Am.  Jour.  Pharm.  1 
March,  li>96.  J 
Acetone  and  Acetone-Chloroform. 
159 
its  career  the  numerous  fatalities  from  its  use  were  charged  to  its 
impurities,  so  that  the  alcohol  process  was  adhered  to  until  the 
identity  of  the  products  from  alcohol  and  acetone  was  fully  proved 
— not  only  chemically,  but  also  by  surgical  experience  of  considera- 
ble duration.  Then  as  time  passed  and  the  subject  came  up  for  re- 
search and  reconsideration,  the  Siemerling  results  came  up  also  and 
settled  the  question  against  acetone. 
Finally,  Dr.  Gustav  Rumpf,  a  German,  and  an  employee  for  some 
years  in  an  acetone-chloroform  manufactory  in  Germany,  where 
there  is  no  patent,  came  to  this  country,  took  out  these  patents  and 
assigned  them  to  the  present  holders,  so  that  now,  for  the  past  seven 
years  or  more,  any  one  making  acetone-chloroform  in  this  country, 
by  processes  that  had  been  free  and  largely  used  in  Germany  for 
many  years,  was  liable  to  prosecution  for  infringement. 
Having  any  general  knowledge  of  the  history  of  acetone  and  ace- 
tone-chloroform, it  is  difficult  to  understand  how  such  patents  could 
be  issued  that  would  claim  to  control  the  proportions  of  well-known 
chemical  materials  in  long-known  chemical  reactions.  But  such 
patents  were  issued,  and,  therefore,  command  respect.  That  the 
processes  were  not  used  earlier  in  this  country  may  be  charged 
chiefly  to  the  endorsements  of  the  Siemerling  paper ;  and  that  the 
patents  appear  to  have  been  so  long  acquiesced  in  is  due  to  the  cir- 
cumstance that  any  one  who  might  contest  them  would  do  so  at 
great  cost  of  money,  time  and  annoyance  in  defensive  litigation 
which,  if  successful,  would  secure  the  benefits  equally  to  many 
manufacturers  and  to  the  public  in  lower  prices  of  the  products, 
whilst  the  contestant  would  bear  all  the  costs. 
In  seeking  new  outlets  for  acetic  acid,  the  writer  determined  to 
convert  the  acid  into  chloroform,  and  determined  also  to  respect 
these  patents.  In  the  intermediate  step  of  making  acetone,  acetic 
acid  was  used,  not  to  evade  the  patents,  but  because  by  its  use  the 
impurities  of  the  crude  acetates  of  lime  were  avoided,  and  a  larger 
yield  of  better  acetone  was  obtained.  In  the  use  of  acetic  acid  in- 
stead of  the  acetates  of  the  patent  an  entirely  different  apparatus 
and  management  are  required  and  used,  and  if  the  patent  did  not 
exist  the  writer  would  not  use  either  its  apparatus  or  management, 
but  would  prefer  the  rotary  still  and  the  continuous  process. 
With  regard  to  the  other  step,  wherein  the  acetone  is  converted 
into  chloroform,  this  is  accomplished  by  a  reaction  that  was  long 
