The Doctor has successfully and properly exposed the futile defence set up by the College, through its agent Dr. Powell, for the adoption of the changes introduced; and were no better reasons to be found, this product of its genius and learning would justly deserve to be neglected; as indeed it would soon of itself naturally fall to the ground, like a soap-bubble blown for the gratification and whim of infantile fancy. But it is fortunate that this defence is unnecessary for the support of the general system, which we are of opinion has sufficient to recommend it, notwithstanding the badness of the execution of some of its parts.

"">

The vague term abietis resina, is justly objected to as a word which " means any resinous substance obtained from the spruce fir;" and as being therefore "indeterminate, inaccurate, and only imperfectly scientific :" while thus, the former name was short and distinct, accurately defined and generally understood, sanctioned by use, and conveying no false idea of the nature of the substance.' (P. 8.) Acacia gummi is also with propriety objected to as a substitute for the well-known term of gum Arabic; first, on account of the uncertainty of the botanical arrangement which has styled the genus in which the plant that is supposed to yield it is now placed secondly, from the reason there is for supposing that it is the produce of several species: and lastly, with most justice, in our opinion, on account of "the gross, and even dangerous error, of using the generic term alone."

"In the present instance," adds the Doctor, as an illustration of his remark," the genus Acacia, as constituted by Wildenow, contains no less than 102 species, to each of which the generic term equally applies; so that, were we not previously informed by some other means, what was the article referred to, there is nothing in the name which could enable us to ascertain which of the 102 plants was the one in question." (P. 12.)

A list of sixty-nine articles of the Materia Medica are subjoined in a note, one third of which is clearly liable to the same objection; an error which is the more unpardonable, as some of the members of the Royal College, and we believe one if not two of these were in the Committee for altering the Pharmacopoeia, lay claim, and not without valid pretensions, to a high rank in botanical science.

It would be impossible for us to follow the Doctor in each of his remarks, without inserting the whole of the pamphlet into our review; we shall, therefore, notice those only which are remarkable, or to the propriety of which we must object; and point out the omissions, which, notwithstanding the minuteness of the criticism, have escaped our author's observation. Although the names, acctum, ærugo, cerussa,

and

and such like, are not objected to as improper, inasmuch as they are sanctioned by use; and the components of the substances they are meant to express are either so multifarious, or so insufficiently ascertained, that they could not be named so as to express their composition correctly, or without a long periphrasis, according to modern Nomenclature; yet they are objected to on account of their want of uniformity with the more scientific appellations, and their deviation from the principles on which the College attempted the change. This objection, however, has more plausibility than justice; and does not so much attach to the framers of the Pharmacopoeia, as to the insufficiency of modern chemical Nomenclature; of which, however, all that can be said only shews that it is not yet brought to a state of absolute perfection. No objections could have been justly advanced against the language of the Pharmacopoeia, had it in all the instances of error erred only in this degree; and we should not condemn the whole of a structure because some of its parts are imperfect. The transposition of the specific name's of the salts, as ammoniæ murias, instead of murias ammoniæ, &c. &c. is justly objected to, as shewing that instead of promoting uniformity," the framers of the new Nomenclature have seemed rather to seek for opportunities of differing from their contemporaries." (P. 16.) The same force, however, cannot be allowed to the objection which our author states against the retention of the old name for gum ammoniac; for although Wildenow does not doubt that this substance is obtained from the heracleum gummiferum, a plant which he raised from seeds found in the gum ammoniac of the shops, yet he has not succeeded in obtaining any gumresin from the plants he reared; and the little reliance which can be put on the unscientific description, and engraving, of the plant named ferhaale, from which the Barbary ammoniacum is obtained, given by Mr. Jackson in his History of Morocco, would not authorize the College in adopting the opinion of even so respectable a naturalist as Wildenow, till the identity of the plants be more accurately established. The very puerile alterations in the orthography of the words columba and gambogia, which are now spelt calumba and cambogia, are justly ridiculed; but our author is wrong in objecting to the part of the capsicum plant which is used, being styled bacca, and stating, that it is not the berry, but the capsule that is employed in medicine." If this passage means to imply that the fruit of the capsicum is improperly styled a berry, the College may urge the authority of Gærtner, the highest on this subject, who styles it, in his description, Bacca cava, multiformis :" but even if it

3 K 2

means,

means, as we suppose to be the case, that the outside of the berry or the covering part only of the fruit being used, the word berry, which designates the whole of the fruit, should not be employed, the term capsule would not be correct in this case, as it properly signifies a particular kind of fruit. The truth is, the part medically employed is the pericarp, and hence it should have stood in the Pharmacopoeia capsici annui pericarpium. We cannot defend the College for the adoption of the term cetaceum, instead of spermaceti; but it may, perhaps, be allowed the new name does not convey an erroneous idea of the substance, which was the case with the old term, although sanctioned by long usage.

