Untitled

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9039, 27 April 1888, Page 4

It is not our desire to prolong the discussion of the resultants in Mr. Pond's analysis of the water supply; but we must take the liberty of correcting his correction of what he describes as our "mistake" respecting his "precipitates." In a former letter he said: " Although I examined the precipitates from the waters with the higher powers of the microscope I was unable to observe bacteria." As he goes on to say, " At the same time the analyses of the waters showing so small, an amount of ammonias present," &c.,the reasonable--indeed the only possible—conclusion, is that by " precipitates here was intended the substances thrown to the bottom by the action of the chemicals used in such analytical experiments, and not at all mere sedimentary deposits from the settling of the water. One of the best dictionaries available defines a " precipitate " as " a substance, which having been dissolved is again separated from its solvent, and thrown to the bottom of the vessel by pouring another liquor upon it." Tins is the sense in which we took Mr. Pond's precipitates, and this was the only sense admissible when taking into account the fact stated, that at the same time " analyses of the waters were being chemically made. And when Mr. Pond in such circumstances said " precipitates," while he meant mere sedimentary deposits, the mistake was his, not ours. If Mr. Pond sought for the microbes in the deposits from the settling of the water he probably did right; if he sought for them in the precipitates formed by tho action of chemical substances poured into the water, as his language implied, then he did wrong, for as we said, unless Ul3 chemicals were poor stuff they must inevitably have shrivelled up these little animal or vegetable organisms beyond the possibility of recognition.