THEODORE GEORGE WORMLEY-FIRST AMERICAN MICROCHEMIST 1826-1897 A Contemporary of Pasteur WILLIAM MARSHALL MacNEVIN The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
INTHESE DAYS when the lives of men like Pasteur and Ehrlich have been judged important and picturesque enough to be used as subjects for historical films, it is interesting to realize that Pastenr had an American contemporary who also triumphed notably with the aid of a microscope. Indeed when we compare the lives of Pastenr and Wormley we see many striking parallels. Theywere born four years apart and died within a year of each other. Neither came of wealthy parents but both received good educations. Both had artistic leanings, Pasteur toward drawing, Wormley toward music. Both went out of the chosen fields of their early scientific training to make their greatest contributions. Pasteur trained as a chemist but did his most famous work in bacteriology. Wormley, after preparing in medicine, turned to chemist~yand especially to toxicology. Both became teachers in their middle twenties. During the Civil War, Wormley served his country on a relief commission. After the Franco-Prussian War of 1871, Pastenr worked for a greater France through the contributions of her scientists. Both men applied theirknowledge to the practical problems of their communities. Both received many honors although Pasteur's came withgreater difficulty. If, on the one hand, Pasteur's work led to greater fame it was the result of a combination of circumstances; his public was more vitally affected by the new ideas about fermentation, silkworm, and cattle diseases than was Wormley's public in the reasons for untimely death by poison. Pasteur also was more articulate about his work. Wormley, shy and retiring, was rarely known to talk about his scientific activities. Theodore George W~rmley,'-~ whose portrait is reproduced in the frontispiece, was born April 1,1826, in Wormleysburg, Pennsylvania, of Dutch ancestors who had emigrated to America in 1753. In 1842.he entered the preparatory department of Dickmson College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. After three years of collegiate study he began the study of medicine under apreceptor, Dr. John J. Meyers, with whom he spent two years. He , was graduated from the Philadelphia College of Medicine in 1849 and practiced medicine for a year in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, and Chillicothe, Ohio. In 1850 he JOHN, JR., of' College of Physicians," Philadelphia, NOT. 3, 1897. 1 "Dictionary of American Biography," Vol. XX, p. 535. a "National Cyclopnedia of American Biography," Vol. XIII, p. 104. SMITH, E. F., J. Am. Chem. Sac., 19, 275 (1897).
came to Columbus, Ohio, where he lived twenty-seven years. In 1877 he was called to the University of Pennsylvania where he remained until his death in 1897. The origin of his interest in the microscope is not clear. In the course of toxicology which was part of his medical training the instrument was not used. He had become familiar with it, however, in his ordinary medical studies. On coming to Columbus he made the acquaintance of William Sullivantbho had previously made a trip abroad to indulge his interest in the botanical microscope. Then, too, about 1850, a Dr. Richard Gundy was urged to come to Columbus from England to take up general practice and at the same time teach a course in microscopy a t the newly established Starling Medical College. It was attended b y many professional men and laymen a n d excited much interest and enthusiasm. Nevertheless, Gnndy in two years gave up this effortand became a physician in The State Hospital for the Insane. In the meant,ime Wormley had become associated with the Sullivant group. His interest in natural science and chemistry led him to resist the attractions of a general practice, and in 1852 he became the first Prbfessor of Natural Science at Capital University in Columbus. In 1854 he wag also appointed to the chair of chemistry and toxicology a t the Starling Medical College. At both institutions he had laboratory facilities and spent