REVIEWS. 
371 
a licence, in contravention of the Petroleum Act, by which he had incurred a penalty of 
£20. The oil in question had been tested, and was found to flash at 94° F. Mr. 
Grantham, who appeared for the defence, called Mr. Kemp, Secretary of the Petroleum 
Association, who had tested a sample of oil similar to that produced, and found that it 
gave off inflammable vapour at 106° F. Witness pointed out what he considered to be 
defects in the apparatus used in the case for the prosecution, which affected the result 
to the extent of 5 degrees. Mr. Paget, the magistrate, suggested that the two analysts 
should retire and repeat their experiments. This was done, but as there was still consider¬ 
able discrepancy in the results of the experiments, Mr. Paget said that on the evidence 
he had heard, he should convict. He decided that the oil was petroleum, which flashed 
under 100° F. The Act was one of great importance, and he should inflict the full 
penalty of £20. Mr. Grantham, for the defence, applied for a case for the consideration 
of a superior court, but as the question was one of fact, this was refused. 
‘ THE CONVERSION OF THE GREEK T. 
The following letter from Dr. John Harley appeared in the ‘ Medical Times and Ga¬ 
zette’ of October 30th :— 
“ Sir,—In the review of my work on the ' Old Vegetable Neurotics’ in your last im¬ 
pression, the writer very pertinently asks why I have sometimes spelt ‘ hyoscyamus with 
an i in the third syllable.’ I am glad that he has done so, not that I am able to clear 
myself of the error, but because it gives me an opportunity of calling attention to what 
amounts to a very wide-spread orthographical degeneracy. To illustrate what I mean 
in reference merely to medical terms, I will take the last edition of the British Pharma¬ 
copoeia, a book which abounds in Greek words, and which we assume to be authoritative 
in respect of the correctness of their form. But, strange to say, We here find both error 
and inconsistency in the conversion of the u. Thus, on the one hand, we have oxygen 
and oxide, but, on the other, hydrogen and hydride, or hydration. Now, oxide is not an 
abbreviation of oxy-ide, for German and French chymists—or, as all the world has it 
now, chemists—invariably write oxyde, etc. But to revert to the Pharmacopoeia, we find 
in opposite series Plumbi oxidum and Lithargyrum. Here is inconsistency. In both 
the body of the work and in the index the word Glycerinum is immediately followed by 
Glycyrrhiza. Here is error and inconsistency both ; for if e were the proper substitute 
for v in the former word, y could not be the equivalent of v in the other, the root in both 
words being the same— yAvuvs. 
“I have pointed out this error in Hooper’s ‘Physicians’ Vade-Mecum,’ ed. 8, p. 677, 
and have in the ‘ Old Vegetable Neurotics’ uniformly used the correct spelling, both of 
this word and of the derivatives of o|vs, and I hope my adhesion to classical rules in 
respect of these degraded words will be accepted as a sufficient set-off against the un¬ 
warrantable freedom which I have used in spelling hyoscyamus with an i once in about 
ten times.” 
REVIEWS. 
Veterinary Pharmacopoeia. By R. V. Tuson, F.C.S. Churchill, 1869. 
We cannot determine whether or not this book is intended to perform the same func¬ 
tions for the veterinary profession that the British Pharmacopoeia does for our own. It 
emanates from a private author, and has nothing but its own merits to recommend or 
enforce the general use of its formulae. Although Mr. Tuson is Professor of Chemistry 
and Materia Medica at the Royal Veterinary College, it does not appear that the medi¬ 
cines included in his book are in any way specially sanctioned by the College. We 
cannot even learn whether the preparations he describes are those employed in the 
College dispensary. Yet we are inclined to think that the author has intended his book 
to be something more than a collection of receipts, or a manual of materia medica. He 
has chosen a plan for his work which gives it the appearance at least of an authoritative 
standard, intended to regulate the nature and composition of veterinary medicines. 
