368  Chemistry  of  British  Pharmacopoeia.  {A^n^*f^m' 
mixtures  are  other  portions  of  the  plant  yielding  the  drug,  and  at 
other  times  they  are  unavoidable  or  accidental  foreign  substances. 
No  attempt  whatever  is  made  to  either  recognize  the  presence  of 
such  admixtures  or  to  fix  limitations  therefor. 
The  descriptions  of  the  macroscopical  characters  of  the  drugs  are 
very  little  improvement  over  those  of. the  former  edition.  It  is  rather 
the  exception  that  the  descriptions  of  the  histology  or  microscopical 
structural  characteristics  of  the  drugs  or  of  the  powders  are  given  with 
any  degree  of  thoroughness,  and  the  common  adulterants  and  their 
characteristics  are  not  even  mentioned. 
While  in  some  drugs  a  limit  of  ash  has  been  added,  in  many 
others  equally  important  this  has  been  ignored.  As  examples,  the 
ash  of  lobelia  has  been  fixed  in  this  revision  at  "  not  more  than  12 
per  cent.,"  but  for  hyoscyamus  no  limit  of  ash  is  given. 
The  tenacity  with  which  the  English  people  adhere  to  the  tenets 
and  practices  of  their  fathers  and  forefathers,  their  aversity  to  in- 
novations and  the  making  of  radical  changes,  is  a  recognized  trait  of 
the  English  character.  This  conservatism  of  the  nation  is  reflected 
in  their  pharmacopoeia,  and,'  while  we  criticise  in  a  friendly  spirit 
some  of  its  defects  and  lack  of  progress,  we  recognize  that  it  is  a 
safe  and  practical  book  of  standards  for  most  of  the  substances 
prescribed  in  British  medical  practice. 
THE  CHEMISTRY  OF  THE  BRITISH  PHARMACOPOEIA, 
1914.1 
By  Charles  H.  La  Wall. 
In  reviewing  the  chemical  text  of  the  British  Pharmacopoeia, 
1914,  one  would  naturally  be  prepared  for  some  radical  changes, 
inasmuch  as  the  last  edition  of  the  book  bears  the  date  1898,  which  is 
sixteen  years  previous. 
Undoubtedly  the  most  radical  change  (and  this  applies  to  the 
book  in  a  broad  sense)  is  in  the  adoption  of  the  metric  system, 
together  with  the  use  of  the  word  "  millilitre,"  which  is  given  through- 
out the  text  in  the  unabbreviated  form.  That  this  change  is  radical 
will  be  appreciated  by  all  who  know  the  history  of  the  Imperial 
1  Read  at  the  annual  meeting  of  the  New  Jersey  Pharmaceutical  Associa- 
tion, June,  1915. 
