October 29,1870.] 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
353 
that made by hand. The latter had many defects, and 
the former possesses many advantages. Machinery, by 
lowering the price of lint, has very much increased its 
consumption; but there still lingers in the minds of 
many persons the feeling that there is no lint like that 
made by hand, and also a suspicion that the so-called 
“flax-lints” contain a mixture of cotton, varying in the 
samples of different makers, but objectionable in all. 
Just at the time when I was engaged on this subject a 
circumstance occurred.which will serve to illustrate my 
remarks. A medical man called on me for some lint. I 
unrolled a packet of Taylor’s Super A 1 flax lint. He ob¬ 
jected to it, remarking that it was mixed with cotton, and 
also that the presence of cotton in lint detracted from the 
value of the lint as a dressing for sores; and this was espe¬ 
cially the case when applied to a blistered surface. Now 
here was a question of fact and also one of opinion; and to 
determine one at least of these—the presence of cotton, 
or otherwise, in samples of professedly flax lint—was 
the object I had in view, and I have thought that the 
subject possessed sufficient interest to justify me in bring¬ 
ing the results under j’onr notice. 
A difficulty met me at the outset. I had purposely 
discarded all “cotton lints ,”—they did not come within 
the scope of my inquiry; and to examine every sample 
even of those labelled “flax lints,” whether from whole¬ 
sale houses or retail establishments, would occupy 
more than the limited time at my disposal, and be of no 
practical value, for the absence of the maker’s name left 
no means of identification. Here, for instance, is a 
sample of lint. The packet had a very pretentious label 
—“ Superfine Lint,” etc. It does not profess to be flax, 
nor does it say that it is cotton, neither has it the maker’s 
name. Its composition is about half cotton and half 
flax, and the same remark will apply to the linted surface. 
I have examined a good many samples labelled flax lints, 
from different sources, but shall illustrate this paper by 
reference to those of a few T well-known makers. 
No. 1 Sample.—I will commence with the lint to 
which objection was made, Taylor’s Super A 1 Flax 
Lint. I certainly was somewhat startled to find that it 
did contain cotton. By taking a piece of this lint and 
detaching from it a few threads, without reference to any 
particular part, the presence of cotton may be detected ; 
but when the sample is subjected to a more methodical 
investigation,—when, for instance, the warp is separated 
from the weft which crosses it at right angles, and they 
and the fluff on the surface are examined,— it is found 
that the “warp” consists of a yam of loose linen fibre, 
the “weft” of a closely-twisted thread of cotton, and 
that the fluff on the surface contains no cotton what¬ 
ever, being composed entirely of flax. I use the words 
“yarn” with reference to the flax -warp, and “thread” to 
the cotton weft, to convey a tolerably correct idea of 
their relative size and condition in the fabric. A stray 
fibre of cotton may be found on the surface, but it is not 
there in any appreciable quantity. The cotton would 
appear to have its place and value in binding together, 
so to speak, the flax yarns; but it forms no part of the 
linted “pile,” consequently all the fibres coming into 
contact with a wound are pure flax. It is just possible 
that the presence of a thin thread of cotton as a weft, 
may make the material lighter and more porous, and 
assist in producing a larger linted surface to a given 
weight of lint. The view adopted is probably borne out 
by reference to the next. I think, therefore, that we 
are justified in considering this sample as a flax lint. 
No. 2 Sample is Maw’s Ellesmere Lint, composed en¬ 
tirely of flax in warp and weft, and consequently the 
fibres of which the linted surface is composed have no 
mixture of cotton. It is a coarse lint as compared with 
some others. 
No. 3 Sample is Robinson’s, of Chesterfield, Flax Lint. 
Warp flax ; weft cotton. Surface for the most part flax. 
No. 4 Sample is hand-made lint, composed entirely of 
flax. It has very little fluff’ on the surface. 
The second question may now be considered. Is the 
presence of cotton in any quantity really objectionable 
when forming part of the linted surface ? It would be 
difficult for me by any direct experiment to determine 
this point. I must leave others to speak. I shall only 
quote one authority bearing directly on lint, and his 
remarks I think embody the opinions of most of those 
■who have alluded to the subject. Erasmus Wilson, in 
his treatise on ‘ Healthy Skin,’ says, in substance, “that 
he attributes the softness and smoothness of linen to the 
roundness and pliability of its fibre; the cold feeling to, 
its being a good conductor of heat,—the porosity of its, 
fibre rendering it very attractive of moisture, absorbing- 
it freely, which, as water is a conductor of heat, removes 
it rapidly from the body. On the contrary, “ cotton is a 
bad conductor of heat; it does not absorb moisture to, 
conduct the heat away. It wants the freshness of linen; 
it is not, like linen, composed of fibres which are per¬ 
fectly rounded, but, on the contrary, its fibres are flat. 
and have sharp edges, which are apt, in delicate skins, 
to excite irritation. It is on this account that we care¬ 
fully avoid the application of cotton to a graze or w r ound, 
and employ for such a purpose its softer and smoother- 
rival, linen.” 
You will observe that his objections to cotton apply,, 
in the first place, to its being a bad conductor of heat, 
and, in the second, to the sharp edges of the cotton. 
His first objection may be valid, but the second has no 
* The woodcuts represent the appearance of the fibres by. 
transmitted light. 
