ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF CHEMISTRY 295 



mineral analysis came near becoming a lost art there. 

 It was during that period that an English mineralogist, 

 visiting New Haven and praising the mineral analyses 

 that were being carried out at Yale, expressed regret that 

 there appeared to be no one in England, or in Germany 

 either, who could analyze minerals. 



The best analytical work done in this country in the 

 early part of our period was chiefly in connection with 

 mineral analysis, and a large share of it was published in 

 the Journal. Henry Seybert, of Philadelphia, in par- 

 ticular, showed remarkable skill in this direction, and 

 published numerous analyses of silicates and other min- 

 erals, beginning in 1822. It was he who first detected 

 boric acid in tourmaline (6, 155, 1822), and beryllium in 

 chrysoberyl (8, 105, 1824). His methods for silicate 

 analyses were very similar to those used at the present 

 time. 



J. Lawrence Smith in 1853 described his method for 

 determining alkalies in minerals (16, 53), a method which 

 in its final form (1, 269, 1871) is the best ever devised for 

 the purpose. He also described (15, 94, 1853) a very 

 useful method, still largely used in analytical work, for 

 destroying ammonium salts by means of aqua regia. 

 Carey Lea (42, 109, 1866) described the well-known test 

 for iodides by means of potassium dichromate. F. W. 

 Clarke (49, 48, 1870) showed that antimony and arsenic 

 could be quantitatively separated from tin by the pre- 

 cipitation of the sulphides in the presence of oxalic acid. 

 In 1864 Wolcott Gibbs (37, 346) began an important 

 series of analytical notes from the Lawrence Scientific 

 School, and he worked out later many difficult analytical 

 problems, particularly in connection with his extensive 

 researches upon the complex inorganic acids. 



From 1850 on, Brush and his students made many 

 important investigations upon minerals, and from 1877 

 Penfield (13, 425), beginning with an analysis of a new 

 mineral from Branchville, Connecticut, described by 

 Brush and E. S. Dana, displayed remarkable skill and 

 industry in this kind of work. Both of the writers of 

 this article were fortunate in being associated with Pen- 

 field in some of his researches upon minerals and one of 

 us besran as he did with the Branchville work It is 



