208 Prof. Graham and Hoffmann on the Alleged 



avoiding loss of alcohol by evaporation. The spirits which 

 now contained the strychnine were next filtered, and after- 

 wards submitted to distillation. A watery fluid remained 

 behind, holding the strychnine in solution, but not sufficiently 

 pure for the test. The final purification was accomplished by 

 adding a few drops of potash to the watery fluid, and then 

 shaking it with an ounce of ether. A portion of the ethereal 

 solution evaporated upon a watch glass, left a whitish solid 

 mass of intense bitterness, and this was recognised to be 

 strychnine, by giving the violet tint previously described 

 upon the application to it of sulphuric acid and chromate of 

 potash. 



Having satisfied ourselves by repeated experiments with 

 samples of beer, to which strychnine had been previously 

 added, of the never-failing efficiency of the above method of 

 extraction, we now proceeded to the actual examination 

 of the commercial article. With this object a series of 

 samples were taken indiscriminately from the stores of a con- 

 siderable number of the London bottlers, whosupply the 

 public with Allsopp's pale ale. 



It may be stated that with the exception of five varieties, 

 the casks from which these samples were taken had all been 

 received in London before the 20th of March, i. e. 9 the period 

 when the possible use of strychnine in the manufacture of 

 bitter beer was first brought before the English public. 



Not one of these varieties of beer, when tested with the 

 greatest scrupulousness, gave the slightest evidence of the- pre- 

 sence of strychnine. 



The charge of adulteration of beer by strychnine has been 

 proposed in a manner so vague, that it is difficult to fix it, 

 and try its validity. The existence of the adulteration is 

 not alleged in any particular sample of beer, nor the practice 

 ascribed to any individual brewer or dealer. An English 

 journalist adopts the charge, upon the report that such an 

 opinion is entertained and expressed by a French chemist of 

 distinction, M. Payen, in his public lectures at Paris. From 

 this gentleman we have since obtained explanations which 

 define more closely the kind of charge which was actually 

 made by him. The late M. Pelletier, the well-known manu- 



