[from the am. jour, of science and arts, vol^xxx, 
REVIEW OE Dr. ANTISELL'S WORK ON PHOTOGENIC OILS, k 
[The following Review of Dr. Antisell’s book on Photogenic Oils has been 
for some months in type waiting an opportunity when our other engagements 
would permit its publication. It will amply repay the careful perusal of all 
who are interested in this important practical subject.—Eds.] 
REVIEW. 
I. The Manufacture of Photogenic or Hydro-Carbon Oils from Coal and 
other Bituminous Substances capable of supplying Burning Fluids; by Thomas 
Antisell, M.D., Professor of Chemistry in the Medical Department of 
Georgetown College, D. C., etc. etc. New York and London: D. Appleton Si 
Co. 1859. pp. 144.—In entering an earnest protest against the work before 
us, we would not have our motives misunderstood. We are not of those 
who would condemn a book solely on the ground that it is “not so good 
as it should be,” and will not therefore urge this objection against the effort 
of our Author, although it would be hard to find a case to which the charge 
would more forcibly apply. But we do condemn most heartily the presump- 
tion of the man who in these days attempts to write a handbook upon any 
scientific or technological subject with which he is not somewhat familiar. 
We beiieve, moreover, that errors, either of omission or of commission— 
accidental or intentional—in scientific writings, which exceed the well-under- 
stood conventional limits of tolerance, should not be allowed quietly to pass 
without correction. 
Dr. Antisell, from his position of chemical examiner in the Patent Office at 
Washington, has naturally had a rare opportunity of familiarising himself with 
the recent improvements which have been made—or claimed—in the manufac- 
ture of coal oils. In the work in question, he has published an index of these, 
which cannot but be acceptable to all who are interested either in the practi- 
cal or scientific consideration of the subject. Had this list been published by 
itself, or had it been incorporated with a portion of the materials which Dr. A. 
has now exhibited, in an article, or a short series of articles, in some one of 
our scientific or technological magazines, it would have been most gratefully 
received, and, we doubt not, widely copied. Diluted and scattered as this 
information has been, however, that it might fill a volume, its value has been 
lessened in no slight degree. 
We have endeavored, in vain, to make out the point of view from which the 
Author regarded his subject. Claiming the attention of all persons engaged 
in the manufacture of liquid products from the distillation of mineral combus- 
tibles, his work is nevertheless not a didactic one. In it scarcely any attempt 
is made to instruct the manufacturer, either by a clear enunciation of general 
principles to be followed, or of special details to be observed in given 
cases;* while a most lamentable lack of familiarity with the chemistry of the 
subject is continually exhibited throughout the work. Indeed the book is 
simply a jumble of badly selected extracts, huddled together in a manner 
which must be anything but edifying to the student. As a compilation, it 
has the merit of directing attention to a number of sources from which valu- 
able information may be derived; while it has the great fault of omitting to 
mention numerous other sources of knowledge of equal or of greater value. 
In several instances, moreover, erroneous assertions are made, or wrongful 
conclusions drawn. One or two of these we propose to discuss and correct 
* In this respect our author has fallen far below the level attained by previous 
writers upon the subject. Compare for example: Uhlenhuth, Randbuch der Photo- 
gen-und Paraffin-Fabrikation. Quedlinburg Basse, 1858. 2 
Review of Dr. Anti sell's Work 
in this article. Our attention will be especially directed to the first chapter of 
Dr. Antisell’s book—“History of the Art”—for in it are errors which have too 
long been current in the annals of chemical science—errors, the repetition of 
which by our author is the more unpardonable, since, from his very position, 
he should have known them to be such. Indeed, from statements to be found 
in various parts of his work, it would appear that he must have known of these 
errors—that he must have been in possession of most of the facts which will 
here be brought forward. 
That we may form a correct notion of the subject under discussion, let us 
here digress fora moment. 
As a general rule, when any bituminous substance is subjected to distilla- 
tion—in the ordinary acceptation of the term, i. e., when it is gradually heated 
in any appropriate apparatus, a quantity of an oily fluid is produced, which 
may be collected in receivers; small quantities of gas, water, and other inci- 
dental products being at the same time obtained. 
The oily liquid, which alone interests us here, known in this country as 
crude coal oil, is a mixture of various hydrocarbons, among which the wax-like 
substance Paraffine is an almost never-failing constituent. Crude oil, though 
of course varying greatly, according to the sources from which it is derived, 
like the various marketable “coal oils” obtained from it by purification, is spe- 
cially characterized by its low specific gravity, being capable of floating upon 
water. 
When, on the other hand, a bituminous substance, instead of being gently 
and gradually heated, is suddenly exposed to the action of an intense heat— 
when, as in the ordinary process of gas-making, it is thrown into vessels of iron 
or clay, which have previously been brought to a bright red heat, a different set 
of products is obtained. A large quantity of permanent gas is produced, while 
the liquids formed are no longer the light oily compounds just spoken of, but 
are composed of another set of hydrocarbons which taken collectively, are 
heavier than water. These constitute coal-tar. Among them paraffine is no 
longer found, excepting in comparatively rare instances, another solid sub- 
stince, Naphthaline, being a characteristic component of the mixture. When 
the process to which the bituminous matter is subjected is a mixed one, i.e., 
when a portion of the substance comes in contact with strongly heated surfaces, 
while other portions receive only an amount of heat sufficient to distill off oils 
of the kind first described, a mixed product, containing both coal-oil and coal- 
tar, is naturally obtained. As an instance of such mixed product may be men- 
tioned the tar obtained in the preparation of gas from Boghead coal,* it being 
almost impossible, in this case, to maintain the retorts at the temperature best 
suited for gas-making, on account of the great amount of heat which is ren- 
dered latent by the enormous volume of gas generated by this highly bitu- 
minous substance. 
It should be mentioned, that both crude coal-oil and coal-tar contain a quan- 
tity of “ light stuff,” composed of several exceedingly volatile and inflammable 
liquids. Some of these naphtha-like fluids, for example benzol—the benzine of 
the French-*-(known as benzule in the private vocabulary of Dr. Antisell, or that 
of his proof-reader)—may occur both in crude-oil and in tar; others do not. We 
refer to these “ light-stuffs” here merely for the purpose of explaining that they 
have been at times spoken of as “volatile oils,” from the resemblance which 
they bear to spirits of turpentine and other essential oils, and to eliminate them 
from the discussion. They are of but minor interest at the present moment, 
when compared with the true “coal-oil” now so largely employed in this coun- 
try. We may mention, in passing, that Dr. Antisell has very inconsiderately 
obscured his historical sketch of the progress of the art of distilling coal-oil 
* In the same class are several Scotch cannels, our own Breckenridge and allied 
coals, also the Albert coal of New Brunswick and the like. on Photogenic or Hydrocarbon-Oils from Coal. 
3 
by blending with it the question of coal-tar naphthas. He has, for that matter, 
been unfortunate throughout in the presentation of this part of his subject; all 
the crude liquid products of distillation, at whatever temperature the process has 
been conducted, being indiscriminately classed by him as tar. Now, it is well 
known to practical men, as has already been described, that the products ob- 
tained from bituminous matters by slowly distilling them, is as different from 
coal-tar as ether is from alcohol. The term crude-oil, by which the first-named 
liquid is known to manufacturers in this country,characterizes it perfectly; so 
does the term huile de schiste (written at times simply “ schist e") of the French.* 
It is surprising that Dr. Antisell should have followed the example of sev- 
eral German authors—without their excuse—in thus perplexing his readers. 
In returning from this digression, we would expressly declare our disbelief 
in the adage which allows for the existence of no novelty. Still we do believe 
that, very few of the arts have sprung into existence in a day, their perfection, 
and especially their development, having almost always resulted from the suc- 
cessive labors of numerous individuals ; and we do believe that the inventor, 
who first practically “ applies ” any abstract knowledge, and thus creates a new 
art or branch of industry, is entitled to credit therefore—and to far more credit, 
and that of a different order, than the man who subsequently introduces this 
art into a foreign country.- We would not detract from the efforts of the latter; 
on the contrary, would accord them high praise; but we desire, first of all, to 
see justice meted out to him who created the art—to those who increase hu- 
man knowledge, sooner than to its mere diffusers. 
We would therefore join issue with Dr. Antisell when, in his preface, he 
tells us that his book is a “record of the origin and condition of an infant 
art,” and again mentions “ this new branch of industry.” So, also, in the first 
lines of his Historical Introduction, where he speaks of “ the new and exten- 
sive manufacture of oils from coal and other bituminous substances.” For 
these statements are not only erroneous in themselves, but they—no less than 
the unfair allusions which appear on subsequent pages—tend to do great in- 
justice to earlier inventors, and especially to the memory of a man whose 
name must ever remain inseparably connected with the history of the art of man- 
ufacturing the fluid now known as coal or paraffine-oil. We refer to Sf.l- 
niocE. More than twenty-five years ago, this inventor’s method of obtaining 
such oil was described in the Journal des Connaissances Usuelles, for Dec., J8-14, 
p. 285. (See also Dingier's Polytechnisches Journal, 1835, lvi, 40.) This article 
was subsequently followed by numerous others, until in Selligue’s patent of 
March 19, 1845, we find the whole subject treated of most fully and clearly. 
