Yearly (52 numbers).

Half-Yearly (26 numbers) Quarterly (13 numbers)

10s. 6d.

68. Od.

3s. 3d.

Readers will oblige by making their remittances for subscriptions by Postal or Post Office Order, crossed.

Communications for the Editor, if intended for insertion in the current week's issue, should reach the office not later than Tuesday Morning.

Articles, reports, and correspondence on all matters of interest to the Chemical and allied industries, home and foreign, are solicited. Correspondents should condense their matter as much as possible, write on one side only of the paper, and in all cases give their names and addresses, not necessarily for publication. Sketches should be sent on separate sheets.

We cannot undertake to return rejected manuscripts or drawings, unless accompanied by a stamped directed envelope.

Readers are invited to forward items of intelligence, or cuttings from local newspapers, of interest to the trades concerned.

As it is one of the special features of the Chemical Trade Journal to give the earliest information respecting new processes, improvements, inventions, etc., bearing upon the Chemical and allied industries, or which may be of interest to our readers, the Editor invites particulars of such-when in working order-from the originators; and if the subject is deemed of sufficient importance, an expert will visit and report upon the same in the columns of the Journal. There is no fee required for visits of this kind.

We shall esteem it a favour if any of our readers, in making inquiries of, or opening accounts with advertisers in this paper, will kindly mention the Chemical Trade Journal as the source of their information.

Advertisements intended for insertion in the current week's issue, should reach the office by Wednesday morning at the latest.

NOTICE OF REMOVAL.

Our subscribers and correspondents will please note that we have now vacated our late premises, and removed to BLACKFRIARS BRIDGE, Manchester. All communications relating to the Journal should now be addressed to

DAVIS & CO.,
BLACKFRIARS BRIDGE,

MANCHESTER.

THE TECHNICAL EDUCATION

REFERENCE to another column will

done in the House of Commons, du with the Technical Education Bill. W already been fairly outspoken over what w trap of this bill, a bill called for only by tho b put this kind of instruction upon a proper the opportunity. We have said this bill i one class-we have erred-there is anothe those who expect to profit by it pecuniaril to draw on the local rates for all their extr It is well to point out again and again mischief is done by the agitators for techn the fault lies with the teaching bodies ar they have inaugurated and upheld. That in substance and in fact is quite a sufficier liament should stay its hand and not comm large amount of expenditure on such a my until some sensible and definite scheme h to it. If an experiment is needed, let ou be taxed first, let our university towns follo then let us see what results are to be departure.

The real fact is that the appointment of lecturers is in a most unsatisfactory state. is a huge job from beginning to end. M after on account of their teaching capac men do not come forward to contest the fo And, moreover, the salaries attached to miserable that a good technologist, if offer tion would be most likely, (to use the word Legends) to

"Put his thumb unto his nos And spread his fingers out." Who is it, then, that accepts these positi is: Men who use the title of their appoint tisement, in order to gather in the loaves they often do to the utter neglect of their s

We hear the Lectureship of Chemica fallen vacant at Owen's College, and we a who will come forward as a candidate for doled out to the labourer who fills such a p

There are two baneful results of this syst case of the Chemical and Allied Indust grave to require special consideration. W an early date.

