Sapphire, one of the earliest gems known to man, is found in riverbeds and torrents, the force of the water washing the stones from their matrix ; and to this day are still found under these conditions. In its finest quality the Sapphire is of a deep blue colour, and the more it resembles the dark velvety blue of the Pansy the greater is its value.

Of coloured gems, the Sapphire has been the most venerated amongst all nations, and particularly in the East it is the stone most frequently consecrated to the various deities. Amongst Buddhists it is believed to produce a desire for prayer, and is regarded as the Stone of Stones to give Spiritual Light, and to bring Peace and Happiness as long as its wearer leads a moral life.

In the early days of the Christian Church, the stones and metal used in making the ring of a Bishop was left very much to the taste of the individual, but in the twelfth century Innocent III decreed that these rings should be made of pure gold, set with an unengraved stone, the Sapphire being the gem selected, as possessing the virtues and qualities essential to its dignified position as the badge of Pontifical rank and “a seal of secrets,” for there be many things “that a priest conceals from the senses of the vulgar and less intelligent ; which he keeps locked up as it were under seal.”

Of this gem St. Jerome writes that “it procures favours with princes, pacifies enemies, frees from enchantment, and obtains freedom from captivity.”

The Jews also held this stone in high veneration, the seal-stone in the ring of King Solomon being said to be a Sapphire, and in Exodus xxiv. 10, we read in the description of a manifestation of Jehovah :

“There was under his feet as it were a paved work of a Sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness.”

This description of clearness, if taken as meaning transparency, would indicate a familiarity with the qualities of the stone as we know it, although in most of the ancient writings all blue stones are loosely described as Sapphires, including the Tables of the Law, which it is practically certain could not have been of Sapphire and in all probability were of Lapis Lazuli.

During the Middle Ages the qualities attributed to the Sapphire were that it preserved Chastity, discovered Fraud and Treachery, protected from poison, Plague, Fever, and Skin Diseases, and had great power in resisting black magic and illwishing ; in smallpox it preserved the eyes from injury if rubbed on them. It also gave concentration ; but if worn by an intemperate or impious person, it lost its lustre, thus indicating the presence of vice and impurity. It is recorded that in the Church of Old St. Paul’s, London, there was a famous Sapphire given by “Richard de Preston, Citizen and Grocer of that city, for the cure of infirmities in the eyes of those thus afflicted who might resort to it.”

Cloudy Sapphires are sometimes found which owing to a peculiarity in their composition show six rays of light running from the top of the stone. These are known as Asteria, or Star Stones, and this Star Sapphire was much valued by the Ancients as a love charm ; they considered it peculiarly powerful for the procuring of favours, for bringing good fortune and averting witchcraft. Six is the number given to Venus, and is also the number of the true Solomon’s Seal, whose virtues and qualities this stone represents.

The wife of the Emperor Charlemagne is reputed to have possessed a very powerful talisman composed of two rough Sapphires and a portion of the Holy Cross, made by the Magi in the train of Haaroon Al Raschid, Emperor of the East. This Talisman was made for the purpose of keeping Charlemagne’s affections constant to his wife, and it was so efficacious that his love endured after her death. He would not allow the body, on which the Talisman hung, to be interred, even when decomposition had set in ; and burial was only permitted when Charlemagne’s confessor, who knew of the talisman and its virtue, removed it from the body. The confessor kept the Talisman and was raised to high honours by Charlemagne, becoming Archbishop of Mainz and Chancellor of the Empire. It was, however, restored to the monarch on his death-bed when he was suffering great agony, and it enabled him to pass peacefully away.

There are, however, certain minerals which possess distinctive features in their qualities of hardness, colour, transparency, refractability or double refractability to light-beams, which qualities place them in an entirely different class to the minerals of a metallic nature. These particular and non-metallic minerals, therefore, because of their comparative rarity, rise pre-eminently above other minerals, and become actually “precious.”

