Am.  Jour.  Pliarm. ) 
Jan.,  1881.  j 
Editorial. 
37 
.a  number  of  hospitals  where  the  saffron  was  omitted  from  the  preparations 
without  detriment.  Prof.  Redwood,  however,  was  not  thoroughly  satisfied 
'that  saffron  could  do  no  good  at  all,  and  should  hesitate  to  join  in  that 
•onslaught  upon  every  constituent  and  preparation  in  the  Pharmacopoeia 
which  could  not  be  clearly  shown  to  possess  very  decided  therapeutic 
value.  Somewhat  similar  views  were  expressed  by  several  other  members, 
and  the  frequent  codulteration  of  saffron  being  alluded  to,  Mr.  Tanner 
.showed  a  sample  adulterated  with  some  red  ferruginous  earth,  the  adul- 
"teration  being  easily  detected  by  placing  some  of  the  saffron  in  water,  when 
the  water  becomes  turbid  immediately  from  the  sei^aration  of  the  adhering 
particles. 
Mr.  Allen  described  Dr.  Symes'  process  for  making  syrup  of  saffron  by 
first  prej^aring  a  concentrated  infusion  from  a  given  quantity  of  saffron, 
pouring  it  upon  a  calculated  amount  of  sugar,  drying  the  mixture,  and 
then  dissolving  6  grams  of  this  sugar  in  2  grams  of  water.  He  prepared  a 
glycerol  of  saffron  in  the  ordinary  way  of  a  syrup,  according  to  the  Lon- 
don Pharmacopoeia,  with  the  exception  that,  instead  of  mixing  with  sugar, 
he  uses  equal  quantities  of  sugar  and  of  glycerin.  The  product  had  kept 
well  for  three  years,  would  mix  with  water  in  a  capital  manner,  and  was 
free  from  deposit  for  a  considerable  time.  Tincture  of  saffron  does  not  give 
rsuch  a  satisfactory  result  as  the  glycerol  on  being  mixed  with  water. 
EDITORIAL  DEPARTMENT. 
The  Relation  of  Medicine  and  Pharmacy  has  recently  been  the 
.subject  of  discussion  between  members  of  both  jDrofessions  in  this  city,  and 
has  not  unfrequently  been  alluded  to  in  medical  journals.  That  abuses 
■exist  will  be  acknowledged  by  all  who  are  unbinsed ;  to  assert  that  they 
^exist  in  one  profession  only,  and  that  the  members  of  the  other  are  entirely 
without  fault,  is  noticing  the  splinter  in  the  neighbor's  eye  without  discov- 
ing  the  beam  in  one's  own  eye ;  to  charge  such  abuses  to  the  professions, 
instead  of  to  the  individuals  guilty  of  them,  is  decidedly  wrong.  We  have 
abundant  j^roof  of  the  fact  that  the  extreme  views  advocated  by  a  few  phy- 
sicians and  pharmacists,  laying  the  blame  for  existing  evils  altogether 
J^efore  the  other  door,  are  not  shaied  by  the  calmer  and  reflecting  members, 
and  it  gives  us  pleasure  to  reproduce  an  editorial  from  the  "  Medical  Bul- 
letin "  of  September,  1880,  in  which  some  of  the  evils  complained  of,  and 
some  of  the  remedies  suggested,  are  calmly  and  fairly  discussed : 
The  proper  relations  between  these  two  professions,  or,  better,  these  two 
branches  of  our  profession,  have  been  for  some  time  a  subject  of  lively 
•controversy,  and,  in  view  of  the  likelihood  of  an  early  animated  discussion 
of  this  matter,  the  "  Bulletin  "  gives  below  its  views  on  the  subject. 
That  there  has  been  a  tendency  among  "  Druggists  "  (we  aj^ply  tliis  term 
to  the  drug  vendors  in  contradistinction  to  the  word  "  Pharmacist,"  which 
is  applicable  only  to  the  scientiflc  compounder,  chemist  and  investigator 
of  remedial  substances  and  their  therapeutical  merits)  to  take  unto  them- 
