A  M.  Jour.  Phaem.  ) 
April  1, 1871.  J 
Pharmaceutical  Titles. 
157 
PHARMACEUTICAL  TITLES. 
By  the  Editor. 
The  value  set  upon  titles  varies  much  with  individuals  ;  so  much, 
indeed,  that  many  will  work  more  earnestly  for  a  title  than  for  more 
important  things.  If  their  possession  carried  with  it  the  knowledge 
and  dignity  which,  sometimes,  it  is  presumed  to  represent,  then  titles 
might  well  be  sought  for  as  desirable  evidence  of  accomplished  work. 
Unfortunately,  in  very  many  instances,  there  is  no  such  relationship. 
An  esteemed  correspondent  in  a  neighboring  city  writes:  ''There  is 
quite  a  discussion  going  on  here  about  the  title  proper  for  graduates. 
Some  agree  that  '  Doctor  in  Pharmacy '  would  be  most  correct,  but 
others  consider  that  improper,  'because  not  usual.'  It  would  be  in- 
teresting to  have  an  opinion  expressed  in  your  Journal,"  &c. 
Accepting  the  invitation,  we  will  suggest  that  it  is  desirable  to  avoid 
the  adoption  and  use  of  any  titles,  for  common  use  by  pharmaceutists, 
that  will  conflict  with  those  of  the  medical  profession.  Pharmacy  is, 
to  a  large  extent,  an  Art,  which  every  well-qualified  apothecary 
masters.  Its  pursuit  involves  so  much  scientific  knowledge,  that  it 
may  very  properly  be  called  a  profession,  and  he  who  properly  prac- 
tises the  art  is  a  Master  iii  Pharmacy.  This  title,  however,  should 
not  be  given  to  the  major  part  of  graduates,  as  they  now  issue  from 
our  schools  of  pharmacy,  who  should  be  satisfied  with  the  probational 
title  of  Graduate  in  Pharmacy,  (or,  perhaps.  Bachelor  in  Pharmacy^ 
until,  by  a  certain  length  of  service  as  assistants  or  principals,  they 
acquire  that  thoroughness  arising  from  experience  and  responsibility 
which  justifies  them  in  assuming  the  title  of  Master  in  Pharmacy. 
Whether  this  assumption  should  be  preceded  by  another  examination 
and  certificate,  or  whether  the  lapse  of  a  given  time  in  the  practice 
of  pharmacy  should  be  considered  sufficient,  would  be  questions  for 
the  Faculty  to  decide.  Our  own  opinion  is  that  the  title  would  carry 
more  weight  with  the  public,  and  be  more  esteemed  by  the  owner,  if 
it  had  been  properly  earned  and  certified  to  by  authority.  When, 
however,  the  title  Doctor  in  Pharmacy  is  not  intended  for  every-day  use, 
but  is  made  entirely  honorary  and  its  being  conferred  on  an  individual 
is  intended  to  express  the  favorable  appreciation,  by  the  conferring 
body,  of  his  labors,  or  qualities,  or  acquirements,  its  use  is  not  ob- 
noxious to  the  objection  above  stated,  any  more  than  is  the  honorary 
title  of  LL.D.  to  the  various  classes  of  persons  who  have  received  it 
from  our  Universities. 
« 
