56 BEroRT— 1889. 



2. Have you any objections, and if so what are they, to the use of a 

 Decimal system — such as parts per million, per 100,000, per 10,000, or 

 per 1,000 ? 



3. In recording the results of complete Analysis of the Mineral matters 

 present in water, is it your custom to state the proportion of each indi- 

 vidual Base and Acid as actually determined, or to combine the Bases and 

 Acids so as to form salts ? 



4. Should it be your custom to combine the Bases and Acids, explain 

 the principles by which you are guided in so combining them, and state 

 what, in your opinion, are the advantages attaching to such combi- 

 nation. 



5. If your present method of recording results is more or less influ- 

 enced by special circumstances, such as the custom of professional Chemists 

 generally, what other method of recording results would you yourself select 

 as the most rational and the most convenient for universal adoption ? 



6. Would you support the adoption of the following method, recom- 

 mended by the American Committee, of stating the constituents of a 

 Mineral Water ? — 



'That the parts per thousand of each basic element, K, Na, Li, Ca, 

 Mg, Fe ' (Fco), etc., be given, and of each acidic element, such 

 as CI, I, S, etc., that is combined dii'ectly with a basic element, or 

 that may reasonably be supposed to be so combined, the rest of 

 the acidic elements to be given in connection with all the oxygen 

 of their salts, as usually written in our present emjiirical formulas, 

 as SO4, CO3, PO4, etc' 



From the answers we have received to the above questions, as well as 

 from our own personal experience, we gather that there would be nc 

 reluctance on the part of British chemists to adopt a uniform and ra- 

 tional scheme, but for the great difficulty of rendering such a method of 

 statement popularly understood. Thus the majority of analysts employ 

 the ^ grain- gallon ' system of statement, as being the one most intelligible 

 to their clients, and this system undoubtedly possesses certain advantages 

 in the case of analyses for technical purposes, in which the analytical 

 figures have to be applied to large volumes of water which in this country 

 are almost invariably measured in gallons. 



We find, however, a general readiness on the part of most analysts to 

 adopt a uniform and prescribed system only to be departed from in special 

 cases, and we are of opinion that it would be impossible to secure more 

 than such a qualified consent to any one system. 



Although there is but little possibility of directly influencing the 

 custom of professional chemists in their private practice, we are of 

 opinion that it is of great importance to urge upon water-analysts the 

 desirability of adopting some uniform system in the case of such analyses 

 as are communicated to scientific societies or other learned bodies, and 

 which are therefore calculated to have a circulation in countries where 

 the imperial gallon is not recognised, and if such uniformity could be 

 secured, there is but little doubt that the system would before long 

 establish itself even in the case of analyses of a non-public character. 



As regards the method of statement which would be most suitable for 

 general use in such published analyses, we are of opinion— 



(1) That it should be on the decimal system, -prekTSihly parts per mil- 

 lion (mgrms. per litre), or 2oaris per 100,000, as parts per 1,000 (grms. per 



