T H E J O U R N A L O F I N D U S T R I A L A N D E N G I N E E R I N G CHEMISTRY The opinion of the court is contained in a decision covering The outstanding dictum is that affirmation of the finding of the lower court would have the effect of retarding sulfur mining for more than a score of years, save by those who are in control of what are known as the Frasch patents. The court’s decision was written by Judge Buffington, the other judges concurring. 52 typewritten pages.
SULFUR MINING METHODS
In his opinion the court enters learnedly and entertainingly on the history and methods of sulfur mining in England, Italy, particularly Sicily, and elsewhere, and then comes down to operations in the United States. Taking up the Louisiana sulfur mining activities, he says that a deposit was found in that State in 1869 at a depth of 400 to 500 feet below the surface, and incident to drilling for oil. Though vast sums of money were spent in securing the highest engineering skill and equipment, all efforts to mine successfully the Louisiana sulfur deposits failed for a period of 2 5 years. The richness of the beds and the futile efforts to make them available, it is then set forth, attracted the attention of Frasch, who had experimented in the sulfurous oil mining in Pennsylvania. It is admitted that Prasch did pioneer work along the lines involved in the suit, ’but it is contended that his method of drilling and the use of ‘either heat or chemical liquefaction were not perfected by himself, that workmen and engineers carried on his experiments, and that finally, by a process of evolution, a method was perfected which is now commercially profitable, but which the court holds is not controlled by certain patents which Frasch securcd, and which are the subject matter for the litigation thus decided. The court says that in the Louisiana district the early drilling methods disclosed quicksand and water; that the drill further showed that after passing these there existed a vein of cap rock overlying the sulfur, and upon which caisson shafts could be rersted, so that the sulfur could safely be mmed through the shaft carried from the caisson through the cap rock. Drilling, however, revealed the presence of water strongly impregnated with sulfurous gas, and this proved a serious obstacle and contributed to the abandonment of the shafting operations, although it did show the intimate proximity of sulfur and water to each other The principal difficulty in shafting arose from the quicksand because, when the shaft reached a certain depth, the quicksand forced its way up from the bottom of the inside of the rings and precluded further effort. The sulfurous gases killed several workmen. DISSOLVED SULFUR UNDER GROUND
It, therefore, became Frasch’s idea to abandon shafting operations and to drill and pump out oil which was impregnated with sulfur; also to drill a small sized hole into the sulfur beds, force down hot water, and then pump the liquefied sulfur to the surface. However, the plan, when submitted to companies in England and Italy familiar with sulfur mining, was pronounced impractical, even impossible. But Frasch in several experiments with sulfurous oil wells had successfully devised means of utilizing hydrochloric acid in increasing the oil flow. By plugging the well after the acid was poured down, pressure of carbonic acid gas generated, forced passage-ways through seams in the limestone and thus opened channels for oil supply. Frasch’s patent for processes of drilling were two, the court says, first, use of hot water to liquefy sulfur; second, liquefaction by chemicals. The water process was patented October 20, 1891;patent No. 461,429. The first trial of Frasch’s patent proved practical, for sulfur was liquefied under ground and brought t o the surface, the result of four or five hours’ pumping being 500 barrels of sulfur. But corrosion of pump rods from sulfur checked operations. Aluminum parts were decided upon .and later other improvements on the patents were made.
375
THREE PATENTS INVOLVED
Three patents were involved in the suit in the light of previous processes which apply to both porous and non-porous sulfur, and the court, therefore, addressed itself to the question whether they involved Frasch’s inventions. The court holds, however, that the patents granted in 1905 and which were subsequent to the original patent, which expired in 1908, if sustained, would have conferred a monopoly of sulfur mining for 31 years. The court proceeds with the discussion of patents issued and modifying the first granted. It points out that “these subsequent patents were in the nature of a consistent series of delays which, while perhaps legal and involving nothing censurable, yet would have the effect if validated by court, and if enforced, of shutting out the public from the fields of underground sulfur liquefaction for 31 years.” The court, therefore, takes the position that it behooves it, before being led to a decision with such grave consequences to the sulfur industry, to take care from being led to a decision “which, instead of fulfilling the constitutional purposes of promoting the progress of science and useful arts, in reality blocks the path of progress.” The court proceeds to discuss the various subsequent and modifying patents as mechanical improvements were made and methods perfected and adds: “As to the several combinations in claims which embrace delivery of hot water a t different levels, we are of opinion they do not involve patentability and also lark inventive substance.” The patent granted 111 1911,for instance, covers a perforated lining which distributes the outgoing hot water over a wider zone and by its many scattered holes prevents clogging where surrounding substances cave in as liquefaction proceeds. The court holds in this instance that the use of perforated pipes for such general purposes is too manifestly such a mere mechanical expedient that it cannot find any inventive act in using such a strainer and accordingly it holds such claims void. Similarly several other claims are decreed invalid and, therefore, the court dismisses the bill.
