Diamond, topaz, and tourmaline are powerful enough, when electrified by friction with a cloth, to attract fragments of paper, the electrification being positive. Amber develops considerable negative electricity when treated in a similar manner.
Diamond is translucent to the Röntgen (X) rays; glass, on the other hand, is opaque to them, and this test distinguishes brilliants from paste imitations. Diamond also, unlike glass, phosphoresces under the influence of radium, a property characterizing also kunzite.
It will be seen that the electrical characters, although of considerable interest to the student, are, on account of their limited application and difficulty of test, of little service for the discrimination of gem-stones.
PART I—SECTION B
THE TECHNOLOGY OF GEM-STONES
CHAPTER XI
UNIT OF WEIGHT
THE system in use for recording the weights of precious stones is peculiar to jewellery. The unit, which is known as the carat, bears no simple relation to any unit that has existed among European nations, and indubitably has been introduced from the East. When man in early days sought to record the weights of small objects, he made use of the most convenient seeds or grains which were easily obtainable and were at the same time nearly uniform in size. In Europe the smallest unit of weight was the barley grain. Similarly in the East the seeds of some leguminous tree were selected. Those of the locust-tree, Ceratonia siliqua, which is common in the countries bordering the Mediterranean, on the average weigh so nearly a carat that they almost certainly formed the original unit. It is, indeed, from the Greek κεράτιον, little horn, which refers to the shape of the pods, that the word carat is derived.
It is one of the eccentricities of the jewellery trade that precision should not have been given to the unit of weight. Not only does it vary at most of the trade centres in the world, but it is not even always constant at each centre. The difference is negligible in the case of single stones of ordinary size, but becomes a matter of serious importance when large stones, or parcels of small stones, are bought and sold, particularly when the stones are very costly. Attempts have been made at various times to secure a uniform standard, but as yet with only partial success. In 1871 the carat defined as the equivalent of 0·20500 gram was suggested at a meeting of the principal jewellers of Paris and London, and was eventually accepted in Paris, New York, Leipzig, and Borneo. It has, however, recently been recognized that in view of the gradual spread of the metric system of weights and measures the most satisfactory unit is the metric carat of one-fifth (0·2) gram. This has now been constituted the legal carat of France and Belgium, and no doubt other countries will follow their example. The carat weight obtaining in London weighs about 0·20530 gram, and the approximate equivalents in the gram at other centres are as follows:—Florence 0·19720, Madrid 0·20539, Berlin 0·20544, Amsterdam 0·20570, Lisbon 0·20575, Frankfort-on-Main 0·20577, Vienna 0·20613, Venice 0·20700, and Madras 0·20735. The gram itself is inconveniently large to serve as a unit for the generality of stones met with in ordinary jewellery.
The notation for expressing the sub-multiples of the carat forms another curious eccentricity. Fractions are used which are powers of the half: thus the half, the half of that, i.e. the quarter, and so on down to the sixty-fourth, and the weight of a stone is expressed by a series of fractions, e.g. 3½⅛1/64 carats. In the case of diamond a single unreduced fraction to the base 64 is substituted in place of the series of single fractions, and the weight of a stone is stated thus, 440/64 carats. With the introduction of the metric carat the more convenient and rational decimal notation would, of course, be simultaneously adopted.