fore it is used in wine, beer, cider and such; on chopped meat it is used to preserve the red color.

SO2 is the most effective agent to destroy all growth upon wines; it is used for the inside and the outside of the wine casks and to prevent afterfermentation. The sulphur is burned in the barrels and according to maniputions more or less SO2, is absorbed by the wine. SO2 retards fermentation and thus ripens new wine for early bottling; the off-taste of old wine if retarded, if not altogether prevented.

According to Nessler, 27 to 54 milligrams per 1000 c.c. are sufficient to prevent the usual wine disturbances. He also states that 22 milligrams are sufficient to prevent fermentation in cider for 28 days.

The amount of SO2 reported as found given in milligrams per 1000cc.

The use in beer is to prevent after-fermentation and thus increase the keeping qualities. Instead of burning the sulphur in the beer barrels, calcium sulphite, especially the bisulphite, is used. Another objection to its use in beer is to make it quickly salable, though unfinished by fermentation, to prevent turning or souring or acquiring a "touch."

Hops is frequently fumigated with SO2. Herz reports finding in 102 samples of beer, 0 to 89 milligrams SO2 per liter. Beer of the MunichHofbreau showed 1.3 to 2.6 SO2 in 1000 c.c.

Kayser reports as having found 730 milligrams in 1000 c.c. of cider. The use of these agents in chopped and minced meat is much abused and commonly practised. The sodium salts are used.

Kaemmerer found that 30 per cent of all samples collected in Neurnberg contained SO2, the average being 510 milligrams per 1000, the smallest amount found being 30 milligrams and the largest 1780 milligrams per 1000. B. Fisher found in Breslau that Hamburg steak was dosed with sulphites to the amount of 100 to 3400 milligrams SO2 in 1000.

Toxicology.

The commercial salts of sulphites are more or less decomposed and contain varying quantities of sulphate. To this property Professor Pfeiffer claims are due most of the reported observations of harmlessness in stipulated quantities, while the available SO2 only should be considered. This refers especially to the claims of Polli, who published reports of the harmlessness of daily doses of 8 to 12 grams of sulphite salts.

Bernatzik and Braun, who experiments with non-decomposed salts, found that 80 milligrams in 260 c. c. of sweetened water and given during twenty-four hours, produced very unpleasant results, purging diarrhoea, cramps, vomiting and uncomfortable feeling for days. Even doses of one gram magnesium sulphite (0.3 SO2) caused vomiting and diarrhoea. Experiments with women after confinement showed the following results: Onethird of the subjects to whom was administered 3.75 NaHSO3 -2.28 S02 and two-thirds who received 3.75 KHSO3 -1.98 SO2 during 24 hours did not manifest bad effects therefrom. The other women suffered from stomachic and intestinal colic.

Pfeiffer and other physicians experimented on themselves 0.5 Na2SO3250 milligrams, SO2 causing oppression and pain in stomach, general uncasiness and eructations.

Leuch found that 45 mg as SO2 of a sulphite taken in 300 c. c. wine

caused four hours after meal headache, tickling in the throat, diarrhoea, increase of mucus and saliva secretion, and burning sensation in stomach. Similar effects were noticed when the aldehyde-sulphurous acid was present to the amount of 250 mgs.

Kionka experimented with a dog of 4000 grams in weight, administering mixed with hashed meat sulphites containing 37 to 150 mgs SO2. Inside of two (2) months no unpleasant symptoms were noticed, nor did it appear that the growth of the animal was effected, but upon autopsy of the animal, serious damage was revealed. No perforation of the stomach nor intestinal tract was found, but the lungs showed numerous old and new echimotic (hemorrhagic) spots; this was also the case in the kidneys, accompanied by inflammation. A dog weighing 12,000 grams, which is three times the above designated weight, and fed the same way, showed similar results, but less pronounced.

In wines much of the SO2 is found as aldehyde-sulphurous acid, which has a less toxic effect. The SO2 of the CH3 COH-SO3H2 cannot be esti-' mated by the iodine method, therefore in wines two separate methods must be used to determine SO2, as sulphite or free sulphurous acid and as aldehydesulphurous acid to determine quality and toxiety.

In 238 aged wines known to be pure, except the casks having been treated with burning sulphur, Ripper found from 3m to 260 mgs. of aldehyde-sulphurous acid and of free SO2 only 1 to 30 mgs. C. Schmitt reports as finding as high as 241 mgs. of aldehyde -sulphurous acid.

In all wine producing countries, except in the United States, the amount of SO2 is limited by law, the amount permitted being 0.1 to 0.2 per liter, which is from 1.5 to 3 grains per quart. Almost all countries prohibit the use of sulphites in beer.