most of his spare time in testing recommended methods for chemical analysis. His emphasis on laboratory work was important for it is said that his lectures would have been dull had it not been for the many well-conducted lecture demonstrations. During the period from 1852 to 1854 he was "Instructor of Chemistry, etc.," a t the Esther Institute,' in Columbus, a seminary for young ladies. It was here he met Anna E. Gill whom he later married. Wormley was also state gas commissioner of Ohio, 1867-75, themist of the state geological survey, 1869-74, and Editor of the Ohio Medical and Surgical Journal, 186244. During his later years he received many honorary degrees from American universities. He was a member of many scientific societies both here and abroad. Among the officesheld was the vice-presidency of the American Chemical Society. He was also vice-president of the
'
HOWE, HENRY, "Historical Collections of Ohio," 1908, Vol. I, p. 657. ' Catalogue of Esther Institute, 1854. 182
APRIL, 1948
Centennial of Chemistry held in Northumberland, Pennsylvania, in 1874. His contributions to scientific periodicals number nineteen titles, listed in a biographical sketch of Wormley by Edgar Fahs Smith.' At the time of his appointment to the chair of toxicology the methods of analysis in general use were largely macrochemical. A text by Professor Otto existed which was largely a series of macrochemical tests and lacked the authority of experience which Wormley was later to give the subject. Various publications, among them the Quarterly Jmrnal of Miwoseopy, carried the results of researches .of those interested in the field. ' Wormley was completely familiar with this literature and was continually checking its reliability. After a few years of experience, which, aside from teaching, included a good deal of independent research on microscopic methods and some experiencein the legal aspects of his subject, he arrived at a point where he felt he should assemble his information. In March, 1861, he published a .prospectus. His work was interrupted by the civil struggle of 1861-65 but, following his release from army duty, he published in 1867 his textbook, "The Microchemistry of Poisons." The title page of a copy now in the possession of the writer is reproduced here. It carries a notation believed to be in the handwriting of Wormley which indicates this copy was a gift of Wormley and Mrs. Wormley t o her parents, "ME.and Mrs. Jno L. Gill, with the affectionate regards of the Authors." A second edition, with additional illustrations by Mrs. Wormley and their daughter, Mrs. John Marshall, of Philadelphia, was published by J. B. Lippincott in 1885. Both editions came to be widely used as references in medico-legal cases. The book clearly indicates the qualities of the man as a chemical investigator. It is an elaborate chemical and microscopic analysis of the nature and operation of many different poisons in their relation t o animal life. It is the result of years of patient experimenting at the : cost of the lives of some two thousand cats and dogs of the city of Columbus, whose blood and stomach contents were analyzed t o determine the exact appearance of the poison crystals after producing death. The book includes tests for fifteen of the common inorganic poisons and eighteen organic poisons, most of them alkaloids. These were the poisons he had to deal with in his work as professional toxicologist in the Columbus area. Throughout the course of his experiments he was assisted by his wife, who with remarkable accuracy and delicacy made drawings of the crystalline forms. This was the more difficult owing to the volatility of the forms. Since only one or two engravers in the country had sufficient skill to reproduce the drawings, and the expense would have been prohibitive, Mrs.. Wormley learned the art and did the engraving herself. I n less than a year she finished the etching of thirteen plates, containing in all seventy-eight figures. They have been pronounced by competent judges the finest set of microscopic plates ever produced in America or Europe.
183
Figure 1.