This is, at the same time, but a comparative term, for it will readily be understood that in the case of a sudden flooding of the market with one class of stone, even if it should be one hitherto rare and precious, there would be an equally sudden drop in the intrinsic value of the jewel to such an extent as perhaps to wipe it out of the category of precious stones. For instance, rubies were discovered long before diamonds; then when diamonds were found these were considered much more valuable till their abundance made them common, and they became of little account. Rubies again asserted their position as chief of all precious stones in value, and in many biblical references rubies are quoted as being the symbol of the very acme of wealth, such as in Proverbs, chapter iii., verses 13 and 15, where there are the passages, “happy is the man that findeth wisdom … she is more precious than rubies”–and this, notwithstanding the enormous quantity of them at that time obtained from the ruby mines of Ophir and Nubia, which were then the chief sources of wealth.

It will also be remembered that Josephus relates how, at the fall of Jerusalem, the spoil of gold was so great that Syria was inundated with it, and the value of gold there quickly dropped to one-half; other historians, also, speaking of this time, record such a glut of gold, silver, and jewels in Syria, as made them of little value, which state continued for some considerable period, till the untold wealth became ruthlessly and wastefully scattered, when the normal values slowly reasserted themselves.

Amongst so many varieties of these precious minerals, it cannot be otherwise than that there should be important differences in their various characteristics, though for a stone to have the slightest claim to be classed as “precious” it must conform to several at least of the following requirements:–It must withstand the action of light without deterioration of its beauty, lustre, or substance, and it must be of sufficient hardness to retain its form, purity and lustre under the actions of warmth, reasonable wear, and the dust which falls upon it during use; it must not be subject to chemical change, decomposition, disintegration, or other alteration of its substance under exposure to atmospheric air; otherwise it is useless for all practical purposes of adornment or ornamentation.

There are certain other characteristics of these curious minerals which may be classified briefly, thus:–Some stones owe their beauty to a wonderful play of colour or fire, due to the action of light, quite apart from the colour of the stone itself, and of this series the opal may be taken as a type. In others, this splendid play of colour is altogether absent, the colour being associated with the stone itself, in its substance, the charm lying entirely in the superb transparency, the ruby being taken as an example of this class of stone. Others, again, have not only colour, but transparency and lustre, as in the coloured diamonds, whilst the commoner well-known diamonds are extremely rich in transparency and lustre, the play of light alone showing a considerable amount of brilliancy and beauty of colour, though the stone itself is clear. Still others are opaque, or semi-opaque, or practically free from play of light and from lustre, owing their value and beauty entirely to their richness of colour.

In all cases the value of the stone cannot be appreciated fully till the gem is separated from its matrix and polished, and in some cases, such as in that of the diamond, cut in variously shaped facets, on and amongst which the light rays have power to play; other stones, such as the opal, turquoise and the like, are cut or ground in flat, dome-shaped, or other form, and then merely polished. It frequently happens that only a small portion of even a large stone is of supreme value or purity, the cutter often retaining as his perquisite the smaller pieces and waste. These, if too small for setting, are ground into powder and used to cut and polish other stones.

Broadly speaking, the greatest claim which a stone can possess in order to be classed as precious is its rarity. To this may be added public opinion, which is led for better or worse by the fashion of the moment. For if the comparatively common amethyst should chance to be made extraordinarily conspicuous by some society leader, it would at once step from its humbler position as semi-precious, and rise to the nobler classification of a truly precious stone, by reason of the demand created for it, which would, in all probability, absorb the available stock to rarity; and this despite the more entrancing beauty of the now rarer stones.

The study of this section of mineralogy is one of intense interest, and by understanding the nature, environment, chemical composition and the properties of the stones, possibility of fraud is altogether precluded, and there is induced in the mind–even of those with whom the study of precious stones has no part commercially–an intelligent interest in the sight or association of what might otherwise excite no more than a mere glance of admiration or curiosity. There is scarcely any form of matter, be it liquid, solid, or gaseous, but has yielded or is now yielding up its secrets with more or less freedom to the scientist. By his method of synthesis (which is the scientific name for putting substances together in order to form new compounds out of their union) or of analysis (the decomposing of bodies so as to divide or separate them into substances of less complexity), particularly the latter, he slowly and surely breaks down the substances undergoing examination into their various constituents, reducing these still further till no more reduction is possible, and he arrives at their elements. From their behaviour during the many and varied processes through which they have passed he finds out, with unerring accuracy, the exact proportions of their composition, and, in many cases, the cause of their origin.

