362 
NOTES ON THE BRITISH PHARMACOPOEIA. 
Rhamnus catliarticus. 
Sagus species. 
Saguerus species. 
Sagapenuin plant. 
Salix species. 
Simaruba officinalis. 
Spigelia marjlandica. 
Spongia officinalis. 
Tormentilla officinalis. 
Veratrum album. 
Yiola oclorata. 
In the above table we have not included the plant from which “ Aloe Hepa- 
tica” is obtained, because “Aloe Socotrina” is still an article of the Materia 
Medica of the British Pharmacopoeia, and there can be little doubt but that both 
kinds of aloes have a similar botanical origin, and owe their distinctive charac¬ 
teristics to their different modes of preparation. 
The above lists show that no less than eighty-two substances of the organic 
Materia Medica lately included in the British Pharmacopoeias, and fifty-two 
plants and animals, have no place in the present ‘ British Pharmacopoeia. 1 This 
is no trifling change so far as organic bodies are concerned, and upon the whole 
we regard it as a useful step in the right direction, for such substances as Absin¬ 
thium, Angelica, Carota, Centaurium, Cornu, Dolichos, Inula, Laurus, Linum 
catharticum, Melissa, Menyanthes, Origanum, Pix, Sagapenuin, Simaruba, Tere- 
binthina Chia, Terebinthina Veneta, etc., have long been almost obsolete in this 
country, and could consequently have no claims to be inserted in a new national 
Pharmacopoeia. Such substances, however, as Althaea, Canella, Chimapliila, 
Canna, Helleborus, Lactuca, Maranta, Pyrethrum,RhamniBaccae, Sago, Tapioca, 
Tormentilla, etc., have, w T e think, at least equal claims for insertion as Arnica, 
Cocculus, Elemi, Ficus, Hemidesmus, Mori Succus, Prunum, Pterocarpus, 
Rhoeas, Thus, Ulmus, Uvae, etc., which are included in the present Pharmacopoeia. 
The pruning-knife might also in certain cases have probably been exercised with 
benefit in other directions; thus, what advantage has been gained by retaining 
all the following fruits, possessing, as they do, nearly identical properties ; 
namely, those of Anethum, Anisum, Carui, Coriandrum, and Foeniculum? or, 
in like manner, Benzoinum, Styrax, Balsamum Peruvianum, and Balsamum 
Tolutanum ? 
It will be seen that the majority of excluded substances were formerly in 
the Edinburgh Pharmacopoeia. Thus w r e find 72 excluded from the 1 British 
Pharmacopoeia 1 which were formerly included in the Edinburgh; 46 excluded 
from the Loudon ; and 36 from the Dublin. The great majority excluded 
from the Edinburgh is doubtless due to the long period which has elapsed 
since a new Pharmacopoeia has been issued by the college of that city. 
If we now turn to the second table, we find only twenty-one new substances 
introduced to the organic Materia Medica, and but eight new officinal plants 
and animals. The number of new organic bodies alluded to in the present 
Pharmacopoeia is somewdiat increased in the Appendix, etc., where we find ox-bile, 
indigo, oxalic acid, pyroxylin, and a few other substances ordered, which are 
employed in the preparation of medicines, in chemical analysis, or as test solu¬ 
tions. We regret to find so short a list of new organic bodies, for several sub¬ 
stances in frequent use might with great advantage have been introduced. We 
should like to see a similar plan adopted by the framers of the ‘ British Pharma¬ 
copoeia 1 as has been for some time employed with great advantage in the United 
States Pharmacopoeia,—that is, to have a Secondary List of the Materia Medica, 
to include all newly-introduced remedies which are upon their trial, but not suffi¬ 
ciently established to warrant their being placed in a prominent position in a 
national Pharmacopoeia. 
Although the number of new organic substances in the Materia Medica and 
Appendix of the British Pharmacopoeia is but twenty-jive, as compared with the 
three last Pharmacopoeias of the United Kingdom, yet, when compared with the 
last London Pharmacopoeia, the number of new bodies is increased, as will be 
seen by the following table :— 
