72 — 
Per cent. 
Silicic acid. 0.5 
Sodic sulphate.57-3 
Calcic sulphate.26.0 
Magnesic sulphate . 8.7 
Magnesic chloride. 4.8 
Magnesic carbonate. 2.7 
100 • 0 
I he composition of the water accounts for its nauseat¬ 
ing, bitter taste. It was clear and almost sparkling. We 
give the following analysis of a seepage water collected late 
in the season from a newly opened drain running through 
an alkalized and somewhat marshy swale. The larger 
quantity of salts held in solution and their difference in 
character, distinguish the ground water from the seepage 
water. The magnesic salts in the seepage water have evi¬ 
dently been taken up from the soil. The water used for ir¬ 
rigating was practically snow water. I have no analyses of 
the Arkansas river water at my command. I have no doubt 
but that it is quite as different from the ground water as 
the seepage water is, and resembles the latter much more 
than it does the former. 
Ground Water. 
Total grs. per gal.596.766 
Sodic sulphate.^41.771 
Calcic “ 155.650 
Magnesic sulphate. 51.880 
chloride.29.027 
carbonate. 16.026 
Insoluble. 2.412 
596.766 
f Total magnesic salts.96.933 
Total grs. per gal.,.97.85 
Sodic sulphate.54.38 
Magnesic chloride... 7 • 50 
Insoluble. 1.25 
97 • 85 
Total magnesic salts. 12.77 
