from the reporter, was sent to me during my absence in Europe and was not corrected. So many errors of omission and commission have crept in that I ask the privilege to publish the corrected version. Page 318, second line, should read: In 1914 Schuhmacher published in the Dermatologische Wochenschrift an article on "Arsphenamin, a True Dyestuff." He stated that if the urine of a patient who has received an injection of arsphenamin is mixed with a reagent and filtered through charcoal, the clear

more »

... filtrate does not show the arsphenamin reaction any more. This means that the arsphenamin in the urine has been absorbed by the charcoal, a physical property which is common to nearly all organic dyestuffs. Chemical properties (the presence of one or more aromatic nuclei and of a so-called chromophore) confirm this view. If this is true, arsphenamin, phenolphthalein and antipyrin belong to the same group. Dr. Schamberg, to whom I spoke about this, does not share the view that arsphenamin is a dyestuff. I, myself, am not sufficiently versed in chemistry to decide this question. It remains, however, a fact that these drugs are aromatic compounds which contain a benzene ring as a nucleus. I believe that this benzene ring is responsible for the eruption. The experiments which the essayist has in mind have been made in my service. A patient with a fixed arsphenamin eruption has been given phenol¬ phthalein and a patient with a phenolphthalein eruption has been injected with arsphenamin-with negative results. On page 320 it should read : I have seen two cases of arsphenamin eruption identical with the phenol¬