As a lucid and truthful description of his processes and of the products obtained, 
this specification is most praiseworthy. Few subsequent writers upon the sub- 
ject have been able to add anything to the stock of knowledge which it im- 
parts. Taken for all in all, it is doubtless the most meritorious essay which 
his ever been published upon the art of manufacturing coal-oil. We can but 
reiterate our statement, that the brief, inaccurate, and exceedingly superficial 
comments which have been bestowed by Dr. A. (pp. 9, 80, etc.) upon the 
information which Selligue has impatted in his admirable series of essays, 
does great injustice to the subject as well as to this author. 
Leaving for a moment the minute consideration of Selligue’s improvements, 
let us first glance at the labors of some of his predecessors. 
As Dr. Antisell has truly said (p. 7), the discovery of the production of oil 
from coal appears to date as far back as the time of Boyle, (1728-1799), when 
the well known experiments of Dr. Clayton were made.f 
* We may here observe, that throughout this article we shall translate the French 
term huile de xc/nste, by its Knglish equivalent, coal-oil. 
\ Philosophical Transactions, Jan. 1739, No. 452, p. §9; in Martyn’s Abridgment, 
vol, ix. p. 395. 4 
Review of Dr. Antisell's Work 
In distilling coal from a pit near Wigan in Lancashire, this observer ob- 
tained, first phlegm (water), then oil, arid finally gas. 
No doubt an earlier record of similar experiments might be found in the 
writings of the alchemists, who, as is well known, subjected almost every sub- 
stance to processes of distillation. 
During the last century attention was again several times called to the 
fact.* 
It would seem, however, that nothing very definite was published before the 
year 1830. UnverdorbENf had, indeed, in the preceding year, called atten- 
tion to oils distilled from petroleum, and even appears to have obtained paraf- 
fine—to which however he gave no name.J The attention of the scientific 
world was first really attracted to this substance by the memorable memoir 
of Reichenbach,§ who separated it, in the first instance, from wood tar, and 
described its properties at length. In the following year, Reichenbach|| is 
at great pains to prove that the crude-oil, obtained by slowly distilling coal, 
contains no naphthaline,II that naphthaline is not a product of the slow distil- 
lation of coal, but is a result of the subsequent decomposition of such products 
by heat; and that the coal-tar of gas-works is not crude-oil, but an impure 
mixture of the products of distillation with those resulting from their decom- 
position.** 
* In addition to the authorities cited by Dr. A. (p. 8), we would mention the fol- 
lowing from An Experimental History of the Materia Medico., or of the Natural 
and Artificial Substances made use of in Medicine ; by William Lewis M.B, F.RS., 
3rd Edit. 8vo, Dublin, mdcolxix, vol. ii, p. 143. Article Petroleum; also, (accord- 
ing to American Druggists’ Circular, iv, 36,) in the London edition of Lewis. 4to, 
1761, p. 436: 
“ Some mineral oils, procurable among ourselves, are used by the common people, 
and often with benefit. The empirical medicine, called British oil, is of the same 
nature with the petrolea; the genuine sort being extracted by distillation from a 
hard bitumen, or a kind of stone coal, found in Shropshire and other parts of Eng- 
land.” 
f Berzelius’s Jahresbericht, x, 181, from Kastner’s Archiv, xvi, 122; also in 
Schweigger-Seidel’s Journal fur Cliemie und Physik, 1829, lviii, 243. 
X For allusions to other earlier German researches bearing upon the subject, see 
Reichenbach’s Memoirs, which will be cited directly. Compare also Gmelin’s 
Handbook of Chemistry (Cavendish Soc. Edit.), xii, 439. 
§ Journal fur Chemie und Physik, (or Jahrbuck der Cliemie u. Physilc, Band, 
xxix) von Schweigger-Seidel. 1830, lix, 436. 
|| ibid, (or Neues Jahrbuch der Chemie u. Physik, B. 1,) lxi, 175. 
•([ Dr. Antisell dismisses this article (p. 11) with the statement that “in 1830-’31, 
Reichenbach discovered naphthalin.” It may not be amiss to state that naphthaline 
was discovered at least ten years earlier, having been described by Garden in 1820 
(Thomson’s Annals of Philosophy, xv, 74), to whose labors as well as to those of 
Chamberi.ain, Kinn, and others, Reichenbach particularly refers in this very article. 
See also loc. cit. B. lxviii, [B. viii, of the “ Neues- Jahrbuch,”] S. 233. 
** It must here be explained that Reichenbach has suffered great injustice at the 
hands of those who, in translating portions of his papers, have rendered his term 
“ Stein kohlentheer” literally—coal-tar. Now the term coal-tar, in countries abounding 
in gas-works like England or the United States, means the tar of gas-works, and it 
means nothing else. Gas-works, it must be remembered, were, until quite recently, 
by no means so common in Germany, and were doubtless rare enough in 1830, con- 
sequently, it is not at all strange that the English idea of “ coal-tar” should not have 
become current in that country. Reichenbach, for that matter, distinctly and re- 
peatedly asserts, that his “ Steinkohlentheer” is a very different substance from the 
tar of gas-works. In a word, it was crude-oil. If, perchance, there may be any per- 
son who would accuse us of mistranslating certain words used by Reichenbach. we 
would at once refer such an one to the orginal memoirs of this author. Submitting it 
to the judgment of any competent chemist, whether we have misinterpreted his lan- on Photogenic or Hydrocarbon-Oils from Coal. 
5 
These experiments were made upon a manufacturing scale, Reichenbach 
being, at this time, “ chief of an extensive system of mines, iron furnaces, 
machine shops, chemical works, etc., most of them established by himself on 
the estate of Count Salm [Blankso, Moravia]. These works lie along a line 
some fifteen miles [5 Stvnden] in length.” (Schweigger Seidel). 
In another article published later, in 1831,* he describes his method of ob- 
taining paraffine from the distillation of flesh and of coal (portions of 75 lbs. 
weight having been operated upon). With regard to coal, he particularly 
urges the necessity of slow distillation, in order to prevent the decomposition 
of the first products and the consequent formation of naphthaline, as explained 
in his previous article, to which he refers. The paraffine was separated from 
the less volatile portions of the rectified oil by cooling—the description of 
which oil R. reserves for a separate articled He also obtained paraffine from 
petroleum. Two more papers upon the subject were published by Reichen- 
bach in this year,]; only the first of which is of particular importance in this 
connection. It relates to Eupion (ti> very, Ttiov fat). A term by which Reich- 
enbach designates, in some instances, a portion, in others the whole of the some- 
what difficultly volatile, fat-like oils, prepared by purifying the first product ob- 
tained by slowly distilling substances of animal or vegetable origin. This 
eupion was, in fact, a mixture of several hydrocarbons—the same which, in 
similar mixture*, are now collectively known in commerce as coal-oil; called 
paraffine oil by some, and designated in the retail trade by innumerable other 
names of only local significance. 
Eupion was obtained by Reichenbach from the products of the slow distilla- 
tion of animal and vegetable substances, as well as from coal, and was minutely 
described by him. We make but a single extract from this article, which occu- 
pies some thirty-two pages: “ When any one shall succeed in separating eu- 
pion, at a sufficiently cheap rate, from the tars [crude-oils], it will very proba- 
bly enter into the circle of substances useful in household economy. For, 
since it burns from a wick, brightly and clearly, and is free from smoke, it is 
in no wise inferior to the finest oil as an illuminating material. It does not 
grease nor crust the wick, nor stiffen when cold. If we consider, in addition 
to this, that for all purposes where cold can exert no influence, the paraffine 
need not be separated, but can be left dissolved in the eupion, and used in 
conjunction with it for lighting; we shall perceive that this is of some im- 
portance, since the two substances are thus mutually improved for technical 
purposes.” 
In 1832, Reichenbach§ again published a note upon eupion ; and, in 1834, 
another long article,|j in which he once more dwells upon its useful proper- 
ties. 
Reichenbach’s contributions on the subject of the dry distillation of organic 
substances, are comprised in some twenty or more long articles, not counting 
guage, [compare, for example, loc. cit., B. lxviii., [B. viii, of the Neues-Jahrbuch.,] 
S. 226]. 
It may be worth while also to call the attention of the reader to the fact that all of 
the substances discovered by Reichenbach in “ tar” (as the text books tell us) were 
in reality obtained from crude-oil. Knowing this, every one familiar with recent 
chemical literature, will perceive at once why so few of R’s scientifiic results have 
been corroborated. For, until quite recently, the attention of chemists interested in 
such researches, has been almost completely occupied with the subject of coal-tar. 
Compare also Reichenbach’s complaint against Dumas and Laurent, in Schweigger- 
Seidel’s Journal fur Ch.u. Phy•»., 1838, lxviii, 223. 
* Loc. cit., lxi, [or B. 1, of the Neues-Jahrbuch], S. 273. 
f Vid. infra. 
I Loc. cit., lxii, [or B. ii. of the Neues-Jahrbuch], S. 129, 273. 
