A^b™y,Pih9iom'}       Pharmacognosy  and  the  US. P.  59 
in  that  time,  the  necessity  arises  for  a  vast  amount  of  work  in  bring- 
ing this  part  up  to  date  and  in  making  it  a  guide  and  standard  for 
practical  purposes. 
In  a  previous  paper  3  I  pointed  out  some  of  the  difficulties  con- 
nected with  revision  work,  particularly  in  this  department.  Soon 
after  the  Subcommittee  on  Pharmacognosy  of  the  last  revision 
began  its  work  it  became  evident  that  it  was  not  a  question  of 
developing  the  special  work  in  hand  or  improving  the  Pharmaco- 
poeia, as  it  was  of  conducting  a  campaign  of  education  showing  the 
necessity  for  and  importance  of  the  work.  While  it  remains  to  be 
seen  what  has  been  accomplished  by  this  campaign  of  education, 
there  can  be  no  question  as  to  what  is  required  in  the  inspection 
and  selection  of  drugs. 
In  order  that  the  U.  S.  Pharmacopoeia  IX  may  not  onlv  be 
abreast  of  the  times  but  also  be  a  valuable  guide  and  handbook, 
and  at  the  same  time  a  credit  to  the  revisers  as  well  as  a  source  of 
pride  to  the  physicians  and  pharmacists  of  this  country,  it  is  impor- 
tant in  the  first  place  that  the  Pharmacopceial  Convention  abstain 
from  passing  anv  resolutions  which  would  tend  to  bind  the  hands 
of  the  Subcommittee  on  Pharmacognosy  and  prevent  them  from 
doinsr  their  best  work.  Tentative  recommendations  might  be  made 
by  the  Convention  and  referred  to  the  subcommittee  for  their  con- 
sideration and  final  decision,  and  these  should  be  welcomed. 
This  leads  me  to  sav  that  the  work  of  a  subcommittee  mav'not 
onlv  be  handicapped  by  binding  resolutions  adopted  by  the  Conven- 
tion but  also  by  the  giving  of  instructions  bv  the  Committee  of 
Revision  which  tend  to  hinder  the  work.  Here  it  mav  be  pointed  out 
that  the  Committee  of  Revision  as  a  whole  does  not  appear  to  me 
to  be  so  constituted  as  to  be  anv  more  capable  of  making  binding 
recommendations  on  special  subjects  than  the  Convention  itself. 
Therefore  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  in  the  work  of  the  next  revision 
the  subcommittees  will  be  free  to  carrv  on  the  work  to  the  best  of 
their  knowledee,  experience,  and  ability,  and  for  which  thev  will 
be  held  responsible.  In  mv  previous  paper,  to  which  reference  has 
alreadv  been  made,  I  have  discussed  this  matter  at  some  length,  and 
it  will  not  be  necessarv  to  go  into  it  further  at  this  time.  But  after 
all,  as  I  have  elsewhere  4  stated,  "  it  is  not  so  much  a  matter  of 
3  Am.  Jour.  Pharm.,  8o,  8i,  February,  1908. 
4  Am.  Dr.,  55,  378,  1909. 
