hydrochloric acid at a minimum of cost, and that here again all branches of manufacturing chemistry reIceive direct benefit. As a final result-if, indeed, any result can properly be called final-we find that the soda, for which the process was devised, has been enormously cheapened. In 1814, soda crystals were worth about 300 dols. per ton. By 1861, the price had fallen to 22 dols.; 5000 tons a week were produced, and 10,000 labourers found direct employment. This does not include the labour engaged in furnishing materials for the process, nor that incidentally stimulated through other industries. By the cheapening of soda, other things of more generally familiar utility were cheapened also. Chief among these we may mention glass and soap, two articles in which soda is a leading ingredient. Such a reduction in the price of soda as that just indicated could not but work wonders here. As glass and soap became cheaper, the demand for them naturally increased; and hence, through Le Blanc's invention, our houses are better lighted, cleanliness has been encouraged, and the public health, because of these steps forward, has unquestionably been improved, In short, the results of this single invention, direct and indirect, can be traced into nearly every department of human industry. These results have been exclusively beneficial. All of us share in their advantages, and no one has been injured. They have given employment to many thousands of labourers, and that without prejudice to older occupations. And thus it is in some degree with every discovery of the chemist. Each one is like a grain of corn, small in itself, and yet a germ from which may spring the food of numberless future generations. In the course of our labours, many grains may fall by the wayside and bring but small return; still, that which sinks into fertile soil will yield a thousand fold reward to the sower. I need build no argument upon the facts I have just given. They stand before us, not only on the pages of books, but embodied in countless manufactories scattered all over the civilised world. They render life pleasanter, easier, more comfortable. They are the sources from which future discoveries shall flow, and help to make certain the steady growth of civilisation. If the general public is not interested in chemistry, it is because we as chemists have neglected a part of our duty. We have but to speak in order to command the public ear. Our work is work of national importance, and is sure in time of national recognition. Let us ask ourselves to-day how the splendid achievements of the past may be made more fruitful, and what measures and what researches will best advance the interests of our science in the future. It is safe to assert that in every science there is some central line of growth, to which all details are subordinated, and along which its fundamental principles find their readiest and most logical development. Here lie the germs of future generalisations; whatever promise there may be of greater exactness, either in methods or in data; and all those deeper conceptions which most intimately connect a given science with other branches of thought and knowledge. Without such a main stem, each science would be but a mass of scattered details, isolated facts, fragmentary principles, with little coherence or order. True, we may fail to recognise a real line of growth, or we may follow a false clue, and yet make discoveries of great value; but without clear ideas upon this subject the highest work is impossible. In physics, the doctrines of the conservation of energy and the correlation of forces are points on the central line. In the study of organised life, the theory of evolution indicates a main stem. How is it with chemistry? Among chemists to-day there seem to be two schools; at least practically, if not in point of abstract theory. It is almost as if the line of growth had divided, so that we can hardly tell which is the greater, and which the lesser stem. One school, represented by a large majority of modern working chemists, seems to take an interest only in the statical side of the science; its chief aim is to discover immense numbers of new compounds, and to theorise upon their constitution. Strangely enough, these chemists have devoted nine-tenths of their energy to the compounds of a single element, carbon; scarcely regarding other substances save in so far as they unite with this or with bodies containing it. To me it sometimes seems as if, in the light of their labours, chemistry was to be defined as the science of speculating upon the possible position of theoretical atoms within imaginary molecules. Do not think, however, that I underiate the value of the work they have done. I fully recognise its importance, although I consider it unfortunate that so much time and energy should have been spent in this one line of research, to the neglect of other, and I believe greater, fields of investigation. The other school of chemists, a school which seems to be rapidly growing in England and to be gaining industrious votaries elsewhere, may be described as essentially dynamical in its ideas. It sees in every chemical reaction three objects of study: first, the substances which enter into the reaction; secondly, the phenomena which occur during the reaction; thirdly, the substances produced 50 Cultivation of Chemistry. CHEMICAL NEWS, {January 31, 1879. by the reaction. The second term, the term which involves | philosopher, that the power to search after truth is more all the transformations of energy, is to them of at least equal importance with the others. In this they study the play of forces attendant upon the formation and destruction of compounds, the appearance or disappearance of heat, the velocity of the change, the effects of pressure, the alterations in volume, and so on. To them, every element and every reaction is important and interesting; they strive to see each change of composition in all its relations; to study processes as well as results; to recognise the intimate connection between chemistry and other sciences. Does it not seem as if these workers were pretty nearly on the right track? Is not their method of study the deepest and broadest? Does it not really include all there is of permanent value in the other school? To me, at least, it seems as if here the great advances are to be made, and the central line of growth discovered. This