§ Loc. cit., B. lxvi, [B. vi. of the Neues-Jahrbuch], S. 318. 
| Erdmann’s Journal fur praktische Chemie, i, 377. 6 
Review of Dr. AntiselTs Work 
several smaller “ notes.” A tolerably complete list of which may be found in 
Erdmann’s Journal fiir praktische Chemie, i, 1. It is very much to be regretted 
that these memoirs have never been collected and published as a separate 
volume. Even now, any chemist who could find time to collect these scattered 
articles and translate them into English or French, would unquestionably pro- 
mote the cause of science by so doing. 
Looking at the question for a moment, solely in its scientific bearings, we 
cannot refrain from an expression of astonishment, that the details of Reichen- 
bach’s researches are so little known to the generality of chemists;* while, on 
the other hand, we are forced to confess, that it is indeed rare that scientific 
researches, conducted by a chemist in his laboratory, have so fully described a 
future art—have so accurately pointed out the methods to be followed and pre- 
cautions to be observed by the practical manufacturer. We must not omit to 
mention that, in 1831, Christisonf of Edinburgh made known his discovery of 
paraffine in petroleum from Rangoon. Not knowing of Reichenbach’s previ- 
ous publication, Christison named it Petroline, but subsequently admitted its 
identity with paraffine. In 1833, Bleyf distilled oils from lignite. 
A little later, in 1834, Gregory§ published an able article upon paraffine and 
eupion, and their occurrence in petroleum. Of this memoir we cite but two 
lines, (vid. Trans., p. 129, or Rep, p. 113). “ It follows,” says Gregory, “ that 
there are some kinds of naphtha [petroleum] which contain paraffine and eu- 
pion, and are consequently the results of destructive distillation.” 
In the following year, v. Kobeli|| also noticed paraffine in petroleum. 
For the labors of Hess in Russia, and of several other chemists in Ger- 
many, as well as for the interesting discussions which followed between these 
* This lack of information appears to depend upon the circumstance, that the 
writers of mo-t recent chemical text-books seem to have derived their knowledge of 
the subject in question, from Gay Lussac’s brief abstract of Iteichenbach’s earlier 
memoirs, which was published in 1832, in PoggendorfFs Annalen, xxiv, 173; also in 
the Annales de Chirnie et de Physique, [2], 1, 69; and quite extensively copied by 
the journals of the day. 
In this connection we would respectfully urge upon all those who have fallen into 
the common habit of regarding as somewhat apochryphal the numerous substances 
of greater or less scientific interest, which Reichenbach separated from the products 
of dry distillation, that before seeking to discredit—or allowing themselves to dis- 
believe—them, they should conduct experiments similar to his, on a scale of equal 
magnitude. Let us here also bear in mind the luminous conclusion of the late Dr. 
Hock of Edinburgh, who, as the story goes, (Vid. London Chemical News, i, 56), 
one day informed his class that Reichenbach had discovered in tar, “ creosote, pica- 
mar, paraffine, cedriret, capnomor, and a host of other substances of no interest or 
importance whatever.” Of these “unimportant” substances, two at least, eupion and 
paraffine, are to-day as well known, in the world, as bees wax or spermaceti, although 
comparatively little—we had almost said nothing—has been added to ihe scientific 
knowledge of them, since the publication of Reichenbach’s memoirs. If, perchance, 
any other of these well-nigh forgotten bodies should be found to possess any techni- 
cal importance, we would quickly enough find some one claiming credit for its “ dis- 
covery,” and oppressing chemical nomenclature, by adding yet another name to the 
existing “ host.” Even now we await, with no little interest, the elucidation of the 
question—whether the new violet dye, prepared bv oxydizing anilin, which is ex- 
citing so much interest, under the names anilein, Perkin’s purple, mauve, etc., is not 
identical with, or a component of, the pittical of Reichenbach. 
f Transactions of Royal Society of Edinburgh, xiii, 118; also in Repertory of 
Patent Inventions, 1835, [N. S.] vol. iii, p. 390. 
t Sell w eigger-Seidel’s Journal fur Chemie u. Physik, B. lxix, [B. ix, of the Neues- 
Jahrbuch\, S. 129. 
§ Transactions of Royal Society of Edinburgh, xiii, 124; also in Repertory of 
Patent Inventions 1835, [N. S.] vol. iv, p. 109. 
|1 J. pr. Chem. v. 213. on Photogenic or Hydrocarbon-Oils from Coal. 
7 
observers and Reichenbach, the reader may consult the general index 
[Nainen-u. Sach-Register zu den Biinden i. bis lx, Leipzig, 1845] to Poggen- 
dorff’s Annalen der Physik u. Chemie. 
At the same time that these scientific researches were in progress in Ger- 
many and Scotland, or even earlier, numerous practical efforts to manufacture 
oils from bituminous substances were made in France. 
Although the precise date at which these experiments were commenced is 
somewhat obscure, it will not be difficult to trace the history of the success- 
ful development of the industry to which they gave rise. 
As stated by Dr. Antisell, the MM. Chervan* had a patent, dated in 1824, 
for distilling bituminous substances. Blum and Moneuse,f in 1832, claim 
only the application of coal-oil to purposes of lighting—not its manufacture, 
which they allude to as being well known. 
Subsequently (7th October, 1833) BoscaryJ obtained a patent for extracting 
pyrogenous oil from different substances, asphaltums, etc., and especially from 
the shales which occur in the environs of Autun (Suone et Loire), and finally 
from all the bituminous matters in France The oil, which is obtained by 
distilling the shale in metallic cylinders, may be used, according to Boscary, 
instead of fish-oil or resin, for gas-making—a much better gas than that pre- 
pared from coal being thus obtained. 
In 1833, Laurent.§ occupied himself with the investigation of various bitu- 
minous shales, both French and English, at the instance of the MM. Blum, 
whom he mentions as being occupied with the distillation of oil from the shales 
of the environs of Autun || Laurent gives the details of the process employed 
by himself, telling us that the retort in which his shales were distilled attained 
a sombre red heat at the close of the operation; also of the percentage amounts 
of oil (20 p.c.), gas, coke and water obtained from the Autun shale; how the 
oil cannot be burned in ordinary lamps, on account of smoking, but affords a 
very luminous flame when consumed in lamps furnished with suitable chim- 
neys. He shows moreover that the oil contains paraffine, and does not contain 
naphthaline. 
Laurent subsequently published another paperll upon this oil, in which article 
he records his efforts to ascertain what definite chemical compounds are con- 
tained in the oil. One of the products obtained by fractional distillation, viz., 
an oil boiling at 167° to 170° (C.) = 333“ to 338° F-, he considers as identical 
with eupion. 
In 1834, we find, for the first time, an article** describing the process of 
Selligue, although it would appear from the statements of this chemist and 
of others, that his attention had been directed to the subject of distilling 
bituminous shales several years earlier. The cited article relates howr the shale 
is slowly distilled in iron cylinders, until no more oil comes over; how the oil 
obtained is characterized by containing neither oxygen nor naphthaline, but 
a solid substance differing from the latter, and resembling that called para- 
naphthalineff by Laurent. 
* Brevets d’Invention xviii, 232. \ Ibid. lxv. 250. 
\ Ibid, lxviii, 359. 
§ Annales de Chimie et de Physique, liv, 392. 
|| According to Laurent, he had himself proposed to a company, in 1829, to 
■work these shales, in order to extract the oil contained in them, and to employ it 
for lighting. 
Comptes Rendus, 1837, iv, 909 ; more fully in Annales de Chimie et de Phys- 
ique, lxiv, 321. 
** Journal des Connaissances Umelles, Dec. 1834, p. 285; also in Dingler’s Poly- 
teehnisch.es Journal, 1835, lvi, 40, from which our extract is taken. 
ff The inadvertency of confounding this body with paraffine was subsequently 
corrected by Selligue. 8 
Review of Dr. Antisell’s Work 
In 1834, ’35 and ’36, Selligue* was principally occupied with his well-known 
process for making water-gas. In calling the attention of the French Acad- 
emyf to this, he remarks that, in conjunction with David Blum, he holds 
a patent granted in 1832 for the application of oils obtained from shale to 
purposes of direct illumination, and that the working of the shale employed is 
in the hands of a company capable of developing the business to any extent 
which commerce or the arts may require. 
In the same year Payen,j in reporting upon Selligue’s water-gas, remarks 
upon the great importance of the new industry of distilling oil from shales 
which S. has introduced. 
In the following year we again find Selligue before the Academy§ request- 
ing that body to appoint a committee to examine the merits of his new system 
of gas-lighting; his process of distilling bituminous shales on the great scale 
by means of apparatus, each one of which furnishes from 1,000 to 1,400 pounds 
of crude oil per day—this being about 10 per cent of the weight of the shale 
employed, and being almost all which exists in the raw material; also of his 
process of separating various products from the crude oil, some of which are 
applicable to the production of gas, others to ordinary purposes of illumination, 
and others to different uses in the arts. This petition was referred to a com- 
mittee of three—Thenard, D’Arcet and Dumas—who reported in 1840.|| They 
mention the localities of Selligue’s three establishments for obtaining oil 
from shales; the amounts of oil obtained from the different kinds of shale, &c. 
