Heinrich Rose. ‘ 319 
do with his researches upon the acids of the tantalites, much 
would have been preserved which is now overlooked in the 
great extent of his writings, or has been lost in the imperfect 
abstracts which have been made of them. The first paper of 
his researches upon the decomposing action of water was pu 
lished in 1851, but as early as 1839 this action was suggested as 
the cause of the production of ether in the distillation of alcohol 
with sulphuric acid. 
Of the previous theories of this process, the catalytic or con- 
tact theory attempted no explanation; it only placed the forma- 
tion of ether with a group of reactions which, from their general 
resemblance, were assumed to depend upon a common principle. 
The older theory that alcohol, regarded as the hydrate of 
oxyd of ethyl, was decomposed by the affinity of sulphuric acid 
for water, failed to show why the water distilled over with the 
ether, Liebig, assuming the formation in the first instance of 
sulphovinic acid, overcame this objection by supposing the pro- 
duction of ether and of water to be the result of two different, 
and not simultaneous reactions; the resolution of the sulpho- 
vinic acid was ascribed by him to the temperature of the boiling 
liquid. Two defects were pointed out in his theory. It was 
shown by Rose that the formation of ether takes place at a tem- 
perature inferior to that at which sulphovinic acid is decom- 
posed; and it was objected that the theory supposes the forma- 
tion and decomposition of this acid in the same liquid. The 
latter objection had especial force after it was shown by Mits- 
cherlich that the production of ether continues when the alcohol 
18 supplied in the state of hot vapor, where no great difference 
temperature in the portions of the liquid is possible. ah 
, holding to the view of Liebig that sulphovinie acid is 
first generated, and that the formation of ether and water is the 
result of different actions which do not occur at the same mo- 
ment, considered the decomposition of the sulphoviniec acid to 
arise from the action of water, combining as a base with the 
Sulphuric acid and displacing the oxyd of ethyl. Water acts in 
18 View upon the double sulphate of water and ethyl precisely 
a it does upon the salts of feeble bases, like bismuth or anti- 
mony. The difficulty lies here again in conceiving the formation 
and decomposition of the sulphovinic acid in the same liqui 
ie the possibility of the formation and decompo- 
Cause beside the affinity of the sulphuric acid for water, which 
Prevents the reunion of the water with the oxyd of ethyl. For, 
Were they to combine, there would be a reproduction of alcohol 
in the same liquid in which it had just been decom 
