224 SILVER. 



to create that impression ; really, he probably did not under- 

 stand the subject at all. 



Now, for 7 low with the purest oxalate, what would be the 

 corresponding atomic weight of silver? Since 7 is less than 

 of 38 low (for o.i high), the atomic weight of silver cor- 

 responding to this analysis is less than 0.02 high, or A& is 

 Jess than 108.02. 



The oxalate process is necessarily inferior to the acetate 

 process, which in 1894 I used alone ; but the oxalate process 

 is a good approximation and thus offers a valuable and 

 instructive confirmation. 



But even the oxalate process of Maumene* is much 

 superior in accuracy and chemical reliability to the C( famous 

 determinations" of Stas, which superseded all good chem- 

 ical work, but will now soon be remembered only as 

 infamous impositions. 



There can remain no possible doubt about the atomic 

 weight of silver; it is found within o.ooi to be 108. It is 108 

 exactly. 



Other Determinations. 



Organic Silver Salts weighed, and silver obtained by 

 reduction, weighed. Loss of silver almost unavoidable. 



Liebig and Redtenbacher, 1840, made 5 determinations 

 each on the acetate, tartrate, racemate and malate; results 

 reasonably concordant, but all means 60 to 67 low (red. to 

 vacuum), representing the atomic weight 2 to 3 tenths low 

 (107.7). 



Maumene, 1846, did considerably better work on the 

 acetate; a third recrystallization gave him only 5 low, 

 corresponding to 107.975. 



It was upon the material furnished by Liebig and 

 Redtenbacher that A. Strecker, in 1846 (Liebig's Annalen 

 LIX), for the first time inflicted a purely mathematical 

 curse upon chemistry, by supposing no errors but absolutely 

 uniform and constant ones (how utterly absurd in chemistry) 

 and then applied the formulary of elimination and the 

 " Method of the least Squares.' 1 ' 1 



The process and publication was most learned, the results 

 palpably false. See a summary, Sebelien, 73-75. 



