DR. H. DEBUS ON THE CHEMICAL THEORY OE GUNPOWDER. 
531 
The results of other experiments, made by Noble and Abel, differ from each other 
in a similar manner. 
One is forced to conclude either that the methods of analysis adopted by Noble 
and Abel do not yield exact results, or that the powders exploded did not possess the 
composition which was attributed to them. 
Gunpowder is a mechanical mixture of saltpetre, charcoal, and sulphur. It can 
hardly be expected that such a mixture should, even if the greatest care has been 
taken by the manufacturer, be perfectly homogeneous. Moreover, the burning of 
wood into charcoal will not always yield a product containing the same percentage 
amount of carbon, and as gunpowder is a mixture of 75 parts of saltpetre, 10 of 
sulphur, and 15 of charcoal, it appears a 'priori probable that the same description 
of powder from the same manufacturer will not always possess the same percentage 
composition. The amount of carbon, more particularly, may be expected to vary more 
or less. 
In order to test this conclusion by experiment, I requested the late Mr. Wills to 
analyse a sample of It. L. G. and one of pebble (P.) powder, both obtained from the 
Royal Arsenal, Woolwich. His results, placed side by side with those of Noble and 
Abel, are given below. 
R. L. G. P. 
( " ^ 
r~ 
> 
Noble and Abel. 
Wills. 
Noble and Abel. 
Wills. 
Saltpetre.... 
74*95 
75-10 
74-67 
74-26 
Sulphur .... 
Charcoal— 
10-27 
8-96 
10-07 
9-51 
Carbon 
10-86 
12-09 
12-12 
11-58 
Hydrogen. 
0-42 
0-54 
0-42 
0-51 
Oxygen . . 
1-99 
2-12 
1-45 
2-55 
Ash. 
0-25 
0-20 
0-23 
0-33 
Water .... 
1T1 
0-85 
0-95 
0*76 
99-85 
99-86 
99-91 
99-50 
It will be noticed that the amounts of carbon and sulphur found by Wills differ 
considerably from those found by Noble and Abel. But the best proof that the 
same description of powder from the same works may vary much in composition has 
been furnished by Noble and Abel themselves. In their first memoir they assign to 
R. L. G. powder the above composition; in their second paper “On Fired Gunpowder''’ 
they publish the following analysis :— 
