ON  FLUID  EXTRACTS. 
339 
it,  and  the  furnishing  of  practical  formulas  for  fluid  extracts, 
suited  to  the  requirements  of  the  limited  trade  of  the  majority 
of  American  pharmacists.  The  best  method  for  removing  the 
•  difficulty  should  be  honestly  sought  and  applied.  To  the  writer, 
no  other  yet  presented  promises  so  much  as  the  suggestion  of 
Mr.  Diehl,  so  ably  advocated  in  the  Pharmacist  for  April,  by 
Mr.  Bartlett,  showing  the  advantage  of  a  reduction  in  the 
strength  of  fluid  extracts.  It  points  out  an  easy  and  unobjec- 
tionable method  for  correcting  the  greatest  abuse  that  pharmacy 
and  medicine  now  sufi'er  from.  It  is  necessary  to  keep  in  mind, 
when  considering  proposed  reforms,  that  we  must  take  the  world 
as  we  find  it,  time  being  necessary  for  reconstruction.  It  is  also 
the  part  of  wisdom  to  make  only  such  laws  as  we  are  able  to  en- 
force. Is  it  wise,  therefore,  to  retain  a  series  of  formulas  that 
not  one  out  of  ten  apothecaries  will  attempt  to  use  ?  Rather,  is 
it  not  our  duty  to  so  modify  the  formulas  that  each  well-disposed 
pharmacist  will  prepare  what  he  requires  for  dispensing  ?  There 
need  be  no  compromise  with  ignorance,  nor  with  dishonesty  in 
this  matter,  for  the  better  reasons  are  all  in  favor  of  the  pro- 
posed change,  while  it  is  difficult  to  name  a  sufficient  reason  for 
maintaining  the  present  standard.  Perhaps  the  best  one  adduced 
is  that  it  is  convenient  for  physicians  to  remember  the  propor- 
tion of  "  ounce  to  ounce,''  yet  it  is  difficult  to  imagine  a  memory 
so  poor  as  to  forget  the  proportion  of  one  half  ounce  of  the  drug 
to  the  fluid  ounce  of  extract,  particularly  when  we  now  have  two 
preparations  of  that  strength. 
The  only  other  reason  urged,  of  any  weight,  is  that  such  a 
standard  was  adopted  ten  years  ago,  and  has  been  generally  ad- 
vocated as  the  right  one,  yet,  to  admit  this  as  a  good  argument, 
would  prevent  making  any  changes  in  our  present  formulas. 
Further,  this  supposed  reason  is  negatived  by  the  fact,  that  the 
fluid  extracts  in  common  use  are  not  made  by  this  standard,  nor 
equal  it  in  strength. 
Experience  should  lead  to  improvement,  and  prejudice  should 
be  cast  aside  in  questions  of  so  much  importance  as  this. 
The  present  system  forces  a  compromise  with  right  by  compel- 
ling a  large  majority  of  druggists  to  use  the  inferior  prepara- 
tions so  extensively  advertised  by  specialists,  each  claiming  to 