It

We refer to the fact with a certain amount of editorial pleasure, in the first place, because our report was compiled under more than the usual amount of high pressure which is inseparable from the conducting of a weekly trade journal, and secondly, because it gives us an opportunity of correcting a mistaken idea which we know is entertained by some of the leading spirits on the Council of the Society, that the Chemical Trade Journal is an unfriendly critic, and is a factor to be reckoned with as regards the continued success of the Society, more especially of its monthly Journal. The notion that the Chemical Trade Journal is a rival to the Journal of the Society is as absurd as it is far-fetched. The two publications are on entirely different lines. The one is the outcome-and a most valuable outcome withal-of a highly successful Society which, if continued on the basis which has served as the foundation of its prosperity, will continue to flourish, and our very best wishes are that it may so continue. The Chemical Trade Journal, on the other hand, is a business enterprise, entirely dissociated from any society or any party, perfectly independent, and its success depends on its catering satisfactorily for its very numerous clientelage, viz., those engaged in the chemical and allied industries. would surprise the Executive of the Society of Chemical Industry to know what a large proportion of their members are included in our own subscription list. Moreover, these subscribers are of that class who form the back-bone of the Society, and it only goes to shew that there is not, and need not be, any antagonism between the two publications, but that each fulfils its own sphere. If we might draw a broad line of distinction between the Journal of the Society and our own Journal it would be this, that the former is for the savant and the study, the Chemical Trade Journal is for the business man and the counting-house. Harking back to the subject which prompted this article, we might mention the difficulties under which our report of the Society of Chemical Industry meeting was prepared, as a forcible illustration of the wide difference existing between a Trade Journal such as ours, with its "committee" of proprie. tors only, and the round-about responsibility of a “publication committee” in a matter of extreme urgency. On the Tuesday before the Wednesday on which the annual meeting of the Society was held, we received a telegram from our own reporter, who had been sent specially to London to prepare a full report, that he was taken ill, and could not possibly undertake his mission. It should be remembered that chemical reporters are not plentiful as blackberries. An occasional contributor, moreover, on whom we had relied for furnishing us with details of the incoming president's career, also wrote us that his professional engagements prevented his undertaking the work by the time it was required (Thursday morning), and this was the dilemma we were placed in on Tuesday at noon. Our editorial resources were placed on high tension; however, Thursday morning saw all the necessary copy" in the printer's hands, but only those acquainted with journalistic work can properly understand or appreciate what had to be done between Tuesday noon and Thursday morning, to secure what was wanted. We mention the foregoing simply to illustrate the difference between the conducting of a private journalistic enterprise and a society periodical. To the Society of Chemical Industry and its admirable Journal we wish every possible success, we shall continue to chronicle the proceedings at its various centres with as much fulness as our space will permit, and we hope the "unquiet spirits" in London, who are jealous of the success of the Chemical Trade Journal, and who desire to place the Society Journal on a similar footing as regards frequency of publication and

66

the furnishing of purely trade information, will study the remarks we have made in this article, and pause before jeopardising the success of the sheet-anchor of the Society. It is in the best interests of the Society of Chemical Industry, as well as of its Journal, that we advise them to "let well alone."

THE NITRATE OF SODA, GUANO, &c., TRADES IN 1889.

MESSRS. Thompson, Aikman and Co., in their half-yearly report on

the nitrate of soda, guano, ammonia, and other trades, say :-The chemical trade has continued fairly satisfactory to manufacturers in its principal branches. Prices of most agricultural products, which at the close of last year had improved, have throughout the past six months been depressed, but the prospects of an unusually abundant and early harvest throughout Europe, and the generally improved condition of trade, encourage a more sanguine out-look than at this date last year. The prospects of the coming beetroot crop on the Continent are very satisfactory, both as to condition and price. The value of beet sugar, which at date last year was about 14s., is now quoted at 28s. for old crop summer delivery, and about 175. per cwt. for new crop winter delivery. A large acreage is again being devoted to this crop in Germany, Austria, and France, and, but for the unusually late spring and sudden transition to summer weather in May, a larger consumption of fertilisers would probably have taken place. Reports from the United States are also very satisfactory as to the crop prospects, the weather there, as in Europe, having been unusually favourable since the beginning of May. There are few special features to note in the fertiliser trade. Nitrate of soda has again met with an increased consumption, but at a much smaller ratio than during the preceding year. Germany and France during the past twelve months have each absorbed about 15 per cent. more, Belgium about the same quantity, while the United Kingdom shows a falling off of about 7 per cent., when compared with the figures of the previous twelve months. The ratio of increase in the United States has been about 10 per cent., but as yet only a small proportion of the consumption there is for agricultural purposes. In Chili the labour question has still interfered with a more rapid increase in the rate of production, but with lessened competition for labour in the copper mining districts, an increased output has taken place during the past two months. The anticipation of increased supplies for shipment, and the prospect of a short supply of tonnage to remove it during the next few months have caused an important advance in freights; the rate of exchange ruled at a higher point than during the past few years, till the crisis in copper brought it down to a point slightly below that at date last year. The market for sulphate of ammonia has been uneventful, and values have fluctuated less than in recent years, while production has increased on but a small scale. The value of all sources of phos. phate have advanced during the past year, that of phosphate slag, formerly a waste product in the manufacture of steel, most noticeably. The increasing consumption has fully overtaken the sources of supply. Peruvian guano has been shipped home to a very limited extent, and has ceased to be an important factor in values of other sources of nitrogen and phosphoric acid. The value of potash continues to be regulated by the German makers.

year.

