» 

in, oe? 
+ 
7 EBRUARY 24, 1923] 
depended upon the analysis of the tetrachloride, which 
was held to be sufficiently purified by fractional dis- 
tillation. The results were extremely discrepant, far 
more so than could be explained by ordinary analytical 
errors. The values for the atomic weight of titanium 
ranged from 47 to 56. The determinations have been 
discussed by Becker, and, independently, by Clarke in 
the ‘‘ Smithsonian Collections,” and also by Meyer 
and Seubert. Clarke contents himself with remark- 
ing that the atomic weight of titanium is “‘ imperfectly 
determined,’’ and Meyer and Seubert place « titanium 
in the list of those elements of which the value is 
uncertain to within several units. 
Pierre’s determinations made on the tetrachloride 
_ were long regarded as the most trustworthy, and his 
final value 50-25 was adopted in all atomic weight 
tables prior to 1885. 
The position of titanium in the table drawn up by 
Mendeléeff, in accordance with the requirements of 
the Periodic Law, was discussed by him on the occa- 
sion of the publication of his famous memoir, when 
he pointed out that the “law” indicated that its 
accepted atomic weight, based mainly upon Pierre’s 
work, was at least two units too high (see his 
“Principles of Chemistry,” vol. ii. p. 26). A re- 
determination made upon the carefully purified tetra- 
chloride and tetrabromide proved that Mendeléeft’s 
prevision was correct (Thorpe, Journ. Chem. Soc., 1885, 
47, 108), and the value 48-1, then ascertained, was 
accepted by the International Committee, and finds 
its place in all recent atomic weight tables. 
That there was an undiscovered element associated 
with titanium in its various naturally occurring 
compounds has long been surmised. It is almost 
impossible to escape the conviction that the extra- 
ordinarily discordant values for the atomic weight 
of titanium obtained by the several chemists above 
referred to are in all probability to be explained by 
the presence of an element of higher atomic weight 
in the material investigated by them. Mendeléeff, in 
the course of conversation with me, more than once 
expressed his conviction that a diligent search among 
naturally occurring titaniferous compounds, or among 
minerals belonging to the same group of elements as 
titanium, would be rewarded by the discovery of such 
an element. T. E. TuHorpe. 
Whinfield, Salcombe, South Devon. 
Insulin. 
Str WILLIAM Baytiss’s article in Nature of 
February 10, p. 188, displays an attitude of friendly 
criticism towards the Medical Research Council’s 
policy, in expressing their willingness to accept 
assignment of the insulin patent from the University 
of Toronto. The fact that an observer so sympathetic, 
and having so many opportunities of ascertaining 
the true nature of the position, should give expression 
to doubt and disquiet, may well arouse misgiving 
in a wider circle. There are several points concern- 
ing which he is clearly under a misapprehension. 
(1) Sir William Bayliss, in stating that ‘‘ there is 
a strong feeling here '’—+.e. in this country—‘‘ against 
patenting products of value in the cure of disease,’ 
makes an assumption which seems scarcely justified 
by the facts. I think his statement is wider than 
his intention. It can hardly be maintained that such 
feeling is general, in face of the fact that practically 
every new remedy obtained by synthesis in the 
chemical laboratory is not only patented, but ex- 
hat for the profit of the discoverer or his employers. 
ir William Bayliss is a. thinking only of 
remedies discovered in physiological or pathological 
NO. 2782, VOL. r11]| 
NATURE 

253 
laboratories, the patenting of which has, indeed, 
been discouraged by the facts that such remedies 
are usually invented by qualified members of the 
medical profession, with a wholly honourable tradition 
against secrecy and monopoly, and that their protec- 
tion by sound patents is, in any case, difficult. It is, 
however, not logical that we should look askance 
at one chemist, who patents a process for extracting 
a hormone, even if he does it for age gain, and 
regard with approval another, who makes a large 
fortune by patenting the synthesis of, say, a new 
hypnotic. 
(2) It is, however, not necessary, in the instance 
under discussion, to consider the propriety of patent- 
ing remedies for gain. Sir William Bayliss’s intro- 
duction, in this connexion, of the question of rewards 
for medical discoverers is really quite irrelevant. 
Whether the University of Toronto expects to make 
profit out of the patent is a question for its authorities 
to answer. I am quite certain, however, that, if 
profit is made, it will not go to the remuneration of 
the discoverers, but to make good the heavy ex- 
penditure in which the insulin investigation has 
involved the University, and to make provision for 
further research upon it. The Medical Research 
Council, I am confident, will make no profit at all 
from their action in accepting assignment, not even 
to replace the money they are spending to make 
this remedy available and to promote investigation 
of its properties. 
(3) The question of profit being excluded, it is 
obvious that the Council’s action could have no 
other aim than to assist the public in obtaining the 
remedy under the best possible conditions, and to 
prevent the dangers and difficulties which might 
arise if the preparation were left at the mercy of 
unrestricted commercial exploitation. Sir William 
Bayliss sees an easy way to secure these ends. 
“Would not,” he asks, “the best way to effect 
these objects be to announce that the Medical 
Research Council were prepared to test and certify 
preparations sent to them ?’’ He sees himself that 
this might involve “a large amount of work,’’ and 
suggests large batches and the delegation of testing 
to firms having facilities. He may be assured that 
these possibilities have not been ignored; but it 
must also be said that he does not begin to see the 
real difficulties. It will suffice to mention one, 
which is easily overlooked from the arm-chair of 
the study, or even from the stool of the academic 
laboratory. The supply of raw material is not 
unlimited ; it is by no means certain that it will 
prove adequate to the need of sufferers in this country, 
even if all of it is properly used. The ordinary 
methods of commerce would involve a _ vigorous 
competition for the material, with no guarantee 
against the purchase of a large part of it, or even 
the whole, at artificially exalted prices, by firms 
concerned only to take advantage of the popular 
excitement, by selling, at high prices, something 
which could be represented as “ Insulin.” 
Does Sir William Bayliss seriously suppose that 
such a situation could be met by a friendly offer to 
test anything calling itself ‘ Insulin,’’ prepared by 
any one regarding himself as competent, or wishing 
to have his share in exploiting a public clamour ? 
Given that the enterprise can be confined to firms 
possessing the necessary equipment of plant and 
scientific staff, and that they will agree not to raise 
the price of the raw material artificially by competi- 
tion, or of the finished product by combination, 
there is everything to be said in favour of encouraging 
them to carry out experiments and improve the 
process. It is possible also to hand on, to firms 
accepting such conditions, all information, from any 
