35 » 
[June, 
The History of Antozone 
hostile to cram as is the “ Journal of Science,” and in face 
of the overwhelming amount of the knowable he evidently 
leans, like ourselves, to Specialism, and would not examine 
the curator of a zoological museum in the higher mathe- 
matics and in dead languages. 
II. THE HISTORY OF ANTOZONE AND 
PEROXIDE OF HYDROGEN. 
By Albert R. Leeds, Ph.D. 
I. Antozone . 
(S§) Y far the most important faCt in the long and perplexing 
jySD history of antozone is the recent discovery that there 
is no antozone. After giving rise to a very vo- 
luminous literature, filled with confused and contradictory 
statements, the mysterious body named by Schonbein 
“ Antozone ” has disappeared from the pages of chemistry, 
and been added to that daily increasing host of defunCt 
chemical elements which, after a brief and troubled exist- 
ence, have fallen into final oblivion. As it was, it never had 
a sturdy existence. It appeared to be a sort of chemical 
Will-o’-the-Wisp, a matter of exhalations, connecting its 
existence with the formation and disappearance of clouds 
and similar phenomena, and ever resisting the attempts of 
the experimenter to obtain it in some tangible form. The 
ghost of antozone, raised by Schonbein, and, together with 
its twin-brother, atmizone, expanded into great proportions 
by the labours of Meissner, was struck down by Von Babo 
(in his “ Contributions towards a Knowledge of Ozone,” 
1863), and finally laid by the experiments of Nasse and 
Engler, on the phenomena attendant upon the aCtion of oil 
of vitriol upon peroxide of barium (1870). 
And when we consider for a moment the overwhelming 
host of acquisitions which are being yearly made to our 
stores of veritable chemical knowledge, the mind experiences 
a sensation of aCtual relief in seeing so many questionable 
statements expunged from the history of chemistry, and in 
getting hold, so to speak, of an unexpected tabula rasa on 