Title Page. "Microshemistry of Poisons"
Four of the thirteen plates are shown here. The delicate touches of Mrs. Wormley as a scientific artist defy criticism even under the scrutiny of the microscope. The appendix also contains an elaborate table showing the reactions of the fourteen known alkaloids with all of the common reagents. Limits are expressed precisely and the solubility of each alkaloid in several solvents is stated quantitatively. Wormley's microscope was a simple one by our standards but did carry polarizing equipment and a micrometer eyepiece. Magnification was up to 250 times. After he left Columbus in 1878 his instrument remained in possession of the Starling Medical College and became later the property of The OhioState University. Wormley seems to have been the first to apply microchemical methods to chemical analysis in America. In the preface of his book Wormley says, "Heretofore the microscope has received hut little attention as an aid t o chemical investigations, yet it is destined to very greatly extend our knowledge. . . ." Wormley's contributions to microchemsitry were far ahead of his time. If anyone has the idea that only in recent years have we become precision-minded and
is characteristic of the substance; while for the detection of others we are acquainted with only one such reaction; there are others still, for which we have no specific reagent, hut mhose presence can be fully established by the concurrent result of several tests; lastly there are some organic poisons for the detection of which a t present, there is not even known any combination of chemical reactions by which they can be detected." He recognized the difference between a test carried out nith pure reagents and one performed in the presence of foreign matter (pages 52, 53): ' I . . .Among the poisons that can be readily detected when in their pure state, there are some which when present, even in quite notable quantity, in complex organic mixtures, adhere so tenaciously to the foreign organic matter, t,hat it is difficult or impossible to separate them in a stat,e sufficiently pure to determine their presence. . . Thus, at present we can recognize by chemical means, vhen in its pure state, the presence of the 10,000th part of a grain,
Figure 2. Plate IV, "Mioroehemhtry of Poisons." T. G. Wormley. Nitrate of Silver. X 225 1. '/lo,aoo Grain Hydroryanic Arid Vapor Nitrate of Diameters. 2. Grain Hydrosy.nis Acid vmpor Silver, X 125 Diameters. 3. L/laoo G r e n Phosphoric Aoid Ammonio-sulfato of Magnesia, X 80 Diarnatsra. 4. Tarter Emetic. from H o t Supsrsotuvated Solution. X 40 Diamaters. 5. Arsenious Acid, Sub1im.d. X 125 Disrnsters. 6. '/1(100 Grain Arsenious Acid Ammonio-nitrate of Silmr. X 75 Diameters.
+
+
+
+
aware of chemical asppsis, let him consider some of the recommendations regarding general procedure given in the book. Reagents were much more of a problem than now and had to be constantly checked and rechecked for impurities. For example, sheet copper used in the test for arsenic always had arsenic as an impurity. In fact, most common reagents were usually contaminatcd. His appreciation of the significance of chemical and microscopic tests would do credit to a present-day investigator (page 52) : "The result of a chemical examination will depend, at least in a great measure, upon how far we are acquainted with the reactions peculiar to the substance under consideration; the delicacy of these reactions; and in many instances, our ability to separate the substance from foreign matter . . . For the recognition of many poisons, we are a t present familiar with several tests, the reaction of each of which
P1.t.V. "Microshemistry of Poisons." T. G. Wormley. 1. Grain Arsenic Acid Ammonio-sulfate of Magnesia. X 75 Diameters. 2. Corrosive Sublimats. Sublimed, X 40 Diamstera. 3. Grain L ~ e d Diluted Sulfuric Acid. X 80 Dimmetars. 4 . Grain Lead Diluted Hydrochloric Acid, X 80 Dimmeters. 6. '/1000 Grain Zinc Oxalic Aoid, X 80 Diameters. Figure3.
+
+
+
+
APRIL. 1948
185
and in some instances even less, of either arsenic, mercury, strychnine, hydrocyanic acid, or atropine, with absolute certainty. I t does not, however, foUow, that quantities as small as these when present in complex mixtures can be recovered and their nature then established. It is a popular idea, and indeed a very fair inference from the statements of some writers, that the quantity of a substance that can be recognized by chemical means in its pure state, represents that which can be detected under all circumstances. But this is a great error, since the quantity that can thus be recognized and the amount necessary to be present in a complex mixture to enable us to separate that quantity, may differ many hundreds and even thousands of t,imes: the difference usually being in proportion to the complexity of the mixture." He pointed out the peculiar value and limitations of
Figure 5. P h t a XIII. "Microchemistry of Poisons," T. G . WormCorba..tic Acid. X 80 Diemeters. 2. l e y 1. l j l a o Groin Atropine '/loo Grain Atropine Chloride of Gold. X 80 Diameters. 3. ,/ma Grain Veratrine Chloride of Gold, X 40 Diameters. 4. Grain Bromine in Bromohydris Acid. X 80 Diameters. 5. Vermtrine Solanins, horn Aloholic Solution. X 80 Diiimstmrs. 6. '/loo Grain Solanin-. ms Sulfate on Spontaneous Evaporation, X 80 D i a m s t e r ~ .
