282 



molecule (C 4 H 4 )", equivalent to H 2 as such, has been assimilated by 

 the aniline. 



But how is the composition of the bodies formed by the action of 

 iodide of methyl and ethyl to be interpreted? Are they simply 

 compounds of the alcohol-iodides with 2 equivalents of ethylene-phe- 

 nylamine, analogous to the salts produced by the union of 1 equiv. 

 iodide of mercury with 2 equivs. of ammonia ? 



Does not the existence of these bodies involve a further considera- 

 tion of the formula which has been assigned to ethylene-phenylamine ? 

 Does the formula C 16 H 9 N actually represent the molecule of this 

 body, or is it not more correct to double that expression and to con- 

 sider the formula C 32 H 18 .N 2 as a more appropriate representation of 

 this molecule ? Ethylene-phenylamine would then be derived from 2 

 equivalents of ammonia, it would be a diamine, and the hydrochlorate 

 and the platinum-compounds would appear in the light of diammo- 



nium-compounds. 



(C H V 1 



Diethylene-diphenyl-diamine /p XT ^ f N a . 



l^M**/a J 



(C H V 

 Bichloride ........................ 4 



Platinum - salt ..................... N 2 C1 2 , 2PtCl, 



At the first glance it certainly appears strange that a molecule 

 capable of assimilating 2 equivalents of hydrochloric acid should 

 unite only with 1 equiv. of iodide of methyl or ethyl, well established 

 members of the hydrochloric type. But this deportment after all is 

 not without parallelism. 



The expression 



C 20 H 12 NO a , 



originally established for quinine by Liebig, supported as it was by 

 the analysis of numerous salts of the formula 



C 20 H 12 N0 2 ,HX, 



and especially by that of a platinum- compound, 

 C 20 H 12 N0 2 ,HCl,PtCl 2 ,aq, 

 was universally adopted by chemists. 



