272 
REPORT ON THE PHARMACOPOEIA. 
Reasons are given in the Journal of Amendments for every 
change and amendment which is proposed. 
During the arrangement and preparation of the officinal 
list, other matters incidental to the general result were dis- 
cussed and acted upon, and among others, it was resolved that 
each member of the Committee should provide himself with a 
copy of the U. S. Pharmacopoeia, edit. 1830, and such other 
books of reference as he could obtain, and produce them at the 
meetings of the Committee; — consequent upon the passage of 
this resolution, was the presence at each meeting of several 
excellent works of reference, and standard authorities. The two 
lists having been completed, the consideration of other topics, 
whose position properly introduced them after the lists, was 
entered upon. These considerations embraced the subject of 
weights and measures, specific gravity, some general pharma- 
ceutic directions, and a table of brief chemical directions, which 
should determine, by reagents, the purity of all chemical substan- 
ces contained in the Pharmacopoeia. The consideration of these 
subjects resulted in the adoption of the existing, tables of 
weights and measures, with a slight amendment as regarded 
the weights; in the adoption of the terms of Baume's hydro- 
meter to be employed in common with the ordinary terms of 
specific gravity to express the density of fluids; and in the dis- 
pensing with general pharmaceutic directions, as inconsistent 
with the nature of a Pharmacopoeia. The preparation of the 
chemical direction, a work of great labor, and requiring an 
intimate acquaintance with pharmacy and chemistry, no less 
than untiring industry and perseverance, was confided to a 
sub-committee of three, the chairman of which, Ambrose 
Smith, was aided by Thomas H. Powers and John C. Allen. 
Their labor has but just been completed, having proceeded/>«r2 
passu with the general revision; and subsequent reflection 
has induced the Committee to assign to the directions a position 
following the preparations, instead of making them intermedi- 
ate between that division of the work and the list, as was at first 
proposed. The value of such a table or digest, it is presumed 
no one can doubt. It affords a criterion by which the identity 
