March 8,1873.] 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTION?. 
701 
LEGAL PHARMACEUTICAL 
PREPARATIONS. * 
BY CHARLES SYMES. PH.D. 
The intimation given by Dr. Redwood at the last 
Pharmaceutical Meeting, that an Appendix to the 
Pharmacopoeia is under consideration, calls up to 
the mind of the pharmacist some of his past reflec¬ 
tions whilst perusing that book of pharmaceutical 
authority. 
It is very generally admitted that the present 
work is far more perfect than its predecessors ; and 
in being so is, of course, in accordance with the pro¬ 
gress of science and advancement of the age ; never¬ 
theless, imperfections crop up here and there—most 
of them are very palpable—are probably oversights, 
and have from time to time been pointed out either 
in the Journals or at Pharmaceutical meetings. 
Now the adoption of the formulae in this work is 
not optional, but is enforced onus under certain pains 
and penalties ; hence it becomes in itself a book of 
pharmaceutical law, and its preparations the only 
legal ones of. the same name. It is nothing un¬ 
common for imperfections to be legal, but that devia¬ 
tion from them should be illegal is an anomaly which, 
in our profession at least, we should all be gratified 
to have remedied. 
Let us take as a familiar example liquor bis- 
muthi ; probably 05 per cent, of samples in the mar¬ 
ket answer the B.P. characters and tests, and yet it 
is equally probable that not 50 per cent are prepared 
strictly according to the B.P. process, ergo, 50 per 
cent are illegal. 
The only inducement, however, to deviate from 
the process given would be greater facility or 
economy in manufacture, or the production of a 
better article. Were it a question of a new edition 
of the Pharmacopoeia, these difficulties could be 
readily got over by a more complete description in 
many cases of what the article should be, and an 
extension of the license which already exists with 
regard to some chemicals, viz., to use any process 
which will produce the article possessing definite 
and uniform characters, and answering the tests 
given. In the case of the chemicals, for example, 
sulphate of magnesia, no process is given; but in 
the case of preparations, a formula capable of pro¬ 
ducing the article described should in every case be 
given ; but this should be open to real improvements, 
provided the strength and general characters be not 
interfered with. It is a somewhat difficult ques¬ 
tion to deal with perhaps, and that more particu¬ 
larly in the issue of an appendix; but it is in good 
hands, and we can hope that Dr. Redwood’s deep 
perception will enable him to see his way well 
through it. 
We shall also probably see a page of “ Errata,” 
including not only the corrections which were pointed 
out shortly after the publication of the work, such 
as the addition of suppos. plumbi co. to the opium pre¬ 
paration ; confect, opii and confect, scammonii as pre¬ 
parations into which syrup enters; but one or two 
more important, viz., under the head of syr. ferri 
phosph., for the product should measure exactly 
twelve fluid ounces,” read “ the product should mea¬ 
sure from ten and a half to eleven fluid ounces,” 
varying slightly according to the greater or less 
* Read at the Evening Meeting of the Pharmaceutical 
Society of Great Britain, March 5, 1873. 
Third Series, No. 141. 
amount of moisture left in the precipitate,—if it be 
pressed between folds of bibulous paper as directed 
(which, by the way, is quite unnecessary), it never 
measures more than ten ounces and six drachms. 
Under the tests for the purity, etc., of calcis 
phospli., for “ the solution continues clear when an 
excess of acetate of soda is added,” read “ the solu¬ 
tion continues clear when a dilute solution of acetate 
of soda is added in excess,” for if the solutions are 
concentrated, a precipitate does occur on their ad¬ 
mixture, even if the phosphate is all that can be 
desired. 
As a matter of course, preparations not included 
in the Pharmacopoeia are lawful to dispense when 
prescribed by the medical practitioner; and for the 
sake of uniformity, as many of these in general use 
as have been proved to be effectual as remedies, 
should be included in the appendix. Succus digi¬ 
talis, succus belladonna, amyl nitris, chloral hy¬ 
dras, tinct. aurantii recentis, etc. 
Syr. phosph. co. has been largely prescribed 
throughout the country for many years past, and 
has every right to find itself in the appendix. It is 
not a secret preparation, the formula having been 
published by the late Professor Parrish, the origi¬ 
nator. Then, syr. ferri et quinos et strychnine 
phosph. has a well-established reputation as a reme¬ 
dial agent, and should also be added. 
I do not advocate that the Pharmacopoeia should 
recognize all new medicines that are introduced, or 
even that become popular, otherwise it would have 
to include Winslow’s syrup, Allcock’s plasters. 
Brown’s troches, etc.; but it must be borne in mind 
that a great number of the preparations contained 
therein were originally popular remedies, such as 
Gregory’s powder, Dovers’ powder, James’ powder, 
etc. Now, the object of the work under considera¬ 
tion is to ensure uniformity in character and effect 
of medicines recognized by the medical profession 
and in general use. In this way we get ext. opii 
liq. as a substitute for liq. opii sed., made by Batt- 
ley and a score of imitators. It is still competent 
for medical men to prescribe Battley’s preparation, 
and they do so very frequently. We know, too, that 
a liq. chloroform! co. was contemplated, and even 
printed in the proof sheets of the present B.P., but 
why it was withdrawn and replaced by so absurd a 
substitute as tinct. chloroformi co. is a matter we 
are not quite so clear about. It is even questionable 
if the proprietor of “ the original chlorodyne ” 
would have suffered by its retention, as medical 
men would still have prescribed “ Brown’s ” if they 
wished it used, and the public would doubtless be 
duly “ cautioned against purchasing any other.’’ 
As it will be some time before the appendix is in 
print, we shall probably have expression of various, 
opinions as to what substances and preparations, 
should be legally recognized. 
EMULSIONS. 
BY HERBERT G. ROGERSON. 
The appearance in a recent number of this Jour¬ 
nal of a paper bearing the above title, transcribed 
from the New York Druggists Circular, leads me 
to offer a remark or two on the same subject. 
The paper referred to was mainly devoted to a 
consideration of the merits of a combination ot gum 