It may be thought that, knowing all this, it is strange that man does not himself manufacture these rare gems, such as the diamond, but so far he has only succeeded in making a few of microscopic size, altogether useless except as scientific curiosities. The manner in which these minute gems and spurious stones are manufactured, and the methods by which they may readily be distinguished from real, will be dealt with in due course.

The natural stones represent the slow chemical action of water, decay, and association with, or near, other chemical substances or elements, combined with the action of millions of years of time, and the unceasing enormous pressure during that time of thousands, perhaps millions, of tons of earth, rock, and the like, subjected, for a certain portion at least of that period, to extremes of heat or cold, all of which determine the nature of the gem. So that only in the earth itself, under strictly natural conditions, can these rare substances be found at all in any workable size; therefore they must be sought after assiduously, with more or less speculative risk.

At the very commencement we are faced with a subject on which mineralogists and geologists are by no means in full agreement, and there seems just ground for considerable divergence of opinion, according to the line of argument taken. It is a most remarkable fact that, precious as are certain stones, they do not (with a few exceptions) contain any of the rarer metals, such as platinum, gold, etc., or any of their compounds, but are composed entirely of the common elements and their derivatives, especially of those elements contained in the upper crust of the earth, and this notwithstanding the fact that gems are often found deep down in the earth.

This is very significant, and points to the conclusion that these stones were formed by the slow percolation of water from the surface through the deeper parts of the earth, carrying with it, in solution or suspension, the chemical constituents of the earth’s upper crust; time and long-continued pressure, combined with heat or cold, or perhaps both in turn, doing the rest, as already mentioned.

The moisture falling in dew and rain becomes acidulated with carbonic acid, CO_{2} (carbon dioxide), from the combustion and decay of organic matter, vegetation, and other sources, and this moisture is capable of dissolving certain calcareous substances, which it takes deep into the earth, till the time comes when it enters perhaps a division-plane in some rock, or some such cavity, and is unable to get away. The hollow becomes filled with water, which is slowly more and more charged with the salts brought down, till saturated; then super-saturated, so that the salts become precipitated, or perhaps crystallised out, maybe by the presence of more or other salts, or by a change in temperature. These crystals then become packed hard by further supplies and pressure, till eventually, after the lapse of ages, a natural gem is found, _exactly filling_ the cavity, and is a precious find in many cases.

If now we try to find its analogy in chemistry, and for a moment consider the curious behaviour of some well-known salts, under different conditions of temperature, what is taking place underground ceases to be mysterious and becomes readily intelligible.

Perhaps the best salt for the purpose, and one easy to obtain for experiment, is the sulphate of sodium–known also as Glauber’s Salt.

It is in large, colourless prisms, which may soon be dissolved in about three parts of water, so long as the water does not exceed 60° F., and at this temperature a super-saturated solution may easily be made. But if the water is heated the salt then becomes more and more insoluble as the temperature increases, till it is completely insoluble.

If a super-saturated solution of this Glauber’s Salt is made in a glass, at ordinary atmospheric temperature, and into this cold solution, without heating, is dropped a small crystal of the same salt, there will be caused a rise in temperature, and the whole will then crystallise out quite suddenly; the water will be absorbed, and the whole will solidify into a mass which exactly fits the inner contour of the vessel.

We have now formed what _might_ be a precious stone, and no doubt would be, if continuous pressure could be applied to it for perhaps a few thousand years; at any rate, the formation of a natural jewel is not greatly different, and after being subjected for a period, extending to ages, to the washings of moisture, the contact of its containing bed (its later matrix), the action of the changes in the temperature of the earth in its vicinity, it emerges by volcanic eruption, earthquake, landslip and the like, or is discovered as a rare and valuable specimen of some simple compound of earth-crust and water, as simple as Glauber’s Salt, or as the pure crystallized carbon.

It is also curious to note that in some cases the stones have not been caused by aqueous deposit in an already existing hollow, but the aqueous infusion has acted on a portion of the rock on which it rested, absorbing the rock, and, as it were, replacing it by its own substance. This is evidenced in cases where gems have been found encrusted on their matrix, which latter was being slowly transformed to the character of the jewel encrusted, or “scabbed” on it.

The character of the matrix is also in a great measure the cause of the variety of the stone, for it is obvious that the same salt-charged aqueous solution which undergoes change in and on ironstone would result in an entirely different product from that resting on or embedded in silica.

