282  Proposed  Changes  in  the  Pharmacopeia.  {AmjlT/,\^rm' 
-required,  would  refer  to  the  proper  works  where  it  may  be  found, 
whether  it  be  the  botanical  description  or  the  therapeutical  uses,  and 
there  is  no  lack  of  books  on  either  subject.  Now  let  us  refer  to  this 
use  of  the  Pharmacopoeia,  not  simply  as  a  dictionary,  but  as  a  book 
which  shall  describe  familiar  drugs,  or  a  drug  as  it  is  met  with  in 
the  market,  with  the  processes  necessarv  for  its  preparation."  (p.  20.) 
"4t  The  description,  as  well  as  the  language,  should  be  as  plain  as  possible, 
and  as  full.  Let  us  have  a  standard  for  the  working  processes  as  well 
as  for  the  ingredients  and  quantities  of  all  the  established  preparations." 
(pp.  20,  21.)  Probably  many  would  quite  as  strenuously  insist  on  a 
full  botanical  description  of  the  materia  medica,  or  even  on  a  brief 
therapeutic  reference. 
While  there  is  nothing  in  the  etymology  of  the  word  "  Pharmaco- 
poeia" which  would  forbid  such  an  extension  of  its  range,  it  must  not 
be  forgotten  that  the  significance  of  words  is  determined  solely  by 
established  usage.  And  universal  usage  has  limited  the  application  of 
this  word  to  a  standard  dictionary  of  the  materia  medica.  The  purpose 
of  such  a  work  is  in  no  sense  to  furnish  a  manual  of  instruction  regard- 
ing the  materials  employed  in  medicine,  by  the  best  practice  of  a  given 
country  ;  but  solely  to  establish  a  desirable  uniformity  of  standard  in 
the  prescription  and  dispensation  of  remedies;  and  as  such,  it  is  ad- 
dressed to  experts  in  the  two  great  professions  of  medicine  and  phar- 
macy. 
When,  therefore,  our  critic  insists  that  "a  Pharmacopoeia  for  the 
present  and  future  should  not  only  embrace  the  established  materia 
medica,  but  practically  the  whole  materia  medica  ;  it  should  not  only 
be  a  standard  of  quality,  composition  and  strength  of  the  old,  but  also 
a  standard  of  knowledge  for  that  which  is  new  in  advancing  the  art  of 
medicine;"  and  that  it  "should  no  longer  be  of  the  character  of  a 
catalogue,  dictionary  and  formulary;  it  should  aim  at  a  clear  and  com- 
plete separation  and  identification  of  that  grade  or  quality  of  each  sub- 
stance which  only  is  to  be  used  in  medicine,"  (p.  43.)  he  is  really 
contending  that  the  "  Pharmacopoeia,"  properly  so-called,  should  be 
abandoned,  and  superseded  by  a  Pharmacology  or  a  Dispensatory.  This 
is  undoubtedly  a  proper  subject  for  inquiry  and  suggested  improvement. 
But  its  discussion  should  be  approached  directly  and  legitimately. 
When  it  is  stated  that  "our  last  revision  was  unsuccessful  .  .  . 
because  it  is  so  constructed  as  to  require  a  Dispensatory,"  (p.  19.)  the 