66

Doctor Bostock points out as deserving of particular notice, the frequent àiteration which the names of the three kinds of cinchona have experienced; and properly observes that the use of the specific names of the plants, instead of the cld titles of the barks, are a mere exercise of the memory, while the old ones could scarcely be either mistaken or for gotten." The objection to this mode of naming the bark is, in our opinion, not pushed sufficiently far; for there seems to be a misunderstanding between Zea, on whose authority the change is made, and the College, at least if we can refer to the translation of Dr. Powell, its accredited translator. In the translation, the yellow bark of the shops is regarded as the heart-leaved cinchona bark, cinchona cordifolia cortex, whereas Zea states the cordifolia to be the species which yields the quina amarilla of the Spaniards, which is the common pale or officinal bark; while the cancifolia, which Doctor Powell regards as yielding the pale bark, yields, according to Zea, the quina naranjada of the Spaniards, the calisaga of commerce, which is the yellow or orange bark of the shops. The improper application of general terms to im ply particular substances, as cornua, to express the horns of the stag; ovum, the hen's egg; sevum, mutton suet; and testæ, oyster shells; is very properly condemned. The objection to saccharum, which is used to express the sugar prepared from the arundo saccharifera, because it is the name of a class of vegetable products," is completely hypercritical; and the same may be said of our author's objection to the term, camphor. An unintentional mistake occurs in stating the impropriety of the appellation lytta. After stating the change made by the Edinburgh College in discarding the title cantharis, and adopting that of meloe vesicatorius; "this," says the Doctor," however, from the change of system, or from new discoveries in natural history, is des tined to give way to the still more novel appellation of lytta yesicatoria; of which, although there are twenty-nine

species,

species, and the specific name here has been improperly added, for lytta vesicatoria is but one species; and had it so stood in the Pharmacopoeia instead of the simple generic term, lytta, there could have been no reasonable objection made to the change, nor would the name have been as it now is, 66 imperfect and indeterminate.” We cannot allow that the same objections which are correctly stated to the chemical synonymes of verdigris, and white lead, apply to litharge. In our opinion the name plumbi oxydum semivitreum, adopted by the College, is perfectly correct; for the small portion of carbonic acid it contains cannot be regarded as sufficiently essential to constitute it a subcarbonate. The number of instances, however, in which the name adopted by the college is completely at variance with the synonyme in the opposite column is very remarkable; our author has properly pointed out all of these; and in particular considers"the change of the old word borax to boras-sodæ, is highly censurable, as not only being an incorrect expression, which seems to have been designedly adopted, but as properly belonging to a different substance." P. 21. In this

We

and similar instances it is almost impossible to conceive the motives of the College; for the synonyme is generally a severe criticism on the name of the substance: thus, in the present case, in the first column of the list of Materia Medica is placed "Soda Boras," while opposite, in the second column, we find the proper name of the salt, "subboras sodæ." think there is some reason for the retention of the term spiritus rectificatus, to which Dr. Bostock objects, the term alcohol being employed to designate a purer spirit, of a much less specific gravity; and as there is still a weaker spirit than the common rectified spirit in use, the adjunct dilatus would not have been sufficient to have pointed out the distinction between these; while by the terms used by the College, the three degrees of strength are fully specified. As gum arabic has been rejected, the term tragacantha can scarcely be admitted as a proper appellation for the gum of the astragalus vera; and therefore, our author's objection to it is perfectly valid.

The remarks on the second part of the Pharmacopoeia are equally just as those we have already noticed; and many of them expose a degree of neglect, for it cannot be termed ignorance, of the College, which is extremely culpable, But as we before observed, were we to follow the Doctor step by step, we should be obliged to embody the whole of the pamphlet in our critique; we shall, therefore, only enumerate those titles, which are considered as objectionable. Ammoniæ carbonas, liquor ammonic carbonatis, soda tartarizata, sulphuretum

sulphuretum antimonii præcipitatum, antimonium tartarizatum, pulvis antimonialis, argenti nitras? This preparation Dr. Bostock regards as a subnitrate, and, therefore, affirms that it should have been named subnitras argenti: but his opinion in this instance may be questioned, for the silver as held in solution in the nitric acid, in the preparation of the London College, is evidently an oxynitrate; it is also in the same state in the salt obtained by evaporating the solution; and, although, by the subsequent melting a part of the acid be expelled, yet, it is very probable that the product is not reduced to the state of a subnitrate. Liquor arsenicalis, cuprum ammoniatum, ferrum ammoniatum, ferri carbonas, ferrum tartarizatum, liquor ferri alkalini, tinctura ferri muriati, vinum ferri, hydrargyri oxymurias, hydrargyri submurias, hydrargyrus cum creta, hydrargyri oxydum cinereum, hydrargyrus præcipitatus albus, liquor aluminis compositus, decoctum aloes compositum, infusum catechu, infusum sennæ, tinctura camphore composita, extractum colocynthidis compositum, mistura ferri composita. Notwithstanding the extent of the above list, added to the objectionable names pointed out by Doctor Bostock in the first part, there are still others which he has overlooked, and which we shall therefore now mention. The part of the bulbous plants employed is invariably denominated radix instead of bulbus; the fruit of momordica elaterium is improperly termed pomum, instead of pepo; to acidum aceticum, the word dilutum should have been added, as it is meant to imply distilled vinegar; magnesia carbonas should be subcarbonas magnesia; decoctum cydoniæ should have been decoctum cydoniæ seminum; and decoctum lichenis should have added to it the specific appellation of the plant islandicus, the lichen rocella being now admitted as an article of the Materia Medica by the Dublin College. Doctor Bostock objects to the term oxydum antimonii, not so much on account of the name, but on account of its being improperly given as a synonyme of antimonium calcinatum, antimonium vitrificatum, and crocus antimoni: from our experiments we have no hesitation in saying that, if the preparation which is perfectly useless be allowed to remain, it should be named submurias antimonii.

Upon the whole, although we do not agree with our ingenuous author in deprecating the principle of the change of Nomenclature altogether, yet, we cannot withhold from him the tribute of applause for his acumen, and the propriety of his remarks on the execution of the production of the London College. We regret most deeply the circumstances which have produced these errors; particularly at the pres

sent