62  Principles  of  Pharmacopoeia  Revision.  {^'J^^xiS^' 
pointed  out  in  good  time  some  serious  misstatements  of  fact.  Mr. 
Wilbert's  serious  error  has  been  his  complete  omission  of  reference 
to  other  principles  of  far  more  importance  than  those  which  he  has 
considered.  It  is  of  great  importance,  as  he  has  pointed  out, 
that  physicians'  views  as  to  articles  which  they  desire  to  have  recog- 
nized in  the  Pharmacopoeia  should  receive  the  closest  attention,  and 
should  be  met  as  far  as  possible,  but  it  is  of  equal  importance,  that 
the  pharmacists  should  have  standards  of  identity  and  purity  for 
the  articles  which  they  are  compelled  to  supply,  on  demand,  without 
any  regard  to  the  views  of  physicians  as  to  whether  that  demand  is 
judicious.  It  is  of  even  greater  importance  that  the  administrators 
of  Federal  and  State  laws  should  have  standards  for  the  identity 
and  purity  of  drugs  and  medicines  commonly  imported  and  used, 
without  any  regard  whatever  to  the  views  of  physicians  as  to  the 
therapeutical  merits  of  those  articles.  The  physicians'  duty  is  to 
educate  the  members  of  their  profession  as  to  the  proper  articles 
to  employ.  They  have  innumerable  text-books  for  this  purpose,  and' 
they,  and  not  the  Pharmacopoeia,  constitute  the  medium  that  should 
be  employed  in  that  educational  work.  The  Pharmacopoeia  is  in 
no  sense  a  text-book.  If  physicians  have  neglected  their  duty,  or 
failed  in  its  performance,  they  should  correct  themselves.  Mr. 
Wilbert  calls  for  a  book  that  will  "  command  the  respect  and 
admiration  of  physicians."  They  now  have  more  such  books  than 
they  can  use,  but  the  Pharmacopoeia  was  never  designed  as  an 
object  of  admiration,  however  well  it  might  be  if  it  could  be 
admired.  It  is  a  working  standard,  and  it  should  go  wherever  there 
is  work  to  do.  Moreover,  it  is  a  legal  instrument  and  that  alone 
debars  it  from  being  made  the  subject  of  class  legislation.  Finally, 
after  all  has  been  said  as  to  what  it  should  be,  it  may  be  pointed  out 
that  its  own  fate  depends  upon  its  meeting  the  requirements  above 
referred  to.  If  it  should  be  converted  by  the  committee  into  a  text- 
book for  the  sole  use  of  physicians,  and  only  of  those  of  a  certain 
class,  it  will  be  at  once  relegated  to  that  position,  will  cease  to  be 
an  official  work,  and  will  be  superseded  by  one  constructed  on  the 
only  plan  that  can  fit  it  for  the  work  for  which  a  national  Pharma- 
copoeia is  intended,  and  for  the  use  of  other  classes  who  far  out- 
number the  physicians. 
