The Health Exhibition. 
584 
[October, 
absorbs this metal into his system is often unconscious ot 
the evil until recovery is almost hopeless.. We theielore 
wish good speed to those who are endeavouring to supersede 
the use of this treacherous metal alike in paints, in water- 
pipes, in the linings of pans, &c., and in the glaze of earthen 
utensils. . , . ... 
Much has been said, from time to time, about the. possible 
mischief resulting from the use of arsenic and antimony in 
the arts of dyeing and printing, — not only in the colours 
employed, but in mordants and other accessory preparations. 
This question does not seem to have received an} specia 
attention at the Health Exhibition ; at least we have not 
come across any display of poisonous dyes and moidants in 
contrast with harmless preparations destined to supersede 
them. It has been sufficiently demonstrated, especially by 
Dr. Grandhomme, superintending physician to one of the 
largest manufactories of artificial colours in the woild, 
that these dyes, as now prepared and issued, are non- 
poisonous. . . 
In the so-called “ pigment-style ” of tissue printing, 
where insoluble, mineral colours are, so to speak, cemented 
upon the tissue by means of albumen, &c., poisons are 
certainly used, such as the arsenical greens. 
The use of arsenical pigments in getting up wall-papers 
has been much discussed both in technical and non-tech- 
nical papers, some of the statements appearing in the latter 
being exaggerated and sensational. It will be noticed by 
visitors to the “ sanitary ” and “ unsanitary ” houses that 
the papers on the walls of the latter aie labelled as 
“ arsenical,” whilst those used in the former are marked as 
being “ free from arsenic.” In this case the green colours 
are evidently for the most part chromic oxide or its insoluble 
salts. 
The most painful sight in the Exhibition escaped our 
personal notice. We have been told that theie is on view 
a cloak, belonging to a lady of title, trimmed with the 
skins of a large number of harmless and beautiful birds. 
Against such outrages we are sure all naturalists will join 
us in protesting. The Economists, of couise, with th.eii 
wonted narrowness of vision, say that laws foi bidding 
such sacrifice would be “ sumptuary, and theiefoie 
objectionable. ^Ve deny the assertion : the puipose of the 
needed law is not to restrain expense ( sumptus ), but to 
prevent the wanton extirpation of creatures lovely, inno- 
cent, and often diredtly useful to mankind. In the joint 
names of Science and Humanity we demand piotecftion 
