284 MORRIS LOEB 



Argentic Acetate 



In examining this salt, we were surprised to find that the 

 middle layers of the solution did not remain unchanged, and 

 that the mean concentration after electrolysis did not agree 

 with the [115] original standard. This irregularity is probably 

 due to the slight solubility of the salt, since it can easily 

 happen that the solution about the anode becoming over-con- 

 centrated, some of the salt crystallizes out and vitiates the 

 result. In fact, we did succeed in obtaining reliable values 

 when we had recourse to a highly dilute solution. 



1) * = 25 77i = 0-00972 / t = 20-80 7i = 0'375 



2) * = 24 m = 0-00972 / 1 = 23'99 tt = 0'377 



Argentic Dithionate 



1) f = 24-8 771 = 0-0246 ^ = 33-40 n = 0'604 



2) * = 29'2 w = 0-0246 / x = 46-70 n = 0'604 

 8) t= m = 0-0246 /! = 46-70 7i = 0'605 



4) = 24 2 m = 0-0246 / 1 = 48-85 ft = 0'606 



5) t= 771 = 0-0246 ^ = 45-80 n = 0-603 



2) and 3) were electrolyzed in series. 



Argentic Fluosilicate 



1) = 22 -2 m = 0-02815 ^ = 60-28 n = 0'647 



2) * = 22-2 m = 0-02815 ^ = 37-44 n = 0'647 



In Table II we summarize these values of n, with the 

 corresponding temperatures and concentrations. 



TABLE II 



Argentic n t m 



Nitrate 0'523 25 ) ft-1 O . ft1 



0-539 ] 



Chlorate 0'505 25 0-0245 



Perchlorate 0"514 25 0247 



Ethyl-sulphonate . . . . 0'385 25 0-0243-0-0061 



Naphthalene-sulphonate . .0-390 30 In- no A.AIQ 



0-386 25 / Ux}5U 



Pseudocumene-sulphonate . 0'293 25 \o-09q 



0-273 / 023 



Benzene-sulphonate . . . 0'347 25 0'025 



Acetate 0"376 25 0-097 



Dithionate 0-604 25 



0-604 



Fluosilicate . .0'466 22 0'0282 



0-604 Oo } 0346 



