96  Reviews  and  Bibliographical  Notices.     { ArebJr°uarryTi9ao5m' 
REVIEWS  AND  BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTICES. 
Pharmacal  Jurisprudence.  By  Harley  R.  Wiley,  A.B.,  LL.B. 
Hicks-Judd  Company,  San  Francisco. 
The  author  in  his  preface  states  that  he  was  impelled  to  this  col- 
lation of  legal  principles  and  cases  relating  to  the  legal  status  of 
pharmacy  through  an  actual  need  for  a  treatise  or  collection  of  au- 
thorities as  an  aid  to  his  work  as  a  lecturer  on  the  subject  in  the 
University  of  California. 
The  same  need  has  been  felt  by  all  pharmacists  actively  engaged 
in  attending  to  the  interests  of  the  profession  in  legislative  matters 
as  well  as  by  lawyers  having  cases  in  which  a  clear  understanding 
of  the  accepted  relations  of  the  profession  of  pharmacy  to  statute, 
case  and  constitutional  law  was  necessary. 
The  opening  chapter  is  a  short  but  clear  historical  resume  of  the 
evolution  of  the  fundamental  legal  principles  involved  that  is  so 
lacking  in  the  usual  technical  phraseology  of  legal  text-books  that 
the  average  pharmacist  can  read  it  with  understanding,  and,  it  might 
be  added,  will  be  benefited  by  doing  so. 
The  author  clearly  affirms  and  vigorously  sustains  by  logical 
argument  the  constitutionality  of  properly  framed  laws  regulating 
the  practice  of  pharmacy,  and  in  addition  cites  judicial  opinions 
from  authorities  of  the  highest  standing  in  support  of  this  view  of 
the  question. 
There  is  a  clear  exposition  of  the  border  line  between  the  practice 
of  pharmacy  and  medicine  that  is  drawn  by  the  statutes  relating  to 
the  two  professions. 
The  chapter  on  contracts  explains  clearly  the  difference  between 
the  common  law  doctrine  of "  Caveat  emptor,"  in  which  the  pur- 
chaser relies  upon  his  own  judgment,  and  "  Caveat  venditor,"  in 
which  the  seller  is  warned  to  beware  on  the  ground  that  he  is  the 
responsible  party  to  the  transaction  on  account  of  his  special  knowl- 
edge— thus  explaining  the  principle  that  a  pharmacist  should  and 
does  guarantee  to  all  who  seek  his  services  that  he  has  the  requisite 
scientific  skill  and  knowledge. 
The  law  ot  liability  of  the  pharmacist  in  his  relations  with  his 
patrons  is  clearly  set  forth  in  a  special  chapter,  and  in  view  of  the 
increasing  activity  of  Pure  Food  Commissions  and  State  Boards  of 
Pharmacy,  it  is  a  matter  that  will  be  profitably  studied  by  any  phar- 
macist. 