THE TRAINING OF THE CHEMIST Editor of the Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry: Since the puhlication of the former article on this topic [THIS JOURNAL, 11 (rg~g), 1661 correspondence with the chairman of the committee of the Society on the Relation of Industries and Universities and with the chief chemists of some 35 leading commercial organizations justifies the following propositions: I-It is urged that the above-named committee propose to the Society a t large that it place itself on record as favoring either the extension of the .school year from g to I I months, or the extension of the course from 4 to 5 years, or both. 2-It is strongly urged that the above-named committee appoint one man in each section of the Society to act as a subcommittee in that section, to consult with the industries that may be located within convenient reach of the educational institutions of the section, to persuade the managers of the industries and the authorities of the schools to enter into an arrangement by which chemistry students may get actual industrial experience during their years of training, and to make report of what has been done to the central committee for presentation a t the Fall Meeting of the Society. It is believed these recommendations are well grounded. They are based on opinions expressed within the last month by some prominent and well-known commercial organizations, whose experience and position in the industrial world entitle their judgment to wide publication and to the careful consideration of all who are trying to train chemists. Representatives of these companies were asked to state what defects they had found in the young men in their organization, other than deficiencies in the personal qualities not likely to be affected by education, such as character, ability to get on with men, personal magne-
3 76
T H E J O U R N A L OF I N D U S T R I A L A N D E N G I N E E R I N G C H E M I S T R Y
tism, mediocre or low brain power, etc. A questionnaire is a nuisance, generally speaking. That the men and companies, addressed in this case considered the matter of some importance, is indicated by the fact that out of 125 concerns appealed to for information 35 were heard from directly, and a half dozen more indirectly, a rather large percentage of returns for this method of getting a t facts. The men making the replies and the companies represented are as follows: L. C. Jones, National Aniline and Chemical Company E. C. Uhlig, Brooklyn Union Gas Company J. B. Barnett, General Chemical Company W. C. Carnell, Rohm and Haas Company C. Gelstharp, Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company C. R. Hazen, Milton-Hersey Companv, Canada G. W. Thompson, National Lead Company J. M. Francis, Parke, Davis and Company G. M. Berry, Halcomb Steel Company W. R. Whitney, General Electric Company W. B. Brown, Victor .Chemical Works J. R. Powell, Armour Soap Works G. K. Elliott, The Lunkenheimer Company W. C. Geer, B. F. Goodrich Company F. F. D. Cruser, The Diamond Match Company Paul Rudnick, Armour and Company F. C. Atkinson, American Hominy Company Carleton Ellis, Ellis-Foster Company The Naugatuck Chemical Company A. N. Clark, Owosso Sugar Company E. J. Gutsche, Detroit Copper and Brass Rolling Mills E. H. Raquet, New Hampshire and H R. Railroad Company W. K.Robbins, Amoskeag Manufacturing Company J. H. Kemster, Universal Portland Cement Company A. M. Knight, Deere and Company H. T. McAllister, Ludlum Steel Company C . M. Prentiss, C. M. and St. P. Railway Karl F. Stahl, General Chemical Company of Pennsylvania L. B. Robinson, Robinson Laboratory of Cincinnati W. B. Price, Scovil Manufactusing Company Maximilian Toch, Toch Brothers of New Pork City A. D. Smith, The Milliken Company C. W. Bedford, Goodyear Tire Company A. V. H. Mory, Sears, Roebuck and Company
The training defects noted by these employers of chemists fall quite naturally into three classes: I-There are those which can be corrected within the limit of time now given to the training, namely 36 months, by all of us who are engaged in this work. Possibly we, and not the students nor the conditions, are responsible for them. They are given in the following list: ( a ) The young graduate cannot evaluate measurements. This is stated in various ways in more than two-thirds of the replies, but whatever the form of statement, reduced to its lowest terms it means that the young chemist does not understand that a rapid qualitative reaction may have a greater value in some circumstances than a more accurate and painstaking analysis. One of the replies states the case clearly in these words: “The young graduate lacks accuracy where it is required and tries t o be too accurate where it is not required.” ( b ) Ability to represent experimental data graphically is lacking. (c) There is carelessness in handling apparatus, especially sensitive instruments. (d) Notes are inadequate, insufficient, and unenlightening -sometimes even untrustworthy. (e) The young graduate is contented to get only the data asked for and seldom goes beyond that point. (f) There is a deficiency in mathematical accuracy. More stoichiometry should be given. (g) The foundation in theory is often poorly laid. ( h ) The young graduate lacks concentration, is either indifferent or lazy. If only one man, or ten men, out of the thirty-five had stated that he had found these defects, one might conclude that they did not represent a general condition. The fact is that most of the employers have found deficiencies along these lines. An-
Vol.
