NEW EDITION OF THE BRITISH PIIARMACOPCEIA. 
310 
44 2. If so, whether it requires a stamp when sold to a Surgeon or Druggist 
for use in dispensing. 
44 If the second answer is affirmative— 
44 3. If I render myself liable to penalty by buying it without a stamp, and 
stamping it before selling it again. 
44 4. Also if it can be supplied without a stamp when ordered mixed, or un¬ 
mixed in the prescriptions of qualified medical practitioners, the instructions 
accompanying it being only such as the medical practitioner supplies. 
44 Yours most respectfully, 
“ Barnard S. Proctor.” 
(copy.) 
Inland Revenue, Somerset House , London, W.C. 
23 rd November, 1865. 
44 Sir,—I have laid before the Board of Inland Revenue, your letter of the 
31st ulto., and in reply to the questions therein contained I am directed to 
state:— 
44 I. That the article Chlorodyne, as sold with the wrapper enclosed by you, is 
liable to stamp duty when sold by retail, and 
44 II. Is so liable whether sold to a Surgeon, Druggist, or other person. 
44 III. That the second section of the Act 43 Geo. III. cap. 73, the provisions 
of which are kept in force by the eighth section of the 44 Geo. III. cap. 98, 
imposes a penalty of £20 on a person who shall receive an article subject to 
duty without a Label, and not inform the Commissioners of Inland Revenue 
within ten days. 
44 With reference to the last question in your letter, as to the sale of Chlo¬ 
rodyne, mixed or unmixed, as prescribed by medical practitioners, the Board 
cannot advise without being further informed of the way in which it is pro¬ 
posed to sell the same. 
44 If the preparation in question, with a paper showing the instructions 
issued therewith be sent here, the Board will make a further communication 
to you in the matter. 
44 1 am, Sir, your obedient servant, 
44 Mr. B. S. Proctor. * T. SARGENT.” 
THE NEW EDITION OF THE BRITISH PHARMACOPCEIA. 
TO THE EDITOR OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL. 
Sir,—Observing the suggestions made by a 44 dispenser ‘ 7 respecting the new 
edition of the Pharmacopoeia, may I draw attention to the following objection¬ 
able, nay, dangerous alteration in the nomenclature of 44 Hydrarg. Bichlor. P. L.” 
The new name, 44 Hydrarg. Corrosivum Sublimatum,” is not only inconvenient, 
but, like 44 Calomelas,” too public. The achievements of the prescriber are often 
frustrated, because a nervous patient privately objects to take mercury; then 
again, if we adopt the only alternative, 44 Hydrarg. Chlor.,” it is really dangerous, 
and will sooner or later lead to a fatal mistake. For instance, an apprentice 
enters the profession, and, if we may rely upon the integrity of his master, he is 
brought up in the rudiments of the British Pharmacopoeia ; he is there taught 
that 44 Hydr. Chlor.” means 44 Ilydr. Corrosivum Sublimatum,” etc., and altoge¬ 
ther he has made such fair progress as to enable him to dispense a prescription 
mechanically. Enters presently (probably during the unavoidable absence of the 
master or assistant) a blustering bachelor with a 44 funny fancy for his favourite 
physichis time-worn prescription, tracing its origin so far back as the palmy 
