December 16,1871.] THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
4&1 
SATURDAY, DECEMBER 16, 1S71. 
Communications for this Journal, and boohs for review, etc., 
should be addressed to the Editor, 17, Bloomsbury Square. 
Instructions from Members and Associates respecting the 
transmission of the Journal should be sent to Elias Brem- 
ridge, Secretary, 17, Bloomsbury Square, IV. C. 
Advertisements to Messrs. Churchill, New'Burlington 
Street, London , IV. Envelopes indorsed u Pharm. Journ." 
THE END OF THE BETTS SUITS. 
A short letter in our correspondence columns 
last week, from the solicitors who had charge of the 
defence to the Betts Suits, stating that Mr. Betts 
had applied to have his Bill in the case Betts v. 
Rimmel dismissed, the costs to be paid by himself, 
records what is probably the last stage in this long 
and vexatious litigation. As this case and the twin 
case of Betts v. Wilmot at one time created con¬ 
siderable excitement among pharmaceutists, it will 
not be out of place to accompany this last act of the 
drama with a few remarks upon this glaring in¬ 
stance of the abuses possible in the present state of 
the law of patents. 
The details of this dispute have so often been re¬ 
ferred to in this Journal, that there is no necessity 
to repeat them here. The broad facts are that we 
have seen a patentee attacking a manufacturer for 
an alleged infringement of his patent,—the manu¬ 
facturer not having made the article nor having a 
reliable test for distinguishing a capsule coated with 
tin by heat from one coated with tin by pressure; 
and even the patentee himself acknowledging that 
lie could not tell one from the other. 
Further, the patentee, not satisfied with getting 
his pound of llesli from the innocent manufacturer, 
pounced at the same time upon the customers of the 
latter, they being, if possible, still more blameless, 
and so sought his remedy from two sources. 
But, fortunately, by dint of great exertions on the 
part of the defendants, the patentee was ignomini- 
ously defeated. He was forced to confess that he 
himself supplied the incriminated articles, which 
were made at his own house in Paris and sent bv 
him to those who nearly became his victims. 
And now the end of it all is, that the patentee 
simply withdraws from the prosecution, paying only 
the taxed costs, and justice is satisfied! But what 
is to compensate honest tradesmen for six years’ 
anxiety from such wanton attacks ? Why should one 
man have a right causelessly to inflict on another 
such losses in time, money and reputation ? 
We are glad to remember that the evil has been 
mitigated to some extent by the spirited and united 
manner in which the members of the trade concerned 
met the attack. The expenses of such litigation are 
very heavy,—we trust that, insatiable as Mr. Betts; 
appears to be, he will now be satisfied with his share 
of them,—and few tradesmen would have been pre¬ 
pared to incur the loss necessarily following even a 
successful defence. But had a system of compro¬ 
mise been generally carried out, the appetite no 
doubt would have been indefinitely sharpened by 
that which it fed upon. We, therefore, think that 
we may congratulate the defendants and the De¬ 
fence Committee that—the necessity having arisen 
—the time and money employed by them have not 
been altogether thrown away. 
PHARMACEUTICAL ETHICS IN NEW YORK. 
At a meeting of the New York College of Phar¬ 
macy on the 19th October, a “Code of Ethics” that 
had been drawn up was discussed and adopted. 
The greater part of this code is doubtless in accord 
with what is approved and carried into practice by 
most respectable pharmacists in this country, but 
we reproduce it for the purpose of illustrating the- 
principles upon which our New York brethren 
aspire to have all pharmaceutical dealings in their 
city to be based, and the steps they are prepared to 
take to secure that object. 
Preamble .—The members of the College of Pharmacy 
of the City of New York, considering it necessary that 
some mutual understanding should exist in regard t© 
the moral principles guiding them in their profession, 
hereby agree upon the following Code of Ethics :— 
1. We accept the U. S. Pharmacopoeia as our standard 
and guide for all officinal preparations, and recognize a 
variance from its rules only in exceptional cases, where- 
sufficient authority has proved some other process more 
reliable to attain the same end. 
2. Although not a legitimate part of our business, 
custom and the necessity of the times warrant us in 
keeping on hand the patent medicines of the day; yet 
we earnestly recommend the propriety of discouraging 
their employment when called upon for an opinion of 
their merits. 
3. We discountenance all secret formulas between 
physicians and pharmacists, and consider it our duty t© 
communicate such to each other when required. 
4. AVe distinctly repudiate the practice of allowing 
physicians a percentage on their prescriptions; and we 
agree not to have a secret understanding with physi¬ 
cians to the pecuniary detriment of the public. 
5. AVe will endeavour, as far as lies in our power, to 
refrain from compromising the professional reputation of 
physicians, and we expect the same comity from them. 
6. Since the professional training of the pharmacist 
does not include those branches which enable the physi¬ 
cian to diagnose and treat disease, we should, in all prac¬ 
ticable cases, decline to give medical advice, and refer 
the applicant to a regular physician. 
7. The growing demands of the age require that those:- 
who follow the profession of pharmacy should be edu¬ 
cated up to a higher standard. Therefore, we consider- 
it our duty, individually and collectively, to encourage- 
the advancement of knowledge in our profession gene¬ 
rally, and particularly by stimulating our assistants to< 
attend the lectures of the College, and by aiding and. 
assisting them to do so. 
8. Considering it expedient that some rule be adopted, 
to enforce the provisions of our code, we hereby agree*. 
