AmFTeb.?i894HrnK}   Revision  of  the  U.  S.  Pharmacopoeia.  97 
purely  scientific  standpoint  is  admitted.  The  committee  evidently 
had  in  mind  a  lofty  ideal  for  their  Pharmacopoeia.  The  book  is  at 
least  a  decade  in  advance  of  the  scientific  attainments  of  the  aver- 
age American  pharmacist  and  is  likely  to  give  the  impression  to  our 
foreign  professional  brethren  that  he  is  the  possessor  of  knowledge 
and  standing,  alas,  too  often  lacking.  We  imagine  that  we  hear 
many  of  the  class  who  are  more  concerned  over  the  commercial 
aspect  than  the  professional  side  of  their  calling,  repeat  the  words 
of  the  horse  to  his  groom  in  /Esop's  fable  :  "  Groom  me  less  and 
feed  me  more." 
I  firmly  believe  that  this  is  a  grand  step  and  that  it  will  mark  a 
distinct  epoch  in  American  pharmacy  ;  that  it  will  stimulate  hosts 
of  pharmacists  to  renewed  efforts  to  maintain  their  educational  and 
professional  standing,  and  that  it  will  compel  many  to  a  more  thor- 
ough education  in  order  to  stand  on  the  same  plane  to  which  this 
volume  will  elevate  the  progressive  pharmacist.  It  is  a  matter  of 
profound  regret  that  in  a  volume  of  such  magnificent  intent  there 
should  be  so  much  to  criticise  adversely. 
In  concluding  this  review  the  writer  wishes  to  explain  that  it  was 
undertaken  in  response  to  the  request  of  the  late  editor  of  the 
American  Journal  of  Pharmacy,  Professor  John  M.  Maisch,  for  a 
criticism  to  be  published  in  parts  commencing  with  the  October 
number  of  the  journal. 
In  discharging  this  task,  I  have  conceived  it  to  be  my  duty  as  well 
as  to  the  best  interests  of  pharmacy  to  unhesitatingly  express  my 
vievys.  It  has  been  the  aim  to  avoid  all  personalities,  and  if  any  one 
has  been  offended  it  has  been  unintentional.  The  writer  has  no 
axe  to  grind  and  is  personally  acquainted  with  but  few  of  the  com- 
mittee, nor  has  he  any  knowledge  as  to  which  members  of  the  com- 
mittee  the  various  parts  of  the  volume  can  be  attributed.  I  have 
naturally  assumed  the  position  expressed  by  Mr.  Hosea  Biglow's 
candidate  : 
"  There's  nothin'  thet  my  natur  so  shuns 
Ez  bein'  mum  or  underhand  ; 
I'm  a  straight-spoken  kind  o'  creetur 
Thet  blurts  right  out  wut's  in  his  head, 
An  ef  I've  one  pecooler  feetur, 
It  is  a  nose  thet  wunt  be  led." 
Hardly  had  the  introductory  lines  of  this  review  appeared  before 
the  writer  was  criticised  as  a  pessimist,  and  his  review  as  being 