The sulphites are distinctly toxic and injurious-they should be prohibited in beer, cider and especially meat-meanwhile in wines a definite quantity should be designated and then only used under the supervision of a responsible agent. I believe this to be an imperative necessity, for nothing else, not even salicylic acid, has been found capable of curing the many ills of wine.

In the United State legislation, to regulate the use of sulphur is imperative. Many wines contain so much sulphur dioxide that the odor and taste are very pronounced, etc., etc., etc.

Kansas City is in crying need of an ordinance prohibiting the use of sulphites, which are promiscuously used to the detriment of the public. (Where even the air is frequently charged with sulphur dioxide so that the well-known odor of an old-fashioned match is equaled, and often exceeded!)

Fluor and Fluorids.

Sodium fluorid, ammonium fluorid also silico-fluorids and boro-fluorids are used.

Sodium fluorid has been heralded as an excellent and absolutely innocent preservative, especially for milk and butter

Perret attests to its efficiency; 1 per cent prevents decomposition in milk; 3 to 4 grams per liter are sufficient to preserve it for a few days and that treating butter with a 0.3 per cent solution imparts keeping qualities.

Toxicology.

Rabuteau, who took 0.25 sodium fluorid, testifies that it increased the flow of saliva; dogs vomited after doses of 0.5 NaF. Larger doses caused cramps, paralysis and finally death.

Perre claims that he suffered no injury from eating, for a number of weeks, butter which had been preserved with 0.3 per cent NaF.

Serious effects are reported by Tappeimer and Brandl, who found that continued use of food mixed with doses of 0.1 to 0.9 NaF caused gradually muscular contraction (cramps) along the spine and slight episthotonus. Much fluor had accumulated, especially in the bones as crystalline calcium fluorid. The use of flour preparations must be condemned, and should be prohibited. That excuse that by kneading butter with water frees it from the preservative, does certainly not apply to milk.

Salicylic Acid.

Salicylic acid has been recommended and is more or less extensively used for the preservation of all kinds of organic substances. On account of taste and sparing solubility in water, salicylic acid is especially suitable for alcoholic and substances of very pronounced taste.

For beer 1 in 20,000 proves effective; export beers often contain 1 in 5000.

Toxicology.

Prof. Kolbe investigated during 1874 the properties of salicylic acid, suggested by the very easy transformation of phenol (carbolic acid) into salicylic acid. He consumed for one year daily 1 gram, taken in different beverages, he asserts, without any ill effect.

The addition of 0.1 per cent of salicylic acid to beer causes a decided taste. Prof. Lehman, of Wuerzburg, asserts that liter of such beer taken daily for 75 days and again for 91 days did not cause any deleterious effect.

After the administration of doses of 6 to 12 grams, cerebral toxic effects have been noticed after short intervals. 4.0 sodium salicylate has caused scrious toxic effects. In French literature claims are especially common, that salicylic acid acts with serious results upon persons suffering from any kind ef kidney affection. Another claim is, that elimination is extremely tardy with aged people.

In this country salicylic acid is chiefly used to preserve fruit and vegetable products.

Salicylic acid, if used at all as a preservative agent, demands legislative supervision.

Benzoic Acid and Sodium Benzoate.

Are today used more and more in place of salicylic acid and salicylates. In this country either may be found added to wine, cider, beer, preserved fruit and vegetables, catsups, jams, jellies, mince meat, preserves and sometimes in dairy products.

Though benzoic acid and sodium benzoate may not be as objectionable as some preservative agents, yet it seems to act toxicologically similar to salicylic acid and salicylates, thus the indiscriminate use should be prohibited by law.

Beta-Naphtol,

as a medicine, is administered with caution. The commercial article may contain small amounts of the more toxic isomeric form a-naphtol. Hydronaphtol seems to be identified with beta-naphtol. It should not be used as a food preservative.

Saccharine,

A sweetening agent, asserts some claims as a preservative. Our present state of knowledge does not justify recommendation nor condemnation.

Such applies also to abrastol or asaprol, which is calcium beta-naphtol, alpha-monosulfonate.

Pyrolignous Acid

Is largely used under such fancy names as "Extract of Smoke" or "Liquid Smoke."

The preservative effect of smoke is due to creosote. Using the pyrolignous acid by simply dipping the meat into it and allow it to dry, does not produce the same nor any similar effect as smoking meat with wood smoke. Hygienic studies on this substance are wanting, but meat preserved with it should not be sold as smoked meat.

Finally, I desire to state herewith, that in my official capacity as city chemist, that I do not advocate the general use of preservatives, nor that I would be lax in my search for even the smallest quantity of any, though it may be an ideal preservative.

If there are laws and ordinances that forbid the use of an antiseptic substance in food products, I certainly will and must report and testify to such findings regardless of my personal belief.

