AFebJr0uaryP^™'l      Need-  of  a  Profession  of  Pharmacy.  67 
That  physicians,  and  by  physicians  I  mean  medical  men  having 
ethical  ideals,  are  willing  and  even  anxious  to  assist  pharmacists  to 
improve  themselves  and  their  calling,  is  amply  evidenced  by  the 
numerous  kindly  words  of  advice  and  encouragement  to  be  found 
in  the  same  medical  journals  that  appear  to  be  the  most  bitter  in 
their  denunciation  of  supposed  abuses.  One  writer  in  American 
Medicine  says:  "The  physician  is  dependent  for  his  results  in  drug 
therapy  upon  the  honor  and  skill  of  the  pharmacist.  It  is  therefore 
in  the  interest  of  science  and  of  mankind  that  a  sharp  line  be  drawn 
between  the  honorable  and  the  dishonorable,  the  careful  and  the 
indifferent,  the  skilled  and  the  blundering  among  pharmacists.  It 
is  likewise  important  that  the  pharmacist  be  more  than  a  salesman 
of  manufactured  articles.  No  one  needs  a  liberal  preliminary  edu- 
cation and  four  years  of  laboratory  training  to  hand  out  ready-made 
preparations."  7 
Dr.  A.  L.  Benedict,  in  his  paper  on  "  Ethical  Pharmacy,"  quoted 
above,3  gives  several  practical  suggestions  as  to  how  the  existing 
evils  might  be  remedied,  and  in  a  personal  letter  on  the  same  sub- 
ject says  :  "  With  regard  to  the  question,  Is  a  profession  of  phar- 
macy necessary  or  desirable  ?  it  seems  to  me  there  is  no  possible 
successful  argument  on  the  negative  side.  Indeed,  I  am  by  no 
means  entirely  opposed  to  the  present  make-up  of  the  drug-store 
with  its  extra  professional  branches,  but  do  not  believe  that  the 
pharmacist  should  pose  as  a  physician.  My  objections  to  such 
practices  (nostrum  vending  and  counter  prescribing)  are,  (1)  that  it 
undermines  health, and  kills  human  beings;  (2)  that  it  is  ultimately 
contrary  to  statute  law  ;  (3)  that  these  are  facts  because  the  pharma- 
cist is  not  competent  to  practise  pharmacy.  I  believe  that  any  phar- 
macist who  would  drop  his  stock  of  patent  medicines  and  put  up  a 
sign  that  he  was  not  a  physician  and  would  not  handle  products 
which  were  to  be  taken  indiscriminately,  and  who  would  demon- 
strate by  consistent,  honorable  methods,  that  he  meant  what  he 
said,  would,  after  a  year  or  two,  receive  the  cordial  support  of  the 
medical  profession  and  of  the  intelligent  laity." 
Commenting  on  the  probable  status  of  "  The  Pharmacist  of  the 
Future,"  the  New  York  Medical  Journal,  in  an  editorial,8  says  :  "  The 
physician  frequently  finds  himself  disposed,  almost  constrained,  to 
seek  for  information  from  the  pharmacist,"  and  further  expresses 
the  opinion  that  the  necessary  training  that  must  be  accorded  the 
