190  American  Pharmaceutical  Association.     { AmAPTii"; wwfm ' 
instructed  to  communicate  with  the  proper  officers  of  the  Philadel- 
phia County  Medical  Society  with  a  view  of  having  the  members 
of  that  organization  express  their  desires  regarding  the  refilling  of 
prescriptions. 
Among  the  several  questions  that  were  brought  up  in  connection 
with  or  bearing  on  the  renewal  of  prescriptions  it  may  be  interesting 
to  note  the  following,  with  a  view  of  presenting  them  for  further 
discussion  : 
Who  owns  the  prescription  ? 
Is  an  agreement  that  does  not  bear  the  signatures  of  both  parties 
valid  ? 
Would  the  Courts  sustain  a  pharmacist  in  refusing  to  refill  a  pre- 
scription bearing  an  injunction  "  Not  to  be  refilled  "? 
Should  a' pharmacist  always  retain  the  original  prescription  ? 
Can  a  pharmacist,  legally,  refuse  to  give  the  patient  a  copy  of  the 
prescription  ? 
What  is  the  status  of  the  copy  of  a  prescription  ? 
Should  a  reputable  pharmacist  fill  or  refill  a  "  copy  "  ? 
Granted  that  a  "  copy  "  should  be  recognized  as  a  prescription, 
should  the  pharmacist  differentiate  between  a  copy  written  by  a 
pharmacist  and  one  written  by  the  patient  himself? 
What  relation  does  the  "  copy "  of  a  prescription  bear  to  the 
printed  prescriptions  found  in  many  of  our  daily  papers  ? 
Should  newspaper  prescriptions  be  filled  by  reputable  pharma- 
cists ? 
These  questions,  and  many  more  that  might  be  cited,  presented 
themselves  either  directly  or  indirectly  in  the  course  of  the  discus- 
sion, and  despite  the  fact  that  some  of  them  at  least  would  appear 
to  be  capable  of  a  direct  answer,  they  all  allow  of  a  difference  of 
opinion,  and  together  they  amply  justify  the  indecision  of  this  par- 
ticular meeting  of  the  Philadelphia  Branch. 
This  being  the  annual  meeting,  the  discussion  was  preceded  by  a 
business  meeting  and  election  of  officers. 
The  business  meeting  included  the  reports  ot  several  committees, 
the  first  of  which,  the  committee  on  the  death  of  Albert  E.  Ebert, 
reported  the  following  preamble  and  resolutions : 
Whereas,  the  death  of  Albert  E.  Ebert  removes  from  the  ranks 
of  the  American  Pharmaceutical  Association  one  of  the  most  active 
workers  and  truest  adherents,  and  constitutes  an  irreparable  loss  to 
the  science  of  pharmacy  in  America.    Now,  therefore,  be  it 
