XXXll 
Montlih/  Council,  February  3,  1904. 
A member  of  the  Society,  intending  to 
use  sulphate  of  copper  for  the  spraying 
of  charlock  and  for  dressing  sheep 
against  foot  rot,  ordered  from  an  Asso- 
ciation, of  which  he  was  a member,  on 
June  lt!,1903,  Icwt.  of  sulphate  of  copper, 
stipulating  that  this  should  be  pure. 
This  was  obtained  by  the  Association 
from  a firm  of  wholesale  druggists,  being 
invoiced  to  the  Association  as  follows; — 
“ 1 cwt.  Pulv.  (Jupri  Sulph.  Ihir.  at  SO.v.” 
It  was  in  turn  invoiced  to  the  member 
as: — 
“ 1 cwt.  Sulphate  of  Copper,  35.v.” 
Subsequent  to  this  purchase  the 
member  in  question,  wishing  to  have  a 
further  lot,  gave  an  order  on  June  29, 
1903,  for  2 cwt.  more.  The  order  was 
given  verbally  to  be  the  same  as  the 
previous  lot.  The  order  was  sent  on  to 
the  same  firm  of  wholesale  druggists, 
but  it  appears  that,  owing  to  the 
absence  of  the  manager  of  the  Associa- 
tion at  the  time,  the  order  was  given  for 
sulphate  of  copper,  but  without  any 
stipulation  as  to  purity. 
The  firm  of  wholesale  druggists,  on 
receiving  the  order,  sent  to  the  Associa- 
tion what  was  invoiced  to  them  as : — 
‘'2  cwt.  Agric.  Sulphate  Copper  at  16s." 
this  being  just  about  half  the  price  of 
the  previous  lot. 
The  2 cwt.  was  duly  delivered  to  the 
member,  and  was  invoiced  to  him  as 
follows 
“July  1, 190v3. — 2 cwt.  Sulphate  of 
Copper,  31. 10s.” 
The  member,  however,  being  suspicious 
of  its  appearance,  sent  to  Dr.  Voelcker 
a sample  on  July  7 lor  analysis.  Previous 
to  this,  namely,  on  July  3,  the  manager  of 
the  Association  had  written  to  the  firm  of 
wholesale  druggists  inquiring  whether 
the  price  charged  the  Association  was 
the  right  one,  and  in  reply  was  told  (by 
letter  of  July  6j  that  “the  prices  were 
correct,  as  the  order  for  2 cwt.  June  29 
only  said  ‘Sul.  Copper.’  We  took  this 
literally,  and  sent  in  lump  and  agricul- 
tural quality." 
Dr.  Voelcker  analysed  the  sample, 
and  his  certificate,  dated  July  11,  1903, 
showed  that  the  material  contained  only 
W03  per  cent,  of  sulphate  of  copper, 
while  8555  per  cent,  consisted  of  sulphate 
of  iron,  the  actual  value  of  the  material 
being  only  about  5/.  a ton,  instead  of  35/., 
the  rate  at  which  the  pure  sulphate  of 
copper  was  sold. 
On  the  member  complaining  about 
the  material,  the  Association  wrote  to 
the  firm  who  supplied  them,  and  ob- 
tained the  answer:— “The  article  sent 
you  is  a commercial  one,  invoiced  by 
makers  and  brokers  alike  as  ‘Agricul- 
tural Sulphate  of  Copper.”’  The  firm 
added  that  they  got  it  without  any 
guarantee,  and  sold  it  without  any,  and 
were  not  aware  that  it  was  an  article 
understood  to  be  of  any  definite  quality. 
The  Association  explained  to  the 
member  that  the  invoicing  to  him  of 
the  2 cwt.  at  the  same  price  as  before, 
and  not  at  one-half  the  price,  was  an 
unintentional  mistake  made  in  their 
office,  and  they  expressed  their  readiness 
to  credit  the  purchaser  with  the  whole 
amount  of  the  transaction. 
Granting  that  there  was  no  intention 
to  defraud  the  member,  either  as  to  the 
quality  or  the  price  charged  him,  there 
remains  the  fact  that  an  order  for  sul- 
phate of  copper  given  to  a firm  of 
wholesale  druggists  was  met  by  the 
supply  of  an  article  called  “ Agricultural 
Sulphate  of  Copper,”  which  contained 
only  14  per  cent,  sulphate  of  copper  in- 
stead of  the  98  per  cent,  which  should 
be  present  in  the  genuine  article,  and 
at  a price  about  one-half  that  of  the 
genuine  arlicle.  It  is  clearly  most 
unsatisfactory  that,  when  a material 
like  sulphate  of  copper  is  ordered,  unless 
there  is  a definite  guarantee  of  purity 
stipulated  lor,  a material  can  be  supplied 
with  the  covering  qualification  “agri- 
cultural," which  may  be  of  such  nature 
as  here  represented.  Equally  unsatis- 
factory is  the  conclusion  to  be  drawn 
that,  becausean  article  is  for  agricultural 
purposes,  it  may  therefore  be  a grossly 
adulterated  one. 
II.  SULPHATE  OF  Potash. 
In  a case  recently  reported  (see  Vol.G4, 
1903,  page  Ixxv)  attention  was  called  to 
the  sale,  under  the  name  “Sulphate  of 
Potash,”  of  an  article  that  contained 
some  amount  of  carbonate  of  potash. 
It  was  pointed  out  that  if  this  material 
were  mixed  with  sulphate  of  ammonia 
— as  might  be  the  case  in  making  a mix- 
ture of  manures  for  potatoes,  Ac  — a loss 
of  ammonia  might  occur  on  account  of 
the  alkaline  character  of  the  sulphate  of 
potash. 
It  has  since  transpired  that  there  are 
on  the  market  two  kinds  of  sulphate  of 
potash,  the  one  the  commercially  pure 
salt,  sulphate  of  potash,  supplied  from 
the  German  potash  mines  at  Stassfurt. 
This  is  neutral,  and  free  from  carbonates 
of  potash  or  soda,  and  can  be  used  quite 
weU  by  farmers  for  mixing  with  sulphate 
of  ammonia  and  other  ammonia-con- 
taining materials. 
The  other,  a less  pure  sulphate  of 
potash,  is  obtained  as  a recovery  product 
from  the  manufacture  of  beetroot  sugar, 
and  is  manufactured  considerably  in 
Austria  and  elsewhere  on  the  Continent. 
This  salt  contains  some  quantity  of  the 
carbonates  of  potash  and  soda,  as  well 
as  other  salts,  and  has  an  alkaline 
reaction.  It  is  usual  to  sell  it  on  the 
basis  of  the  potash  it  contains,  and  for 
the  manufacture  of  artificial  manures 
it  can  be  used  quite  well,  and  doubtless 
more  economically  than  the  pure  salt. 
But  it  is  well  to  warn  the  agriculturist 
who  purchases  the  ingredients  of  mixed 
manures  separately  that  it  will  not  do 
to  mix  this  material  with  sulphate  of 
ammonia  and  other  ammoniacal  ma- 
terials, and  if  he  is  making  up  for  him- 
self a mixed  manure  of  this  class,  he 
should  stipulate  for  being  supplied  with 
the  pure  sulphate  of  potash. 
J.  Augustus  Voelcker. 
February  2,  1904. 
Botanical  and  Zoological. 
Mr.  Wheeler  (Chairman)  [)re- 
sented  recommendations  as  to  the 
preparation  of  exhibits  for  the  British 
Forestry  Exhibition  at  Park  Royal. 
