OCTOBEB 8, 1909] 



SCIENCE 



467 



still employing a plan which, although al- 

 most universal not many years ago, is now 

 obsolescent. I refer to the purely mechan- 

 ical process in which great emphasis was 

 placed upon the art of making tests and 

 separations, while the teaching of sound 

 chemistry was a matter of minor considera- 

 tion. 



Under this regime, instruction in the 

 laboratory usually fell into a routine and 

 complacent following of some outline of 

 analysis carefully arranged with side mar- 

 gins and pages with indented leaves for 

 ready reference. The group separations 

 were accomplished by unswerving adher- 

 ence to certain tabulated schemes which de- 

 manded a minimum of mental exertion, 

 and afforded a striking example of a 

 "principle of least work." It was no un- 

 common thing to require a student to 

 analyze one hundred "liquid unknowns," 

 one hundred "solid unknowns" and forty 

 minerals arranged in a row. The desired 

 end was reached if the student, at the re- 

 quest of an instructor, could make a correct 

 report of the "acids" and "bases" which 

 he had found in each unknown. 



The text-book frequently contained 

 page after page of those incomplete equa- 

 tions in which the right-hand member was 

 to be supplied by the student. This was 

 often done in a successful way by the pre- 

 carious process of analogy; but in many 

 cases there were several guesses equally 

 plausible, and the student generally made 

 his choice without any effort to find out the 

 facts in the case. When I think of the 

 vagueness of these equations, I am re- 

 minded of a question which, I have heard, 

 was once proposed to a class in history at 

 an examination. It read, "Who chased 

 whom how many times around the walls 

 of what?" The answer to this question 

 was probably more certain to be correct 

 than the answers to be expected in the case 



of the fragmentary equations of the kind I 

 mention. 



If by chance any recitations were at- 

 tempted in connection with this ineffective 

 course, they usually degenerated into mere 

 droning of equations, sometimes in unison, 

 like a chant. In other words, the essential 

 role of the course consisted in an endeavor 

 to master the details of the manipulative 

 art, with the result that the science under- 

 lying it was sadly neglected to the great 

 detriment of the student who usually knew 

 less chemistry at the end of his course in 

 qualitative analysis than he did at the be- 

 ginning of it. 



To my mind, a course in qualitative 

 analysis first of all should be designed 

 to teach advanced general chemistry; 

 in the second place it should aim to 

 teach the necessary manipulative skill, 

 a knowledge of which, I confess, is of 

 the utmost importance for success in 

 chemistry. The golden threads of physical 

 chemistry have so intertwined themselves 

 in every fiber of the warp and woof of gen- 

 eral inorganic chemistry, and have so il- 

 lumined the problems of analytical chem- 

 istry at every turn that there is no longer 

 any excuse for making the subject matter 

 of qualitative analysis profitable to the stu- 

 dent mainly in the direction of acquiring 

 laboratory technique. Such a course 

 should furnish the teacher a most fortunate 

 opportunity for presenting to the student 

 certain views of general chemistry in a 

 manner more advanced and more forceful 

 than the latter has ever met them before; 

 and should serve at the same time as a 

 means of relating and fixing facts which, 

 up to that time, may have been unrelated 

 and vague. 



I have in mind a course of recitations 

 with lectures, so arranged that points taken 

 up in the class-room shall be illustrated 

 again and again in the laboratory practise 



