of competition, and bestowing a sort of bonus upon scientific acquirements. Now, it appears to me that like all other partial legislation, this restrains rather than promotes the great interests involved. Let us extend intelligence among the masses, and break down every false pretense by fair and equal competition, trusting to the good sense of the people to promote and conserve the cause of education and of the public health.

Since, then, the claim the educated preparer and dispenser of medicines makes to the title of a professional man is but partially acknowledged by the public, and since in our time and country it is no discredit to the most accomplished man of science that he thrives through the honest pursuit of a useful trade, I, for one, am willing to abandon any such pretensions to the professional character as involve the use of a title of distinction.

A name or title to designate our calling is, however, a desideratum; a title which should at once be brief, distinctive, intelligible and universal, for, strange to say, though the craft of the apothecary has been practiced more or less, in connection with the science and art of medicine, from the earliest periods of which we have historical records, we have in our language no universal method of designating it. The term Apothecary has a different meaning in England from that applied to it on the continent of Europe and in this country. In England they call a man a Chemist and Druggist, who in the United States would be called a Pharmaceutist, though this latter term is by no means universal among us, our brethren in New England, still calling themselves apothecaries, and a very large number in all sections of the country having never yet adopted the new word Pharmaceutist. The French have a good name for the purpose in Pharmacien, and some among us have anglicized this, spelling it Pharmacian, corresponding in termination with physician and an improvement upon its four syllabelled synomyn. This is very rarely used, however, and I think rather less adapted to our purpose than Pharmacist, the term I have used in this paper and which I am inclined to prefer, from its close correspondence with druggist and chemist, its easy pronunciation and spelling, and its being short and hence convenient to write and to speak. It may be said, as we have no uniformity in the use of the old terms, why introduce a new one

to complicate the matter. I reply that I consider the whole question of terms an open one at present. Uniformity would now be quite impossible, and it is necessary that by discussion we should arrive at a clear and well considered choice, adopt a term that would be uniformly acceptable, and give it the sanction of a formal approval by this and other representative bodies of those interested. This is one of the subjects which has a common interest for this Association and the British Conference, and if Pharmacist or Pharmacian should be the noun adopted to designate the individual, Pharmacal* might be the adjective used in connection with the respective names of our Associations, and wherever we now use the very long and awkward word Pharmaceutical. In this connection the names to be applied to our stores or shops should also be discussed. Some Pharmacists have quite repudiated the very proper term of shop as applied to their places of business, preferring the more pretensious word store, in fact the general practice indicates that choice. To this is added the adjective Pharmaceutical, or more frequently drug and chemical, sometimes all three. Since the nature of the business is equally well understood by the public in either case, the sign being less important than the appearance of the front window and of the shelving and show cases within, it becomes a matter of choice with each individual how he will designate his business on his sign, his business cards, his labels, or in his advertisements. Acting on this principle I have selected the name "Pharmacy" to designate my place of business. I find it convenient, brief and sufficiently distinctive, though liable to these apparent objections. The term Pharmacy is applied in a general way to the science and art which we practice, and the use now proposed for it is such as to give it a direction to the place in which we practice it. Moreover, my treatise on Pharmacy is commonly called among booksellers "Parrish's Pharmacy;" my store has the same apellation. These objections should be considered, however, in connection with the acknowledged flexibility of language, and the fact that the connection in which a word is used greatly modifies its accepted meaning. During the several years that I have applied it in that way it has served me a good purpose. Ast

* Pharmacial, as suggested at page 78.

differently spelled, (Pharmacie) it serves the whole French nation for the same use, and I believe if it were generally adopted it would be like some other things we have borrowed from France, an improvement.

ON THE SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF MEDICINAL CHLOROFORM.

BY JOHN M. MAISCH.

While the U. S. Army Laboratory at Philadelphia was in operation, large quantities of chloroform were prepared. It being our aim to furnish all preparations in every respect up to the requirements of the Pharmacopoeia, it was aimed to have the specific gravity of the chloroform between 1.490 and 1·494. A record kept of 44 carboys, with the specific gravity taken by the one-thousand-grain bottle, shows that 18 came fully up to the Pharmacopoeia, ranging between 1·4901 and 1·4933. The other 26 were mostly only an insignificant fraction below the former, while several carboys were as low as 1.4841, 1·4844, 1·4846, 1.4860, &c. These variations are easily accounted for, if it is borne in mind that the preparation was made on a very extensive cale,sand that in practice the specific gravity is taken with a hydrometer; then the result will be easily affected by a reduction of the temperature caused by the rapid evaporation of the chloroform, thus making the latter appear heavier than it in reality is.