The

NITRATE OF SODA.-The import into Glasgow has been 2,700 tons, the consumption 4,600 tons and the stock at date about 600 tons. half-year's consumption in Scotland has been about 17,000 tons, against 20,000, 14,000, 19,000, and 20,000 tons during the same period in 1888, 1887, 1886, and 1885. The total six months' consumption and export from the United Kingdom have reached 72,000 tons, against 77,000, 67,000, 61,000, and 70,000 tons during first half of 1888, 1887, 1886, and 1885. The stock at date is about 18,000 tons, against 15,000 tons on 1st January, and 11,000 tons at end of June last From Continental ports the consumption has reached about 370,000 tons, against 343,000, 245,000, 225,000, and 221,000 tons during first half of 1888, 1887, 1886, and 1885. The stocks at date in the ports are about 93,000, tons, against 65,000 tons on 1st January, and 30,000 tons at end of June last year. The consumption in the United States (including California) has reached about 37,000 tons, against 30,000, 30,000, and 23,000 tons during first half of 1888, 1887, 1886, and the visible supply, stock and afloat, is about 27,000 tons against 30,000, 35,000, and 35,000 tons in 1888, 1887, and 1886. Stocks in consumers' hands and in the interior on the Continent are believed to be in excess of those at this date during the past few years, owing to the low prices stimulating a large delivery from the ports in May and June. The consumption throughout the world, during the period 1st July to 30th June, may be estimated for 1888-1889 at 730,000 tons, with an average price of 9s. 10d. ; for 1887-1888 at 670,000 tons, with 9s. 4d, ; for 1886-1887 at 510,000 tons, with 9s. 9d. ; for 1885-1886 at 440,000 tons, with 10s 6d.; for 1884-1885 at 490,000 tons, with 9s. 9d.; for 1883-1884 at 530,000 tons, with 10s.; for 1882-1883 at 430,000 tons, with 12s. 3d.;

The Lord Chief Justice considered that the findings were unintelligible, and refused to give judgment. The Divisional Court ordered a new trial. The case was then tried before Mr. Justice Field without a jury, when the learned judge held that there had been no 66 order" for these machines, and that the plaintiff was not entitled to commission. The plaintiff appealed.

Mr. Channel, Q.C. (Mr. H. O. Edwards with him), for the plaintiff; Mr. Kemp, Q.C. (Mr. R. Kemp with him), for the defendants.

The COURT allowed the appeal.

The MASTER of the ROLLS said that the subject matter of the commission contract was this, that the plaintiff was to exert himself to obtain for the defendants profitable contracts for the machines. The words in the letter were that the plaintiff was to be paid commission on "orders." What might be-he did not say what was, but what might be-the meaning of the word "orders ?" The benefit that the defendants were to derive was the obtaining of a contract binding people to take the machines. In his opinion that might in business be construed as an 66 order. In this case there was undoubtedly a binding contract which secured to the defendants certain benefits. If the case had been

was an

66

tried by a jury, though the construction of the contract would be for the Judge, the question whether an "order" had been obtained from Messrs. Bath and Sons would be properly for the jury to determine. Here there was a piece of evidence strongly in favour of the plaintiff, for the defendants in their letter of December 21st treated the contract with Messrs. Bath and Sons, as an "order." That was the strongest testimony that the contract obtained by the plaintiff for the defendants order." The result was fair and just, for otherwise the defendants would get the benefit of the contract obtained by the plaintiff without paying anything for it. The plaintiff was certainly not entitled to commission on the full market price of all the 27 machines. He might be entitled to commission on £810, being the £30 forfeits on each of the 27 machines which Messrs. Bath and Sons agreed to pay to the defendants. But Mr. Channell was content to take commission on the £600 actually paid to the defendants, and judgment must be entered for the plaintiff for this sum.

Lord Justice LINDLEY concurred.