Enforcement of

Laws must be enforced, even if wrong or obnoxious. the law will cause salutary changes, when public opinion, substantiated by scientific support, proves advances in the right direction.

*DIPLOBACILLUS CONJUNCTIVITIS AT THE ROYAL UNIVERSITY EYE CLINIC AT BONN, GERMANY.

Translated from the German of Dr. zur Nedden by J. W. Sherer, M. D., (Uu. of Pa.) of Kansas City, Mo., (Klin Monatsble, f. Augenh Jahrg, xxxix. Nr. I. S. 6.)

(Continued from Page 27.)

We have directed our attention with particular interest to the corneal complications since Petit has described an abundance of material (18 cases), whereas the earlier observations of Axenfeld, Peters, Morax and Hoffman were limited to a few isolated cases.

These are to be regarded partly as direct sequelae of the catarrh and partly as intercurrent accidents. In 17 cases we observed corneal involvement by infiltration and superficial vascularization.

Seven of these cases were complicated by conjunctivitis phlyctenulosa, which is to be regarded as the real cause of the Keratitis. At any rate, they were as light as if no diplobacilli were present.

The remaining ten cases developed as direct sequelae of the catarrh, partly following the acute form and partly following cases which had run a less impetuous course. In each of these the bulbar conjunctiva was much inflamed.

It is more difficult to formulate an opinion upon the cases in which there is corneal ulceration for a very few cases only have been reported by Peters, Hoffman and Petit. It appears almost astonishing that we have observed 23 cases of ulcus corneae with diplobacilli.

Most of these ulcers followed conjunctivitis phlyctenulosa, trachoma or trauma. A few were the direct result of diplobacillus catarrh.

Naturally it is of interest to know whether diplobacilli are to be found in the ulcer itself. Peters found them but once and thought they had lodged mechanically in the ulcer.

Petit found them present in abundance. We have not been able to examine all ulcers this way, because it is sometimes dangerous to scrape the base

*The Italics have been introduced by the translator.

of the ulcer, but when this can be done, we believe the germs will always be found in profusion.

This series of investigations was completed by the study of 11 cases of ulcers serpens, complicated by diplobacillus catarrh. By searching the necrotic tissue along the edges of the ulcer, we succeeded, with a single exception, in finding diplobacilli. In the exceptional case pneumococci were found.

Both these bacteria existed in nine cases. In one case diplobacilli were found exclusively, although earnest search was made for others. Since the diplobacilli infected the conjuctiva in all these cases, we consider that they passed from the conjunctiva into the ulcer.

Moreover, it appears to us that the diplobacilli find a good culture media in the necrotic tissue and purulent walls of the ulcer, for they often occurred in such masses that the condition could not be accounted for merely by the adventitious lodgment of the germs in the ulcer.

This applies peculiarly to the cases in which the germs were more abundant in the ulcer than in the secretion from the conjunctiva.

The clinical picture was in no way influenced by the presence of the diplobacilli. The further course of the ulcera serpentia was typical. All the cases healed satisfactorily except one, which had already perforated before coming to treatment.

In this case the bad result was not attributable to diplobacilli, but rather to the presence of the streptococcus longus, which has demonstrated by culture to be prolific in the case.

As to the effect of diplobacilli upon the cornea, the following fact may have some weight. In four ulcera sepentia in which keratotomy was necessary, healing was kind, no symptoms of deep irritation of the iris or other tissue supervening.

In three other cases of the perforation of the cornea from ulcer, complicated with diplobacilli, no deep infection occurred. Even in cases where keratitis resulted from severe diplobacillus catarrh, the cornea seemed indifferent to the action of the germ.

In contrast to this diplobacillus, the habitat of which is the conjunctiva, is another, recently discovered by Petit (10), which produces a clinical picture similar to ulcus serpens of the cornea.

Morphologically it is the same as the former, but a little smaller. These two bacteria may be differentiated by the fact that the diplobacillus of the conjunctiva grows only upon media containing human juices (menschlichen Flussigkeiten), while the other thrives upon all practical media and rapidly liquifies gelatin, whence Petit has named it "liquifying."

His observations rest upon three cases, which correspond closely to ulcus serpens, but which presented the following striking differences. There was no pain nor photophobia, they developed gradually, there was no iritis and no pneumococci could be found in the ulcers, but instead the diplobacillus in question was discovered.

The differences cannot be thought very characteristic, and still the bacterial finding shows a marked peculiarity and admonishes us to make more cultures than we have hitherto thought necessary.

In the 11 cases of serpentic ulcer mentioned above, in only 3 did we prove by culture tests that the bacteria was the true Morax-Axenfeld diplobacillus. Indeed, these were only from ulcers in which no other bacteria than the diplobacillus occurred. In the other eight cases the cover-glass preparations seemed to us to be sufficient.