Pharmaceutical  Meeting. 
( Am.  Jour.  Pharm. 
I      March,  1906. 
New  York,  gave  an  address  entitled  "  Comments  on  the  Chemicals 
of  the  Eighth  Decennial  Revision  of  the  U.  S.  Pharmacopoeia,"  which 
will  be  published  in  full  in  a  subsequent  issue  of  this  Journal. 
Dr.  C.  B.  Lowe  expressed  himself  as  much  pleased  with  the  ad . 
dress  and  moved  that  a  vote  of  thanks  be  tendered  Professor  Coblentz 
for  presenting  it,  which  motion  was  unanimously  adopted. 
Prof.  Joseph  P.  Remington  said  that  he  was  very  glad  that  Pro- 
fessor Coblentz  had  explained  in  detail  the  work  connected  with  the 
revision  of  that  portion  of  the  Pharmacopoeia  relating  to  inorganic 
chemicals,  and  said  that  he  could  testify  to  the  great  amount  of 
work  done  by  the  committee  having  this  work  in  charge.  He  said 
that  commendations  from  all  over  the  world,  including  those  from 
the  highest  authorities,  show  this  revision  of  the  U.  S.  Pharmacopoeia 
to  be  far  ahead  of  any  yet  published.  He  then  referred  to  the 
Digest  of  Criticisms  which  the  Committee  of  Revision  had  compiled 
for  the  use  of  the  members,  and  said  that  only  about  2  per  cent,  of 
the  criticisms  made  on  the  1890  edition  were  found  to  have  any 
value,  the  others  showing  for  the  most  part  merely  differences  of 
opinion.  He  expressed  the  hope  that  the  criticisms  on  the  eighth 
decennial  revision  would  be  of  more  value,  and  said  that  they  will 
all  be  considered.  Continuing,  Professor  Remington  said  that  every 
change  in  the  Pharmacopoeia  is  likely  to  affect  some  one.  In  the 
first  place,  preparations  must  be  made  to  conform  to  it,  and  this  may 
involve  some  loss  and  trouble  ;  then  again,  there  are  those  who  object 
to  change,  preferring  to  go  on  in  the  old  way,  and  hence  criticism  is 
likely  to  arise.  On  the  other  hand,  he  said,  it  should  be  understood 
that  the  Pharmacopoeia  is  a  book  of  standards  for  medicines,  and 
not  for  analytical  chemists.  He  then  referred  to  the  rubric  for 
chemicals,  which  he  said  had  not  been  adversely  criticized,  and  in 
this  connection  called  attention  to  the  great  purity  of  the  tartaric 
acid  and  sodium  bicarbonate  on  the  market  (these  containing  from 
99*5  to  99'9  Per  cent,  of  the  pure  chemical),  offering  in  explanation 
of  this  the  fact  of  the  rivalry  between  the  Cleveland  and  Royal 
baking-powder  companies,  each  making  a  claim  for  the  purity  of 
their  products.  In  concluding  his  remarks  Professor  Remington 
referred  to  the  criticism  that  the  Pharmacopoeia  is  a  manufacturers' 
book,  and  asked  how  it  could  be  anything  else  when  all  of  the 
chemicals  are  made  by  manufacturers  and  not  by  druggists  them- 
selves. 
Professor  Coblentz  said  with  regard  to  the  criticisms  pertaining  to 
