OPINIONS AS TO VALUE OF WOOD TURPENTINE. 47 



John. It . Ma.mry & Son, New York City: Aside from its objectionable odor there 

 seems to be no reason why wood turpentine should not be used in paint as well as the 

 gum turpentine. In the ripening or aging of varnish turpentine as well as linseed 

 oil it absorbs some oxygen, * * * whereby the valuable properties of the varnish 

 increase. * * * Here no solvent which does not have the capacity of such change 

 can replace turpentine, but so far as we have been able to observe there is no great 

 difference between wood and gum turpentine. We believe, therefore, that its pun- 

 gent characteristic odor is the main obstacle to its universal substitution for the genuine 

 in paints and varnishes. 



As a problem apart by itself, however small may be the demonstrable scientific 

 difference between wood and gum spirits, the conservative varnish maker will prefer 

 the gum spirits. This very natural prejudice arises from his consciousness of unknown 

 chemical relations in a process which for some time to come must remain largely 

 empirical, and as his good reputation rests largely upon results so achieved he does 

 not willingly take chances for the fraction of 1 per cent gain which the difference 

 in price between the two turpentines has heretofore offered. 



So far as paint is concerned the situation is clearer. Here turpentine is a volatile 

 thinner, used to obtain a practical brushing consistency where it is desirable to keep 

 the ratio of oil to pigment low. 



Sherwin-Williams Co., Newark, N. J.: Our experience with the material is limited, 

 but so far as we know the solvent power is not materially different. Careful tests 

 iiave satisfied us that so-called wood turpentine does not dry as well as the gum spirits, 

 but has a definite retarding action. In some instances this would not be objection- 

 able; in others it would. So far as we know there is no other difference in varnish 

 thinned with it nor in the manipulation or covering power of such paint and varnishes. 

 We see no reason why the properly worked out process material should not be equal 

 to ordinary turpentine. 



F. W. Devoe & C. T. Raynolds Co., New York, N. Y.: The samples which we have 

 examined have varied considerably, both in chemical and physical constitution. 

 Some of them seemingly do contain a small proportion of the real turpentine, but most 

 of them contain nothing other than what is probably known as pinene as distinguished 

 from the terpenes of turpentine. For all practical purposes I believe that the solvent 

 properties of the better grade would compare favorably with that of regular turpen- 

 tine. Some of the better-made samples will evaporate with as little residue. The 

 covering power of a paint or varnish made with wood turpentine should not differ 

 in any way as far as I can see from that made with ordinary turpentine. The odor 

 of the wood turpentine is so persistent that it can not be disguised. This odor is so 

 disagreeable that we find painters and varnishers object to a varnish made with wood 

 turpentine for the reason that it affects their eyes and also their throats, especially 

 where the varnish is used in the interior of buildings where there is no draft to take 

 away these odors. 



Patton Paint Co., Milwaukee, Wis.: Considered as a paint thinner only, we believe 

 a properly made wood turpentine is to all practical purposes just as good a thinner as 

 gum turpentine. The principal objection that has been urged in the past against its 

 use is that of its somewhat offensive and irritating odor. In the case of products of 

 more recent refining processes these objections have been very largely if not wholly 

 overcome; certainly reduced to such an extent that when present in the percentage 

 found in ordinary paints no unpleasant results need be expected. 



With regard to its utility as a varnish thinner we are not prepared to state as to 

 whether in our opinion it would be safe to substitute wood products for gum turpen- 

 tine on account of the turpentine being present in much greater quantities than in 

 an ordinary paint. The objections previously urged are correspondingly more appar- 

 ent. Moreover, any nonvolatile residue that might be contained in the wood tur- 

 pentine would prejudice its use to a greater extent than in paint. When we refer to 

 nonvolatile residue we consider the temperature at or about 70. 



