Am.  Jour.  Pharm.  ) 
Aug.,  1878.  ; 
Editorial. 
411 
nothing  but  a  want  of  co-ordinating  power  in  the  muscles  from  loss  of  sensation. 
Paralysis,  if  it  occur,  does  not  happen  till  near  death.  The  so-called  spasms  were 
not  convulsions  but  paroxysms  of  tossing  about. 
Dr.  Cook,  the  chairman,  called  upon  Mr.  Fuller,  who  was  present,  to  make 
remarks. 
Mr.  Fuller  animadverted  upon  the  law  which  permits  fraud,  if  the  recent  decision 
is  to  be  sustained.  He  judged  that  the  shutting  out  of  the  testimony  of  the  physi- 
cian in  attendance  was  not  intended  by  the  legislature,  and  was  an  outrage.  The  law 
should  be  such  that  it  will  be  an  easy  matter  to  unearth  and  punish  fraud. 
The  chairman  closed  the  discussion  with  a  statement  of  some  of  the  jurors  that 
the  substantial  agreement  of  the  doctors  in  their  testimony  was  very  suspicious.  He 
complimented  druggists  on  the  care  usually  taken  to  prevent  mistakes. 
We  make  also  the  following  extracts  from  Judge  RiegeTs  charge  to  the  jury  : 
It  appears  that  a  dose  of  this  preparation  was  administered  to  the  plaintiff  on  the 
evening  before  Thanksgiving;  that  soon  thereafter  he  was  seized  with  violent 
spasms,  his  throat  became^dry,  he  felt  a  burning  sensation  in  his  throat  and  stomach, 
was  seized  with  retching  and  vomiting,  and  tossed  himself  to  and  fro  upon  the  bed, 
and  the  pupils  of  his  eyes  were  dilated.  His  family  became  alarmed  and  sent  for 
his  relatives.  After  three  o'clock  he  became  easier.  The  immediate  symptoms  of 
the  poison  passed  off  within  a  few  days,  but  it  is  claimed  by  the  plaintiff  that  it  pro- 
duced effects  more  or  less  permanent.  It  is  claimed  that  by  reason  of  this  poison- 
ous dose  he  was  rendered  so  feeble  as  to  be  compelled  to  remain  indoors  until  the 
following  April,  during  nearly  all  that  time  keeping  his  bed  5  that  for  a  considerable 
space  of  time  thereafter  his  sight  was  impaired  so  as  to  be  unable  to  read  at  times  5 
that  the  poison  produced  inflammation  of  the  stomach,  which  caused  frequent 
vomiting  and  loss  of  appetite  for  a  considerable  space  of  time  ;  that  his  lower 
extremities  are  still  partially  paralyzed  ;  that  he  has  not  wholly  recovered  from  these 
effects  of  the  poisonous  dose 
It  is  conceded  by  the  defendant  that  the  immediate  symptoms  which  are  claimed 
to  have  followed  the  administration  of  this  dose  did  and  would  naturally  follow, 
but  the  permanent  results  which  are  claimed  to  have  followed  it  are  denied,  and 
physicians  have  been  placed  upon  the  stand  to  prove  that  by  the  known  nature  of 
this  poison,  those  results  did  not  and  could  not  have  followed. 
It  being  conceded  that  some  evil  consequences  to  the  plaintiff  did  follow  the 
administration  of  the  poisonous  dose,  the  extent  of  those  evil  consequences  can 
only  be  material  as  bearing  upon  the  amount  of  damages  that  should  be  awarded 
to  the  plaintiff  in  case  the  jury  shall  find  the  defendant  liable.  I  will,  therefore, 
•call  the  attention  of  the  jury  first  to  the  question  of  liability,  and  then  to  the 
question  of  damage. 
7  he  action  is  for  negligence.  It  proceeds  upon  the  theory  that  a  man  who 
follows  the  calling  of  a  druggist  holds  himself  out  to  the  community  as  possessing 
the  amount  of  skill,  caution  and  prudence  which  a  man  exercising  so  responsible  a 
calling  ought  to  possess.  The  greater  the  danger  to  the  public  from  want  of  skill, 
want  of  care  and  want  of  prudence  in  the  conduct  of  any  trade  or  calling,  the 
greater  the  duty  resting  upon  the  person  carrying  on  that  trade  or  calling,  that  he 
possess  and  exercise  that  skill  and  prudence.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  is  the 
duty  of  every  man  who  holds  himself  out  to  the  community  as  a  druggist,  a  com- 
pounder of  drugs  and  medicines,  many  of  which  are  deadly  poisons,  and  when 
improperly  administered  dangerous  to  life  and  health,  is  in  duty  bound,  first  to 
possess  himself  of  a  competent  knowledge  of  the  nature  and  qualities  of  these 
drugs  so  as  to  know  at  a  glance  whether  the  dose  as  prescribed  is  dangerous — and 
that  he  cannot  shelter  himself  from  the  consequences  of  ignorance  in  these  regards 
behind  the  written  prescription  of  a  physician,  however  eminent. 
