98 
ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PHARMACOPCETA. 
is not. But in making these criticisms it must be admitted that in the large 
majority of cases, the names employed in the British Pharmacopoeia have been 
well selected, and are as free from objection on the score of ambiguity or incon¬ 
sistency as any names can be. 
In the selection of names to be used, as well as in the introduction of new 
formulae, or the omission of old, it appears to me that more regard should be 
had to existing custom and practice. Thus names that are familiar and in con¬ 
stant use should not be hastily changed ; medicines that are hitherto unknown 
should not make their first appearance in a pharmacopoeia • and old medicines 
which are in daily employment should not be suddenly discarded, or have their 
composition materially altered.* 
OBSERVATIONS UPON THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 
PHARMACOPOEIA. 
BY MR. A. F. HASELBEN. 
“ Dediscit animus sero quod didicit diu.” 
To offer suggestions or make remarks upon a work which has been pretty 
freely dealt with, and is now in the hands of those well qualified to revise it 
with ability and judgment, might at first sight seem needless, uncalled for, and 
mtiusive; and I should be among the last to appear in the lists under such 
colours, but I am induced to offer my thoughts upon the construction of a Phar¬ 
macopoeia, in consequence of the invitation given at the last Pharmaceutical 
Evening Meeting by Professor Redwood, and seconded by the chairman of the 
evening, in words suggestive of the French proverb, “ Chacun ira au moulin 
avec son propre sac,’ still more from a degree of pleasure I feel in the matter, 
and from the additional stimulus that my attempts or contributions are xeceived 
with consideration and attention, and moreover, now is the time to speak or 
write, before the next edition ot the British Pharmacopoeia makes its appearance. 
Ro one can, I feel, be justly blamed for stating his ideas, whether corrector 
otherwise, beforehand, but to wait until the book is out (knowing the probable 
form it will take), and then suggest or find fault, might well expect to be met 
with the rejoinder, “Then why not have said so before?” this not applying to 
any preparations, the introduction of which may be new, and consequently could 
not be commented upon before their appearance, any more than the present 
work, before it was published. 
To commence then at the beginning : although the die, I feel, is cast, and at 
the lisk of being by some thought pedantic, I have from the first regretted, 
and do so still, that the British Pharmacopoeia was not written in Latin ; in 
that language it would have been read and understood wherever civilization had 
fixed its stamp, whereas on the European continent in the English language, 
the number of those who can thoroughly understand it must be limited. Again, 
tlieie is yet a stronger home reason : I have always looked upon the London 
Pharmacopoeia in Latin, as a link between the school Latin of the apprentice 
and the Latin of the prescribes ; in studying the Pharmacopoeia in Latin, two 
objects were gained, in the first place, a general knowledge of, and acquaintance 
with, the different preparations ; and secondly, the opportunity at the same 
time of becoming conversant with words and sentences likely to be met with 
* ^T7ii^ US ^ ra ^ CmS i°^ ^ iese Etter propositions may be mentioned the introduction of Oil of 
-Elder r lowers into the London Pharmacopoeia of 1836 ; the omission of Compound Extract of 
Colocynth from that of 1851; the alteration in the composition of the Steel Wine and Ipeca¬ 
cuanha Wine in the Pharmacopoeia of 1824; and the augmentation of strength in the Liquor 
Ammonnc acetatis of that of 1864. 
