TOBACCO.

259

gave the same.” Here we have nearly double the proportion of sand from leaf thatthere is from stalks.

Let us compare these experiments of Mr. G. Phillips with the unlucky counter-statement of Mr. II. Phillips. The former actually finds in the one set of stalks only4 lOths of 1 per ct. of sand, and 1 and 3 lOths, or upward of three times as much, in theleaf; while, in the other set, he finds about one half of sand in the stalks of what wasin the leaf. Now Mr. R. Phillips defers to Mr. G. P. as his standard authority on thispoint. Thus-—•

“ Question 7,580. You [Mr. R. Phillips] are not able to state the exact amount ofthose saline matters which exist in the different kinds of tobacco ?—No, I have nevertried.”

“ 7,582. You have not, up to this time, made that experiment in the various inquiriesyou have made ?—No, I have not. I have not thought it necessary.

“ 7,583. You state that the earthy matter found” (in the ashes) “ is silica; do youmean sand ?—Yes.

“ 7,584. What is the greatest or the smallest quantity you have found in the genu-ine tobacco ?—I have not got the proportion ; I perhaps could find it, but X have it notwith me.

“ 7,585. You do not know the minimum or the maximum ?—No, but I believe thatcan be stated by Mr. George Phillips very accurately.”

“ 7,633.-.—[Answer of Mr. R. Phillips.] With respect to the increased quan-

tity of sand, that might come in with the increased quantity of stalks, which always con-tain a larger quantity than leaf-tobacco.

“ 7,634. Would the proportion of sand be accounted for, in your opinion, by the in-troduction of 12 oz. of stalks ?—I think it would.”

Why did not the two Messrs. Phillips compare notes beforehand ?

“ 7,878. Besides silica, what did you [Mr. G. Phillips] find ?—Number 36, whichproduced 19-5; gave carbonate of lime 7-3 grains, silica 1-4, carbonate of potash, anda trace of iron, 9-7 grains ;* that is, it showed the presence of iron, but there was noappreciable quantity. The object of separating it into lime and potash was, that ifthere had been an introduction of 5 per cent, of potash, I should have had an increasedamount of extractive matter” (soluble, he should say), “ and an increased amount ofashes; in genuine tobacco, where the extractive proportion is high, the ashes arelow.”}

“ 7,885. Are there any other articles found, besides the silica, and carbonate of lime,and potash ?—Not by my mode : both lime and potash exist in tobacco, in various quan-tities, malate and nitrate, and so on; but the amount of each has never been found byany one.”}

“ 7,918.-.— -'ins. The only two kinds of tobacco manufactured worth speaking

tf, are Virginia and Kentucky , and they come in strips principally. Now the tobacco-manufacturer might endeavor to defeat us in this way ; suppose we endeavor to tie him-down, he might mix his tobacco not in the proportion that we expect.”

The excise, though it has no power to tie the manufacturers down so hard and fastthat they may not use any duty-paid tobacco which they please, yet it is too # apt to giverise to a” spirit of evasion. When a low-priced Kentucky , poor in extract, is laid down,it may be easily enriched with 10 per cent, of some vegetable extract to bring it up to.Mr. G. Phillips’s standard Virginia pitch of 55.

“ 7,924. Have you subjected the extract to the process of combustion, in order toascertain its amount of saline matter ?—Not the extract; I make a point of preservingpart, in order to experiment upon.”

Yet he immediately afterward declares he makes no experiments upon it.

“7,928. What do the ashes of C consist of?—We did not try that beyond thesand.

“ 7,929. You have got the ashes 16 by combustion ?—Yes, we suspected this sampleto contain sugar, and also tried for sand.”

“ 7,934. Could you not find alum ?—Yes, but it would be impossible to try for thevarious salts that might be put in tobacco; you might be experimenting for years on onesample.”

Relatively to Mr. R. Phillips’s explanation of the rationale of the production of sand,question 7,961 to Mr G. Phillips affords a flat contradiction. “ Could the introductionof 12 ounces of ground stalk into 13 pounds 9 ounces of tobacco, give an adulterationof 3 per cent.of sand l—It is perfectly impossible; the stalk contains less sand than theleaf.”

“ 8,032. In any of those 12 specimens that you examined, were you able to distin-* An extraordinary quantity.

t How easy to give this character to tobacco by adding extractive matter from different plants!t What a rash assertion ! He missed a uniform and main constituent, the phosphate of lime.