i r
hPP,”
ANALYTICAL C H E M I S T R Y Walter 1. Murphy, Editor
The Reviews-A
Fifth Anniversary
\S7e know n-e speak for every analyst everywhere when we say “thank yo^" to these and others who have shared with them the burden of preparing the revien-s. M o s t fortunate is the analyst who has a complete set of the reprints from 1949, for he possesses a handy and ready reference work not duplicated here or abroad. There is very little glory in the day-by-day task of reading and listing the literature, evaluating it, and then preparing a serious discussion of what is really not only new and novel but a worth-while addition to the permanent literature. The only satisfaction is that of serving fellon- members of a profession by helping them maintain and, indeed, improve their scientific and technical qualifications. Once again the editors ask the readers for suggestions and constructive criticisms. Should we cover still additional subjects, either in the applied or fundamental fields’? If we can have suggestions promptly, arrangements can be made immediately with outstanding authorities so that additional subjects can be covered in 1954 and 1955, if it appears desirable to do so.
r r I I I E has a n-ay of flying past without one’s realizing how the years accumulate. It seems but yesterday that we were writing an editorial announcing the establishment of the annual analytical chemistry reviews. S o w we are presenting in this issue number five in the series and in a somewhat modified fashion. From the beginning of the project we have published the reviews on the fundamentals of analytical chemistry in the January issue, and the reviews on the applied aspects in the following issue. -4decision mas reached early in 1952 that the time had arrived when it n as desirable to alternate the reviews on a biennial basisthe first to appear concerns the applied fields. Two review-“Pharmaceuticals” and “Solid and Gaseous Fuels”-given in 1952 are not included in the 1953 review but mill reappear in 1955. Two new reviews-one on “Clinical Chemistry” and the other on “Pesticides”-are published for the first time. R . JI. Archibald of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research is the authority on clinical chemistry, and J. L. St. John of State College of Washington, on pesticides. Two reviews, last published in 1950, appear again in this collection--‘ ‘Fertilizers” and “Essential Oils.” The editors would like to pay special tribute to those authors who accepted assignments for the initial reviews published in 1949 and are still active. R. W. Stafford of the Stamford Laboratories of American Cyanamid Co. was a coauthor with T. G. Rochow on the “Coatings” review. His present coauthor is his associate, J. F. Shay. H. F. Beeghly of Jones and Laughlin Steel Corp. has authored all five of the reviews on “Ferrous Metallurgy” and, just to indicate both the amount of work involved in the preparation of one of these reviews and their intrinsic value and importance, we point out that there are 161 literature references in his critical survey of the developments in 1951. There are other reviews in this series with even more literature citations than Mr. Beeghly has listed-for example, the one on “Natural and Synthetic Rubbers” contains over 300. Harry Levin of the Texas Co. is another who has served long and brilliantly. He is the author of the “Petroleum” review. Norman Bekkedahl of the S a tioiial Bureau of Standards, mho was a coauthor in 1949 of the review “Katural and Synthetic Rubbers,” is ‘ author this year, and S. K. L o ~ eof the C. S. Geological Survey, who served alone in 1949 on the “Water” review, now shares the honors with L. L. Thatcher.
An Example to Follow WE WOULD not be human if we did not derive a t least a slight amount of personal satisfaction from a letter written by an official of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, in which credit is given to an editorial in A 4 ~ ~CHEMISTRY 4 ~ ~ [22, ~ 205 ~ (1950)l ~ ~ as 4 being ~ the stimulus behind the action of Aluminum Co. of America in presenting R P I with an ARL densitometer. The editorial entitled “Financing Modern Instrumentation in Academic Institutions” quoted extensively from a private communication from N. R. Fenske of Pennsylvania State College, in which he showed a sizable percentage decline between the years 1931 and 1949 in the number of analytical papers from academic institutions. The editorial then went on to say: Advances in applied research in instrumental analysis depend upon continuing advances in fundamental knowledge. It is but natural that we look t o the colleges and universities to supply a large share of the exploratory work into physical and chemical phenomena. They u-ill not be in a position to do so if funds are not made available to them for the purchase of necessary instrumentation.
It is well beside the point where the original motivation came from that led to the gift by Alcoa to RPI. This example, we trust, will be followed by many other industrial companies. 1
