264 G, I’. Barker on Formic versus Carbonous Acid. 
8. The radical formyl (CH®), unlike acetyl (©,H,®), is not 
required to formulate the derivatives of the acid. Moreover, 
no chlorid or hydrid of this radical exists. The anhydrous acid 
(formylic oxyd), too, (EHO) t @ is unknown. If, however, the 
acid be Mi t ©, then its secondary oxyd would be €” } @, car- 
bonic oxyd. 
4, Its synthesis. We have—a, Berthelot’s method, 
KO0-+€6—HK€9, ; just as HKO+50,—HKSO, 
b, Kolbe’s method by deoxydizing H,€0,, 
H,60,).+Na,—HNa€O-HNaCO,4+H,0. 
¢, Dupré’s method, H,€0,+€+H,0=(H,60,), ; similar to 
H,50,+5+H,0= a a2" : 
d, Chapman’s method, partial oxydation of carbon, 
€-+-0-+-H,6—H.€0.. - 
5. Its preparation. a, from oxalic acid H,€,0,=H,€0,+60,, 
as well as the reverse action; }, from cyanhydric acid 
rT “ 
Bn {N+} =H t Orth? tN. 
And in general its production from the oxydation of carbona- 
ceous materials. In no. case is the intermediate body formi¢ 
aldehyd, obtained ; this anomalous result is accounted for if the 
acid be 4 tee. 
6. Its decompositions. Like sulphurous and similar acids, it 
readily reduces metallic salts; it is oxydized readily by platinum 
black; by action of H,S@,, H,€0, gives H,O and €0, the 
anhydrid; the action of PCl, produces no formylic chlorid, 
H,€6,+PCl,=PCl,0+€0+4(HC)),; chlorine gives H,602+ 
Cl=€6,+(HCI),. 
ss Its acknowledged divergence from the acetic or fatty acid 
Series, In which it is usually classed. These acids resist the 
oxydizing action of dilute chromic acid, while formic acid o0 
the other hand is 4 powerful reducing agent. ; 
_ #rom the above statements, it is clear that this question turns 
on the fact whether this acid is mono or dibasic. Just now, the 
acid carbonites, but the anomaly of an acid, all of whose salts 
