42 
REVIEWS. 
process is entirely omitted, so that if the “ Companion ” were consulted and not the 
Pharmacopoeia, the product would not be such as the Pharmacopoeia orders. In the 
formula for Syrup of I'o/u, a curious instance occurs of mystification resulting from the 
adoption of this new method of expressing quantities. The process is thus described : 
—“Balsam of Tolu, 1^; sugar, 32; water, 20; boil the balsam half an hour, adding 
water when required ; filter, add sugar, and dissolve. When finished, weighs 48 oz., 
and measures 64 oz. sp. gr. 1*33.” We thiuk it would puzzle any other than an accom¬ 
plished pharmaceutist to make anything intelligible out of this, and yet the process as 
given in the Pharmacopoeia is perfectly simple, clear, and well described. If liquids as 
well as solids had been ordered by weight, as is the case in some of the Continental 
Pharmacopoeias, the use of simple proportional numbers would, of course, have greatly 
simplified the formulae ; but while liquids are measured, we do not see that any advan¬ 
tage results from the plan adopted by the author. 
The arrangement of the matter in the “ Companion ” is different from that in the 
Pharmacopoeia, and is no doubt considered better; for unless there were some special 
object in altering the arrangement, the simultaneous use of the two works would have 
been easier if they had both been arranged alike. In both the arrangement is alphabe¬ 
tical, but in the Pharmacopoeia the Materia Medica part is separated from the pre¬ 
parations whilst in the “ Companion ” they are put. together, the preparations being de¬ 
scribed under the heads of the principal drugs used in producing them, as is usually done 
in works on Materia Medica. The adoption of this plan, we think, gives to the work less 
of a pharmaceutical character than it would otherwise have. 
In the processes there is not much of an emendatory character, and yet it cannot be 
said that there is nothing of this character. In a few instances, such as those of Liquor 
Fe ri Perchloridi and Tinctura Ferri Perchloridi , where glaring defects exist in the 
Pharmacopoeia processes, they are pointed out, and suitable remedies are suggested. The 
value and importance of these suggestions make us regret that the author, whose skill 
and experience in pharmaceutical operations are well known, has not entered more 
generally and fully into that class of annotation in his book. The process for Spiritus 
FEtheris nitrosi is condemned, as also is the substitution of the strong fuming nitric 
acid of 1*5 sp. gr. for the weaker acid of the London Pharmacopoeia, and the process for 
collodion is set right, while the new process for spirit of sal volatile is very justly com¬ 
mended. But in most cases the processes are passed over without comment, not how¬ 
ever without alteration, for, as we have already said, most of the matter, and especially 
the processes, taken from the Pharmacopoeia, are expressed in altered terms, often much 
abbreviated, and sometimes from this cause rendered obscure. In some cases there are 
obviously intentional deviations from the Pharmacopoeia instructions, some of which may 
be improvements, although we do not think them always so. One thing, however, we 
decidedly object to, and that is, that there is nothing to indicate which part is in accord¬ 
ance with the Pharmacopoeia and which is not. This character in the work entirely pre¬ 
cludes its use in any other way than as a companion to the Pharmacopoeia, which was 
probably intended. 
The work does not partake much of an explanatory character, yet to a certain extent 
brief explanations are given, especially where tests are described. Thus in the first article, 
on Acacia, the test for Gum Arabic is extended, improved, and explained. In the article 
on Acetum, after giving the Pharmacopoeia test, the following explanatory sentence is 
added :—“ Indicating absence of hydrochloric acid, lime, and metals.'” This should have 
been, indicating the absence of more than a minute quantity of sulphuric acid and lime, 
a nd the entire absence of lead, copper, and tin. To the test for arsenious acid is appended, 
“ the iodine converts the arsenite of soda into arseniate.” It would have been well in 
this case to have explained how it does so, for those who understand the modus operandi 
of the test do not require to be told what the result of the reaction is. The explanations 
given in this way, however, are generally very brief, but not always so much so as in 
the above instance, and sometimes they are full and sufficient. 
But the principal object of the book cannot be said to be either that of suggesting 
amendments or of explaining processes and reactions ; it is rather that of supplementing 
the Pharmacopoeia with matter likely to be useful to those by whom such works are con¬ 
sulted. Thus, with reference to salts and many other substances used in medicine, we 
have a statement of their solubilities and solvent poyvers. Of definite chemical substances 
the chemical equivalents are frequently, although not invariably given. As these may be 