feeling is justified, I believe by history. Much of the best progress in chemical science has been made on the physical side. In truth, chemistry and physics are but one at bottom, having their roots in the same fundamental principles. Electricity cannot be studied apart from chemical considerations, neither can light nor heat. Nor are we able to understand truly a chemical operation until we know a good deal about the physical forces which it necessarily involves. Neither science can be mastered apart from the other; for they are but two great branches from one common line of growth. The molecular theory, without which modern chemistry could hardly have existed, rests mainly upon physical foundations. Apart from the laws of Avogadro and Ampère, of Dulong and Petit, of Boyle and Mariotte, of Gay-Lussac and Charles, much which is now plain and orderly to the chemist would be chaotic and unmanageable. Doubtless, at some future time, the investigations of Mitscherlich and others into isomorphism, of Kopp into molecular volumes, of Thomsen and Berthelot into thermo-chemistry, of Gladstone into refractive indices, of Harcourt and Esson, and Boguski and Kajander into the velocity of chemical changes, will lead to generalisations of equal importance with these. The workers I have named, with many others equally worthy of naming, have already done enough to give us glimpses of great laws which we are as yet unable to see in their entirety. These glimpses forward are like promises made by Nature; sometime to be fulfilled, certainly never to be broken. Were we to take from chemistry all that has been done upon the physical side, how little true science would remain! We should have left but little law and little order; scarcely more than a vast mass of scattered facts and details, unconnected with any fundamental conceptions or any definite method of scientific research. Physics, stripped of its chemical portion, might make a somewhat better showing; but even then it would be little more than a skeleton of what it now is. Neither science can be strong without the other. One of the main objects of science is to render prevision possible. The more thoroughly our knowledge is coordinated, the better are we able to predict the nearer discoveries of the future, and to see what lines of research will be most fruitful. Science is continually striving after exactness; of which this prevision is one of the results. The line, therefore, which leads most directly to definiteness and precision in any department of knowledge, is evidently the true line of growth which we should seek to find and to follow. Nature marks out pathways for us, even though we close our eyes to her indications. To-day, notwithstanding its brilliant achievements in the past, chemistry is an inexact science. From top to bottom, from beginning to end, it shows signs of imperfection. Indeed, to most minds, this incompleteness is a great charm. There is so much to be done in chemistry, so many lines of research to follow out, so many discoveries to be made, so much glory to be won and good to be accomplished, that an active mind can hardly fail of being attracted. We may well feel, with the German precious than truth itself. Were it possible for any science to become absolutely perfect, we should but idly fold our hands and enjoy its fruits, caring little for the history behind us, or for a future which could bring us nothing more. Perhaps, in the beneficence of Nature, we might even lapse into forgetfulness, in order that our descendants could enjoy the pleasure of a re-discovery. Speaking simply in a relative sense, chemistry is an eminently imperfect science. In experimental resources it is wonderfully rich; in delicate methods of investigation no other science can surpass it; but in those principles which render foresight possible, chemistry is poor and meagre. We may guess the existence of some undiscovered compound, but until we have prepared it what can we tell of its properties? A little perhaps, a very little; and that only approximately. Of its relations to the great forces of Nature, we know in advance almost nothing. We are able only to devise for it some "structural formula" which shall last for about five years, and then be replaced by another of equally perishable quality. We are, in fact, to-day but laying the foundations of a future science, which shall be to the chemistry of the present what that is to the alchemy of the past. What the chemist has already done for humanity has been done in spite of difficulties and defects; it is but a trifle compared with that which shall be accomplished in the better time to come. Enough has been done to prove the possibility of more; to encourage the investigator in his labours; to show the public that here is something worthy of study, of help, and of applause. There are three great objects of investigation in chemistry as seen under its present aspect; three central problems upon which all else depends. First, what laws govern the transformations of energy that occur during chemical changes? Second, how do the properties of compounds stand related to those of the elements contained in them? Third, what is the nature of chemical union? These problems must be studied largely together; each one in the light of the other two. The first and second, however, are more practical in_character than the third, and involve less speculation. They need for their solution severe experimental researches, the exact determination of numerical data, and reasoning of a rigidly mathematical kind. Under the third problem we encounter the chief speculations of chemistry, hypotheses which serve to suggest and stimulate investigations with regard to the other two, while at the same time dependent upon these latter for the security of their foundations. The nature of the elements, whether one or many; the truth or falsity of the atomic theory; all questions of inter-molecular structure; the validity of certain formulæ; the value of such doctrines as that of quantivalence; these are the ideas with which this problem has to do. Each one of these theoretical questions is but a special case depending for its answer upon our views concerning the main point of all. Plainly, the first thing for chemistry to do is to make sure of its foundations; using speculation only as a line by which parts of the work may possibly be helped and guided. The only