In 1838 Selligue also obtained a new patentH “ for the employment of mineral 
oils for lighting.” In his specification he informs us that the principles upon 
which his processes for rendering the oil obtained from shales proper for the 
purposes of direct** illumination depend, are: 
I. Removal of almost all odor. II. Removal of all tar. III. Removal of 
the most volatile portions of the oil, which are also the most inflammable and 
the most odorous, the presence of which would cause the oil to have too great 
fluidity for the capillarity of ordinary wicks. * * * 
The operations, continues Selligue, consist in slowly distilling the bitumin- 
ous shale, and collecting the liquid products in large receivers. These pro- 
ducts are redistilled, and divided into fractions by refrigerating. They are 
treated with concentrated sulphuric acid for a longer or shorter time accord- 
ing to the nature of the shale employed. Twenty-four hours are ordinarily 
sufficient, the oil being agitated from time to time. The quantity of acid 
used varies from to After this the oil is to be carefully drawn off 
from the tar, and washed with water. Slaked lime is then added and a cur- 
rent of steam passed through the oil in order to carry off by distillation all the 
more volatile and odorous liquids. This last, says Selligue, is the most im- 
portant part of my process, for if this very inflammable portion were allowed 
to remain in the oil, one could not use the latter in ordinary lamps a courant 
d'air. * * * This patent it should be observed claims only to be an im- 
provement upon that of Blum and Moneuse (vid. Supra). Selligue asserts, 
however, that coal-oil had never before been prepared in such a manner that 
* See seven patents in Brevets d’Invention, lxx, 269. Of these patents two are 
dated 1834; two, 1835; and three, 1836. For a description of his process of gas- 
making see also Bulletin de la Societe d'Encouragement, Oct. 1838, p. 396 ; or 
Dingler’s Polytechnisches Journal, Ixxi, 29. 
f Comptes Rendus, 1837, iv, 969. 
\ Dingler’s Polytechnisches Journal, lxviii, 201; from Bulletin de la Society 
dPEncourayement,l)ec. 1837, p. 493. 
§ Comptes Rendus, 1838, vii, 897. 
|| Comptes Rendus, x, 861; also in Dingler’s Polytechnisches Journal, lxxvii, 137. 
•[f Brevets cTInvention, lxviii, 395. 
** The term “ direct illumination” is constantly used by Selligue in contradistinc- 
tion to the indirect use of the oil in his process of gas-making. on Photogenic or Hydrocarbon-Oils from Coal. 
9 
it was fit for use in common lamps. This has, indeed, he says, been the 
subject of many researches, but no one has hitherto succeeded in avoiding the 
empyreumatic odor, and the very inflammable products which caused the 
oil to rise too quickly to the summit of the wick. He goes on to define the 
difference between his purified oil and the crude oil obtained directly from 
shale. On the 27th of March, 1839, Selligue specifies certain additions and 
improvements to the preceding patent. 1 should add, he says, that I now- 
divide the products of distillation into four distinct parts, which afford me 
every facility for employing these products in the arts and for domestic 
economy. In these divisions there are indeed some anomalies which arise 
from differences in the shales, &c. which I treat; but the following products 
are always obtained: 
I. A light, volatile oil more or less odorous according to the source from 
which it is derived. * * * This can be used in painting, for dissolving 
resins, &c., for lighting by vaporising it (it being very volatile) or for the pro- 
duction of gas according to my system. 
II. A fat oil only slightly volatile, and having but little odor; this can be 
used for domestic purposes in ordinary lamps with or without admixture of 
animal or vegetable oils. 
III. A fatty substance almost odorless, possessing all the properties of the 
fats, and well adapted for use in the arts. It can also be used for lighting, either 
by mixing it with light oils or by decomposing it for the production of gas. 
It can moreover be used for soap* since it saponifies very well, and being 
without odor affords a very good soap; with ammonia the fat forms a sort of 
pomade. 
IV. An odorless pitch of great purity and tenacity, suitable for preparing 
a black solid varnish for preserving wood, iron-work, &c. * * * 
In 1839, Selliguef in alluding to the use of his oils in the treatment of 
cutaneous diseases speaks of the three large establishments for the distillation 
of bituminous shale which he has erected in the Department Saone et Loire, 
and mentions the fact that the oil (crude ?) is furnished at the rate of about two 
cents [ten centimes] per pound. 
The question of price is again discussed a few years later, when SelligueJ: 
says: it has been stated that crude shale oil costs only $1 50 per 100 pounds, 
an I that it contains 60 per cent of a very light volatile ethereal oil well 
suited to afford light, as well as 40 per cent of a fat substance. Now since 
1837, I have extracted more than 4,000,000 pounds of oil from bituminous 
shale, but the oil (crude?) costs 20 cents a gallon (22 frs. the hectolitre) or 
even 27 cents when delivered in Paris. From every hundred measures of the 
crude oil are obtained (by distillation) 20 measures of volatile oil boiling at 
100° C.=2I2:> F.; 30 measures of less volatile oil boiling at 150° to 260° 
C.=302° to 500° F.; 14 measures of an oil containing paraffine, and 28 
measures of fat—five measures being lost. In purifying these products a 
further portion is lost. 
The clearest of all Selligue’s specifications, however, is that of the patent 
granted to him March 19, 1845§ for the distillation of bituminous shales and 
sandstones. 
After describing the various forms of apparatus used in distilling, into one 
of which superheated steam was introduced, he enumerates the products of 
distillation as follows: I. A white, almost odorless, very limpid mineral oil— 
somewhat soluble in alcohol—which may be used as a solvent, or for purposes 
of illumination in suitable lamps, &c. 
* This “ soap,” (emulsion) is described more fully in the sequel, 
f Comptes Rend as, ix, 140; also Annalen der Rhannacie, vou Woehler u. Liebig, 
xxxii, 123. 
\ Dingler’s Polytechnisches Journal, xci, 193 ; from the Moniteur Industriel, 1843, 
No. 770. 
§ Brevets d'Invention, [new series, (loi, du 5 Juillet, 1844,) ] iv, 30. 10 
Review of Dr. Antisell’s Work 
II. A sparingly volatile mineral oil of sp. gr. 0-84 to 0-87, of a light lemon 
color, perfectly limpid, almost odorless, never becoming rancid, and suscepti- 
ble of being burned in ordinary oil lamps, of constant level a reservoir svpe- 
rieur, with double current of air—a slight modification of the form of the 
chimney and burner being alone necessary. This oil can also be mixed 
with the animal or vegetable oils. Oils thus prepared do not readily become 
rancid, nor do they congeal easily when subjected to cold. 
III. A fat mineral oil, liquid at the same temperature as olive oil. This oil 
contains a little paraffine; it is peculiarly well adapted for lubricating ma- 
chinery, and has an advantage over olive and other vegetable oils, or neats- 
foot oil in that it preserves its unctuosity when in contact with metals and 
does not dry up. It saponifies easily, and forms several compounds with 
ammonia. 
IV. Prom the oils Nos, I, II, and III, I extract a red coloring matter which 
can be used in various arts. 
V. White crystalline paraffine which needs but little treatment in order to be 
fit for making candles; this substance does not occur in very large proportion 
in the crude oil, and the proportion varies according to the different mineral 
substances upon which 1 operate. There is but little of it in petroleum, and 
in the oil obtained from bituminous limestone. I often leave a great part of 
the paraffine in the fat oil and in the grease in order that these may be of 
superior quality. 
VI. Grease. This grease is superior to that of animals for lubricating 
machinery, and for many other purposes, since it does not become rancid, and 
remains unctuous when in contact with metals. 
VII. Perfectly black pitch—very “ drying”—suitable for preserving wood, 
metals, &c. 
VIII. An alkaline soap obtained by treating the oils with alkalies. 
IX. Sulphate of ammonia. X. Manure prepared by mixing the ammoniacal 
liquor, or the blood of animals, with the crushed fixed residue (coke) of the 
shale. XL Sulphate of alumina from the residue of the shale. f. h. s. 
In describing the methods of purification proposed by Selligue, we shall 
make no attempt to follow their various details, our limited space compelling us 
to content ourselves with only the broadest generalities. Selligue sets forth 
at length two methods: 1st. A cold treatment which consists in agitating 
the oil with sulphuric, muriatic, or nitric acid. This agitation should be 
thorough, he says, and should be continued for a longer or shorter time ac- 
cording to the nature and quantity of the matter treated. Here follows a 
description of his agitators. After several hours’ repose, the oil may be de- 
canted, except from muriatic acid in which case more time and a larger 
amount of acid is required. After the oil has been thus separated from the 
deposit of tar, the acid remaining in it must be neutralized by means of an 
alkali. I prefer, says Selligue, to employ the lye of soap-boilers marking 36° 
to 38° [B..?], since it is easy of application, and produces a sure effect; 
I thus precipitate together the coloring matter and tar which would other- 
wise have remained in the oil. The oil is then decanted: if it is the first 
distillation of the crude oil I do not allow the mixture to subside entirely, pre- 
ferring to leave a portion of the alkali mixed with the oil, and to distil off only 
fths of the latter. * * * When the soda lye—in quantity slightly greater 
than is necessary to neutralize the acid—is added, the liquid must be agitated 
violently in order that each particle of the oil may be brought in contact with 
the alkali; this agitation must be continued until the color of the oil under- 
goes change. 
