Aconite Root.

BY E. R. SQUIBB, M.D.

The description of the Pharmacopoeia applies very well indeed to some parcels of Aconite root, but there are few drugs which, while retaining a general form, vary more in size, color and thickness of bark, in different parcels met with in the markets. The roots in the same parcel vary very much also in size, surface, and internal structure. Many roots in every parcel will not be over 1 to 1 ½ inches in length, and while a large proportion are very much wrinkled longitudinally, a few are quite smooth. These smooth roots are absent entirely from some parcels, and are not very numerous in any. They break with a solid, starchy fracture, and commonly have a very thin bark. The wrinkled roots are more spongy internally, and some are very light and porous, doubtless from having been in a very succulent condition when gathered. All these varieties may be very strong or very feeble to the taste, for the appearance bears very little relation to the activity of the root. Some parcels are much more stalky than others; that is, have more of the comparatively inert stalk cut off with the root, and in this are of course objectionable, yet many parcels that are quite stalky are to be preferred to those which are better trimmed, on account of superior activity. The greatest difference, however, in different bales is in the taste, or rather in the aconite impression upon the tongue and lips, and upon this the writer has long relied in selecting for purchase. Some years ago he published the method of testing by taste, and at that time stated that, with care in selection, parcels could be had which when each root of a handful sample was broken in the middle, and a very small piece from the point of fracture was chewed between the front teeth in contact with the tip of the tongue for a few moments, and was then discharged, eight out of ten of the roots would give the characteristic aconite tingling in some degree within ten or fifteen minutes. He can now state that parcels are easily had, though at a higher price, every root of which will give a strong sensation from a very small particle. This has made him revise the test within the past two years. As it comes from shipboard, or from storehouses, it is commonly tough enough to be cut across with a sharp knife without going to dust as it does when dry. A very thin slice cut across from the middle of the root will weigh about a centigramme, or a little over one-sixth of a grain. This, if cut in ten pieces of nearly equal size, each will weigh about a milligramme, or the sixty-fifth of a grain. One of such pieces, taken between the front teeth and chewed in contact with the tip of the tongue with saliva enough to wet it, for about one minute, should give the aconite impression, not strongly, and not amounting to tingling, but yet a distinct impression which, when realized a few times, will always be recognized. There is no need of this cutting and weighing more than once, and that only to see how small a piece to take for the test, and there is a great advantage in taking so very small a piece, because the impression from it is so faint that it soon passes away, and admits of another root being tested in the same way in half an hour or so. If the piece be larger and the impression strong, it will last for two hours or more, and thus only a very few pieces can be tested in a day. At best it is a slow process, but well worth applying in the interest of accurate medication by a drug so important. Few pharmacists or physicians ever see the root, but only get the powdered root. The powder should be tested in the same way, taking about the same quantity on the tip of the tongue, and bruising and softening it with the teeth so as to get out the active principle.

Aconite root is not sweetish as described by the Pharmacopoeia, but is distinctly bitterish, but the taste proper is always faint. Some roots are tasteless, or so nearly so that no very distinct taste is recognized, and yet such roots may in a few minutes give a very decided impression.—Ephemeris, March, 1884, p. 502.

The American Journal of Pharmacy, Vol. 56, 1884, was edited by John M. Maisch.