510  Review  of  Chemistry  of  the  U.S.P.  {*&*™i*?88£- 
many  publications  of  practical  value.  It  seems  this  set  of  U.S.P. 
weights  had  its  inception  from  the  Government  chemist,  Prof.  F.  W. 
Clarke.  (See  preface,  p.  xlvi.)  Did  he  dupe  the  committee,  or  did 
the  silly  didactic  nonsense  appeal  to  the  didactic  druggists  on  the 
commission?  Again,  we  must  say  that  the  chemists  should  not  be 
hampered  by  others  on  the  commission.  Those  who  read  only  drug 
journals  or  the  A.  Ph.  A.  year-book  cannot  be  said  to  be  posted  on 
current  chemical  literature. 
In  1900  and  1901  there  appeared  a  series  of  articles  bearing  on 
this  subject  in  the  National  Druggist,  that  brought  out  a  letter  from 
the  professor  just  mentioned.  In  this  letter  the  Government  chemist 
desires  the  committee  to  remember  that,  of  143  chemical  teachers 
in  German  universities,  118  favored  the  hydrogen  standard,  20 
favored  the  oxygen  standard,  and  5  were  indifferent.  From  the 
above,  we  see  who  was  the  nigger  in  the  wood-pile.  Four  years 
only  have  elapsed  since  the  said  effusion.  To-day  the  International 
Commission  desires  the  oxygen  standard  only.  They  dropped 
hydrogen  for  the  future.  Why?  Because  a  little  understanding  is 
gradually  percolating  into  their  respective  heads.  It  may  also  be 
noted  that  the  very  prominent  chemist,  M.  Guye,  has  lately  proved 
the  Stas  value  for  nitrogen  false,  though  declared  by  Stas  as  correct 
and  sworn  to  by  Prof.  F.  W.  Clarke,  for  he  is  a  great  Stasian.  When 
the  foundation  stones  of  the  Government  atomic  weights  are  proven 
false,  those  based  thereon  are  false ;  but,  worst  of  all,  analyses  in 
which  such  values  are  used  are  also  far  from  the  truth.  Of  course, 
when  this  is  brought  out  in  criminal  proceedings  in  the  courts, 
judges  will  take  note  of  the  facts,  and  rule  against  the  U.S.P.  weights. 
I  have  found  the  dicta  of  official  chemists  are  not  blindly  followed 
by  the  wideawake  jurists  in  American  courts. 
I  may  be  pardoned  for  expressing  some  satisfaction  over  the  turn 
that  has  occurred  during  the  past  few  years  on  atomic  weights, 
especially  as  the  first  questioning  of  the  Stasian  system  some  fifteen 
years  ago  in  the  Academy  of  Sciences  of  Paris  by  my  father  has 
borne  fruit.  It  then  almost  amounted  to  sacrilege  to  question  the 
work  of  Stas.  To-day  it  is  gradually  being  admitted  that  there  was 
a  great  deal  of  humbug  in  the  work  of  this  scientist.  Will  the 
United  States  Government  chemists  blindly  follow  the  old  lead, 
when  all  the  world  refuses  to  be  further  duped  ?  We  know  not,  but 
this  is  certain,  independent  chemists  care  little  for  Government  work 
in  this  country  ;  reason  will  prevail. 