The oil becomes less odorous and less highly colored after each such 
“ cold treatment.” 
After having been allowed to separate from the lye, the oil is decanted off*; 
if it has not lost much of its color the process has been badly conducted. It on Photogenic or Hydrocarbon-Oils from Coal. 
11 
should be stated that the oil must not be agitated several times with the alkali, 
for, by so doing, the dark color of the oil would be restored. * * * As 
for the residues of the soda treatment, continues Selligue, they should be 
allowed to stand at rest during some days beneath a portion of oil, which will 
protect them from contact with the air; the clear lye at the bottom being then 
drawn off may be used for other operations, while the remainder is a soap, 
containing excess of alkali. By adding to it a little grease a soap can be 
made, or by adding water, grease may be separated. This grease is similar to 
that used for wagons. 
2d. A warm treatment which follows the cold, and consists of a series of 
fractional distillations,—special operations for the purification of the “ light- 
stufts,” being resorted to. For the details of these we must refer to the 
original specification of Selligue—a truly classical document which should 
be read by every one interested in the manufacture of coal-oils.# Nor will our 
limited space permit us to cite the detailed “example” of his treatment 
which Selligue has described. We trust that we have already written enough 
to enable the reader to judge whether or no Selligue understood his business. 
As for paraffine, Selligue obtained it by subjecting the oil to a low tempera-, 
ture in order that this substance might crystallize. The mixed oil and paraf- 
fine was then thrown upon fine metallic filters through which the oil flowed 
while the paraffine was separated. Or one may separate, he says, the oil by 
imbibition, but this occasions a great loss of oil and also requires more labor. 
* * With this specification the scientific discussion of the subject by Selligue 
appears to have ceased, yet in the same year he repliesf to a note published by 
ChenotJ who asserted that the oil of shale often contains arsenic, denying that 
arsenic can be found in the products from his own establishments. He again 
describes the locality and geological position of his shale, the method of distil- 
lation employed,—how the temperature is gradually elevated, &c. 
This is of interest as showing that the manufacture of coal-oil in France 
was no ephemeral fancy, but for many years was a well established branch of 
industry. In this connection the scientific research, upon the commercial pro- 
ducts of the distillation of bituminous shale, of Saint-Evre§ should also be 
mentioned. Contemporaneous with Selligue we find other inventors occupied 
with the same subject. Thus Holthorp,|| in 1841, claims that he has first dis- 
covered a means of purifying the fluid substance, which he calls “ schiste,” re- 
sulting from the distillation of coal or of bitumen. His attention was evidently 
chiefly devoted to the volatile naphthas, but he also obtained paraffine. 
Guillard Meynier,H in 1842, speaks of the fixed oil from shale, telling us 
that it may be used for lighting or lubricating and that paraffine may be sepa- 
rated when the oil is cooled or treated with alcohol. 
In the same year Bonnet** in treating of liquids suitable for lighting inci- 
dentally mentions eupion and paraffine. 
Nor should we omit to mention the very interesting article upon Hydrocar- 
lures Liquides, by A. Mallet (in Laboulaye’s Dictionnaire des Arts et Manu- 
factures, 2d EtL, Paris, 1854f,f), in which Selligue’s processes are incidentally 
described. After discussing in detail the light volatile products obtained by 
distilling coal-tar, he says, we have still to speak of the carbo-hydrogens 
from shales; a branch of industry which we owe entirely to Selligue—cut off, 
* A tolerably accurate English translation of this important patent may be 
found in the specification of M. A. B. B. DuBuisson, 1845; specification Jfo.lu,726 
of the English Patent Office. 
f Cornptes Rendns, 1845, xx, 573.. \ Ibid, xx, 306. 
§ Comptes Rendus. 1849, xxix, 339; |[ Brevets dInvention, liii, 263. 
•([ Brevets ofInvention, lxxviii, 91. ** Ibid, lxxix, 63. 
ft A portion of this article, 'which directly refers for the most part only to the 
volatile products suitable for “burning fluids,” which may be obtained in any way 
from coal, is also contained in Dingler’s Polyiechnisches Journal, 1847, cvi, 128. 12 
Review of Dr. AntiselTs Work 
alas! prematurely, in the midst of his career so full of discoveries and of ueefu 
wo ks. As is well known, he obtained by distilling shales from the environsl 
of Antun: I, volatile ethereal oils, II, fixed oils, III, oils combined with 
paraffine from which he prepared grease for carriages, IV, paraffine suitable 
for making candles, &c. Among all these bodies, Mallet continues, we have 
only to occupy ourselves with the volatile oils. Further on M. remarks that 
the acid and alkaline treatment used by Selligue is similar to that proposed by 
Barral for products from coal-tar. Thus far, says Mallet, these hydro-carbons 
have found no application,* partly on account of their insupportable odor when 
not purified and partly on account of their high price—about $10C0 the hun- 
dred lbs.—when purified. 
We have been at no pains to ascertain whether the industrial distillation of 
shales, so well grounded by Selligue, has been continued in France without 
interruption up to the present time, for we know of no reason to doubt the fact. 
Certain it is that coal-oils produced by French manufactories were exhibited, 
at the Exposition Universelle at Paris in 1855, and likewise in 1851 atLondon.f 
To any one familiar with the extreme slowness with which the practical 
applications of chemistry are even now imparted to, and recorded by, scientific 
writers, it would have been no matter of surprise if the results obtained by 
Selligue had remained uncopied upon the records of the French patent office. 
Such however was not the case. From the preceding citations it will be seen 
that his results rvere published in various well known journals and were widely 
diffused. Dumas, in his Trade. de Chimie Jlppliquee aux .drts,\ expressly calls 
attention to them. They are also noticed iri the Handivorterbuch der reinen 
und angewandten C'hemie, von Liebig, Poggendorff u. Wadder, 1844, iii. 364. 
What we cannot explain is the apparent ignorance of these facts which was 
exhibited by several of the leading chemists of Great Britain on the occasion, 
of a trial,§ Young, v. White and others held in June, 1854, in the Court of 
Queen’s Bench before Lord Chief Justice Campbell. 
Several patents for the production of oils [coal-oils] from bituminous sub- 
stances were meanwhile obtained in England. Butler,|| for example, in de- 
scribing his “improvements in the manufacture of oil and gas” proposes to 
distil bituminous shales, &c. for the purpose of obtaining oil and gas free 
from naphthaline. The shale, best after wetting it with water if the principal 
object is to obtain oil, is distilled in common gas retorts under which a gentle 
fire is lighted. As soon as oil begins to flow over freely the fire is to be 
increased and the retorts brought to a red heat; a large quantity of gas is thus 
obtained which is collected in a gas holder. The rough oils, as Butler informs 
us, may be purified by washing with sulphuric acid, filtration, &c., or they 
may be used in the rough state for making oil-gas. The oils in their rough 
state are often found entirely free from oxygen, and if obtained by the process 
described never contain so much as is contained in the coal-tar obtained in 
the coal-gas works where the coal is thrown into retorts already brought to a 
red heat. These oils in their rough state are further distinguished from coal- 
tar by their containing no naphthaline. Moreover the less volatile part of the 
* It will be observed by the reader of Mallet’s treatise that he is interested only 
in a single branch of the subject, viz., the volatile naphthas—“ light stuffs,” just as 
we are heie giving prominence to another portion of it, viz., the fixed, or paraffine- 
oil; and that he holds the naphthas from shale in small repute, since in his opinion 
they can never compete in the matter of cost with those from coal tar. 
f A. IT. Morkan (No. 1361, Cat. 9), Bas-Rhin. 
\ Paris, 1844, t. vii, p. 390; also t. iii, p. 315 of the Liege edition; and B. vii, S. 
510 of the German translation. 
§ Reported in Barlow’s London Journal of Gas Lighting, Aug. 10, 1854, vol. iii, 
p. 508. 
| Patent granted Jan. 29, 1833. Specification No. 6375 of the English Patent 
Office. on Photogenic or Hydrocarbon-Oils from Coal. 
13 
oil [No. 2] offers another characteristic feature; if after being drawn off and 
distilled, and if in this latter process the more volatile or first proceeds, say 
one half of the quantity acted upon, be set apart and the remaining half ex- 
posed to a low temperature, there will soon appear in this part of the distilled 
oil small flakes of a white, odorless, and light substance which is a compound 
of carbon and hydrogen [paraffine]. The familiarity with the subject, some- 
what remarkable in view of the early date of his patent, which Butler exhibits 
cannot fail to strike the reader. This inventor was however unfortunate in the 
idea of trying to make at the same time oil and gas—in endeavoring to recon- 
cile two antagonistic processes. 