+
r i g u l e 4 . p1at.x. "Microchemistry of P O i i i i i i i iT. G. Wo?mley. 1. '/,m Grain Stryshnine Potash or Ammonia. X 40 Diameters. 2. 'hOoGrainStrychnine Sulfosyanidoof Potmasium. X 40Diamsters. 3. 'jsuo Grain Strrrhnine Bichromata of Potmsh. X 40 Diameters. 4. 1/2500 Gmin Strychnine Bichromate of Potash. X 80 Diameters. Chloride of Gold. X 40 Di=meters. 6. Grain Strychnine 8. '/,rno Grain Stryshnina Bishlorido of Platinum. X 40Diameters.
+ +
+
+ + +
+
+
+
crystal reactions observed under the microscope (page 54): "The true nature of a reaction that is common to several substances, can in some instances be readily determined by means of the microscope. Thus a solution of nitrate of silver, when exposed to several different vapors, becomes covered with a nhit.e film; hut hydrocyanic acid is the only one in the action of which the film is crystalline, and this is characteristic even with the reaction of the 100,000th part of a grain of the acid. A substance may yield a peculiar crystalline precipitate at one degree of dilution, while at another, the precipitate may not be characteristic. . ." He emphasized the need for confirmatory reactions (page 55): "So also, the true nature of a reaction, may in some instances be determined by submitting the result to a subsequent test. A slip of clean copper boiled in hydrochloric acid solution of either arsenic,
.
186
mercury, antimony, or of several other metals becomes coated with the metal; hut when the coated copper is heated in a reduction tube, arsenic is the only substance that will yield a sublimate of octahedral crystals, and mercury the only one that will furnish metallic globules. . . . Yet, for medico-legal purposes, it is always best, if sufficient material he at hand, to confirm the results by several tests, and when practicable, show the presence of the poison by two or more independent methods." I n the preface to his text he states that, "Among the more prominent objects of the present volume are t o indicate the limit of the reactions." Not only does he do this but he defines very clearly a method of expressing limits which removes amhiguity. Previously, limits had been defined carelessly. For example, one observer of the test for arsenic gave the limits in terms of dilution as 1:80,000, whereas another gave it as 1: 1,200,000. Wormley's examination of the experimental records showed that both observers failed t o record the amount of solution taken. He also emuhasized the necessity for standardization of appara;us. Although Wormley made a strong plea for completeness of information on limits, it must be admitted that, with the exception of such men as Fritz Feigl, many microchemists today still fail t o take this point into account and amhiguity is often present. Wormley tried out with his own hands all tests for poisons reported in the literature of his time. He determined the sensitivity or limit of the reaction, which he states clearly in each example. I n this respect he added t o information already available by establishing new and definite limits for the reactions he studied. I t is very difficult to tell from t h e text, perhaps because of the modesty of the man where his
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION
own contribution begins. He does, however, give credit in frequent references to many of his sources of informatiqn. He determined the limits of chemical tests for poisons under as nearly actual conditions as possible. He was well aware that crystal reactions were sensitive to the presence of impurities, particularly those organic ones which would he present in search for a poison. Hence, the sad fate of the stray cats and dogs of Columbus. He also gave much attention t o what he called the "fallacies" of each test. By this word he meant what we now call "interference." His treatment of interference was thorough and resulted in producing a specific test for each of the thirty-one tests described, with the exception of that for the alkaloid, aconitine. In this case, he had to depend upon a physiological test in which some person acting as a guinea pig would put a drop of the suspected solution on his tongue and record any loss of feeling during the next couple of hours. Many of the tests described by Wormley are still in use today. The book, and especially the collection of plates, was long used as a medico-legal reference in all parts of the world. As records of reactions, the plates, hand drawn and steel engraved by Mrs. Wormley, are not excelled today even by the best photographic means. Modern textbooks on toxicology owe much t o the thoroughness of Wormley's work. None of the tests has ever been found faulty. Wormley also pointed the way for microchemists, who found in his book a source of inspiration and a lasting example of how thorough one must be in the use and interpretation of microscopic tests.
