23 
Remington, J. P., says: 
The book was delayed because the United States has been unable, until within 
the last three months, to form a standard for diphtheria antitoxin. — Proc. Penna. 
Pharm. Ass., 1905, p. 74. 
“ Gnomon ” understands that the delay in publication has been 
caused by prolonged negotiations having for their object the finding 
of a firm of publishers which should offer the best terms. — Pharm. J., 
Loud. 1905, v. 21, p. TO. 
Caldwell, Paul, says: 
Enough time has not been allowed for the circulation of the book among drug- 
gists to allow them to be prepared for the official change. — Drug. Circ. & Chem. 
Gaz., X. Y., 1905, v. 49, p. 307. 
Wilbert, M. I.. points out that the time required for the revision 
could be reduced if the book were thoroughly criticised before the 
meeting of the national convention. — Am. J. Pharm., Phila., 1905, 
v. TT, p. 370. 
Williams, S. W., says that unless an interval of six months or 
more can be provided for between the date on which the pharma- 
copoeia can be freely bought and the date on which it becomes “ offi- 
cial,” something in the nature of a “ prospectus ” should be pre- 
sented to the trade sufficiently in advance to allow manufacturers and 
others to adapt themselves to the required changes. — Drug. Circ. & 
Chem. Gaz., N. Y., 1905, v. 49, p. 308. 
The editor records the difficulty of securing copies of the pharma- 
copoeia during July, August, and September. — Ibid., p. 341. 
Editorial note on letters received explaining why pharmacopoeias 
can not be supplied. — Ibid., p. 414. 
The editor discusses the relation between the number of pharma- 
copoeias sold and the number of drug stores in the country. — Ibid., 
p. 304. 
The editor suggests that publicity be given to the work of revision 
and thus increase the interest in the book and secure for it a far 
larger measure of support than it has ever had from either phar- 
macists or physicians. — Bull. Pharm., Detroit, 1905, v. 19, p. 442. 
The editor discusses the several communications that have ap- 
peared relative to the publication of commentaries and other pub- 
lications bearing on the U. S. P., VIII. — Chem. & Drug., Bond., 
1905, v. 67, p. 545. 
Cowley. R. C., deprecates the publication of upwards of 75 pages 
of matter relating largely to the individual members of the several 
committees and the members of the national convention. — Brit. & 
Col. Drug., Lond., 1905, v. 48, p. 382. 
MacEwan, Peter, suggests that in future the U. S. P. and B. P. 
be published in quinquennial intervals, the B. P. in 1910, the U. S. P. 
in 1915, and so on. — Am. Druggist, N. Y., 1905, v. 47, p. 95. 
