LIVERPOOL CHEMISTS’ ASSOCIATION. 
7 F5 
many instances, is the bar to success, and it, is this, the want amongst chemists of suffi¬ 
cient knowledge of the principles and practice involved in the construction of apparatus, 
without which few chemical processes can be carried out on a manufacturing scale with 
anything like success. So much depends upon the mechanical arrangement and 
construction of the apparatus involved in carrying out chemical processes on a large 
scale, that it is almost impossible for a chemist, not possessing knowledge of such 
matters, to he in an}- way successful in a commercial or manufacturing point of view, 
however satisfactory the simple chemistry of his process may be. Too little atten¬ 
tion has been paid by chemists in this country to the construction and arrangement 
of apparatus. There is room here for great improvement, and I hope that before 
long those interested in manufactures will see the necessity, which most undoubtedly 
exists, for providing such education. There are, of course, other reasons why chemical 
processes are not successful, but I believe that in many cases—indeed, in the majo¬ 
rity of cases—the faulty construction of apparatus is the chief cause. There is still 
another point on which I would say a few words, although it is chiefly to express my 
regret at what I consider to be the too precipitate and premature study of certain 
branches of organic chemistry to the neglect of the wide field of inquiry still left 
unworked in reference to chemistry in its connection with manufacturing and indus¬ 
trial pursuits. The principal aim of most, young chemists now-a-days seems to be to 
give birth to some new system of notation, some new and complicated scheme of no¬ 
menclature, or to discover a product or series of products which in most cases can afford, 
but little assistance towards the progress of science, and which, as far as even the 
naming and describing of such products are concerned, are only puzzles to their disco¬ 
verers, and sources of considerable perplexity to chemists and scientific men in general. 
To those who have any ambition to signalize themselves by important discoveries, pro¬ 
lific of benefit to their fellow-men, and who wish to hand down their names to future 
ages as successful investigators, I would say that there is still a wide field open for in¬ 
vestigation in the domain of inorganic chemistry, and in the applications of chemistry 
to industrial pursuits. My opinion is that the verdict of posterity, in years yet to come., 
will award to men like Leblanc, the inventor of the great alkali process ; to James 
Muspratt, who first carried out this process on a large scale, and to such an extent as to 
lay the foundation of a national industry ; and to William Gossage, the indefatigable 
investigator and improver of many of the operations connected with the manufacture,— 
a rank, as public benefactors, as high, although in another class, as it will award to 
Newton, to Bacon, to Faraday, and to others, distinguished by their great discoveries 
and labours in more scientific paths. 
“To return, however, to the question of refuse products, these may be classed under 
three heads,—1st, those that are gaseous in character; 2nd, those that are liquid ; and, 
3rd, those that are solid. Those of the first class, although they give least trouble to 
the manufacturer,—because with him it is simply a case of whait the eye doth not see 
the heart doth not grieve for,—yet, as a rule, these emanations do more damage than 
those which are turned out in a solid or liquid condition. Those of the second class, 
which are liquid, are, as a rule, turned into the nearest available stream or river, and 
render it utterly impure for the remainder of its course, until it empties itself into the 
nearest estuary. Those of the third class, the solid refuse, are often the most cumber¬ 
some and troublesome of the lot; and I shall now offer for your consideration this 
evening one of the most important refuse products of chemical manufactures that can 
possibly be mentioned, namely, alkali or soda waste. In the working of the soda manu¬ 
facture nearly the whole of the sulphur required to commence the process has been 
thrown away in the refuse, and much nuisance, annoyance, and loss, has been thus pro¬ 
duced. Several attempts have been made to recover this sulphur, but without satisfac¬ 
tory result, until a very recent date.” 
The various processes that have from time to time been proposed for recovering the 
sulphur from alkali waste, were next mentioned, and special attention was directed to 
that of A. Kopp, described in the ‘ Chemical News ’ for 1866, and also that patented by 
Mr. William Gossage. With reference to the latter, the author said that he considered 
that the decompositions, etc., indicated in this process, may yet be made available for 
the profitable recovery of sulphur from soda waste. 
The processes of Townsend and Walker, J. L. Jullion, A. Noble, and others, were 
also alluded to. 
3 c 2 