Following out the explanation of the aqueous solution, in which the earth-crust constituents are secreted, we find that the rarer and more precious metals do not generally enter into the composition of precious stones–which fact may advisedly be repeated. It is, of course, to be expected that beryllium will be found in the emerald, since it is under the species beryl, and zirconium in zircon; but such instances are the exception, and we may well wonder at the actions of the infinite powers of nature, when we reflect that the rarest, costliest and most beautiful of all precious stones are the simplest in their constituents.

Thus we find the diamond standing unique amongst all gems in being composed of one element only–carbon–being pure crystallised carbon; a different form from graphite, it is true, but, nevertheless, pure carbon and nothing else. Therefore, from its chemical, as well as from its commercial aspect, the diamond stands alone as the most important of gems.

The next in simplicity, whilst being the most costly of all, is the ruby, and with this may be classed the blue sapphire, seeing that their chemical constituents are exactly the same, the difference being one of colour only. These have two elements, oxygen and aluminium, which important constituents appear also in other stones, but this example is sufficient to prove their simplicity of origin.

Another unique stone is the turquoise, in that it is the only rare gem essentially containing a great proportion of water, which renders it easily liable to destruction, as we shall see later. It is a combination of alumina, water, and phosphoric acid, and is also unique in being the only known valuable stone containing a phosphate.

Turning to the silica series, we again find a number of gems with two elements only, silica–an important constituent of the earth’s crust–and oxygen–an important constituent of atmospheric air. In this group may be mentioned the opal, amethyst, agate, rock-crystal, and the like, as the best known examples, whilst oxygen appears also mostly in the form of oxides, in chrysoberyl, spinel, and the like. This silica group is extremely interesting, for in it, with the exception of the tourmaline and a few others, the composition of the gems is very simple, and we find in this group such stones as the chrysolite, several varieties of topaz, the garnet, emerald, etc., etc.

Malachite and similar stones are more ornamental than precious, though they come in the category of precious stones. These are the carbonate series, containing much carbonic acid, and, as may be expected, a considerable proportion of water in their composition, which water can, of course, be dispelled by the application of heat, but to the destruction of the stone.

From all this will be seen how strong is the theory of aqueous percolation, for, given time and pressure, water charged with earth-crust constituents appears to be the origin of the formation of all precious stones; and all the precious stones known have, when analysed, been found to be almost exclusively composed of upper-earth-crust constituents; the other compounds which certain stones contain may, in all cases, be traced to their matrix, or to their geological or mineralogical situation.

In contradistinction to this, the essentially underground liquids, with time and pressure, form metallic minerals and mineralise the rocks, instead of forming gems.

Thus we see that in a different class of minerals–compounds of metals with the sulphates, such as sulphuric acid and compounds; also those containing the metallic sulphides; in cases where the metalliferous ores or the metallic elements enter into composition with the halogens–bromine, chlorine, fluorine, and iodine–in all these, precious stones are comparatively common, but the stones of these groups are invariably those used for decorative or ornamental purposes, and true “gems” are entirely absent.

It would therefore appear that though metallic minerals, as already mentioned, are formed by the action of essentially _underground_ chemically-charged water–combined with ages of time and long-continued pressure, rocks and earth being transformed into metalliferous ores by the same means–precious stones (or that portion of them ranking as jewels or gems) must on the contrary be wholly, or almost wholly, composed of _upper_-earth-crust materials, carried deep down by water, and subjected to the action of the same time and pressure; the simpler the compound, the more perfect and important the result, as seen in the diamond, the ruby, and the like.

Remembering our lessons in physics we recall that just as light-rays may be refracted, absorbed, or reflected, according to the media through which they are caused to pass, so do heat-rays possess similar properties.

Therefore, if heat-rays are projected through precious stones, or brought to bear on them in some other manner than by simple projection, they will be refracted, absorbed, or reflected by the stones in the same manner as if they were light-rays, and just as certain stones allow light to pass through their substance, whilst others are opaque, so do some stones offer no resistance to the passage of heat-rays, but allow them free movement through the substance, whilst, in other cases, no passage of heat is possible, the stones being as opaque to heat as to light. Indeed, the properties of light and heat are in many ways identical, though the test by heat must in all cases give place to that by light, which latter is by far of the greater importance in the judging and isolation of precious stones.

