304 
MISCELLANEA. 
Dispensing from Prescriptions.— The American papers are discussing a rather 
curious, and not uninteresting question, which concerns us here as well as our transat¬ 
lantic brethren. Nothing is more common than for a druggist to dispense a score of 
times, and at long intervals, from the same prescription of a medical man Avithout any 
renewal of the medical authority. The moral and legal right to do this is disputed ; 
and the ‘ New York Medical Record ’ publishes the following legal opinion —“ 1. The 
prescription is a direction from the physician to some druggist to put up for and prepare 
for a patient’s use a certain medicine. When the druggist performs this act and files 
away the prescription, he has no right to again put up or prepare medicine from that 
prescription, unless he does so by the order of the physician who originally gave it. He 
has no more right to do so than a merchant would have to deliver on a written order for 
one barrel of flour or sundry barrels after the one called for was delivered. A more 
important feature is, however, involved in the matter of physicians’ prescriptions being 
duplicated by a druggist, without the physician’s authority or instruction, which is that, 
the medicine so duplicated may be entirely unsuited to the patient’s changed condition 
of health, which the druggist has no opportunity of knowing. No one is capable of 
judging in such matter but the attending physician. The druggist that duplicates a 
physician’s prescriptions without the physician’s orders, commits a crime against society, 
inasmuch as he permits medicine to leave his store which may cause the death of the 
person to whom it is administered. 2. Medical societies have a right to prescribe and 
establish a rule for the government of druggists in such matters, which no doubt drug¬ 
gists would carefully observe. This would save the medical profession from many 
charges of mal-practice, and many persons from the injuries resulting from the continued 
use of a medicine not advised or prescribed by a physician.”— Brit. Medical Journal. 
Accidental Poisoning by Laudanum. —We regret to have to record another of 
those lamentable accidents,—in this case by the negligence of a chemist. An inquest 
has been held by Mr. Price, the deputy-coroner of Salford, on the body of an infant named 
Allen Whittaker, who had died from the effects of a dose of laudanum. The parents of 
the deceased live in George Street, near the shop of Mr. Robinson,* chemist, Arlington 
Street. The child had been ill for several days, and on Monday a neighbour advised 
Mrs. Whittaker to get some tincture of rhubarb to stop vomiting and purging. Mrs. 
Whittaker went to Mr. Robinson, and asked him what would be a good thing to stop 
infantile diarrhoea. Mr. Robinson recommended a mixture known as “ Infants’ Preser¬ 
vative,” but Mrs. Whittaker replied she would have some tincture of rhubarb, as it had 
been recommended to her. Mr. Robinson told her she could have some, and he filled 
her a small bottle of what she supposed to be the tincture, telling her to give the child 
a teaspoonful occasionally. Mrs. Whittaker gave the child a teaspoonful, and in a few 
minutes it became so very drowsy that her suspicions were aroused, and she took the child 
to Mr. Tomlinson, surgeon, Crescent. That gentleman asked her if she had given the 
infant any “ sleeping drops,” and she assured him that she had done nothing of the 
kind. Mr. Tomlinson made up some medicine, a part of which was given to the child, 
but it grew worse, and Mrs. Whittaker then sent the bottle back to Mr. Robinson, with 
a request that he would examine the mixture. He did so, and found that he had given 
tincture of opium instead of rhubarb. His son, Mr. R. H. Robinson, who is a surgeon, 
and lives with him, immediately attended the child, but he could not counteract the 
effects of the poison, and death took place on Tuesday night. Mr. Robinson’s explana¬ 
tion was that, when Mrs. Whittaker came in, she asked his opinion as to what would be 
best for the child, and after he had given it she persisted in taking the advice of her 
neighbour. Thereupon, he said, he became so annoyed that he took a bottle down from 
a shelf and gave the woman part of its contents without looking at the label; and he 
afterwards found that the bottle containing laudanum had got into the place usually 
occupied by that containing tincture of rhubarb. He wished the jury to understand 
* Mr. Benjamin Robinson, pharmaceutical chemist, Salford, wishes it to be known that the 
unfortunate accident did not take place at his shop, but at the shop of another chemist of the 
same name. 
