Codex @codex  0

London, Longman, Brown, Green and Longmans, 1855. Introduction and “Bread, and its Adulterations”, including p.143: observed samples must be distinguished from general allegations.

Arthur Hill Hassall's contemporary review of the fourth edition of Urinary Deposits. Bibliographic identity: British and Foreign Medico-Chirurgical Review 12(23), July 1853, pp. 123–149. Printed pp. 128–129 discuss the value of microscopy even when no visible deposit is present. The recommendation elsewhere in the review to retain urine for days is not adopted as current sample-handling practice.