Lord Justice BoWEN was of the same opinion. The plaintiff was to receive commission "orders," which must mean commission on upon sums becoming due from the purchaser in respect of orders. The question was whether there was an 66 order" here. That question in each case of such a contract as this was for the jury. He could not regard the contract with Messrs. Bath and Sons as an order for 30 machines, but it might be an "order" within the meaning of the original contract. It might be an order which entitled the plaintiff to commission on sums which became due under the contract. If it were not taken as an order, the result would be that the defendants would receive a windfall of £810 owing to the exertions of the plaintiff, for which the plaintiff would not receive anything. Would not any commercial jury find it to be an order? Sitting as a judge of fact he would hold it to be an order. Nay, more, the defendants themselves in their letter of December 21st treated it as an order. In his opinion that was the true conclusion to arrive at, and that was the very conclusion arrived at by the jury upon the first trial.

LAMBERTON AND CO. v. HADFIELD STEEL
FOUNDRY COMPANY.

IN the Scotch Court of Session Lord Kinnear gave judgment in an action brought by Lamberton and Company, Sunnyside Engine Works Coatbridge, against the Hadfield Steel Company, Hecla Works, Sheffield, in which decree was asked for £149. 12s. 10d., the price of a pulveriser for preparing a composition for lining moulds employed in steel founding. It was stated in defence that the rollers of the machine were not perfectly round, and that it did not grind uniformly.

Lord Kinnear was of opinion that, although the machine might be an excellent one of itself, it was not sufficient for the purpose for which it was required, and it could not perform the work it was guaranteed to accomplish. He accordingly assoilzied the defenders with expenses.

Parliamentary

TECHNICAL EDUCATIO

On the motion of Sir HENRY ROSCOE, t mittee on the Technical Educational Bill. On clause 2,

Sir W. HART-DYKE said that as the cla Voluntary schools were excluded from the bi ing them within its scope, he moved to ins the words "or local authority.' He deepl discussion both in and out of the House h more satisfactory solution of the question. I porters of Voluntary schools could not allo present shape. (Ministerial cheers.)

Sir HENRY ROSCOE thought the right ho pone this amendment, because there was an afterwards in the name of the hon. membe thought they on that side of the House migh tant to remember that what the promoters was to give aid and assistance in the matter those large centres of industry in which Scho that purpose they were anxious to do all tha the Voluntary schools were those schools School Boards. He trusted the right hon. possible on his side to accept the amendment Islington. (Hear, hear.)

Mr. TALBOT supported the amendment, r which the hon. member for South Manches interest was of an entirely one-sided charact The amendment of the hon. member for Islin in which there was no school board, and did of Voluntary schools.

Lord HARTINGTON trusted the Vice-Preside see his way not to press his amendment-(d hon. gentleman had not supported with any ex subject had long been before the country, and of a scandal should the House fail to give almost universal desire that facilities should motion of technical education. The Vice-Pre the hon. member for the University of Camb in the event of their insisting upon raising subject the difficult and burning question of th Voluntary schools it was absolutely impossible ject could be passed either in the present ses which a great deal of time could not be d (Cheers.) In these circumstances he hoped s be arrived at. Hon. members opposite must the present Parliament, nor in any Parliamen to see for some time was there any hope th to apply the rates directly to the assistance (Cheers.) It was quite clear, he repeated, that treated as one of a controversial character th settlement during the present session, and he see the bill dropped through the failure to arriv

Lord CRANBORNE said he too would feel gre to fail on a matter of detail, but he did not thi of view of high principle there was any very gre amendment of his right hon. friend and th by the hon member for Manchester. Whethe the local authority voted the local rates to the not appear very important, but he would point School Boards in every parish. Were they to England, in which there was no School Boa technical education? If they believed in techn as they said, why did they not apply it to the w in parishes where there was a School Board he to expect that the Voluntary schools should board and ask for technical education. Consid existed between the two systems, the Voluntary be subjected to the School Boards in the matte Mr. A. ACLAND opposed the amendment. Mr. FISHER hoped the Vice-President would division.

Sir. U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH held that the Government was untenable, and regretted to he of opponents of the bill.

Mr. GEDGE moved to report progress. Mr. MATHER urged that the discussion shoul time longer, and Mr. Channing and Mr. appeal.

The motion having been withdrawn,