Am.  Jour.  Pharm.  ) 
April,  1877.  j 
Editorial. 
Superfluous.   The  direction,  "a  metri-spoon  three  times  a  day,''  would  thus  naturally  supersede  the  ex  - 
pression,  "a  metri-spoonful."     Were   the  gram   and  centigram  authoritively   adopted,  the  employ 
ment  of  these  weights  (after  having  been  translated  by  suitable  tables)  would  be  found  to  be  much  less, 
troublesome  than  might  be  supposed.    With  a  little  practice,  the  use  would,  of  course,  soon  become  as 
convenient  as  that  of  our  own  weights  at  present. 
The  tenor  of  Mr.  Taylor's  paper  is  well  shown  in  his  concluding  remarks,  where 
he  says: 
To  recapitulate— the  purpose  attempted  in  this  paper  has  been  to  point  out,  first,  that  fluid  medicines 
may  be  as  easily  prescribed  and  dispensed  by  weights  as  by  volumes,  after  a  proper  tabulation  of  effec- 
tive and  maximum  doses  of  the  entire  materia  medica  in  units  of  weight  ;  secondly,  that  mixtures  so  pre- 
pared may  be  administered  with  perfect  facdity  by  familiar  measures  of  volume  ;  thirdly,  that  intheevent. 
of  the  officinal  adoption  of  the  "  metric  "  gram,  its  notation  can  be  made  exceedingly  simple  and  conve- 
nient ;  fourthly,  that  in  this  case,  while  no  serious  disadvantage  would  result  from  the  retention  of  the 
familiar  fluid  drachm,  or  teaspoonful,  yet,  for  the  sake  of  greater  precision  and  neatness,  the  '■  flui-gram  " 
(the  French  millilitre)  should  be  the  popular  unit  of  volume  for  the  actual  administration  of  fluid  medi- 
cines ;  and  lastly,  that,  for  the  sake  of  certainty  and  uniformity,  the  "  teaspoon  should  be  replaced 
by  a  standard  medicinal  spoon,  holding  just  four  "  flui-grams,"  and  the  ordinary,  but  variable,  "wine- 
glass" should,  in  like  manner,  be  superseded  by  a  "  metri-glass  "  having  the  capacity  of  sixteen  such- 
standard  medicinal  spoons. 
These  suggested  reforms  would  none  of  them  be  found  to  be  very  difficult  of  introduction,  and  they 
wouid  result  in  the  advantage  to  the  profession  of  a  great  permanent  convenience,  facility  and  trustwor- 
thiness in  the  employment  and  exhibition  of  therapeutic  agents. 
Responsibility  of  Pharmacists  in  Cases  of  Criminal  Poisoning  A  case  was 
tried  in  the  Court  of  Oyer  and  Terminer,  in  this  city,  on  March  19th,  which  is  of 
considerable  interest  and  general  importance.  It  appears  that  on  November  13th, 
Wm.  H.  Driscall  purchased  four  ounces  of  tincture  of  opium  at  a  well-known 
drug  store,  and  on  arriving  home,  in  the  presence  of  his  mother  and  sister,  swallowed 
about  three  ounces  of  it  in  two  draughts  j  he  vomited  some,  and  although  medical 
aid  was  soon  after  obtained,  he  died  in  about  seven  hours.  I  he  assistant  who  sold 
the  laudanum  was  tried  under  the  charge  of  manslaughter. 
It  was  testified  by  two  relatives  and  two  neighbors  that  the  deceased  was  drunk 
before  the  purchase  ;  he  had  been  seen  in  the  street  somewhat  staggering  and  had 
been  dozy  at  home.  On  the  other  hand  a  witness  for  the  prosecution  testified  that 
at  the  store  he  had  the  appearance  of  a  sober  and  respectable  man,  and  conversed, 
rationally  about  the  election  and  the  weather.  It  was  also  proven  that  when  asked 
why  he  wanted  so  large  a  quantity,  he  said  it  was  for  family  use,  and  he  did  not 
want  to  be  running  out  after  it  every  day  ;  that  the  deceased  had  been  a  customer  at 
the  store  before,  and  that  the  clerk,  because  it  was  said  to  be  for  family  use,  and  to 
guard  against  mistakes  by  the  family,  had  put  a  prominent  poison  label  upon  the 
bottle  in  addition  to  the  regular  label,  which,  besides  the  name  of  the  article  was 
marked  "  poison  "  and  had  full  directions  for  use. 
The  case  was  submitted  without  argument  upon  the  charge  of  the  Court,  judge 
Peirce  charged  the  jury  that  it  was  averred  on  the  part  of  the  Commonwealth  and 
conceded  by  the  defence  that  if  the  defendant  knew  that  deceased  was  drunk  or 
intoxicated  when  he  sold  him  the  drug,  defendant  would  be  liable,  under  this  indict- 
ment, to  conviction.  He  agreed  therewith,  and  it  was  for  the  jury  to  determine 
whether  the  defendant  had  such  a  knowledge  ;  but  if  they  were  satisfied  defendant 
only  sold  the  drug  to  deceased  after  a  conversation  with  him  and  a  careful  inquiry 
