Volume 1

The extra pharmacopœia of Martindale and Westcott.

  • Martindale, William, 1840-1902.
Date:
1932-1935
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The extra pharmacopœia of Martindale and Westcott. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    8/1272
    PREFACE. The nineteenth edition of the First Volume of The Extra Pharmacopoeia was issued in June, 1928, followed by the Second Volume in October, 1929. Since then several National Pharmacopoeias have been published and to these reference has been made in revising our pages. We would mention in this connection—Farmacopea Ufficiale del Regno D’Italia, quinta edizione, 1929; Pharmacopee Belge, quatrieme edition, 1930; and Farmacopea Oficial Espanola, octava edicion, 1930. With regard to the British Pharmacopceia, 1932, we have followed with interest the various Pharmacopoeia Commission Reports of Sub-Committees printed from time to time during the last two years by the General Medical Council. We have prepared abstracts from these and have conducted independent research work in our laboratories on chemical and pharmaceutical points arising from their study, and, we may add, on several occasions have made suggestions to members of one of these Committees which occurred to us as helpful. We prefer, for example, the metric cubic centimetre, and its well-known contraction the Cc., in contradistinction to the millilitre and its abbreviation ‘ mil.* The United States Pharmacopoeia, it will be recalled, tried ‘ mils 5 for an edition but reverted to the more universally accepted cubic centimetre. In addition to this, Gm. is considered the best contraction for Gramme. So far as weights and measures in general for medicinal purposes are concerned, it is doubtful whether perpetuation of the dual system (Imperial and Metric) has any special advantages—vide Weights and Measures posted. It is perhaps not in order to give a detailed criticism of the changes in the British Pharmacopoeia, but one cannot help remarking (pharmacists would agree) that the requirements in the Official work, both as to the making and assaying of preparations, should be as simple and convenient as possible. The pharmacist’s work should be reduced, rather than increased by complicated processes. Criticism will no doubt be forthcoming for some time so we must restrain the pen—much as we should like to digress on the subject. One small instance of labour-saving we must however mention, namely, we proved a few years ago that in many cases maceration of drugs was as effectual as percolation. The result in the case of an investigation of Tincture of Digitalis—confirmed by Bio-Assay—was remarkable—v. p. 390. With these considerations before us it was thought best to arrange the Principal Additions and Changes to be effected in the B.P. ’32 in the form of a Synopsis, as was done on similar occasions in con¬ nection with the B.P. ’85, ’98 and ’14. We trust the arrangement will be found convenient. It enables those using the British