Am.  Jour,  Pharm.  ) 
Nov  1, 1873.  J 
Minutes  of  the  College. 
519 
Committee  of  three  on  Deceased  Members  was  ordered.  S.  Mason  McCollin 
and  Joseph  P.. Remington  acting  as  tellers,  reported  the  following  gentlemen 
elected  to  the  respective  duties. 
Trustees.— Dr.  Wilson  H.  Pile,  Alfred  B.  Taylor,  Evan  T.  Ellis,  S.  Mason 
McCollin,  Charles  Bullock,  William  C.  Bakes,  William  Mclntyre  and  Albert 
P.  Brown. 
Committee  on  Deceased  Members. — Wm.  Procter,  Jr.,  Charles  Bullock  and 
Alfred  B.  Taylor. 
Then  on  motion  adjourned. 
William  J.  Jenks,  Secretary. 
A  Special  Meeting  of  the  Philadelphia  College  of  Pharmacy  was  held  Octo- 
ber 21st,  1873,  at  the  College  Hall,  Dillwyn  Parrish,  President,  in  the  Chair  ; 
39  members  present. 
The  object  of  the  meeting  was  to  hear  a  report  of  the  Committee  appointed 
at  the  Semi-Annual  Meeting  in  September  to  visit  Washiiagton  for  the  purpose 
of  endeavoring  to  effect  a  change  in  the  ruling  of  the  Commissioner  of  Internal 
Revenue  relative  to  the  stamp  tax  on  medicines. 
Joseph  P.  Remington,  on  behalf  of  the  Committee,  read  an  interesting  re- 
port, the  substance  of  which  is  embodied  in  the  following  abstract.  The  Com- 
mittee, in  conjunction  with  a  similar  one  appointed  by  the  Drug  Exchange, 
visited  the  Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue  at  Washington  on  the  30th  ult., 
presented  their  views,  and  stated  the  inconsistency,  in  their  opinion,  of  the  re- 
cent ruling  with  the  decisions  of  previous  Commissioners,  and  endeavored  to 
effect  a  return  to  the  original  rule  that  had  been  followed  since  the  passage  of 
the  law.  They  presented  a  number  of  cases  for  his  opinion  as  to  the  require- 
ments of  the  law  regarding  the  necessity  of  a  stamp  when  put  up  in  packages 
ready  for  sale,  such  as  laudanum,  paregoric  elixir,  hive  syrup,  etc.,  with  their 
respective  labels  specifying  the  dose  to  be  given.  The  Commissioner  called 
to  his  aid  his  assistant,  and  the  two  expounded  the  law,  in  accordance 
with  their  view  of  the  matter,  generally,  however,  at  variance  with  the  views 
entertained  by  the  Committee,  and  sometimes  at  variance  with  one  another, 
showing  the  whole  subject  to  be  a  matter  the  depth  of  which  was  beyond  their 
ability  to  fathom.  The  Commissioner  acknowledged  that  the  execution  of  the 
law  gave  him  a  great  deal  of  trouble,  and  signified  his  willingness  to  assist  in 
having  it  repealed.  He  was  asked  by  the  Committee  if  he  had  called  in  any 
experts  to  assist  him  in  his  decisions,  and  his  reply  was  that  he  felt  fully  com- 
petent to  decide  upon  the  question.  His  mind  seemed  made  up  to  carry  out 
his  recent  ruling  in  full,  but  not  until  the  trade  had  been  made  acquainted  with 
the  requirements  of  the  department. 
He  explained  the  matter  more  fully  by  saying  that  "where  physic  and  phy- 
sician were  supplied  to  the  patient  at  the  same  time,  as  was  the  case  where 
labels  were  used  giving  the  name,  dose  and  directions  of  the  medicine,  it  was 
plain  that  a  stamp  was  required,"  and  he  therefore  ruled  that  the  dose  and  di- 
rections were  sufficient  to  make  any  medicine  stampable  ;  as  instances  a  num- 
ber of  labels  for  special  articles  were  cited,  such  as  Epsom  salts,  one  dose  ; 
castor  oil,  one  dose  ;  "  both  require  stamps,"  was  the  reply.   Seidlitz  powders, 
