560  Some  Pharmacopoeial  Problems. 
passed  upon  and  settled  by  the  National  Convention,  so  that  the 
next  Committee  of  Revision  will  be  relieved  of  all  responsibility 
regarding  their  rejection  or  adoption.  These  subjects  are  not  new, 
and  have  frequently  been  written  and  talked  about.  But,  in  the 
course  of  time,  our  knowledge  has  made  material  advances,  some  of 
our  views  have  undergone  changes,  certain  prejudices  may  have 
been  abandoned,  and  conditions  in  general  appear  to  have  so 
changed  that  it  is  perfectly  proper  to  disregard  former  arguments 
and  deductions,  and  to  consider  the  subjects  anew. 
The  Pharmacopoeia  was  originally  intended  to  be  the  official 
guide  both  for  the  physician  and  the  pharmacist.  During  the  earlier 
period  of  its  existence  in  this  country  the  physician  took  a  greater 
interest  in,  and  had,  at  least  officially,  a  larger  share  in  its  prepara- 
tion or  revision  than  the  pharmacist.  That  this  is  no  longer  the 
case  is  generally  known  and  acknowledged.  While,  theoretically, 
the  medical  profession  has  not  lost  its  interest  in  it,  and  is  well 
represented  at  every  Decennial  Convention,  yet,  practically,  the 
Pharmacopoeia  has  ceased  to  be  a  work  of  reference  for  the  physi- 
cian. And  why?  Chiefly  because  it  does  not  contain  the  informa- 
tion which  the  physician  requires  regarding  the  nature,  properties 
and  doses  of  some  of  the  most  important  remedies  he  uses.  To  a 
large  extent  he  is  himself  responsible  for  this  condition  of  things, 
for  he  has,  very  likely,  been  one  of  the  large  group  of  medical  men 
who  opposed  the  admission  into  the  Pharmacopoeia  of  the  very 
things  regarding  which  he  needs  information,  and  for  which  he  must 
now  look  elsewhere.  Most  physicians  do  not  take  much  interest  in 
botanical  or  chemical  descriptions,  or  in  tests  of  identity  and  purity. 
The  main  objects  which  a  physician  usually  has,  or  would  have,  for 
consulting  a  Pharmacopoeia  are  to  ascertain  : 
(1)  What  form  or  forms  of  administration  are  officially  available 
in  the  case  of  a  certain  drug  ? 
(2)  What  is  the  strength  of  the  respective  preparations  ? 
(3)  What  are  the  ordinary  doses? 
Under  present  circumstances  he  may  find  in  the  book  an  answer 
to  the  first  two  questions,  but,  knowing  that  he  will  find  none  to 
the  last-named  one,  which  to  him  is  probably  the  most  important, 
he  simply  ignores  the  Pharmacopoeia,  and  turns  at  once  to  sources 
which  he  has  found  by  experience  to  afford  the  desired  information. 
There  is  no  use  whatever  in  trying  to  make  the  Pharmacopoeia  bet- 
