Chemical and Physical Papers. 33 



to be found in that department. It is well to call attention to that 

 phase of the subject. There seems to be no claim too extravagant 

 for use by those who write the advertising literature for these nos- 

 trums, and much of this physicians are asked to read and believe. 

 The United States government has endeavored to combat'this evil 

 of misrepresentation on labels and advertising matter, under regu- 

 lation 17E of the food and drugs law, which, referring to misbrand- 

 ing, states that the descriptive matter upon the label shall be free 

 from any statements, design or device regarding the article or the 

 ingredients or substances contained therein or quality thereof, etc., 

 which are false and misleading in any particular. 



In the ruling of the United States supreme court (United States 

 vs. O. A. Johnson; opinion May 29, 1911) we have a contradiction 

 of law which is phenomenal. The ruling here is to the effect that 

 the food and drugs act does not cover the knowingly false labeling 

 of nostrums as to their curative effect. In the language of Presi- 

 dent Taft, "it follows that, without fear of punishment under the 

 law, unscrupulous persons, knowing the medicines to have no 

 curative or remedial value for the diseases for which they indicate 

 them, may ship into interstate commerce medicines composed of 

 substances possessing slight physiological action, and labeled as 

 cures for diseases which, in the present state of science, may be 

 recognized as incurable." In other words, these unblushing false- 

 hoods and extravagant claims of literature, such as we find in the 

 circulars, labels and advertisements, are legitimate, and, according 

 to the ruling of the supreme court, the food and drugs law has no 

 jurisdiction — a position which seems like an insult to the medical 

 and pharmaceutical professions. 



Unquestionably, Mr. Taft's message to Congress, in which he 

 exposes the vital weaknesses of the pure food and drugs act in this 

 direction, will arouse that body to act in such a way as to remove 

 such weakness by either insisting on a different interpretation or 

 by injecting into the law an unmistakable ruling which will apply 

 to these cases. It is worthy of notice that the British Conference 

 of Pharmaceutical Faculties, which was held in July last, have 

 taken up this subject of patent medicines vigorously, and their re- 

 port is to be found in the Pharmaceutical Journal for July 29, 

 1911, pages 165-168, in which it is stated: "This meeting of the 

 British Pharmaceutical Conference is of the opinion that a public 

 inquiry by a royal commission or a departmental committee should 

 be held in regard to the advertising and sale of proprietary and 



-3 



