Du Mez—The Galenical Oleoresins. 
1001 
In the case of the commercial samples, the acid numbers were 
found to vary as a rule in the same direction as the filicin 
content. It would appear, therefore, that the value obtained 
for this constant might serve as a check on the latter determina¬ 
tion. The results obtained in the determination of the acid 
numbers of the preparations examined in the laboratory and 
those reported by Kremel follow: 
Table 21 .—Acid numbers of laboratory preparations. 
Sample 
No. 
Date 
Observer 
Solvent 
Acid 
number 
1. 
1887 
Kremel. 
Alcohol. 
28 
Ether... 
50 to 70 
1. 
1916 
DuMez. 
82.70) 
2. 
Acetone. 
82.20) 
P) These preparations were 6 years old when the acid number was de¬ 
termined. 
Table 22. — Acid numbers of commercial oleoresins. 
Sample 
No. 
Date 
Observer 
Source 
Acid 
Number 
1. 
1916 
DuMez. 
Stearns & Co.. 
50.2 
2. 
Sauibb & Sons. 
65.9 P) 
44 
“ 
Lilly & Co........ 
72 9 
4... 
44 
Parke, Davis Sr, Co ........ 
87.8 
P) Contained ether. 
Saponification value: Determinations made by Parry in 1911 
lead him to state that the saponification value of this prepara¬ 
tion should not be lower than 230, corresponding to a crude 
filicin content of not less than 22 per cent. The values obtained 
for this constant in the laboratory and those reported by Har¬ 
rison and Self agree, as a rule with this statement, when the 
minimum filicin content is taken as 20 per cent. A value of 
less than 230 in the case of commercial samples has been shown 
to be due in general to adulteration with castor oil. In a few 
instances, however; it is to be attributed to the presence of 
unevaporated solvent, or to a low filicin content due to the use 
of a poor quality of drug in the manufacture of the oleoresin. 