11,
No. 4
other important fact is that every teacher recognizes them as faults all too common in students. To correct them is clearly our responsibility, and the correction is also clearly within the range of the possibilities of the training course as now given. Every teacher can see ways in which they can be removed. If a student persists in retaining such defects as these through a four years’ course, should he not be advised to seek a career in some other line than chemistry? Why can’t we all get together a t the April meeting of the Society, teachers in secondary schools and colleges and universities, and a t an informal conference where everybody can talk, thresh out the whole subject with the purpose of securing united effort in eradicating such defects as these, or in persuading those who do not respond to the operation to enter some other profession? All these defects should respond to the training that can be given in the usual period of 36 months. 11-The second class into which fall many of the replies consists of those defects that can be corrected by the extension of the time of training, either from g months to 1 1 months for the year, or from 4 years to 5 or 6 , or, what is better in the opinion of the author, a combination of both. I n this class come such defects as the following: (a) A student learns nothing from unsuccessful experiments. ( b ) The English is defective. This appears in more than three-fourths of the replies. Only one employer states that he is not concerned with the quality of English as exemplified in the reports of work done. A great majority of employing chemists deplore the inability of the young men either to express themselves clearly in spoken English or to present an easily readable written report. (c) There is a decided lack of independence and initiative. The young graduate requires too much assistance, or as another expresses it, “He is a good machine.” (d) The students should have more “brain exercise, and schemes to get them on the alert should constantly be tried.” (e) The young graduate does not do sufficient reading on the side. He is more eager to take directions through his ear than through his eye. (f) The usual course gives too much analytical work and too little constructive work. (g) The lack of imagination is emphasized by over half of the replies. One chemist asks, “Can’t there be a course in chemical imagination?” Every teacher of young chemists knows that the pressure due to the crowding in the present chemistry courses causes an effort to get over a considerable amount of ground and there is little chance for getting a t what lies underneath. The result is that the graduate has accumulated breadth of information rather than depth of mental power. It is obvious that if students are to learn the value of mistakes they must be given time to make mistakes and corrections. If the student is to develop independence he must be given time to flounder. If his course is to result in greater brain power, if he is to be less mechanical, if he is to have a chemical imagination as a result of his training, if he is to develop initiative, if he is to do constructive work, opportunity, even though limited in scope, must be given him to try a few things which for him are new although for the teacher and the science they may not be. It takes more time and is a good deal harder work, for the young undergraduate as well as for the experienced worker, to think out an idea and to express it (“to get it across” is the modern way of saying it) than to do what some teacher or some director or some book states shall be done. The more frequently the hands and body make a given motion, the more easily and quickly it can be made. The same principle applies to the use of the brain, but it takes more time to develop a “brain motion” than i t does a “body motion.” The first of these two classes of defects is within easy control of those of us who are training chemists, and their correction
Apr., 1 9 1 9
T H E J O U R N A L OF I N D U S T R I A L A N D ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
can be accomplished within the present time limits of the course. The second class is also within easy control if sufficient time can be given in which to do the necessary work. The third class of replies is entirely outside the control of the teachers and t o a large extent of the institutions with which they are connected. 111--The third class consists mainly of one thing. Almost g j per cent of the replies received stated that the student does not know how to apply practically what he has learned during his course. In this respect the student of chemistry is not equipped, generally speaking, as well as his brother student in engineering and in agriculture. The chemistry students have not had the opportunity during the course that other technical students get of coming in close contact with the practical side of their work. He does not know what is expected of him in a plant. He has very little idea that the business world is concerned with profits. Chemistry is to the student the means of getting a job rather than either a real part of him or an essential part of a commercial process. Every practical working chemist knows that educational institiitions can give only to a very limited extent practice in actual chemical processes that are commercial. Some of the larger universities and certain trade schools have technical or industrial laboratories in which such processes as filtration, distillation, drying, etc., are done on an industrial scale. One of the employers wrote that “the graduates of trade schools are better equipped practically than those who have come from a more elaborate course.” This criticism of a lack of an acquaintance with the practical application of chemical processes is well taken. Every teacher realizes the deficiency and deplores it all the more because he knows that he is quite‘unable to correct it. Most laboratories in our educational institutions cannot equip themselves with what might be called industrial