462 
LEEDS CHEMISTS’ ASSOCIATIONS 
siate was added as before, when a beautiful light green colour was produced, which in¬ 
creased in intensity by remaining exposed to the air.” 
“Expt. n. The same experiment being repeated on water that had been boiled and 
filtered neither the purple nor blue tinge was produced by the gallic or prussic tests.” 
“ From the first of these experiments, it appears that a small quantity of iron is pre¬ 
sent, in a low state of oxidation, and as no traces of it were found after boiling, it neces¬ 
sarily follows that its solvent must be the carbonic acid.” 
Eepeating these experiments now with this saline ferruginous water, the tests at once 
show the presence of an abundance of iron after it has been boiled and filtered. There 
is, therefore, no doubt that the water, in 1819, did not contain even a trace of proto¬ 
chloride of iron. . 
“ Expt. c. A few drops of muriate of barytes added to a wineglass ot the water, alter 
standing half an hour, exhibited a very slight cloud ; from this I infer the presence of 
sulphuric acid, in combination with some of die eartns or metals, though in a a ery 
minute quantity.” , . ., . ., ,, . 
A s sulphates are incompatible with, salts of baryta, it is evident no chloride ol barium 
was present in the water then. 
When Dr. Hunter repeated his analysis of this water in 1829, and failed to detect con¬ 
stituents which he had found in 1819, he would be the more led to search whether or no 
the water had gained any, and we may reasonably assume that he would, at this time, 
make a similar series of experiments, as when he examined the water in 1819, and would 
in like manner note the absence of iron after the water was ooiied. If this is admitted, 
then the intervening analyses by Scudamore, Murray, and Garner, are freed from the 
imputation of failure. . 
The remaining exception is Dr. Hofmann. On referring to his analysis, it will be ob¬ 
served that the quantity of protocarbonate of iron he obtains, corresponds very nearly 
with that found by Scudamore, Murray, and Garner. To assume that the water in 
1854 contained protochloride of iron, it necessarily follows that the water had lost some 
portion of protocarbonate, which had been replaced by a corresponding portion of proto¬ 
carbonate* which had been replaced by a corresponding portion of protochloride ; now, 
if the quantity of iron obtained had been an increase upon former analysers, then there 
would have been some ground for suspicion; but of the two assumptions, “that a portion 
of the protocarbonate had been replaced by a portion of protochloride,” or “ that the 
iron then existed, in the same state as proved by Dr. Hunter,” this latter is certainly 
the most reasonable; and further, to suppose that by some negligence, Dr. Hofmann had 
been supplied with water from the wrong pump, places us at once in the following di¬ 
lemma :—The quantity of iron contained in the pure chalybeate water, as shown in Dr. 
Muspratt’s analysis,* is more than what Dr. Hofmann found in the saline ferruginous 
water in 1854, therefore, however much the saline ferruginous water, as it is now , may 
be diluted with the pure chalybeate water, it is impossible to reduce it so as to corre¬ 
spond with Dr. Hofmann’s results ; and as the bottling of the samples of the water for 
analysis was superintended by a resident physician, the theory of substitution is not 
tenable. 
The change in the saline ferruginous water may be due to the following causes:— 
By percolations into the well, or into the spring, as it approaches the surface. 
The kind of strata passed through in boring admits of this theory:—There is a state¬ 
ment, by a Dr. Garnett, in 1794, which may have some weight with regard to this ; he 
says,f “ In a chalybeate water, near the road, and not far from the crescent garden, the 
* Pure chalybeate water (July, 1865):— 
Protocarbonate of Iron . . . 6*042 
Carbonate of Lime .... '341 
Sulphate of Lime .... 7*625 
Chloride of Calcium.... 2'311 
„ Magnesium. . . 13T48 
„ Sodium .... 11*650 
„ Potassium . . . *150 
Silicic Acid, etc. *204 
Total amount of saline matter 41*471 grains per gallon, 
f c Treatise on the Mineral Waters of Harrogate,’ by J. Garnett, M.D., p. 105. 