It will readily be understood that in the spectrum the outer or extreme light-rays at each side are more or less bent or diverted, but those nearest the centre are comparatively straight, so that, as before remarked, these central rays are taken as being the standard of light-value.

This divergence or refraction is greater in some stones than in others, and to it the diamond, as an example, owes its chief charm. In just such manner do certain stones refract, absorb, or reflect heat; thus amber, gypsum, and the like, are practically opaque to heat-rays, in contrast with those of the nature of fluorspar, rock-salt, etc., which are receptive.

Heat passes through these as easily as does light through a diamond, such stones being classed as diathermal (to heat through). So that all diathermal stones are easily permeable by radiant heat, which passes through them exactly as does light through transparent bodies.

Others, again, are both single and double refracting to heat-rays, and it is interesting to note the heat-penetrating value as compared with the refractive indexes of the stone. In the following table will be found the refractive indexes of a selection of single and double refractive stones, the figures for “Light” being taken from a standard list.

The second column shows the refractive power of heat, applied to the actual stones, and consisting of a fine pencil blowpipe-flame, one line (the one twelfth part of an inch) in length in each case.
This list must be taken as approximate, since in many instances the test has been made on one stone only, without possibility of obtaining an average; and as stones vary considerably, the figures may be raised or lowered slightly, or perhaps even changed in class, because in some stones the least stain or impurity may cause the heat effects to be altered greatly in their character, and even to become singly or doubly refracting, opaque or transparent, to heat-rays, according to the nature of the impurity or to some slight change in the crystalline structure, and so on.

Selection of Singly refracting stones. Indexes of Rays of
Light. Heat.

Fluorspar 1.436 4.10 varies
Opal 1.479 2.10 ”
Spinel 1.726 1.00
Almandine 1.764 1.00
Diamond 2.431 6.11 double

Selection of Doubly refracting stones. Indexes of Rays of
Light. Heat.

Quartz 1.545 4.7 single and double
Beryl 1.575 1.0 varies considerably
Topaz 1.635 4.1 ” ”
Chrysoberyl 1.765 1.1 ” ”
Ruby 1.949 5.1 single and double

The tourmaline has a light-refractive index of 1.63, with a heat index of none, being to heat-rays completely opaque.

The refractive index of gypsum is 1.54, but heat none, being opaque.

The refractive index of amber is 1.51, but heat none, being opaque.

In some of the specimens the gypsum showed a heat-penetration index of 0.001, and amber of 0.056, but mostly not within the third point.

In all cases the heat-penetration and refraction were shown by electric recorders. These figures are the average of those obtained from tests made in some cases on several stones of the same kind, and also on isolated specimens. Not only does the power of the stone to conduct heat vary in different stones of the same kind or variety, as already explained, but there is seen a remarkable difference in value, according to the spot on which the heat is applied, so that on one stone there is often seen a conductivity varying between 0.15 to 4.70.

This is owing to the differences of expansion due to the temporary disturbance of its crystalline structure, brought about by the applied heat. This will be evident when heat is applied on the axes of the crystal, on their faces, angles, lines of symmetry, etc., etc., each one of which gives different results, not only as to value in conductivity, but a result which varies in a curious degree, out of all proportion to the heat applied.

In many cases a slight diminution in applied heat gives a greater conductivity, whilst in others a slight rise in the temperature of the heat destroys its conductivity altogether, and renders the stone quite opaque to heat-rays.

This anomaly is due entirely to the alteration of crystalline structure, which, in the one case, is so changed by the diminution in heat as to cause the crystals to be so placed that they become diathermal, or transparent to heat-rays; whilst, in the other instance, the crystals which so arrange themselves as to be diathermal are, by a slightly increased temperature, somewhat displaced, and reflect, or otherwise oppose the direct passage of heat-rays, which, at the lower temperature, obtained free passage.

Thus certain stones become both opaque and diathermal, and as the heat is caused to vary, so do they show the complete gamut between the two extremes of total opacity and complete transparency to heat-rays.

For the purpose under consideration, the temperature of the pencil of heat applied to the stones in their several portions was kept constant. It will be seen, therefore, that no great reliance can be placed on the heat test as applied to precious stones.

Group B. Stones whose specific gravity lies between 3.70 and under 4.7963.

