]ß E. DIVERS AND T. HAGA. 



Clans in 1871 worked upon the two sulphazotates, and pive an 

 account very different from Fremy's of their composition, properties, 

 and relations to each other. Finding them inconvertible into each 

 other, he referred (hem to different acids and renamed them. He 

 brought to light the sulphonic constitution of these salts (which lind 

 been, however, foreshadowed by Fremy), and consequently named the 

 neutral sulphazotate of Fremy disnlphydroxyazate, while f )r the Intter's 

 basic sulphazotate he retained the name sulphazotate simply. 



The sulphazotates were again examined in 1887 by Raschig, who 

 established their constitution as derivatives of hydroxylamine* and 

 made discovery of a potassium salt still more alkahne than Fremy's 

 basic salt. He, in his turn, differed greatly from Claus and found 

 Fremy's account of the salts in some respects more in accordance with 

 the ficts, but, on other grounds than those Claus had taken, retained 

 the distinction made by this chemist between the neutral sulphazotate, 

 which he renamed luidroxijlamive-distdpliotiate, and the basic sul])hazo- 

 tate, which he agreed with Claus in calling simply sulpha :otate. To 

 his own discovered third potassium salt he gave the name of basic 

 sulphazotate. 



In the present contribution to tVie subject the existence of sodium 

 oximidosulphonates is established ; these and salts of ammonium, 

 calcium, strontium, bnrium, and lead ;u-e described ; much-needed 

 methods, definite and productive, for preparing both sodium and 

 potassium oximidosulphonates :ire given ; the reversion of these salts 

 to sulphite and nitrite made known ; and the interrelations of the salts 



* Claus liad pointed out the hydroxylamiue derivation of oxyamidosulphonates but had 

 decided :i gainst such a derivation for the (neutral) sulphazotate. In a foot-note to our preliminary 

 paper on the Reaction hettoeen ttilphites and nitrites, J. Ch. S. 51, 659, we erroneously represented 

 Raschig to be not quite accurate in stating tliat Claus had so decided. We regret our error. 

 The facts are that while in one place, overlooked by us, in his several long papers Claus ex- 

 prossly makes this decision, hf in another place, indicated in our note, gives thf- foruiulœ— 

 < >NII(SOgK)2 and HON(S03K)2— as alternative, without deciding between them. 



