64 
Correspondence. 
f  Am.  Jour.  Pharm. 
(    January,  1921. 
Chairmen  of  Sub-Committees  Number 
and  Members  of  the  Sub-Committees.  of  Each. 
Executive  Committee. 
11.  G.  M.  Beringer,  Ph.  M.         No.   n — Extracts,  Fluidex  tracts,  Tinc- 
tures. 
Beringer,    Francis,    Havenhill,  Kelly, 
Nitardy,  Ruddiman.  6 
12.  Wilbur  L.  Scoville  No.  12  —  Waters,    Solutions,  Spirits, 
Syrups,  Elixirs. 
Beringer,  Culley,  Dye,    Fantus,  Kelly, 
Ruddiman,  Scoville,  Seltzer.  8 
13.  Jacob  Diner,  M.  D.i  No,  13 — Cerates,  Ointments  and  Miscel- 
laneous Galenicals. 
Culley,    Diner,    Dye,    Francis,  Kelly, 
Seltzer.  6 
14.  Theodore  J.  Bradley,  A.  M.    N0.1  14 — Tables,  Weights  and  Measures. 
Bradley,  Caspari,  Diner,  DuMez,  Jor- 
dan. 5 
15.  A.  G.  DuMez,  PhjD.  No.  15 — Nomenclature. 
Craig,    DuMez,    Kraemer,  Newcomb, 
Fantus,  Schneider,  Stitt,  Wood.  8 
Another  feature  of  the  Washington  conference  was  the  con- 
sideration by  the  Sub-committee  on  Scope  of  the  articles  official 
in  the  U.  S.  P.  IX.  It  was  understood  that  all  those  articles  for 
which  there  was  no  negative  vote  cast  for  admission  to  the  U.  S. 
P.  X.  would  be  reported  at  once  for  inclusion  in  the  new  Pharma- 
copoeia. Material  was  thus  provided  for  immediate  revision.  The 
Sub-committee  on  Scope  within  a  short  time  reported  about  five 
hundred  titles  for  admission  and  these  articles  have  been  before 
the  various  sub-committees  for  some  months. 
Scope.  A  significant  action  taken  at  the  Washington  confer- 
ence related  to  the  policy  to  be  followed  by  the  Committee  of  Revi- 
sion concerning  admissions.  There  were  many  of  those  on  the 
committee  who  believed  that  the  final  decision  on  admissions,  so 
far  as  therapeutically  useful  substances  were  concerned,  should 
be  left  to  the  medical  members  of  the  committee.  Others  believed 
that  this  decision  should  be  subject  to  the  majority  vote  of  the 
entire  committee  and  the  matter  was  thoroughly  discussed  and  the 
following  motions  finally  approved: 
"In  questions  concerning  the  inclusion  of  substances  of  therapeutic 
usefulness  in  the  Pharmacopoeia,  the  entire  body  of  physicians  on  the  Com- 
mittee of  Revision  shall  have  the  deciding  vote." 
"In  all  questions  regarding  the  inclusion  of  substances  of  pharmaceutic 
necessity,  the  entire  body  of  pharmacists  on  the  Committee  of  Revision  have 
the  deciding  vote." 
