The American Medical Association and the United States pharmacopoeia / a reprint of the pamphlets of H.C. Wood, Alfred B. Taylor, the Philadelphia County Medical Society, and the National College of Pharmacy ; with a rejoinder addressed to the professions of medicine and pharmacy of the United States, by Edward R. Squibb.

  • E. R. Squibb
Date:
1877
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The American Medical Association and the United States pharmacopoeia / a reprint of the pamphlets of H.C. Wood, Alfred B. Taylor, the Philadelphia County Medical Society, and the National College of Pharmacy ; with a rejoinder addressed to the professions of medicine and pharmacy of the United States, by Edward R. Squibb. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    79/159 (page 79)
    results. How much better it must be, however, fur the commission itself to be able to do this work. '' How many are necessary to give that diversitj' of character, of knowledge and of experience and taste, whose average makes up sound judgment. No such result can be expected from a very small body, because it cannot contain the elements necessary; while in large bodies the diffi- culties of harmonious agreement and action, increased by the difficulties of securing prompt attendance at meetings, overbalance the advantages of greater aggregate ability. (p. 47.) If practically there has been difficulty in securing the attendance and co-operation of a large number of active workers in the com- mittee, this should be remedied by a careful selection by the Convention of those both qualified and willing to serve faithfully on this responsible work. Such a commission, charged with the entire work, should be authorized to employ one or two editors or secretaries; perhaps t wo during the general revis- ions and one permanently. These should be experts, competent to do all the detail work under the direction of the council, and should submit the prepared work at the meetings of the council. These officers of the council should be liberally paid for their services, but should have no vote in the council, and per- haps one of them should be permanently employed, entirely and solely in the interest of the Pharmacopoeia, under the absolute dkection and control of the council. There should be no salaries paid to the council ; but actual traveling expenses should be paid. And all expert labor necessary to the work should be liberally paid, and the best experts only should be employed. (p. 9.) To these propositions no reasonable objections could be made. The sacrifice of time required by the members of the commission, in their frequent and pro- longed labors, is a sufficiently onerous tax, without entailing upon those living at a distance from the place of session the pecuniaiy outlay which few could well afford. Most heartily, therefore, do we approve the plan that actual traveling expenses should be paid to all members of the revising committee, in order to secm-e as wide a geoc/raphical representation as possible. In the further elaboration of his scheme, however, Dr. Squibb arrived at the judgment that the labor involved in bringing the Pharmacopoeia up to the level of pharmaceutical progress at the times for its revision has always been great, and increasing rapidly with each revision, has now become very great, far too great to be required or expected from any committee of revision acting voluntarily and gratuitously, while no adequate provision has ever been made for paying for the labor involved. (p. 11.) If to this be opposed the testi- mony that the plan of revising the Pharmacopoeia by this Convention has been eminently successful and sufficient up to 1850 or 1860 will not be doubted by any reasonable person, for the testimony of the great mass of the profession will be heartily, promptly and thankfully accorded to this proposition (p. 33.) the writer labors as unaptly, as ungraciously to maintain the curious thesis that the able and distinguished men who so conscientiousl}- and industriously served on the earlier Committees of Revision did not contribute their voluntary and un- paid toil, as has generally been supposed, but that they did their work well only because indirectly they were well paid! When the work was mainly and so admirably done by Drs. Wood and Bache in the past, it was well and amply paid for by the subordination [!] of the Pharmacopoeia to the Dispensatory of these autliors, which latter as a pri- vate book of its authors has been deservedly one of the most popular, most useful and most lucrative books of the age. (p. 11.) And this Dispensatory