Amjine"*i7h7arm  }  Proposed  Changes  in  the  Pharmacopoeia.  283 
inconsiderate  reader  is  led  to  believe  that  here  is  a  new  and  hapless 
condition  of  affairs — deplorable  for  the  profession  and  discreditable  to 
the  revisers.  In  what  wav  the  Pharmacopoeia  of  1870  has  "lost 
ground,"  or  how  the  conclusion  itself  has  been  reached,  is  not  revealed  ; 
and  in  what  way  either  the  sale  of  the  work  or  its  authority  would 
have  been  increased  by  the  prompt  publication  of  an  independent  Dis- 
pensatory, is  as  little  apparent. 
When  the  reformatory  critic  further  declares  that,  "  In  the  past  it 
■seems  pretty  certain  that  had  there  been  no  dispensa- 
tory, a  pharmacopoeia  upon  the  present  plan  would  have  been  a  failure," 
(p.  20.)  he  either  ignores  the  history  of  all  pharmacopoeias  in  all  coun- 
tries, or  he  pronounces  them  all  to  have  been  u  failures  !"  In  no  case 
has  any  commentary  upon  the  materia  medica  been  issued^by  the  author- 
ity that  has  produced  the  pharmacopoeia.  Such  commentaries  (when 
they  have  existed)  have  been  the  work  of  volunteer  authorship  and 
private  enterprise.  A  noteworthy  fact  in  this  connection  is,  that  in  the 
recent  revision  of  the  German  Pharmacopoeia,  it  was  decided  after  full 
consideration  of  the  subject,  to  retain  for  the  work  the  purely  titular 
and  "skeleton"  form  of  a  dictionary,  in  conformity  with  established 
precedent. 
Having  thus  effectually  dissipated  the  fallacy  as  to  "  the  true  reason 
why  our  last  revision  was  so  unsuccessful,"  according  to  the  estimate 
of  Dr.  Squibb,  and  "  why  we  are  now  left  to  desire  a  change,  (if  we  do 
desire  one!"  p.  19.)  the  field  is  cleared  for  an  impartial  and  independent 
consideration  of  the  policy  of  extending  the  scope  of  the  Pharmaco- 
poeia ;  and  it  is  now  admissible  to  say,  that  if  in  the  judgment  of  the 
Convention  it  is  desirable  to  give  the  work  a  more  doctrinal  and  popular 
form,  no  serious  objection  is  perceived  to  such  an  enlargement  of  its 
plan  and  purpose.  If  this  would  be  admittedly  an  entirely  new  de- 
parture, it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  in  all  professions,  the  people  of 
the  United  States  are  quite  as  much  given  to  making  precedents,  as  to 
following  them. 
Practicallv  there  is  no  incongruity  in  a  work  of  composite  order — 
having  in  its  leading  paragraphs  (and  in  distinctive  type)  the  dogmatic 
character  of  an  authoritative  standard  of  uniformity  for  the  materia 
medica,  properly  belonging  to  a  Pharmacopoeia  ;  and  in  successive 
paragraphs  or  annotations,  (in  subordinate  type)  the  didactic  character 
of  a  cyclopedia  of  the  characteristics,  qualities,  tests,  solvents,  sources, 
