The dispensatory of the United States of America / By George B. Wood ... and Franklin Bache.

  • Wood, George B. (George Bacon), 1797-1879.
Date:
1845
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The dispensatory of the United States of America / By George B. Wood ... and Franklin Bache. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    15/1394 (page 7)
    and explanation appeared necessary. Nothing, in fine, has been omitted, which, in the estimation of the authors, could serve to illustrate its meaning, or promote the ends which it was intended to subserve. This course of proceeding appeared to be due to the national character of the Pharmacopeeia, and to the important object of establishing, as far as possible, throughout the United States, uni- formity both in the nomenclature and, preparation of medicines. In one particular, convenience required that the plan of the Pharma- copia should be departed from. The medicines belonging to the department of Materia Mepica, instead of being arranged in two divisions, corresponding with the Primary and. Secondary Catalogues of that work, have been treated of indiscriminately in alphabetical succession; and the place which they respectively hold in the Phar- macopceia is indicated by the employment of the term Secondary, in connexion with the name of each of the medicines included in the latter catalogue, But, though precedence has thus been given to the Pharmacopeia of the United States, those of Great Britain have not been neglected. The nomenclature adopted by the different British Colleges, and their formule for the preparation of medicines, have been so extensively followed throughout the United States, that a work intended to repre- sent the present state of pharmacy in this country would be imperfect without them; and the fact that the writings of British physicians and surgeons, in which their own officinal terms afd preparations are exclusively employed and referred to, have an extensive circulation - among us, renders some commentary necessary in order to prevent serious mistakes. The Pharmacopeeias of London, Edinburgh, and Dublin have, therefore, been incorporated, in all their essential parts, into the present work. . Their officinal titles are uniformly given— always in subordination to those of the United States Pharmacopeeia, when they express the same object; but in chief, when, as often hap- pens, no corresponding medicine or preparation is recognised by our national standard. In the latter case, if different names are applied by different British Colleges to the same object, that one is generally preferred which is most in accordance with our own system of nomen- clature, and the others are given as synonymes. ‘The medicines directed by the British Colleges are all described, and their processes either copied at length, or so far explained as to be intelligible in all essential particulars. Besides the medicinal substances recognised as bfliclund by the Pharmacopeeias alluded to, some others have been described, which,