DISINFECFANTS AND THE RIVAL PROFESSORS. 
583 
experiments in deodorizing night-soil, in which the comparative 
merits of the three rival fluids are brought into competition. Some- 
times one professor complains that undue favour was shewn to the 
others to his prejudice ; then we have a reply, a rejoinder, an 
appeal to the nightmen, conflicting analyses, and opinions profes- 
sional and non-professional, official correspondence ; and last, not 
least, we may mention a curious collection of paragraphs and puffs 
from the periodical press, and a copy of the handbill in which the 
magic fluid is enveloped, with the usual caution about the signa- 
ture and seal of the patentee on the cork. Each fluid in its turn 
is infinitely superior to the others : each is described as the best 
disinfectant as well as deodorizer, but, each having two opponents, 
the evidence is two to one against this testimony. 
In the face of this energetic support of the three specifics, we 
have the lamentable fact that Ledoyen’s right-hand man fell a 
victim to the fever which he was sent abroad to allay ; and the 
unfortunate circumstance that, in the recent opening of the sewers 
in Westminster, several fatal cases of fever occurred, although 
Sir W. Burnett’s fluid was used for deodorizing the miasm. 
Mr. Ellerman is more general in his statements about disinfec- 
tion, and lays much stress on the fact that both the other fluids 
are poisonous, from which it might be inferred that his is not. 
In reference to the testimony of the nightmen, Mr. Ellerman states 
“ the men were very much pleased, and preferred our fluid to 
Sir W. Burnett’s.” Mr. Roe (Surveyor of the Commissioners of 
Sewers) asserts that the foreman and men “ suffered much more 
from the odour it gave out than they could possibly do by any 
effluvia from the worst cesspools.” 
During this spirited investigation chloride of lime appears to 
have been almost forgotten, the inventor being (.lead, and the 
article too common to tempt any fresh champion to come forward. 
In reviewing the whole evidence we are confirmed in our former 
opinion, that the three fluids have substantiated their character as 
deodorizers, but that none of them can be relied on as disinfectants. 
It would be going too far to say that they possess no efficacy what- 
ever in the latter respect, but the evidence on this point is by no 
means conclusive. In the event of cholera making its appearance, 
the merits of the rival fluids may very properly be put to the test, 
but this should not in any degree supersede the adoption of other 
precautions. 
Pharmaceutical Journal for August 1S48. 