In 1841, Sept. 4, Count de Hompesch of Prussia* specified certain “im- 
provements in obtaining oils and other products from bituminous matters.”f 
It is well known, he says, that oils may be obtained from these substances but 
from the imperfection of the processes now used the quantity obtained is small, 
the quality inferior, and the smell noxious. My invention consists in an im- 
proved process, whereby I increase the quantity, improve the quality, and re- 
move or greatly modify the smell. I have found by experiment, he continues, 
that the oil from shale, &c., possesses three different characters which may be 
called essential oil, intermediary fat oil, and thick oil, and these oils I separate 
by means of peculiar apparatus—which he describes in detail. In distilling 
shales heat is applied until the temperature reaches 100c R. = 257° F., at which 
temperature essential oil will pass over. The charge, after having been sub- 
jected to this temperature for half an hour, is pushed forward in the retort 
which is now subjected to a heat of 200° R. = 482° F., by which increased heat 
the intermediary or fat oil is obtained. After having subjected the charge to 
this increased temperature for half an hour the workmen again pushes the 
charge further on in the retort where it becomes of a red heat; the vapor now 
given off yields the thick oil. The carbonization is now complete; and I ob- 
tain these three separate oils by the gradual increase of the heat; and I effect 
this distillation without decomposition of the substance, the vapors escaping 
from the retort as fast as they are formed. 
The essential oil is separated from the fat oil by exposing the mixture to a 
current of steam by which the more volatile oil is carried off. The oil [fixed] 
thus prepared must be filtered and is then ready for application to all kinds of 
machinery, being very fat, works without friction and leaves no sediment. 
The essential oil is collected and subjected to further treatment. 
The specification of Du Buissonj for improvement in the distillation of bi- 
tuminous substances, is an almost literal translation of Selligue’s last patent. 
Indeed, Du Buisson tells us that the extensive works at Autun, Department of 
the Saone and Loire, France, are partly his property and that he has the 
management of them as chemist. He affirms moreover that the most import- 
ant results have there been attained — results which place the distillation 
and treatment of schistus among the most useful and productive of chemical 
manufactures. 
Since we have already extracted largely from Selligue’s specification it is 
unnecessary to cite more of it here. It is a little curious that this most im- 
portant patent is not mentioned in Dr. Antisell’s “list of English Patents” 
(p. 141). 
The well known attempts to prepare paraffine and oils from peat§ need not 
be discussed here. Another patent, not mentioned in Dr. A.’s list, is that of 
* Specification No. 9060 of the English Patent Office. 
f In a “memorandum of alteration,” dated July 5, 1842, de Hompesch claims the 
right of distilling “ bituminous schists, shales, or slates, or other rocks or minerals 
containing bitumen or bituminous substances.” 
\ Dated June 23, 1845. Specification No. 10,726 of the English Patent Office. 
§ Antisell, p. 85; compare Rees Reece’s patent dated Jan. 23, 1849. Specifica- 
tion 12,436 of the English Patent Office. 14 
Review of Dr. Antisell's Work 
George Michiels.* It is peculiarly interesting since a portion of it relates to 
the preparation of oils from caking coals. Michiels proposes in fact to prepare 
coke from bituminous coals, and from mixtures of such coals with anthracite, 
by moistening the powdered coal with water and introducing it—in charges 
of six tons—into brick retorts furnished with ordinary condensing appara- 
tus and other appliances. The retorts are then heated as if it were intended 
to produce gas, with this difference, that the temperature for the first fifty 
hours should not exceed nascent red heat, or 964° F.; after that time it should 
be increased progressively until it attains a clear red heat, which would be 
about the ninety-sixth hour, I should remark, continues Michiels, that about 
the sixtieth hour I shut off the communication between the retort and the 
condensor by closing the hydraulic valves, and at the same time open the 
valve on top of the retort, &c., so as to allow the air to enter, which burns the 
hydrocarburets [now being evolved] and the products of that combustion heat 
the retort, &c. in passing through the flues which surround the retort, f- * * 
I thus obtain coke, ammoniacal liquors and liquid hydro-carburets. These 
“ hydro-carburets” were repeatedly distilled by M. in order to obtain as much 
light volatile oil as possible, A heavy yellow oil of density 0*9J 1, or lower, 
was also obtained which according to M. will be found applicable to many 
useful purposes, and is suitable for his principle object of turning into gas. 
Further on (p. 15 of his specification) Michiels explains that this oil is well 
adapted for manufacturing gas upon a small scale, since the gas prepared 
from it requires no purification, and since it can be used in any of the ordinary 
apparatus for making gas from camphene, oil, or resin. In a word, he pro- 
posed using it just as rosin oil is now so largely employed by private gas- 
works in this country, or as Boscary and Butler had used the same coal-oil 
before him. 
We passf to a consideration of the well known labors of Mr. James Young 
of Glasgow.]: From evidence brought forward in the trial already cited it 
appears that Mr. Young’s attention was called in 1847 to a mineral oil [petro- 
leum] found exuding from a coal pit at Biddings in Derbyshire. From it he 
obtained a good lubricating oil which he continued to prepare as long as his 
supply of petroleum lasted. Occupied as he was with the subject it can sur- 
prise no one that he should soon have turned his attention to the distillation 
octhe highly bituminous mineral of Torbane-hill, now known as Boghead coal 
in England and in this country, which was introduced to public notice in 1850.§ 
From this substance Young was enabled to prepare a much larger amount of oil 
per ton of mineral than had been obtained by any of his predecessors. To the 
discovery of the vast source of an admirable raw material which the Boghead 
mine furnished is evidently due the immense increase in the production, and 
of course consumption, of coal-oil which immediately ensued. To this we 
say, more than to anything else is to be attributed the rise and progress, during 
the past few years, of the almost innumerable manufactories of coal-oil on the 
continent of Europe and in our own country. From the impetus thus given, a 
branch of industry which had long been, comparatively speaking, of only local 
importance soon attained an enormous development.|| 
* Granted April 30, 1850. Specification No. 13,066 of the English Patent Office. 
f Making no pretence, be it understood, that we have been able to collect all that 
has been published upon the subject before 1850. 
\ Patent dated Oct. 7, 1850. 
§ According to Mr. T. G. Barlow, London Journal of Gas Lighting, iii, 519. 
[| We cannot, in this connection, forbear quoting the following pertinent remarks 
from Lord Campbell’s charge to the jury in the case—Young v. White and others 
(see London Journal of Gas Lighting, iii, 521)—already cited. 
“ And this brings me to an observation,” says his Lordship, “which I meant to 
make, and which I should have been sorry if I had forgotton, which is this—that it 
was the discovery of this Boghead coal that seems to have given the great value on Photogenic or Hydrocarbon-Oils from Coal. 
15 
Let it be distinctly understood that we would in no wise detract from the 
real merit of Mr. Young. Uniting, as he does, no small share of chemical 
knowledge with the cautious, untiring energy of his countrymen, few men 
could have been found better qualified to grasp the golden opportunity of 
which he so fortunately availed himself. His name must ever remain associ- 
ated with those of the distinguished observers from whose labors this most 
important branch of industry has resulted. It is Dr. Antisell only whom we 
blame for his incorrect and partial “history.” When, for example (on p. 14), 
Dr. A. tells us that: “only since the year 1850 has the manufacture of paraf- 
fine from pit-coal, turf and bituminous shales succeeded as an art. The first 
manufacture was that of James Young in Manchester, by whose process, from 
100 parts of Cannel-coal 40 per cent of oil and 10 per cent of paraffine could 
be obtained.” He makes a statement which is grossly exaggerated—if not 
entirely at variance with fact—as our readers must already have perceived. 
We willingly quote what follows: “In thus showing [i. e., dogmatically 
asserting] that the practical manufacture of oils from coal is due to James 
Young, it may not be amiss to call attention to wffiat it was which he produced 
from coals by distillation. He claimed the production of paraffine oils—not 
the production of naphtha or benzule [benzol?], nor naphthalin, but paraffine 
and its congeners: this involves the slower distillation of coals at a lower 
temperature than had been hitherto effected, and this novelty in practice was 
followed by the novel result of a copious production of isomeric liquid hydro- 
carbons ; so that really two great results were first demonstrated, practically 
by the operation of Young’s process, namely—1st, That coal was a material 
from which liquids could be manufactured economically, as tar, bitumens, and 
schists had been hitherto employed; and 2nd, That the liquids so formed 
were paraffine-containing compounds.” Having merely to suggest that the 
sentence might have been more tersely put. For in truth it means only—if 
it means anything—that in the opinion of Dr. A., Mr. Young was the first 
person who distilled coal [on a manufacturing scale ?] at comparatively low 
temperatures. What Dr. Antisell’s private views regarding “low tempera- 
ture” or “practical” may be, we are ignorant. But we do know that when, 
30 years ago, Reicbenbach distilled quantities of coal of 75 lbs. weight each, 
and exercised the greatest care in maintaining the temperature of his retort 
at as low a degree as was admissible, as he has most minutely described in 
the memoirs which we have already cited;—when he obtained paraffine and 
eupion as results of his operation; he most certainly demonstrated the practi- 
cability and the manner of preparing both paraffine and “paraffine-oil.” 
All this however does not appear to satisfy Dr. A. in the least degree, who 
repeatedly assures his readers that the manufacture of oil from coal dates from 
the patent of Mr. Young. Since our author has seen fit to dwell at length 
upon this point and to devote so much space to its discussion we may be par- 
doned for referring to it here. 