Garnets, many varieties.
Almandine 4.11 and occasionally to 4.25
Ruby 4.073 ” 4.080
Sapphire 4.049 ” 4.060
Corundum 3.90 ” 4.16
Cape Ruby 3.861
Demantoid 3.815
Staurolite 3.735
Malachite 3.710 and occasionally to 3.996

Many stones are capable of exhibiting the same phenomenon, not only by friction, as in Thales’s experiment, but also under the influence of light, heat, magnetism, chemical action, pressure, etc., and of holding or retaining this induced or added power for a long or short period, according to conditions and environment.

If a small pith ball is suspended from a non-conducting support, it forms a simple and ready means of testing the electricity in a stone. According to whether the ball is repelled or attracted, so is the electricity in the stone made evident, though the electroscope gives the better results.

By either of these methods it will be found that some of the stones are more capable of giving and receiving charges of electricity than are others; also that some are charged throughout with one kind only, either positive or negative, whilst others have both, becoming polarised electrically, having one portion of their substance negative, the other positive. For instance, amber, as is well known, produces negative electricity under the influence of friction, but in almost all cut stones, other than amber, the electricity produced by the same means is positive, whereas in the uncut stones the electricity is negative, with the exception of the diamond, in which the electricity is positive.

When heated, some stones lose their electricity; others develop it, others have it reversed, the positive becoming negative and vice versâ; others again, when heated, become powerfully magnetic and assume strong polarity.

When electricity develops under the influence of heat, or is in any way connected with a rising or falling of temperature in a body, it is called “pyro-electricity,” from the Greek word “pyros,” fire. The phenomenon was first discovered in the tourmaline, and it is observed, speaking broadly, only in those minerals which are hemimorphic, that is, where the crystals have different planes or faces at their two ends, examples of which are seen in such crystals as those of axinite, boracite, smithsonite, topaz, etc., all of which are hemimorphic.

Taking the tourmaline as an example of the pyro-electric minerals, we find that when this is heated to between 50° F. and 300° F. it assumes electric polarity, becoming electrified positively at one end or pole and negatively at the opposite pole. If it is suspended on a silken thread from a glass rod or other non-conducting support in a similar manner to the pith ball, the tourmaline will be found to have become an excellent magnet.

By testing this continually as it cools there will soon be perceived a point which is of extreme delicacy of temperature, where the magnetic properties are almost in abeyance. But as the tourmaline cools yet further, though but a fraction of a degree, the magnetic properties change; the positive pole becomes the negative, the negative having changed to the positive.

It is also interesting to note that if the tourmaline is not warmed so high as to reach a temperature of 50° F., or is heated so strongly as to exceed more than a few degrees above 300° F., then these magnetic properties do not appear, as no polarity is present. This polarity, or the presence of positive and negative electricity in one stone, may be strikingly illustrated in a very simple manner: -If a little sulphur and red-lead, both in fine powder, are shaken up together in a paper or similar bag, the moderate friction of particle against particle electrifies both; one negatively, the other positively.

If, then, a little of this now golden-coloured mixture is gently dusted over the surface of the tourmaline or other stone possessing electric polarity, a most interesting change is at once apparent. The red-lead separates itself from the sulphur and adheres to the negative portion of the stone, whilst the separated sulphur is at once attracted to the positive end, so that the golden-coloured mixture becomes slowly transformed into its two separate components -the brilliant yellow sulphur, and the equally brilliant red-lead. These particles form in lines and waves around the respective poles in beautiful symmetry, their positions corresponding with the directions of the lines of magnetic force, exactly as will iron filings round the two poles of a magnet.

From this it will clearly be seen how simple a matter it is to isolate the topaz, tourmaline, and all the pyro-electric stones from the non-pyro-electric, for science has not as yet been able to give to spurious stones these same electric properties, however excellent some imitations may be in other respects.

Further, almost all minerals lose their electricity rapidly on exposure to atmospheric influences, even to dry air; the diamond retains it somewhat longer than most stones, though the sapphire, topaz, and a few others retain it almost as long again as the diamond, and these electric properties are some of the tests which are used in the examination of precious stones.

Those stones which show electricity on the application of pressure are such as the fluorspar, calcite, and topaz.

