PHARMACEUTICAL NOMENCLATURE. 
409 
grain ;—and if in doing so it is not only convenient but even necessary to employ 
such multiples, why should they have suppressed the names of dram and scruple, 
because they have adopted a pound which does not comport with these weights? 
At page 255 is the following formula for 
Compound Infusion of Gentian. 
Take of 
Gentian. 4 ounce. 
Bitter-orange Peel.30 grains. 
Corianders.30 „ 
Proof Spirit. 2 fluid ounces. 
Distilled Water. 8 „ 
Here you order 30 grains troy of orange peel and as much of corianders ; in spite 
of your abolition of troy weight, the chemist will use his old half-dram which re¬ 
presents exactly the required amount; and next you order a quarter of an ounce 
which is equal to 109’375 grains, to obtain which a special weight has to be con¬ 
structed to square with your avoirdupois pound ! 
-Y* -if- -Y- -Y- -Yr “itf *5£* 
I cannot quit this subject without expressing my disapproval of the use of 
measures which are ordered to be used for all liquids, mercury excepted, and for 
which the authors of the British Pharmacopoeia manifest a strong predilection. In 
my opinion no instrument is comparable to a balance for determining exactly the 
quantity of a liquid, and I highly approve the directions of the later Prussian phar¬ 
macopoeias in not allowing the measuring of liquids. The Bavarian Pharmacopoeia 
is also to be commended in only permitting the measurement of liquids in the case 
of those which are of but slight medicinal activity. * * * * '* 
PHARMACEUTICAL NOMENCLATURE. 
TO THE EDITORS OE THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL. 
Gentlemen,— So much has been lately written on the nomenclature of the 
Pharmacopoeia, that I fear my remarks will be lost in the crowd, if admitted, 
and go for nothing ; but it does not signify,—here they are. 
I object strongly to the absurd name “ pilula,” alike for a lump capable of 
being formed into a thousand u pilulse,” and for the pill or “ pilule ” itself. It 
is time it was discontinued. Why should not “ massa ” do, already so frequently 
adopted by the profession ? 
When we get to the very “essence” of a thing, it is generally understood 
that we can go no further in that direction. Such a name, Latinized, would be 
far better, and more expressive, than “ oleum,” for the so-called “ essential 
oils,” and would sound more English than Mr. Piesse’s “ otto.” Or, em¬ 
ploying that term as suggested, it would be an infinitely preferable substitute 
for “liquor,” “ infusum, decoctum, or tinctura concentrata,” for such prepa¬ 
rations as are supposed to contain all the properties worth preserving of any 
particular drug in the most available form, when the qualities of keeping, small¬ 
ness of dose, and convenience of administration are taken into view. 
I see no objection to, but great advantage in, the re-adoption of the old word 
“ calomelas ” for a preparation which could not, thus distinguished, possibly be 
mistaken for any other. The oft-repeated objection, viz. the occasional need of 
disguise, has no force, for surely any medical man can, when he sees fit, sub¬ 
stitute a term expressive of its composition, as easily as he could for “ alumen ” 
or “ creta.” In every case, where there is one, I would give at least one autho¬ 
rized synonym, whether scientific or otherwise, so that it be not liable to mislead. 
I would not sanction “ saccharum plumbi” as equivalent to plumbi acetas. 
Although faulty in derivation, I think some such term as “ chloro-mercurius” 
would settle a long-vexed question, and leave little to be desired, for “ hydrar- 
VOL. VII. 
