684 
My first assistant, Mr. G. Meer, to whom I suggested this 
investigation as a subject for his thesis for the doctorate, has been 
so fortunate as to obtain results for the system dichlor-benzene- 
dibrom-benzene-aleohol that gave for the first time an indubitable 
answer to the question proposed here. On the side of dichlor-benzene 
the law of partition appeared to hold within the errors of observation 
for the distribution of dibrom-benzene between solution and mixed 
TABLE I. 
RESULTS ON THE SIDE OF DIBROMINE. 
ST A LTS ES, i TE ETE, 
bene per1000 ee hol ee ooo) K a Ks 2 a ner 
eee ‚cm? solution pre IGE | KS i CG: 
38.7 4.76 52.7 1.23 5.90 3 AT 
48.7 6.31 53.7 1.30 8.18 2.66 
54.8 6.71 54.2 1.23 8.21 . | oen 
55.0 6.64 saa | do 8.02 2.19 
51.6 8.12 55.8. |. tadl 11.44 | 2.45 
61.7 8.32 55.8 1.35 11.22 | 2.49 
15.3 9.47 56.7 1.26 11.91 | 1.60 
83.6 10.11 58.1 1.21 12.23 1.45 
100.2 13.69 59.2 1.37 18.70 1.36 
118.3 13.97 59.5 1.18 16.49 0.99 
123.7 16.83 64.0 1.36 22.81 | 1.09 
190.5 | 24.97 71.0 1.31 32.13 | 0.69 
286.3 | 38.9 ae | 149 40.29 0.41 
564.8 |. 42,95 87.5 0.76 3443 | 0s 
crystal, and the same thing was found for the distribution of dichlor- 
benzene on the dibromine side. Greater deviations were always found 
with greater concentrations, coming from both sides, as was, indeed, 
to be expected. This result was obtained on the assumption that the 
molecular size of dichlor- resp. dibrom-benzene is the same in the 
mixed erystal phase as that in the coexisting solution. 
The foregoing Table I gives a concise summary. 
C 
It follows from this table that only the quotient = yields a very 
S 