As is well known the term “ coal” is applied in common language to a great 
variety of mineral combustibles no two kinds of which are precisely alike 
while some sorts are exceedingly unlike others. The term is at best merely 
conventional; used, in lack of any better one, to designate substances with 
the real nature of which we are still almost entirely ignorant. 
to paraffine, because until then I do not find it was obtained in such quantities as 
really were of any considerable value; but the Boghead coal now being discovered, 
and this schist or coal being discovered, which is of very rich quality, and having a 
great deal of what is the essential part of the paraffine; from that time it has be- 
come much more important; and that may explain why, although the mode of ob- 
taining paraffine was before well known, it should not have been put in practice 
because it would not appear that it could be put into practice with much profit or 
benefit, unless you had such a substance as Boghead coal on which you could operate.” 
In confirmation of this view compare also: Payen, Precis de Chirnie Industrielle, 
4e Ed.. Paris, Hatchette. 1859. t. ii, p. 685. 16 
Review of Dr. Antisell’s Work 
With the flint-like anthracite of Wales, the beautiful Albert coal*—but a 
step removed from asphaltum—of Hillsboro, New Brunswick; our common 
lignites, frequently shading into peat, and the bituminous shales as frequently 
passing by insensible gradations into common slate, as points upon its ex- 
treme limit, we have within the circumference of the circle an infinite number 
of substances, shading into each other by scarcely perceptible degrees,—all 
of which are, in technological language at least, varieties of coal. The 
“amplitude of variation” which this species, or rather this term, enjoys is in- 
deed so great that it would be a matter of no small difficulty to choose any 
single member of the medley as a central point, or even to conceive of an 
ideal coil to which all other varieties should be referred. In attempting any 
such selection a native of one of our sea-board states would assuredly lean 
towards anthracite; the South-German towards his excellent lignites; the 
Scotchman towards his cannel; while Newcastle would claim a proverbial 
right of precedent. We would, for our own part, vote for the last named, or 
some other good caking coal, capable of furnishing both gas and serviceable 
coke, and of being used for an infinite variety of purposes. Starting from 
this then as a type, observe, that as we pass towards the cannels, the different 
varieties of coal become better and better suited for the manufacture of gas 
or oil, j. e., they contain more and more hydrogenous compounds. The ap- 
pearance of the mineral meanwhile approaching more and more closely to 
that of slate, while at the same time the value of the fixed carbonaceous 
residue becomes less and less, soon ceasing to be “coke” at all, but rather a 
more or less carbonaceous slate. At length a maximum of hydrogenous mat- 
ter is reached as in the case of Boghead coal, a slaty substance, the fixed 
residue from the distillation of which is a slightly carbonaceous stone, value- 
less as fuel and useful only, as a substitute for bone-black, for purposes of 
disinfection or decolorizing liquids, uses to which the residues of the 
French shales have long been applied. Beyond this maximum, as the amount 
of gas and oil-producing substances diminishes, and the amount of earthy 
matter increases,—taking the place of the fixed carbon in our typical caking 
coal, we pass into “ bituminous shales,” and these become less and less bitumi- 
nous until at length we reach common clay slate containing no organic matter 
whatsoever. We have here traced no fancy sketch. That the “cannel coals” 
thus gradually pass into “bituminous shales” is now well enough known, at 
least to gas engineers and other practical observers. It rvould not for that 
matter be exceedingly difficult to obtain a continuous series of specimens 
exhibiting this almost insensible gradation. Now did Mr. Young devote his 
attention to the distillation of caking coals similar to our typical Newcastle? 
By no means! On the contrary we find him occupied with a mineral w'hich 
was called indifferently “shale” or “coal,” until it was in 1853 decided in a 
Scottish court that it should henceforth be legally known as coal.f 
* On page 18 of Dr. A.’s work the following remark occurs. “In one respect 
they [bitumens] differ from coal. In no case can an organic tissue or structure be 
demonstrated when they are examined under the microscope. Viewed in this 
light the mineral found at the Albert mine, New Brunswick, should be classed as a 
bitumen since Dr, J. Leidy was unable to detect any trace of structure in its mass.” 
We cannot understand the motive of our author in thus again dragging to light this 
negative result, for it is perfectly well known to the scientific men of America that 
Prof. J. Bacon detected the existence of vegetable structure in the interior of masses 
of the Hillsboro coal. See Reports on the Geological Relations, chemical analyses, 
and microscopic examination of the coal of the Albert Coal Mining Co., situated in 
Hillsboro, Albert Co., N. B, bv Chas. T. Jackson. M D. New York: piinted by 
Nesbitt, 1S51, p. 30; compare this Journal, [2J, xiii, 276. 
f We had supposed, when the above was written, that the decision of this court 
had been sustained. That in this we were mistaken appears from the following, 
which we extract from a statement in a late number of the London Journal of Gas on Photogenic or Hydrocarbon-Oils from Coal. 
17 
We would cast no reflection upon the judgment rendered in this famous 
suit. Looking at it as a mere matter of equity, depending upon the business 
relations of the parties at issue, this verdict was in our own opinion, just. But 
the fact of this mineral being, or not being, called a coal, does not in the least 
degree prevent it from being also a shale; and that it is more nearly related to 
the shales than to the coals is believed by a large proportion of those who are 
intimately acquainted with it, be they scientific or practical men. We have 
no space to discuss at greater length this quibble of Dr. Antisell’s—which, 
however excusable it might have been in a retained attorney or solicitor of 
patents, is anything but becoming to the chemical professor or the historian-— 
being content to refer the reader to the published reports of the trial just men- 
tioned. We will here cite only a few lines* descriptive of Selligue’s mineral: 
“ The quantity of oily matter in these shales is very variable and often very 
Lighting (Jan. 17th, 1860. vol. ix, p. 41), received as this article is going through 
the press. 
“Settlement of the great Torbane-hill case. 
We have been favored with the following particulars connected with the well 
known case, the ‘Bathgate or Boghead Gas Coal alias the Torbane-hill Mineral/ 
which has lasted upwards of seven years, having passed through several phases in 
the Supreme Law Courts of Scotland and England. A compromise was finally 
come to on Wednesday last, the eleventh current. It is embodied in a minute of 
agreement between Mr. and Mrs. Gillepsie of Torbane-hill, of the first part, and 
Messrs. James Russel and Son, and James Russel, Esq., of Blackbraes, of the sec- 
ond part. 
The preamble of the minute of agreement, which itself consists of twelve articles, 
is as follows: 
‘ The said parties, considering that disputes and differences have arisen between 
them and a lengthened litigation has taken place, with respect to the missives of 
agreement for a lease of certain minerals in the lands of Torbane-hill, entered into 
betwixt the said first party hereto on the one part, and the said company of James 
Russel and Son, and individual partners thereof, on the other part, and dated the 
80th of March and 1st of April, 1850; and both parties being now desirous that the 
said litigation should be brought to an end, and all disputes and differences between 
them amicably adjusted and settled, they have agreed, and hereby mutually agree 
and bind themselves as follows : ’— 
The first two articles provide that the actions at present depending shall be aban- 
doned, as a consequence of the execution of the minute. 
The third article provides that each party pay their own expenses. 
The fourth article, which has for title ‘Name of Mineral,’is both an important 
and curious one—important in a scientific point of view, and curious as illustrative 
of the pertinacity with which either party have clung to their own views. The ar- 
ticle is as follows : — ‘ Whereas the second party have been, and are, working in the 
said lands of Torbane-hill, and disposing of, under the name of Bathgate or Boghead 
gas, parrot, or cannel coal, a mineral which they, the second party, deemed and deem 
to be a parrot or cannel coal, and which the first party deemed and deem to be a 
new mineral substance, having an argillaceous base, and to be of so peculiar a na- 
ture as to constitute it in truth a new and very peculiar variety of bituminous schist, 
slate, or clay, and have been for some time in use to call ‘ the Torbane-hill Mineral’; 
it is hereby agreed that, throughout the remainder of these presents, where the 
mineral in question is named, it shall be called for the sake of brevity the disputed 
mineral.’ 
Article fifth relates to the subject of a portion of Torbane-hill which was reserved 
from the operation of the mineral lease, and by this article ‘the disputed mineral,’ 
as we now call it, contained in the reserved portion of the estate, may be worked 
or let by the proprietors, without the danger of any obstruction being offered by 
the second party in the agreement.” * * * 
* From Dufrenoy et Elie de Beaumont’s Explication de la Carte G6ologique de 
la France. Paris, Imp. Royale, 1841. t. i, p. 673. 18 
Review of Dr. AntiselTs Work 
considerable. According to M. Xardel some rare samples exist which afford 
even 45 @ 50 per cent; * * * other specimens afford 20 @ 25 per cent. 
The beds which are worked, or are capable of being worked, yield from 5 to 
9 per cent.” [p. 075.]—Again [p. 676], “The impressions of fossils, so com- 
mon in the shales of d’lgornay, occur in the poorer shales. The rich shales, 
on the contrary, often contain vegetable remains analagous to those commonly 
found in the coal measures. Perhaps the beds of rich shale are in a manner 
the representatives of coal-beds ; it is to be remarked that in the shale which 
yields 9 per cent of oil its sheets are covered with a multitude of shining (mi- 
roirtanles), lenticular veins, having a waxy fracture, which by their aspect 
and manner of burning recall the variety of coal which is called cannd coal.” 
