THE STUDY OF LANGUAGE. 165 



that the Druggist just looking at the contents, can easily mistake 

 Morphine for Quinine. He gives xxx grs. of Morphine by mistake 

 for Quinine, the man dies ; the stomach is sent to Dr. Ellis, and the 

 Druggist a])pears at the next assizes to answer to the charge of man- 

 slaughter. Now, had these been in volumetric solution, with dose 

 for each 1 dr., the Physician would have written Quinine Sulph. 6 drs. 

 and then, as the dose for morphine would been exactly the same a 

 ])oisonous quantity would not have been administered. 



The above are the principal features of the system, but what would I 

 think still further improve it, would be the introduction of the metric 

 system of measures. The dose for all being the same, there would 

 not be the danger of misplacing decimal points as in the metric 

 system as now applied. Taking for the standard dose 1 to 2 cubic 

 centimetres and having our bottles in sizes of 100 and 200 C C.'s 

 theie would be much greater facility of reckoning than at present. 



By having a uniform dosage system, not only would much un- 

 necessary work for the student be abolished and enable him to devote 

 more of his time to the much more essential study of therapeutics, 

 but for therapeutic purposes we would have a most complete scientific 

 system, as the standard dose ^ — 1 dr. or 1 — 2 C.C.'s as the case may 

 be the therapeutic unit, as 1 dr. of tinct. aconite would produce 

 maximum therapeutic effect of the drug, and so likewise the I dr. of 

 tinct. opii. the 1 dr. of tinct. digitalis, etc., ad infinitum. 



Mr. Charles Hill Tout, read a paper on " The Study of 

 Language." 



In the Way Volume of the Popular Science Monthly of last year, is 

 an article from the pen of Mons. Havelocque in which he i)uts forth the 

 astounding statement that language is an organism. Now, as this 

 touches upon an extremely important point in linguistics, and is 

 propounded, presumably, in support of the views held by the school 

 Mons. Havelocque represents, it will be well worth while to consider 

 the grounds on which he makes this assertion. 



He begins his paper by telling us that the faculty of language 

 stands in close relation with a certiin one of the frontal convolutions 

 of the brain which the inferior monkeys do not possess, and which 

 is found in a rudimentary state in the. anthropoids, but the full 

 acquisition and most complete development of which has made man 

 2 ' 



