Apeil 26, 1907] 



SCIENCE 



669 



itate does not absorb sugar, by demonstrating 

 that the ratio of sugai* to water is a trifle lower 

 in the unwashed lead precipitate with its ad- 

 herent sugar solution than it is in the filtrate 

 from the precipitate, while if the adsorption 

 theory were correct a difference of ratio of 

 sugar to water would exist in the other direc- 

 tion and be more than seven times greater 

 than that actually found. The author also 

 shows by analyses of pure sugar solutions to 

 which known quantities of organic matter 

 precipitable by lead were added, that the in- 

 crease in polarization is strictly in accord 

 with the volume of the precipitate, leaving 

 no room for the claim of absorption. 



In regard to the second criticism it is 

 pointed out that analyses of the filtrates after 

 clarification with lead subacetate showed the 

 presence of only very small quantities of lead, 

 which calculated to anhydrous lead subacetate 

 and taking into account the volume which 

 this salt occupies when dissolved, would only 

 have been capable of influencing the results 

 to the extent of 0.044 per cent, and 0.042 per 

 cent, respectively, in two very low test sugars, 

 which are quantities smaller than the allow- 

 able analytical error. High test sugars would 

 be influenced even much less. 



It is pointed out in conclusion that the 

 critics of the dry defecation method have ex- 

 plained away by their gratuitous assumptions 

 twice as much difference between the old and 

 the new methods as ever can exist, while these 

 later researches of Home's all go to strengthen 

 the claims he originally made. 



C. M. Joyce, 



Secretary 



THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETT. NORTH- 

 EASTERN SECTION 



The seventy-fifth regular meeting of the 

 section was held at the Trade Club, 77 Slim- 

 mer Street, Boston, on Friday evening, March 

 29, at eight o'clock. President L. A. Olney in 

 the chair. About ninety members and guests 

 were present. 



The section was addressed by President Ira 

 Kemsen, of the Johns Hopkins University, 

 who gave some 'Reminiscences of Liebig and 

 Wohler.' Having been a student under both 



these great leaders, and knowing one of them 

 (Wohler) rather intimately. President Remsen 

 was able to throw many side-lights upon the 

 characters of them both. While at Miinich 

 as a student in Volhard's laboratory in 1867, 

 he attended Liebig's lectures, and the descrip- 

 tion of Liebig, his pompous personality, his 

 irritable temper and his overbearing attitude 

 towards his assistants and subordinates, his 

 bent towards sensational experiments and 

 striking situations, was most interesting and 

 amusing. Then followed a resume of Liebig's 

 investigations, his great work in agricultural 

 and physiological chemistry: the question of 

 possible extraction of the essential food prin- 

 ciples of meat, and the resulting production of 

 ' Liebig's extract ' ; the scientific preparation; 

 of bread, and the appearance of ' Liebig's 

 bread' in the market; finally his lively con- 

 troversy with Pasteur, on the subject of fer- 

 mentation, was most interestingly told. Lie- 

 big's greatest work was done in Giessen, in 

 what Dr. Remsen considers the ' greatest 

 school of chemistry the world has ever known.' 

 At Munich he rested largely on his reputa- 

 tion, became a court favorite, and gave much 

 less attention to chemical work. 



Through the good offices of Volhard, the 

 speaker was introduced to Wohler, and as a 

 result soon became one of the latter's students 

 at Gottingen. Wohler was most emphatically 

 the opposite of Liebig in every way; a small- 

 statured, quiet man, who was very methodical 

 and painstaking and given to very minute 

 explanations of the various phenomena ob- 

 served in his experiments. He was also a 

 most kindly man in his relations with his 

 family and subordinates. His lectures were 

 elementary as best suited to the needs of his 

 audience, but his investigations were of a high 

 order. For three semesters, the speaker was 

 Wohler's assistant and took part in the re- 

 searches on aluminium, silicon, boron, etc., and 

 dame to know him very well. Wohler had but 

 little interest in the theories of Kekule, who 

 was then exciting a great influence in organio 

 chemistry. Wohler's home life was ideal and 

 his friendship for Berzelius very strong. Lie- 

 big and Wohler exerted a great influence upon 



