334 
THE BRITISH PHARMACOPEIA. 
of the contest between medical treatment and disease. Its language should be 
simple and explicit, and the arrangement of the matter such as to afford the 
greatest facilities for reference. With nothing superfluous, it should neverthe¬ 
less contain ample details suited to the requirements of those by whom medi¬ 
cines are to be prepared. While every attainable quality that will contribute 
to the efficacy of the medicines should, as far as possible, be provided for, no unne¬ 
cessary difficulties should be thrown in the way of manufacturers or dispensers. 
Merely fanciful qualities, difficult of attainment, degrees of purity which can¬ 
not be uniformly ensured, or w r hich, if they can, would occasion an increase of 
expense, unwarranted by any difference in the power or properties of the medi¬ 
cine, should not be required. The ‘ Pharmacopoeia,’ in fact, should be a book 
that he who runs can read, and he who reads can follow. 
There are many practical difficulties in the way of producing a good Pharma¬ 
copoeia. To determine what substances should be included in the Materia Me- 
dica requires the knowledge and experience of the physician. To give to these 
the most suitable condition for medical administration, and to combine them so 
as to produce the required effect, involves the conjoint knowledge of prescriber, 
manufacturer, and dispenser. To devise the best means of eliminating active 
principles, or producing definite compounds, suitable for use in medicine, re¬ 
quires the scientific knowledge and skill of the chemist. To indicate the cha¬ 
racters by which the substances used in medicine may be distinguished and iden¬ 
tified, the habits of observation and powers of discrimination of the naturalist 
must be applied. There are thus required a combination of powers that are 
rarely possessed by one person, and are not easily associated in different indivi¬ 
duals so as to produce the required result. Since physicians have given up the 
practice of pharmacy, they have ceased to possess the knowledge that would 
enable them to indicate the best forms for the administration, and processes for 
the production, of medicines. On these points they must appeal to the practical 
pharmaceutist and manufacturing chemist; nor could these latter accomplish the 
object without the aid of the physician, who watches and judges of the effects of 
the medicines. 
In the preparation of the ‘ British Pharmacopoeia ’ there has been engaged an 
unusual combination of associated talent, from which some persons have been 
led to expect a work greatly superior to any similar wmrk previously produced. 
But if in some respects the Committee, to whom the work has been entrusted, 
have been favourably circumstanced, in others they have laboured under great 
disadvantages. They have had to amalgamate three separate Pharmacopoeias, 
and to reconcile to one standard the practice of medical men, who, as they have 
been differently situated and circumstanced, have hitherto had three separate 
standards. Each of the three previously existing Pharmacopoeias has had its re¬ 
presentatives, and may be supposed to have had its advocates. These represen¬ 
tatives in England, Scotland, and Ireland have been too far removed from each 
other to admit of their working thoroughly in concert, yet their concurrence in 
results has been necessary, and this has, no doubt, involved many compromises 
likely to be unfavourable in their influence upon the character of the work. The 
predictions of success in the first edition of the ‘British Pharmacopoeia’ have 
not been unaccompanied by serious misgivings on the part of many observant 
men. The work, however, is now before the public, and will be fairly judged 
upon its merits. 
The time does not admit in the present number, which is now preparing for 
press, of our entering very fully into a critical examination of a work of this de¬ 
scription, involving so many points on which its merits must depend. As far 
as we have looked into the work, and can judge at first sight, we find much to 
commend, and much also that is wholly indefensible. • 
We propose, in the first place, to point out some of the most prominent 
