040 
PREPARATION OF LIQUOR BISMUT1II. 
Mackay, John, 121, George Street, Edinburgh. 
Morson, Thomas N. R., 88, Queen Square. 
Orridge, Benjamin B., 30, Bucklesbuiy. 
Randall, William Brodrieb, 146, High Street, Southampton. 
Sandford, George Webb, 47, Piccadilly. 
Savage, William Dawson, 65, Edward Street, Brighton. 
Squire, Peter, 277, Oxford Street. 
Standring, Thomas, 1, Piccadilly. Manchester. 
Watts, William Manning, 32, Whitecross Street. 
Waugii, George, 177, Regent Street. 
There being only the requisite number of Candidates proposed for election as Audi¬ 
tors, the Chairman declared the following, who had been nominated and had signified 
their willingness to accept the office, duly elected 
Auditors. 
Barron, Frederick, 2, Bush Lane. 
Beckett, William E., 6, Giltspur Street. 
MUullocii, William, 5, Coleman Street. 
Westwood, Robert, 16, Newgate Street. 
Tippett, Benjamin M., 8 , Sloane Street. 
The Scrutineers handed to the President their Report of the return for the Local Se¬ 
cretaries. 
A vote of thanks having been passed to the Scrutineers and to the Chairman, the 
meeting separated. 
ORIGINAL AND EXTRACTED ARTICLES. 
LIQUOR BISMUTH!. 
TO THE EDITOR OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL. 
Sir,—Two communications have lately appeared upon the above subject; 
one from the pen of Mr. Bartlett, of America, and another from the pen of 
Mr. Blunt. On the appearance of the first, which was' kindly forwarded to 
me by the author some months ago, I determined not to enter upon the theme 
again, as I thought the subject had been thoroughly ventilated in my original 
paper, and by the remarks made thereon by Mr. Schacht, the inventor of the 
fluid. Nor should I take up the time of the readers of your Journal now, ex¬ 
cept that my silence might be construed into an acknowledgment of the cor¬ 
rectness of a statement made by Mr. Blunt, i. e. that lie found the process of 
Mr. Tichborne impracticable. In connection with this, I may remark that I 
am sorry the process to which he refers has failed in his hands, but I shall be 
most happy, if he be sufficiently interested in the subject, to forward him a 
specimen containing the prescribed amount of oxide of bismuth, and made 
strictly according to my formula. 
But, throwing this on one side, the purport of my original communication 
must have been misunderstood; indeed, it must liave been read very superfi¬ 
cially. In that communication the process is given as one calculated to pro¬ 
duce a corresponding fluid to Mr. Schacht’s. Thus, after having given the 
analysis, I say, “The following is probably the mode pursued in making 
the solution,” etc., and then fellows a process the product of which will agree 
in composition with the analysis of Mr. Schacht’s preparation. A formula such 
as recommended by Mr. Blunt would not give a fluid representing Mr. Schacht’s, 
as it would invariably contain nitric acid. My paper was written to describe 
