Amju°iy%S)3arm'}        Epinephrin  and  its  Compounds.  309 
Aldrich's  substance  is,  of  course,  quantitatively  and  qualitatively- 
identical  with  the  adrenalin  of  Takamine,  and  he  has,  therefore, 
used  this  name.  He  analyzed  his  own  compound  and  also  purified 
and  analyzed  the  adrenalin  of  Takamine  with  the  result  that  "  the 
simplest  body  obtainable  is  represented  by  the  formula  C9H13N03." 
Finally  Takamine1  described  his  own  method  already  outlined, 
and  also  published  analyses  of  his  own  adrenalin,  which  differ  very 
materially  from  those  obtained  by  Aldrich.  He  asserted,  indeed, 
that  his  formula  differs  from  that  of  Aldrich  by  CH2  and  adopted 
the  expression  C10H15NO3  as  the  "  probable  empirical  formula  "  of 
adrenalin.  We  have,  then,  an  ^inexplicable  lack  of  agreement  in  the 
analyses  of  what  is  evidently  one  and  the  same  substance,  as 
judged  by  the  descriptions  given  by  these  writers. 
Neither  of  these  writers  has  placed  the  theoretical  values  required 
by  his  formula  side  by  side  with  those  actually  obtained  in  the 
analyses.  When  this  is  done,  as  in  the  following  table,  it  is  seen 
that  neither  formula  can  be  accepted  on  the  evidence  which  has 
thus  far  been  furnished. 
Found,  for  Takamine's 
Adrenalin  as  Purified  and      Theoretical  for  C9H13N03, 
Aldrich's  Adrenalin  Found.  Analyzed  by  Aldrich.  as  Proposed  by  Aldrich. 
C  =  57-89  C  =  58-03  C  =  59-02 
H  =   7-33  H  =   7-20  m                 H=  7-10 
N  =    7-50  N  =   7-66  N  =  7-65 
O  —  27-27  O  =  27*11  O  =  26-23 
99-99                            ioo'oo  ioo'oo 
Adrenalin  as  prepared  and  analyzed  by  Takamine: 
Required  for  Ci0H15NO3, 
Found.  as  Proposed  by  Takamine. 
C  =  59'39  C  =  60-91 
H  =   7-84  H=  7-61 
N  =   7-88  N  =  7-11 
O  =  24-89  O  =  24-37 
IOO'OO  100*00 
The  very  great  deficiency  of  carbon  in  the  analyses  of  both 
Aldrich  and  Takamine,  as  compared  with  the  theoretical  require- 
ments for  this  element,  is  alone  sufficient  to  condemn  the  proposed 
formulae.    The  case,  moreover,  is  such  that  no  rational  formula 
1  See  his  second  paper  as  already  cited. 
