RELATION OP THE BRITISH PHARMACOPOEIA TO PHARMACOLOGY. 633 
neutral or slightly acid solution ; this it does, of course, by decomposing the car¬ 
bonate of potash, producing sulphate of potash. Finally the solution is to be 
evaporated till a film forms on the surface, and then set by for twenty-four 
hours ; the crystals which will have formed by that time are to be dried on fil¬ 
tering paper, and preserved in a bottle. Now in the laboratory we find it 
convenient to follow the first line of this process and the last, but to skip over 
all between. To solution of bisulphate of potash we add carbonate of potash 
until no more effervescence is produced, and then evaporate and crystallize ; 
and operating upon one pound, we find our process quite as economical as that 
of the Pharmacopoeia. 
Pulvis Antimonialis. —Antimonial powder is quite a feature in the new 
Pharmacopoeia. Standing prominently out in the older Pharmacopoeias as in¬ 
constant in its chemical properties, uncertain in its therapeutical effect, and al¬ 
together unsatisfactory and empirical, it is now noticeable for its simplicity of 
formation and perfectly definite character : it is simply a mixture of one part 
of oxide of antimony with two parts of phosphate of lime. We can only 
wonder, indeed, that the process for its preparation was not introduced into the 
London Pharmacopoeia of 1851, for it had been described nine years before that 
date in the pages of the 4 Pharmaceutical Journal.’ Old Quincy, speaking of 
antimony, says, “ There is at this time in the hands of some empirics, medicines 
from this basis, which are an intolerable scandal to learning and education.” 
Spurred on by that observation, Tyson, a medical practitioner whom I have 
already had occasion to cite, began, some fifty years ago, to inquire into the vir¬ 
tues of the various preparations of antimony. This he did both by analysis and 
by carefully watching their effects on the animal economy, and the results of his 
observations were communicated to this Society at the Pharmaceutical Meeting 
of February 9th, 1812 (Pharm. Journ. vol. i. p. 419). After torturing anti¬ 
mony in all ways, and trying, in the course of his practice, all its forms in all 
febrile diseases, in patients of all ages and of all temperaments, he became satis¬ 
fied that we had only two preparations worthy of notice, and that these two were 
invaluable, namely, the tartrate and the oxide ; that the oxide was, in fact, the 
base of every useful preparation of antimony; thus proving the truth of the re¬ 
mark in Duncan’s ‘Edinburgh Dispensatory,’ that “oxide of antimony with'phos- 
phate of lime is one of the best antimonials we possess.” In comparing the effects 
of James’s powder with the pulvis antimonialis of his day, Tyson sometimes found 
their virtues so alike in all their combinations as not to be distinguished. Some¬ 
times he had occasion to prefer James’s powder to the pulvis antimonialis ; at 
other times he had reason to give to pulvis antimonialis the preference, finding 
that in James’s powder there was considerable variation, but in his mixture of 
oxide of antimony and phosphate of lime he found, as he says, “ a prepara¬ 
tion fa,r superior, being always the same and always certain.” Tyson made his 
phosphate of lime from bones by the same process as that now given in the 
British Pharmacopoeia, and also procured his oxide of antimony by the method 
there adopted. lie dissolved sulphide of antimony in hydrochloric acid to form 
what in the Pharmacopoeia is termed Liquor Antimonii Tercliloridi; this he 
poured into water to form the “ pulvis algarothi,” or oxychloride of antimony, 
just the proceeding we are now to follow in making Antimonii Oxyclum ; and 
his oxychloride, like ours, was finally washed with an alkaline carbonate to re¬ 
move all traces of the chlorous element, leaving pure hydrated oxide of anti¬ 
mony. Writing in 1842, Tyson, at the conclusion of his paper, said, “The 
above form of Pulvis Antimonialis I have now used for upwards of twenty years ; 
and such is my estimation of its value in the cure of disease, that if I wished to 
leave a legacy to my country, I think I could not bequeath to her a greater 
boon. I have long found it unnecessary to use either James’s powder or the 
Pulvis Antimonialis of the Pharmacopoeia 5 and I am quite sure that when the 
