720 NOTES AND ABSTRACTS IN CHEMISTRY AND PHARMACY. 
poison (either in part i. or ii.), there is wide scope given by the recent decision 
of the Privy Council, on the case submitted to them, for the exercise of one’s 
own judgment; so that uniformity could hardly be expected. I think it very- 
desirable that we should have some general understanding amongst ourselves, as 
to the strength of preparations labelled u poison,” in order to ensure as much as 
possible a similarity of practice in labelling them. 
When customers obtain the same preparation at two shops, and find one< 
labelled poison, and the other not, they naturally ask questions and are sur¬ 
prised, frequently thinking that some mistake has occurred. If a committee 
were appointed by the Society to consider the subject, and their proposed scheme 
published in the Journal and the ‘ Chemist and Druggist,’and recommended 
for general adoption, in my opinion it would be of great benefit. Not being 
compulsory, every one would be allowed to use his own discretion, and a careful 
discrimination would in many cases be much more effective than a fixed standard 
of strength authoritatively determined by the Privy Council. Every one, who 
has had practical experience on the subject, knows what a difficult matter it is 
to deal with,—the same preparation may be quite safe in one case and dangerous 
in others; no care or forethought of the vender, or signature in the poison 
book, can save from accidents caused by ignorance or carelessness on the part of 
the purchaser. 
With respect to the question raised by Mr. Giles, as to whether we can legally 
refuse to supply poisons, when the form of filling up the entry is complied with, 
I would remark there are many cases in which it is prudent not to supply the 
full quantity asked for, and in some few instances to decline altogether to sell 
any. Yours truly, 
George Brown, 
Sandown, Isle of Wight 
NOTES AND ABSTRACTS IN CHEMISTRY AND PHARMACY. 
BY C. H. WOOD, F.C.S. 
On Emetine. 
M. J. Lefort has published* some researches on the preparation, pro¬ 
perties, and composition of emetine, the active principle of ipecacuanha. 
This substance was first isolated by Pelletier and Magendie, and its pro¬ 
perties afterwards more fully described by Pelletier and by Dumas. These 
chemists recommended the extraction of emetine to be effected by decom¬ 
posing the compound of the base present in the ipecacuanha with calcined 
magnesia; the alcoholic solution, filtered through animal charcoal, deposits 
the alkaloid in the form of a -white or grey substance, possessing all the vomi¬ 
tive property of the ipecacuanha. Several other processes have since been 
published, and, in 1853, M. Leprat applied to the isolation of this base the 
method indicated by M. Rabourdin, for the elimination of atropin and other 
alkaloids. He stated that by treating the alcoholic extract of ipecacuanha 
with chloroform and caustic potash, he had obtained from 100 grammes of 
powdered ipecacuanha, between 6 and 7 grammes of emetine, but he added 
that other samples of the drug had not furnished so large a quantity. M. 
Lefort gives a decided preference to this process of M. Leprat, although it 
occupies a long time in its performance, but he does not find it possible to 
obtain so large a proportion of pure alkaloid as that chemist indicates. 
Erom his own analysis he concludes that the ipecacuanhas of Brazil and 
New Granada do not contain more than 1 per cent, of pure emetine. 
* ‘Journal de Pharmacre,’ April, 18t>9. 
