344 Quarterly Repoi'ts of the Chemical Committee, 1885. 
And he reported : — 
" This manure is not wliat it professes to be, viz., pure dissolved bones, for 
the nitrogen is largely derived from sources other than bone. The price of it, 
11. 4s. per ton, is considerably in excess of what it should be. &l. per ton, 
exclusive of carriage, is ample for such a manure, which is a mixture of 
dissolved bones with other materials." 
A circular sent by the vendors contained the following state- 
ments : — 
" Pure dissolved bones- — guaranteed to be composed entirely of bones 
dissolved in acid. Guaranteed analysis — 20 to 21 per cent, soluble phos- 
phate ; 10 to 11 per cent, softened bone phosphate; and 3 to 4 percent, 
ammonia." 
The manure was invoiced as pure dissolved bones at 9/. per 
ton, 20 per cent, discount being offered, thus bringing the price 
to 11. 4s. per ton, carriage paid. 
The purchaser in order to secure the discount sent a cheque 
for 31/. 10s., on account, and this was ultimately accepted by 
the vendors as payment in full. 
3. Mr. Henry Rogers, of Cheswell Grange, Newport, Salop, 
sent, on April 27th, a sample of bone-meal for analysis, two 
tons of which had been purchased from the Cannock Agricul- 
tural Co., Ld., Cannock, Staffs — H. R. Hart, manager, invoiced 
as "pure bone-meal," at 11. 10s. per ton at works. 
Dr. Voelcker's analysis and report were : — 
Water 14-29 
*Organic matter 30*49 
Phosphate of lime 40*41 
Carbonate of lime, &c 5*77 
Chloride of sodium (common salt) 8*17 
Insoluble siliceous matter 0*87 
100*00 
* Containing nitrogen 3 • 28 
Equal to ammonia 3-98 
" This is not a pure sample of bone-meal, being adulterated to a consider- 
able extent with common salt. J. Augustus Voelcker." 
The manager, in answer to Mr. Rogers's complaint, wr6te : — 
" Caanock, Staffordsbire, May 6th, 1885. 
" Dear Sir, — As I am called away unexpectedly into Norfolk through the 
illness of a relative, and it is uncertain of my being able to be at Newport on 
Monday, I have the pleasure of sending you copies of analyses of our bone- 
meal by Mr. Jones and Professor Sibson ; the former is of the sample taken 
from your bags, the other from a sample fairly drawn from the bulk at the 
works. The difterencc between the two is accounted for by the first sample 
having been partly drawn from the bag, which had got wet. As regards the 
.salt, 1 contend that it is quite incorrect to speak of it as an adulteration. It 
was added with no such object, but simply as an antiseptic, and under the 
advice of Professor Sibson, who assures me that, instead of being injurious, it 
is an improvement to the manure. 