With regard to magnetism, the actual cause of this is not yet known with certainty. It is, of course, a self-evident fact that the magnetic iron ore, which is a form of peroxide, commonly known as magnetite, or lodestone, has the power of attracting a magnet when swinging free, or of being attracted by a magnet, to account for which many plausible reasons have been advanced. Perhaps the most reasonable and acceptable of these is that this material contains molecules which have half their substance positively and the other half negatively magnetised.

Substances so composed, of which magnets are an example, may be made the means of magnetising other substances by friction, without they themselves suffering any loss; but it is not all substances that will respond to the magnet. For instance, common iron pyrites, FeS2, is unresponsive, whilst the magnetic pyrites, which varies from 5FeS, Fe2S3, to 6FeS, Fe2S3, and is a sulphide of iron, is responsive both positively and negatively. Bismuth and antimony also are inactive, whilst almost all minerals containing even a small percentage of iron will deflect the magnetic needle, at least under the influence of heat.

So that from the lodestone -the most powerfully magnetic mineral known -to those minerals possessing no magnetic action whatever, we have a long, graduated scale, in which many of the precious stones appear, those containing iron in their composition being more or less responsive, as already mentioned, and that either in their normal state, or when heated, and always to an extent depending on the quantity or percentage of iron they contain.

In this case, also, science has not as yet been able to introduce into an artificial stone the requisite quantity of iron to bring it the same analytically as the gem it is supposed to represent, without completely spoiling the colour. So that the behaviour of a stone in the presence of a magnet, to the degree to which it should or should not respond, is one of the important tests of a genuine stone.

Whereas a gem might be prized for its beauty by a single individual owner, a stone of curious and suggestive form sometimes claimed the reverence of an entire tribe, since it was thought to be the abode or the chosen instrument of some spirit or genius.

Just as the appeal to higher powers for present help in pressing emergencies preceded the development of a formal religious faith, so this never-failing need of protectors or healers eventually led to the attribution of powers of protection to the spirits of men and women who had led holy lives and about whose history legend had woven a web of pious imaginations at a time when poetic fancy reigned instead of historic record.

In a price-list of a firm of German druggists, printed in 1757, all the precious stones still appear. Here the cost of a pound of rock-crystal is six groschen ($.18) ; the same quantity of emerald was priced at eight groschen ($.25), while the pound of sapphire was quoted at sixteen groschen ($.50), of ruby at one thaler ($.75), and of lapis-lazuli at five thalers ($3.75). This indicates quite clearly the quality of the emerald, sapphire and ruby offered for sale. A pound of Oriental bezoar commanded the highest prioe, sixteen thalers ($12).”

Regarding the length of time during which various preparations retained their strength, Braunfels states that, according to the opinion of the Arabian physicians, the solution of lapis Armenus lasted for ten years, while that of lapis lazuli could be preserved only about three years. A list of the indispensable materials which should be in eyery good pharmacy included the following precious stones :
Jacinth, Magnes, emerald, hematite, Sapphire, Coral, Topaze, Jasper

The supposed medicinal properties of precious stones are subjected to a searching criticism by the Veronese physician, Francesco India, writing in 1593.

After establishing the distinction between alimentary and medicinal substances he proceeds to exclude from the latter category the jacinth, emerald, sapphire, etc. because although they could be reduced to a powder, they could not be dissolved, so that when taken in a potion they could be absorbed in the human system.

Hence no such effects could properly be ascribed to them as were to be expected from the regular and normal medicinal agencies. This writer ascribes the original use of such stones as remedies for malignant fevers and other dangerous diseases to the Arabs, adding that “had they not made this mistake and thus led many physicians into error they would have been better worthy of praise.”

In fact he does not hesitate to pronounce the emphatic opinion that these stones are not remedial agents fit to be
administered or used by any rational physician.

That powdered hematite (red oxide of iron) possesses an astringent quality and may really be looked upon as a medicine, he fully recognizes, more particularly its efficacy for the care of diseases of the eye, but neither these nor similar qualities can be credited to sapphires, emeralds, or jacinths.

At the same time he is not disposed to deny that these stones may have some subtle effect upon the body when worn, or when held in the month for a time. Thus he agrees with Avicenna (Ben Sina) that a jacinth worn over the heart may strengthen that organ, for he knows of the power inherent in jasper to check a hemorrhage. In a word his argument is principally directed against the internal use of powders made from these hard and unassimilable stones.