THE SOLUM! W WATER OF CERTAIN YtTIT.AL SILICATES. 
r.\ George Steiger. 
The results cited 
taracter. The folh 
med at put i !i 
it ion a the sai 
•c fairly comparabi 
The work was car. 
iel\ ground mine 
>ttle ul)ic 
here the teinperati 
taken from t ime t< 
id the solutions '* 
riution, methyl ora§ 
Winn a 'in* in 
netim 
kke of comparison i 
ted in terms of 18 
nail in some of the 
le percent i • of th 
ens from the same 
the preceding paper are purely qualitative 
ng experiments are analogous in kind, but a: 
ibjecl on a quantitative basis. In both invest 
i material were employed, so thai the da! 
1 out as follows: One-half gram of each of tl 
- was weighed out, and placed in a 2-oun< 
trimeters of vi ater. These bol ties were set asi< 
remained about 70 F. for one month, and we: 
ne. At the cud of the period all were filtere< 
) l it rated with a standard hydrochloric aci 
being used for an indicator. 
solution by this treatment I can not say — som 
potash, possibly sometimes lime, but for tl 
results in the following table have been calci 
>: although the percentage of sodium is vei 
ecimens. I have given also in another colum 
unbincd alkalies as shown by analysis of spec 
ilitics. 
Pectolit. I 
Muscovite 
Xatiolitc. \. -v. 
Lintonite, I >a 
Phlogopite, 1 '.«lw ..i 
Laumonite 
Lepidolite, Maine 
El»olite, Litchfield, I 
Heulandite, Nova S< 
Orthoclase 
combined ,! v n • 
alkalies by ol N ^ ()l 
aual 
Ca,(Si(> ) Nail 9.11 
Al 3 (Si04):JvH, 10.00 
15. 7! • 
5. 92 
9.32 
1.00 
Al,(SiO,. V..II 
Al () (SiO,>,(CaNa:) :i .7H:0 .... 
Al(SiCV M.u r Klb 
Al,Si0 4 Si 3 8 Ca.4H,0 
KHLiAl 3 (Si0 4 ) 3 • 
lK 3 Li :i (AlF 2 )3Al(Si 3 8 ) 3 
Al 3 (Si<>,),Na, 
U Si 3 8 ) 6 (CaNa 2 )3.16H 2 0... 
KAlSbOs 
13.00 
21. 17 
2.00 
16.00 
solution. 
0.57 
.32 
.30 
.29 
.22 
.18 
.18 
.16 
.13 
.11 
159 
