THE ALUMNI JOURNAL. 



2 93 



Published under the auspices of the 



Alumni Association of the College of Pharmacy 



OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, 



115=119 WEST 68th STREET. 



Vol. II. 



November, 1895. 



No. 11. 



The Alumni Journal will be published Monthly. 

 Entered at New York Post Office as second-class matter 



SUBSCRIPTION : 

 Per Annum, . . . One Dollar 



Single Copies, ... 15 Cents. 



All copy for publication, or changes of advertisements 

 should reach us on or before the 20th of the month pre- 

 vious to the issue in which they are to appear. 



All matters relating to publication should be written 

 on one side of the paper only, and sent to the editor, 



B. Frank Hays, 17 Vandewater St., New York 



All communications relating to finances and sub- 

 scriptions should be addressed to 



A. Henning, Treas., 115-119 West 68th Street 

 All communications relating to advertising should be 

 addresssd to 



A. K, Lusk. 1 Park Row. 



EDITOR, 



B. FRANK HAYS, PH. G. 



ASSISTANT EDITORS. 



FRED. HOHENTHAL, Ph. G. 

 K. C. MAHEGIN, PH. G. 



ASSOCIATE EDITORS, 



CHARLES RICE, Ph. D. 



CHARLES F. CHANDLER, Ph. D., M. D., L.L.D., etc. 



ARTHUR H. ELLIOTT, Ph. D., F. C. S. 



HENRY H. RUSBY, M. D. 



VIRGIL COBLENTZ, A. M., Ph. G., Ph. D. 



THE ALUMNI LECTURES. 



The lecture delivered by the Hon. 

 George F. Roesch, on Pharmaceutical 

 Jurisprudence, marks the opening of a 

 series of lectures to be given under the 

 auspices of the Alumni Association dur- 

 ing the present season. 



The lecture, which attracted a large 

 audience, was a resume of the laws and 



their interpretation. The subject was 

 treated in a clear and able manner, and 

 will be read with interest and profit by 

 many who were unable to be present at 

 the lecture. 



Among the many points that the lec- 

 turer brought forward, was the question 

 of responsibility which the pharmacist 

 assumes in dispensing a dose of a poison- 

 ous drug, which he knows to be exces- 

 sive. Inasmuch as the dose of a drug 

 within certain bounds is merely relative, 

 it has always been held, that the physi- 

 cian, when he prescribed a larger dose of 

 a remedy than is usually deemed prudent, 

 if he at the time affixed some mark so 

 as to show that he was aware of the 

 poisonous dose and intended the same; 

 or in the absence of any such mark, veri- 

 fied his prescription, when the excessive 

 dose was pointed out by the pharmacist, 

 assumed all the responsibility in case of 

 the dose proving too large. 



This, however, according to the learn- 

 ed gentleman's ruling, is not the case; 

 he says: "II then, a druggist, despite 

 his knowledge as a professional man, of 

 its dangerous character, compound such 

 a prescription, he too, assumes a share 

 in the risk and must abide by the con- 

 sequences. His remedy is to refuse to 

 fill it." 



This places the subject in an entirely 

 new light, and makes the position of the 

 pharmacist a very difficult one. Of 

 course, where the dose ordered is palpably 

 excessive, the only course for the phar- 

 macist to pursue would be to refuse to 

 dispense it, but, as often happens, a 

 physician prescribes a quantity of a 

 remedy at a dose, which is larger than is 

 sanctioned by books of reference, and yet 

 while not actually large enough to be 

 absolutely fatal, might be attended with 

 grave consequences in its administration. 

 It is in these cases where the responsi- 