—Leaving it for our readers to answer the question; how far removed in any- 
thing but productiveness is the “coal” (Boghead) upon which Mr. Young has 
operated from the “shale” distilled by M. Selligue? 
It may not be amiss to mention the fact that upon the continent of Europe 
the Boghead mineral is almost universally called, not coal, but shale. A fact 
with which the reader can readily enough familiarize himself by consulting 
the German chemical journals of the last eight or ten years. In proof of it 
we cite only the following:* “The recent verdict in the celebrated Torbane- 
hill-mineral case appears to be contrary to the scientific opinions held in Ger- 
many, as proof of which we have a case in point, and which, although not at 
the time known in this country, was officially decided upon in Berlin previous 
to the trial coming on in Scotland, which terminated on the 4th of August 
last. It appears that in Frankfort-on-the-Main there has, for some time past, 
been in existence a company for lighting the streets and houses by gas from 
oil, resin, &.c. A rival English company contracted to light with coal-gas; 
and to give both fair play, it was decided that the latter company should be 
confined to the use of coal alone. Mr. Engelhard, the manager of the Oil 
(Resin) Gas Company, having heard of the Boghead and Torbane mineral, 
obtained specimens, and having found they produced excellent gas, gave an 
order for a large consignment which reached Frankfort via Rotterdam, through 
a Dutch agent. This was entered at the Custom-house as cannel coal, much 
to the annoyance of Mr. Engelhard, who was no more at liberty to make gas 
from coal than his rivals were to make it of anything else but coal. He was, 
however, prevented from the necessity of a trial at law, for the officials did 
not feel themselves justified in charging the duty as coal, although, as other 
mineral, it would pass free, and applied to higher authorities for instruction. 
These parties were as much at a loss as their inferiors, and the case wras 
eventually transferred to the Central Board of Customs at Berlin, the last 
court of appeal of the Prussian Zollverein, where all disputed questions in the 
German States are settled. Scientific men, connected with the board, exam- 
ined the Boghead and Torbane mineral and decided that it was not coal, but 
bituminous shale, which is said to be the general opinion among German 
chemists. It has been admitted into Germany, duty free, and Frankfort is 
now partially lighted with gas from this mineral, charged for as resin or oil 
gas. It is described as a clay containing bitumen, and producing oil when 
heated. At all events, we may take this German decision as impartial as, had 
it been admitted as cannel coal it would have been subject to a duty varying 
from Is. to Is. 6rf. per ton.” 
In connection with the question of the products of the distillation of coal 
which Dr. A. would have us believe so entirely new to the world and to this 
country in particular, we cite the following from The Encyclopcedia of Chem- 
istn/, by James C. Booth and Campbell Morfit. 8vo, Philadelphia, Baird, 1850, 
p. 461. Article, Coal: paragraph, “ products of dry distillation.” 
* See London Journal of Gas Lighting, Oct., 1853, iii, 256 ; from London Min- 
ing Journal, on Photogenic or Hydrocarbon-Oils from Coal. 
19 
‘‘These products [of the dry distillation of coal] are somewhat analogous 
t o those derived from wood, and some are identical with them. * * * The 
l1 quid products consist of various bodies closely allied to petroleum, and the 
s°lids Naphthaline and Paraffine. The relative proportions of these products 
vary with the temperature. The low'er the heat employed, the less gas, and 
the more solids and liquids are produced; the higher the temperature the 
greater is the quantity of carburetted hydrogen.” Before closing this sketch 
we must refer to and correct a palpable error of Reichenbach’s* which has 
been cited by Dr. Antisell (p. 14), from whom we quote it: “ So remained par- 
affine until this hour [date of Y.’s patent], a beautiful item in the collection of 
chemical preparations; but it has never escaped from the rooms of the scien- 
tific man.” 
Upon the reader who has followed us thus far we need not urge that the 
above statement is incorrect. As an offset to it we cite the following:f 
“In the Parisian Industrial Exhibition for 1839 Selligue exhibited: 1st— 
Bituminous shale, then fluid bitumen [crude oil], mineral grease, crude and 
refined (the former at 50 fr. the 100 kilog. [=$5.00 per ICO lbs.]), also mine- 
ral wax [paraffine] crude and refined (the former at 125 fr., the latter at 180 fr. 
[= respectively 12£ and 18 dollars per 100 lbs]). The purified mineral wax 
"was beautifully white but the candles made of it had a soiled appearance.” 
V. Hermann (now, according to Wagner, councillor of State in Munich goes) 
on to assert that “ if these fatty products can be prepared economically they 
belong to the most important objects of the Exhibition.” 
It would be foreign to our purpose were we to attempt to trace the recent 
history of the art of manufacturing coal-oil, even if our space allowed of it. 
During the past few years a large number of papers]; on the subject have been 
published in the Scientific Journals of Germany; while several recent works 
upon the materials used for producing lighc have each devoted a separate 
chapter to its description. A few special treatises have also been published 
of which the following is a, doubtless very incomplete, list—§ 
Uhlenhuth, Ed. Handbuch der Photogen- und Paraffin-Fabrikation aus 
Totf, Braunkohle und bituminosem Schiefer nach den neuesten Versuchen und 
Er/ahrungen. Quedlinburg, Basse, 1858. 
Mueller, Carl, Georg, Die trockene Destination und die hauptsdchlichsten 
auf ihr beruhenden Indusiriezweige. Leipzig, Barth. 1858. 
Danckwort, Meitzendorff und Wernecke. [Committee of the Mag- 
deburg Gewerbeverein.] Ueber das Photogen oder Mineralcel, so wie die ihm 
* Erdmann’s Journal fiir praktische Chemie, lxiii. 63. Did our space allow, we 
would gladly transcribe the whole of this article —an English translation of which 
may be found in the London, Edinburgh and Dublin Philosophical Magazine, [4.] viii, 
468—in proof of our assertion that the present widely-spread manufacture of coal- 
oil and paraffine is mainly due to the comparatively recent discovery of rich stores 
of highly bituminous substances. 
i From v. Hermann’s Die Industrie Ausstellung zu Paris ivn Jahre, 1839, Hum 
berg, 1840. p. 147 ;—in Wagner’s Jahresbericht ueber die Fortschritte der chemis- 
chen Techvologie, 1855, i. 416. 
% Very complete synopses of these may be found in Wagner’s Jahresbericht, 
four volumes of which have thus far been published. For references to the recent 
admitable scientific researches of Gueville Williams, De la Rue, and others, which 
have been chiefly confined however to the more volatile portions of the oil and to 
the basic compounds which occur in it, see Liebig and Kopp’s Jahresbericht der 
Chemie, u. s. w. 
p Small as this list is, it will nevertheless recall to the mind of the reader the 
modest lines with which Dr. Antisell’s preface commences, namely these: “the 
present little treatise is the first published monograph on the art of distilling oils 
from minerals containing Bitumen.” 20 
Review of Dr. Antisell’s Work on Photogenic-Oils, fyc. 
dhnlicJien Leuchtstoffe, in Bezug auf ihre Feuergefdhrlichkeit und ihre Jln- 
wendung. Magdeburg, 1856. 
Also the insignificant brochure of Schrader, F. W. Ueber die indnstrielle 
und national-okonomische Bedeutsamkeit dtr Gewinnung von Chemikalien insbe- 
sondere des Paraffin's und Photogen's aus dem Kohlentheer, u. s. w. Ascher- 
sleben, Beyer, 1856. 
This article must here close. Leaving unnoticed several inaccuracies 
which we had intended to discuss we will dismiss the subject with two brief 
quotations. The first from Dr. Antisell’s book, p. 15. “An impression has 
taken hold of the American manufacturing public that the patent of James 
Young has no force, as it was not a new invention at the date of the patent; 
and from the unfavorable effect of that patent upon the actual manufacture of 
coal-oils in this country, an ill-feeling has been produced against it. That 
the owners of this patent have not acted wisely by witholding sales and 
licenses under it until very lately, is to be regretted; but that it was a bona 
fide improvement in an art at the time when it was patented, and that therefore 
the patent was rightly issued in this country, there can be no shadow of i 
doubt in the mind of any one who carefully traces the steps of the discovei-y 
of the production of photogenic oils from different materials.” 
The second from Lord Chief Justice Campbell’s charge* to the jury in Ihe 
case already alluded to. “ Now gentlemen I direct you, in point of law, that 
if there were books then [at date of Young’s patent, 1850] in circulation in Eng- 
land disclosing this mode of obtaining paraffine and paraffine oil which were 
known, were accessible, that the patent would be invalid, although Mr. Young 
never read those books, and although that mode had not been actually put 
in practice. If there were books in England in circulation, accessible to all 
who were interested in the subject, which disclosed this, and would instruct 
them and enable them to obtain the paraffine and the paraffine oil from the dis- 
tillation of bituminous substances, then Mr. Young’s patent would be invalid.” 
Frank H. Storer. 
* Loc. cit., p. 520.