258 



THE ALUMNI JOURNAL, 



Ixe^al ]\[otes. 



In the case of John D. Parks & Sons Co. vs. 

 National Wholesale Druggists Association, Mr. 

 Justice Russell has continued the injunction 

 pending the trial of the action, enjoining the 

 defendant "from conspiring or combining to- 

 gether or with any other person or persons to 

 prevent the plaintiflF from freely purchasing 

 proprietary drugs and medicines, or other goods, 

 * * * But the defendants are not enjoined 

 from obtaining or imparting information as to 

 the manner in which the plaintiff conducts its 

 business or any violation of any agreement with 

 any specific manufacturer or wholesale dealer, 

 and neither of the defendants is enjoined from 

 making any agreement with the plaintiff or any 

 other person fixing the price of sale of his or its 

 particular line of goods. " 



As is well known, the National Wholesale 

 Druggists Association is organized to prevent 

 the cutting of prices and for the mutual benefit 

 of the members generally. It seems that the 

 Parks Co., violated the cutting agreement, then 

 suffered the penalty for such violation and now 

 seeks to enjoin the N. W. D. A. from preventing 

 them from purchasing proprietary articles. 



The facts being presented by aflSdavit do not 

 permit of the same depth of enquiry that a trial 

 does, and from the gist of the opinion, I gather 

 that the injunction will be dissolved when the 

 action is tried. 



From the facts in the recent case of Hatter- 

 man vs. Siemon, it appears, the plaintiff was 

 " required to wash and laundry underclothing 

 impregnated with a loathsome veneral disease 

 and thereby plaintiff contracted said loathsome 

 disease." For the safety of the laundress might 

 it not be well for physicians and druggists to 

 warn such patients of the liability they incur by 

 carelessness ? 



I wonder do my friends, the pharmacists 

 know that the following law is on the Statutes? 

 I didn't : 



PRESCRIPTIONS OF OPIUM, MORPHINE, COCAINE 

 AND CHLORAL. 



"No pharmacist, druggist, apothecary or other 

 person shall refill more than once, prescriptions 

 containing opium or morphine or preparations 

 of either of them or cocaine or chloral, in which 

 the dose of opium shall exceed one-quarter of a 

 grain, or of morphine one-twentieth of a grain 

 or of cocaine one-half of a grain, or of chloral 

 ten grains, except on the written order of a phy- 

 sician." 



Sometime ago I called the attention of the 

 Journals' readers to the preliminary educa- 

 tional requirements of the various professions. 

 Within the past two years the standard of pre- 

 liminary education has been raised in Dentistry, 

 Medicine, Veterinary Surgery and Law. Phai- 

 macy alone has the questionable distinction of 

 licensing people to assume the responsibility for 

 the life and death of human beings without 

 testing their intelligence and general knowl- 

 edge. 



I have heard old druggists say that it made no 

 diflFerence what a man knew about Organic 

 Chemistry or the ordinary high school branches 

 as long as he could buy and sell well he was a 

 good pharmacist and would be successful. 



The test of fitness to practice now seems to be 

 that the candidate has washed bottles four years, 

 can distinguish a few roots and herbs and the 

 properties of a few drugs ; his reasoning capa- 

 city does not enter into consideration at all. 

 That he is able to act intelligently on all occa- 

 sions seems of no consequence. 



Frequently physicians err in their prescrip- 

 tions and the pharmacist's duty is to correct 

 such errors. He must be able to reason to an 

 intelligent conclusion, but how can he without 

 a high grade of intelligence ? 



Whv not require pharmacists to pass an ex- 

 amination in preliminary education the same as 

 students in the other professions? Why is not 

 a knowledge of History, Geography, English 

 Grammar and Arithmetic just as important to a 

 Pharmacist as a Physician or Den.ist ? Why 

 should Pharmacy stand out alone and say that 

 an academic education is not absolutely neces- 

 sary to sdcial, business or professional success? 



H. A Herold. 



THE PRACTICE OF PHARMACY IN NEW SOUTH I 



WALES. ; 

 Under the present law in New South Wales \ 

 almost anyone who wishes can go into business 

 as a chemist and druggist. The law only inter- ; 

 feres when the Sale and Use of Poisons Act is j 

 infringed ; but as these unqualified persons who , 

 act as chemists all over the country are not reg- : 

 istered there is practically no check. In a re- 

 cent famous criminal case, arsenic had been ; 

 purchased from a person in business as a chem- | 

 ist, but not registered. Had he been registered i 

 he would have been compelled to keep poison- i 

 book and the purchase couid have been traced, 

 but not being of a certain status he did nothing , 

 of the kind, and the fact of the purchase was ; 

 only ascertained with great difficulty. As the 

 law stands, hospital wardsmen who have as- 

 sisted in making up prescriptions, doctors' : 

 grooms, and sailors who have helped ship sur- \ 

 geons carry on drug stores. j 



