Du Mez—The Galenical Oleoresins. 
917 
The Belgian Pharmacopoeia of 1854 recognized no less than 
seven ethereal extracts, viz: 
1 ) Extrait 4there de Fougere 
2 ) Extrait Cthere de Cantharides 
3 ) Extrait Cthere de Croton 
4 ) Extrait ethere de Cubebe 
5 ) Extrait ethere de d’Aunee 
6 ) Extrait ethCre de Bois garu 
7 ) Extrait ethere de Semen-eontra 
It will be seen from the above array of ethereal extracts of¬ 
ficial in European pharmacopoeias that the introduction of 
oleoresins into the fifth edition of the United States Pharmaco¬ 
poeia, which appeared in 1863, was well prepared. 
Procter is commonly given credit for having introduced oleore¬ 
sins into American materia medica. That he was instrumental 
in bringing them to the attention of the representatives of the 
regular medical school, and that he obtained a place for them 
in the United States Pharmacopoeia, possibly no one has reason 
to doubt. A review of the early American literature on this 
subject not only reveals this fact, but it also brings out the fact 
that Procter appears to have been ignorant in large part of the 
use of this class of preparations in Europe, 1 ) for nowhere does 
he mention it. It is note-worthy that it was a medical prac¬ 
titioner (Goddard) who first drew Procter’s attention (1846), 
not to a typical representative of this class, but to the prepara¬ 
tion of Dublanc which was a representative of the extracta oleo- 
resina made by a very cumbersome process, now long discarded 
as being as unscientific as it is impractical. In the same year, 
the English pharmacist, Bell, had his attention drawn to this 
same preparation by Yore, thus showing that valuable prepara¬ 
tions not advertised were ignored, while a quasi scientific pre¬ 
paration heralded about apparently attracted general attention. 
To what extent the Eclectic school of medical practioners 
contributed to the popularization of this class of galenicals be¬ 
fore 1860 cannot be definitely stated from the scanty informa- 
1 That Proctor did know of Mohr’s work on this class of preparations 
becomes apparent when the fact is recalled that he adapted Redwood’s 
translation of Mohr’s Pharmaceutische TechniJc to American pharmacy under 
the title of Mohr, Redwood & Procter’s Pharmacy in 1849, and that he had 
previously reviewed Redwood’s translation in the Am. Jour, of Pharm. 
