478 
LECTURES ON THE BRITISH PHARMACOPOEIA. 
deed, it would not be indifferent whether the pressure were effected by ail 
ordinary screw tincture press, or the more powerful hydraulic press, which 
is now being more generally introduced in pharmaceutical laboratories. 
Then, after having percolated, as it is called, we are told to “ filter the product, 
and mix the two liquids.” I infer from this that only one of the two liquids is 
to be filtered; but I presume the usual practice would be to filter the whole, 
after making it up from different sources, to the specified quantity. 
There are other imperfections in the description of the processes for 
some of the tinctures. Thus we are told that aconite root, arnica root, and 
guaiacum resin are to be used in fine powder ; that cochineal is to be in 
powder; that kino is to be in moderately fine powder ; that belladonna leaves, 
benzoin, cantharides, catechu, cinchona bark, cinnamon, jalap, myrrh, and 
opium, are to be in coarse powder ; that buchu, calumba, capsicum, carda¬ 
moms, cascarilla, chiretta, colchicum seeds, hemlock fruit, digitalis, ergot, 
galls, gentian, hyoscyamus, rhatany, rhubarb, savin, squill, etc., are to be 
bruised; while castor, saffron, and hop are to be used in their ordinary com¬ 
mercial states. 
The practical man looks here, but looks in vain, for some sufficient ground 
for ordering these ingredients to be used in the states specified. Why are 
aconite and arnica roots to be in fine powder, while jalap is to be in coarse 
powder, and calumba, gentian, and rhatany, are to be only bruised P Why is 
belladonna to be in coarse powder, while digitalis and hyoscyamus are to be 
only bruised ? Why are cochineal and kino to be in powder, while cardamoms, 
colchicum seeds, ergot of rye, and galls, are to be only bruised ? Why are can¬ 
tharides and catechu to be coarsely powdered, while castor is put in a lump 
into the spirit and left there without agitation P Can any satisfactory answers 
be given to these questions ? I fear not. In fact, if we look closely and cri¬ 
tically into these formulae, we find, I am sorry to say, a great number of 
errors, omissions, inconsistencies, call them what you will. I could say some¬ 
thing in favour of the new process—half maceration and half displacement— 
for the preparation of tinctures, and with a little modification I believe it 
would make a very good process for general use, indeed, I may say the 
best process that coulcl be adopted. I have forms of apparatus here which 
I consider to be applicable and suitable for carrying out this process, 
but as it would be impossible to enter fully into the subject in this lecture, 
I purpose making it the subject of a paper to be read at our next Phar¬ 
maceutical meeting, when it can be freely discussed. But I have no hesi¬ 
tation iD saying that the whole of the formulae for the tinctures ought 
to be rewritten. We expected that the British Pharmacopoeia would repre¬ 
sent the existing advanced state of pharmacy in this country, but if this be 
a representation of our pharmaceutical knowledge, skill, and science, we have 
been retrograding instead of advancing. Thirty-nine of our tinctures are 
directed to be made by the new process, and thirteen of the remainder are 
left to be made b} r the old process of maceration. Yet I must not say by the 
old process of maceration, for in that we were told to shake up the ingre¬ 
dients from time to time, and this was of the very essence of the process, 
without which it would not do at all. But now this part of the process is 
omitted. Take for instance the formula for tincture of castor ; it is as fol¬ 
lows :— 
“ Take of, castor one ounce ; rectified spirit, one pint; macerate for seven 
da}^s, strain, express, filter, and add sufficient rectified spirit to make one 
pint.” 
These are the instructions given not only in that but in all the other thir¬ 
teen cases. In the case of the castor, we are to put the uubroken follicles, 
which in the Materia Medica part of the work are described as about “ three 
