ANNUAL  REPORT  FOR  1904  OF 
CONSULTING  CHEMIST. 
THE 
It  is,  perliaps,  liardly  surprising  that  a diminution  rather 
than  an  increase  in  the  nuinlier  of  samples  sent  to  the 
Consulting  Chemist  for  analysis  has  taken  place.  As  against 
660  samples  sent  in  1903,  only  530  were  forwarded  during  a 
corresponding  period  in  1904. 
Before  passing  to  the  consideration  in  detail  of  particular 
points  which  have  been  brought  out  by  examination  of  the 
various  samples  sent  by  members,  I may  briefly  comment  on 
one  or  two  features  of  the  year’s  Avork.  In  the  first  place 
I would  wish  to  refer,  Avith  an  expression  of  sincere  regret, 
to  the  death,  during  the  year,  of  my  late  colleague.  Dr.  A.  P. 
Aitken,  the  Chemist  of  the  sister  society — the  Highland  and 
Agricultural  Society  of  Scotland.  For  a long  term  of  years 
Dr.  Aitken  filled,  Avith  al)ility  and  distinction,  this  responsible 
position,  and  during  the  Avhole  of  it  our  relations  were  of  the 
most  cordial  kind. 
An  important  matter  bearing  upon  the  Society’s  Avork  in 
the  Chemical  Department  Avas  the  appointment  of  a Depart- 
mental Committee  of  the  Board  of  Agriculture  to  consider  the 
Avorking  of  the  Fertilisers  and  Feeding  Stuffs  Act,  1893,  and 
what  amendments  of  it  might  be  called  for.  A large  mass  of 
evidence  Avas  taken,  and  the  Royal  Agricultural  Society  Avas 
represented  by  Mr.  BoAven-Jones,  Chairman  of  the  Chemical 
Committee,  and  by  myself.  The  Report  of  the  Departmental 
Committee  is  expected  to  appear  shortly. 
Another  matter  of  interest  is  the  reneAved  attention  draAvn 
to  this  Act  by  a circular  of  the  Board  of  Agriculture.  This 
circular  sets  out  the  I'esults  of  .action  taken  in  the  Lindsey 
Division  of  Lincolnshire,  Avhere  several  prosecutions  have  been 
successfully  carried  through.  These  had  reference  more  par- 
ticularly to  linseetl  cake,  sold  as  such,  but  not  proving  to  be 
“pure,”  and  to  cotton  cake,  invoiced  as  Egyptian,  but  found 
to  be  mixed  more  or  less  Avith  seed  of  Bombay  or  other  origin. 