chemical apparatus, and even if they could it is to be questioned whether the result of the use of such apparatus in a school laboratory would give the practical ideas which employers want. All the work done in an educational institution must of necessity have the “educational flavor.” If industrial processes are to take on a “commercial flavor” for the undergraduate, the work can be best done in the industrial plants themselves. The SUCcess of the cooperative courses a t Cincinnati and Akron is conclusive evidence of this. It is apparent that both the manufacturing chemists and those who are engaged in training chemists are agreed that there is this lack of practical knowledge in the undergraduate. The teachers know that the lack can best be supplied by the industries themcjelves. If that part of the training is to fall within the four or five or six years of the preliminary course, and that is where many of us believe it should come, the industries and the educational institutions must work together, each giving that part of the training that it can give best. A few of the replies received to the inquiry fall outside of these three classes. They are not on that account less important, but it is probable that they apply with equal force to students in all courses as well as those in chemistry. The educational institutions must carry the responsibility €or them. I€ the graduate is more concerned with what he gets than what he gives, if he lacks interest in the work he is doing, if he gives little attention to the “why” and “how” of the process in which he is engaged, if he overrates his commercial value and ability, those who have trained him are largely responsible. Such defects can be and ought to be removed even in a much shorter period than the four years now given to the training of young men. As one reads over the above classification of the defects of young chemists as seen by their employers, the wisdom of the proposed recommendations in the opening paragraphs of this article and the necessity of changes in the courses in chemistry a r e apparent. It is worth while both from the point of view
377
of chemical industry and of chemical education that these changes be undertaken a t once. UNIONCOLLEGE SCEENECTADY, N. Y.
EDWARD EWERY
March 4, 1919
AN INSTITUTE FOR COOPERATIVERESEARCH AS AN AID TO THE AMERICAN DRUG INDUSTRY Editor of the Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry: In responding to an invitation to express an opinion regarding the proposed national institute for drug research the writer is glad to avail himself of such an opportunity for recording his hearty commendation of the project. The subject of research is one so broad in its applications as to cover practically every field of human endeavor, and no nation can be expected to develop its resources or take any part in the general extension of knowledge if the spirit of research is dormant. The stirring events of recent years, and the altered conditions which have thus been effected in the world at large, have demonstrated most clearly and forcefully the great part which chemical science is destined to take in human affairs, and in this connection it is desirable to consider its importance in the useful arts rather than in the destructive forces of war. The views of many of those who are actively engaged in scientific work, as well as others who are leaders in industrial pursuits, have already been expressed, and there would seem to be but little more to be said regarding both the utility and the actual need of an institute for drug research. There is, however, one phase of such a project in which the writer is more especially interested to which sufficient consideration does not seem as yet t o have been given. This relates to the more extended investigation of the products of the vegetable kingdom, a subject which may be comprehended under the title of phytochemistry. In glancing over the communications that have already been published it does not seem quite clear what particular fields of research are to be included in the plan for a national institute, but the impression is received that pharmacology or chem,otherapy and the synthetic production of organic medicinal chemicals would be accorded the most prominent place. In connection with one of the proposed plans of work to be‘undertaken it has indeed been suggested by an es. teemed scientist that “in time there might even be a division for the prosecution of pharmaceutical chemical research.” Very divergent views appear to be held with regard to the meaning of pharmaceutical chemistry, and when the scope and functions of the proposed national institute become more clearly defined it will doubtless be considered whether it would most appropriately be denoted as an institute for drug research. According to common usage, especially in European countries, the word “drug” is employed to designate all crude vegetable substances, and a distinction is also made between technical drugs and those used for medicinal purposes, although in a few instances a natural product may be included in both classes. While it cannot be doubted that all of the lines of research thus far proposed would be productive of great and lasting benefit, i t seems to the writer that a valuable opportunity for promoting the usefulness of the institute would be lost if due consideration were not given to the chemical and pharmacological investigation of our native plants as well as the vegetable products from other lands. It is possible that researches of this character might be considered to pertain to the domain of pharmaceutical chemistry, and, therefore, to be of subordinate interest or a t least not requiring immediate attention. Those who have devoted themselves to such studies will, however, readily recognize and appreciate the fact that a field of the most fruitful investigation still remains largely unexplored, for among the vast number of plants in our own country or its insular possessions there are comparatively few whose constituents are known,
