AlAuguUsf;  M5m'}    Pharmacy  of  British  Pharmacopoeia.  367 
per  cent,  by  weight  of  ethyl  nitrite  in  alcoholic  solution.  The  need 
for  both  is  not  understood. 
The  volatile  oils  are  well  defined  and  generally  the  necessary 
tests  for  identity  and  quality  are  clearly  given.  The  assay  processes 
are  the  simplest  that  can  be  satisfactorily  applied..  Instead  of  an 
elaborate  process  for  determining  the  amount  of  cineol,  the  oils  of 
cajuput  and  eucalyptus  are  assayed  by  the  phosphoric  acid  method, 
and  for  pharmacopceial  purposes  this  is  probably  all  that  is  necessary. 
In  oil  of  lemon  the  citral  is  determined  by  the  hydroxylamine  method. 
For  at  least  several  decades  the  trend  of  pharmaceutical  author- 
ities has  been  toward  a  clearer  differentiation  of  the  classes  of 
galenicals;  toward  defining  within  proper  lines  each  class  of  prepara- 
tions and  the  grouping  of  the  individual  formulas,  wherever  possible, 
under  such  defined  classes.  It  was  to  be  expected  that  in  this  re- 
vision these  proper  classifications  would  be  respected  and  followed. 
Yet  we  find  oleoresin  of  male  fern  "an  oily  extract,"  entitled  "  Ex- 
tractum  filicis  liquidum,"  and  printed  along  with  the  extracts,  despite 
the  statement  in  the  preface  that  "  most  of  the  liquid  extracts  are  of 
such  a  strength  that  one  hundred  millilitres  represent  one  hundred 
grammes  of  the  drug  employed."  An  acacia  emulsion  of  castor  oil 
is  classed  with  the  mistura  and  printed  with  such  formulas  as  chalk 
mixture  and  compound  mixture  of  iron. 
The  treatment  of  the  botanical  drugs  is  disappointing.  There  is 
lacking  that  thoroughness  of  description  that  one  would  expect  in  a 
modern  pharmacopoeia  prepared  by  those  who  have  every  oppor- 
tunity to  be  acquainted  with  the  progress  of  science  and  the  great 
advances  in  pharmacognostic  knowledge  since  the  appearance  of  the 
previous  edition,  sixteen  years  ago. 
The  names  of  the  authors  of  the  binomials  adopted  are  given, 
but  in  no  case  is  the  family  or  other  botanical  classification  given. 
The  references  to  the  works  where  the  medicinal  plants  are  figured,  a 
feature  of  the  pharmacopoeia  of  1898,  are  omitted,  and  there  is  good 
reason  to  consider  that  such  information  is  out  of  place  in  a 
pharmacopoeia. 
In  some  cases  the  definition  of  the  drug  assumes  the  style  of  a 
rubric  and  states  the  alkaloidal  standard ;  in  other  cases,  with  equally 
important  drugs,  this  is  omitted,  as  occurs,  for  example,  in  the 
definitions  of  belladonna  root,  hydrastis,  and  hyoscyamus. 
Any  one  who  has  occasion  to  examine  crude  drugs  knows  that 
they  are  very  rarely  free  from  admixtures.    Sometimes  these  ad- 