It was observed that this chloroform decomposed much more rapidly than that of other manufacturers, and it was determined to ascertain the cause of it.

In the first place, pure chloroform, which had been furnished to the medical department of the army, was procured. Of fourteen samples, eleven were below 1.480, the lowest being 1-4760, the highest weighed 1.4806, 1.4815 and 1.4837. On exposing these and some made at the Laboratory to the direct sunlight, the latter was decidedly acid in the course of a day, while the former withstood the action of the light for two or three days, and its decomposition did not proceed quite as fast as in the other case.

A portion of the heavy chloroform was reduced by the addi

tion of a little strong alcohol, when it withstood the decomposing influence of light quite as well as the samples referred to.

Some of these latter were now rectified, in order to obtain them of the standard gravity of the Pharmacopoeia. Sulphuric acid was carefully avoided, because it has been asserted by some that it makes chloroform prone to decomposition. By one simple rectification from a water bath, the gravity of chloroform is not much increased. But, if previously washed with water, and rectified over chloride of calcium in a water bath, it may be obtained of the full strength required by the Pharmacopoeia. If this chloroform was exposed to the light alongside of that prepared at the place, no difference could be observed in their behaviour, both being decidedly acid after one day's exposure.

It was next thought that probably the impurities contained in chloroform might cause its rapid decomposition. Some was rectified from a very carefully-regulated water bath, and it was again observed that 98 per cent. may be obtained in this way of such a purity that sulphuric acid will not be affected in the least.

This perfectly clean chloroform generated free chlorine quite as rapidly as before; if diluted with alcohol to below 1-480, it was unaffected by the light.

Mr. Augustus Henkel, now of Cincinnati, and, for a time, one of my valuable assistants at the Laboratory, made a series of experiments on the effects of light, the results of which I subjoin herewith. The chloroform used for the experiments had a specific gravity of 1·492 at 70° F., was absolutely free from acid reaction, and imparted no coloration whatever to sulphuric acid. The diluted chloroform was made of eight ounces of the former, by the addition of one fluidrachm of strong alcohol. The bottles used for the occasion were made of flint glass, of uniform size and shape, and filled alike. The experiments lasted one week during the hot days in August, 1865.

1. Experiments with pure chloroform.

Appearance and reaction of chloroform at the end of the week, when kept b. In daylight. c. In direct sunlight. Free chlorine in yellow drops and suffocating odor.

Bots. glass-stop'd.

"corked. Cans soldered.

"corked.

a. In the dark. Extremely slight reaction.

Decidedly acid.}

Slightly acid.
Unaltered.

Unchanged.

2. Experiments with diluted chloroform.

Appearance and reaction at the end of a week when kept

1. That in order to preserve pure chloroform of specific gravity 1.49, it should be kept totally excluded from the light.

2. That to keep chloroform in the daylight, it should be reduced in specific gravity by the addition of about two fluidrachms of 95 per cent. alcohol to one avoirdupois pound of chloroform, sp. gr. 1.492.

During the repetition of some of these experiments, attention was drawn to the presence of moisture in some of the bottles, and it was determined to try its effects on chloroform; accordingly, chloroform of 1.492, dried by standing over chloride of calcium, was kept in absolutely dry bottles and in bottles slightly moist, and both kinds exposed to diffused daylight and direct sunlight. The bottle containing the moisture always showed the presence of free chlorine much sooner than the dry one, though the entire absence of moisture would not be sufficient to preserve the chloroform unaltered. But, if the chloroform had been reduced in specific gravity to 1.475 or less, the presence of several drops of water in the bottle would not induce the liberation of chlorine after an exposure of two weeks to the direct sunlight.

No difference in the preservation and decomposition of chloroform could be observed if the bottles were stoppered with glass or cork.

Commercial chloroform was afterwards procured from several manufacturers, and in all cases it was found to have a specific gravity less than 1·480, or barely exceeding it.

I have not found the time yet to prepare absolutely pure chloroform that is absolutely free from water and alcohol, to study the effect of light upon it when preserved in absolutely dry bottles. But even if light should then have no influence on it, it would, for pharmaceutical and medicinal purposes, be of no avail whatever, since the condensation of moisture upon the