foundations which can stand the test of time, in such a science as ours, are exact, rigorous, quantitative measurements. We already know tolerably well in a qualitative way what transformations of energy occur in chemical changes; the question now is as to their definite numerical relations. How much heat appears or vanishes in any given reaction? what is the exact electromotive force of any specified couple? what laws of quantity connect actinic energy with particular combinations or decompositions? These are the questions which science now asks, and for which in a few cases we are just beginning to find answers. The physicist approaches these questions from one side, the chemist from another; eventually the two will meet, and a general solution will be found. From our knowledge of forces on the one hand, and of substances on the other, we shall become able to compute the dynamical relations of every possible chemical change, | results of an investigation carried on by Prof. Crumand perhaps even to determine in advance what reactions Brown and the author. can and what cannot take place. (To be continued) PROCEEDINGS OF SOCIETIES. PHYSICAL SOCIETY. January 25, 1879. Professor G. C. FOSTER, Vice-President, in the Chair. PROF. E. RAY Lankester and Mr. Alex. Macdonald, B.A., were elected members. Dr. ERCK exhibited a constant bichromate of potash battery. The ordinary bichromate battery soon loses power when in use, and in order to secure a powerful constant battery to drive a small astronomical clock, Dr. Erck devised the modified form shown. It consists of a narrow lead trough, 12 ins. long by 3 ins. wide and 1 in. deep, lined along both sides with the carbon plates. The zinc plate, 10 ins. long, is immersed in the solution to the depth of an inch midway between the two carbons. A continual circulation of the bichromate solution is kept up by allowing fresh solution to drop into the cell at one end, and the exhausted solution to drop away by a tap at the other end. As the space between the two carbons is only about half an inch wide, there is merely a thin layer of solution between the positive and negative poles. The internal resistance of the cell is therefore very low when short circuited, only about ohm. To obtain the maximum current, about 8 ozs. of solution per hour should be supplied. Dr. Erck also showed a battery formed of zinc and carbon circular plates mounted on an axle, which is rotated by wheelwork, thus mechanically stirring the bichromate solution. Dr. GUTHRIE, F.R.S., described some the results he had obtained from experiments on the vibration of metal rods or lathes fixed in a vice at one end and free to vibrate at the other. The experiments were carried on by dusting sand on the rod and observing the nodal lines formed by it when the rod was vibrated so as to give out notes determined by a monochord. Dr. Guthrie's results showed that the two final segments at the free end are equal in length to the inner segment at the fixed end. It appears from these experiments that if a free lathe, vibrating with a node in the middle but having an even number of segments, be clamped at where there is a node we alter its conditions of vibration. When the lathe is half free the end segment breaks up into two parts together equal to the segment at the fixed end. In the case of torsional vibration of the lathe the position of the longitudinal nodal lines depended to some extent on the clamping of the lathe in the vice. Prof. FOSTER pointed out that in a natural node the direction of the tangent is varying, whereas in an artificial node it is always horizontal. Prof. UNWIN explained that the sand accumulated at nodes because the particles when thrown off the lathe make certain horizontal excursions, which tend to move them nearer the points of repose of the lathe. Messrs. Elliot Brothers exhibited sundry electric commutators and resistance boxes. EDINBURGH UNIVERSITY CHEMICAL SOCIETY. Third Meeting, January 15, 1879. Mr. G. CARR ROBINSON, F.R.S.E., in the Chair. A PAPER was read by Mr. J. ADRIAN BLAIKIE, B.Sc., on the "Salts of Trimethyl-sulphine," containing further The decomposition product of the hyposulphite of trimethyl-sulphine (CHEMICAL NEWS, vol. xxxvii., p. 130) was found by analysis to be represented by the following equation : [(CH3)3S]2S2O3= (CH3)2S} S2O3+S(CH3)2 The methyl-hyposulphite of trimethyl-sulphine thus ob tained is very hygroscopic, and is gradually oxidised to a sulphate. The solution of the substance does not decolourise iodine solution. These results point to as the probable rational formula of the substance. The sulphite of trimethyl-sulphine was obtained by the action of sulphurous acid on the hydrate. It crystallises well, but there is some difficulty in preparing a perfectly normal salt. The salt, as nearly normal as possible, does not, like the hyposulphite, give up its water of crystallisation in the cold over anhydrous phosphoric acid; at 140° C., however, it becomes anhydrous. Heated to 175° C. it gives off sulphide of methyl-8.3 grms. lost 2.32 grms., or 27'95 per cent. On cooling, the clear liquid residue solidifies, forming a hard, very hygroscopic, crystalline mass. This substance was so deliquescent that no analysis of it was made. This mode of formation leads (CH3)3S) SO3 CH3 to The bearing of this fact on the constitution of mephites is obvious. The acetate of trimethyl-sulphine is formed by treating the iodide of trimethyl-sulphine with acetate of silver. (CH3)3SI+CH3-COOAg=(CH3)3S-OOC-CH3+AgI On leaving the strong solution over sulphuric acid in vacuo for three weeks no crystallisation took place. The strong solution on being heated to 100° decomposed into water acetate of methyl and sulphide of methyl. CH, COO-S(CH3)3=CH-COO-CH3+S(CH3)2. The benzoate of trimethyl-sulphine is formed by treating the iodide of trimethyl-sulphine with benzoate of silver, (CH3)3SI+C6H5—COOAg= C6H5-COO-S(CH3)3+AgI ̧ This salt is very soluble in water. On standing for two weeks over sulphuric acid in vacuo only a very few crystals were formed, which it is difficult to separate from the very thick mother-liquor. It is slightly less soluble in alcohol. The imperfectly dried salt on being heated to 110° decomposes into water, benzoate of methyl, and sulphide of methyl. C6H5-COO-S(CH3)3=C6H5—COO—CH3+S(CH3)2• The dithionate of trimethyl-sulphine is obtained by neutralising an aqueous solution of dithionic acid with |