478 
Editorial. 
J  Am.  Jour.  Pnarm. 
(      Sept.,  1879. 
deal  journals.  Yet  they  exist,  but  to  what  extent  it  is  difficult  to  say,  because  they 
shun  the  light  and  are  concealed  as  much  as  possible.  For  the  same  reasons  a  rem- 
edy for  these  evils  is  not  easily  found.  The  practices  are  denounced  by  the  codes  of 
ethics  of  both  the  medical  and  parmaceutical  societies,  and  we  believe  that  a  mem- 
ber of  either  would  meet  with  well  merited  expulsion,  if  such  collusions  could  be 
proven.  The  self-improved  laws  have,  to  a  certain  extent,  failed  to  abate  the  evils 
alluded  to,  and  we  believe  that  the  most  effectual  way  for  their  complete  discontin- 
uance will  be  found  in  the  higher  moral  training  of  the  aspirants  to  pharmaceutical 
and  medical  honors. 
We  reproduce  the  article  alluded  to  unabridged  : 
How  Some  "Dirty  Shillings"  are  Made  by  the  Profession. — A  physi- 
cian carries  on  his  profession  for  the  benefit  of  himself  and  family  in  the  first 
instance,  and  it  is  proper  and  honorable  in  him  to  make  as  much  money  out  of  it  as 
he  honestly  can.  There  are,  however,  certain  practices  which  are  pursued,  more  or 
less,  in  different  parts  of  the  couutry,  which  cannot  be  approved  by  a  sound  moralist ; 
and  the  proof  that  they  are  known  to  be  contrary  to  a  safe  doctrine  is  that  they  are 
always  conducted  with  an  endeavor  at  secrecy.  Several  of  these  we  shall  proceed 
to  mention. 
It  is  notorious  that  certain  retail  drug  stores  in  this  and  other  cities  offer  practi- 
tioners a  percentage  on  prescriptions  which  are  made  up  at  their  counters,-1  and  it  is 
well  known  also  that  not  a  few  practitioners  take  advantage  of  such  offers.  In  fact, 
they  go  fuither,  and  throw  all  their  influence  against  stores  where  they  will  not  be 
paid  this  percentage.  Yes,  we  have  even  had  reported  to  us,  in  this  city,  compacts 
made  between  physicians,  and  prominent  ones,  too,  holding  official  positions  in  the 
profession,  and  a  particular  druggist,  by  which  patients  were  forced  to  buy  of  this 
druggist  only,  through  the  use  by  the  physician  of  private  formulas,  known  only  to 
these  parties.  The  charge  to  the  patient  was  excessive,  and  the  discreditable  plun- 
der thus  obtained  was  divided  between  the  two  thie —  we  mean  the  two  gentlemen. 
Another  plan  to  fleece  patients  has  been  devised  by  the  enterprising  managers  of 
establishments  devoted  to  surgical  treatment  or  to  the  care  of  special  diseases,  as 
cancer,  etc.  These  managers,  who  always  sport  the  title  of  M.  D.,  send  circulars 
widely  among  the  profession  in  rural  districts,  claiming  that  their  establishments  are 
admirably  supplied  with  everything  needful,  and  are  of  real  benefit  to  most  patients  5 
and  having,  by  these  statements  and  numerous  testimonials,  allayed  doubts  as  to  their 
standing,  they  offer  a  percentage  on  the  payments  made  by  any  patient  the  doctor 
will  send  to  them.  It  is  in  this  way  that  many  of  these  "  institutes  "  manage  to  pay 
their  rentals  and  clear  a  handsome  profit ;  they  subborn  the  regular  profession  by 
money  unrighteously  drawn  from  confiding  sufferers. 
How  such  "  arrangements  "  are  regarded  by  the  law  is  illustrated  in  a  case  recently 
before  the  court  at  Manchester,  England.  It  was  brought  to  light  that  a  doctor 
made  it  a  point  to  send  as  many  persons  as  he  could  to  a  particular  dentist  to  have 
their  teeth  operated  on,  and  that  for  this  service  the  dentist  remunerated  him  with  a 
percentage  on  the  proceeds  derived  from  these  cases.  This  does  not  seem  like  an 
aggravated  case  at  all,  inasmuch  as  there  was  no  evidence  that  the  patients  were 
charged  above  the  ordinary  fee;  nevertheless,  the  judge  stigmatized  it  as  "  mon- 
strous," and  discreditable  to  professional  men. 
It  does  not  seem  to  us  that  the  professional  conscience  in  this  country  is  suffi- 
ciently sensitive  to  the  impropriety  of  making  money  in  this  way.  It  is  improper, 
because  it  is  deceitful  and  unfair.  No  physician  would  dare  tell  a  patient  that  he 
was  to  get  such  a  commission.  The  patient  expects  to  receive  advice  of  a  wholly  disin- 
1  While  we  grant- the  correctness  of  this  statement,  it  is  equally  true  that  certain  physicians  demand  a 
certain  percentage  on  all  prescriptions,  and,  as  far  as  they  can,  will  prevent  their  patients  from  obtaining 
medicines  at  stores  where  the  prescriber  is  not  feed  either  in  money,  the  free  use  of  liquors,  or  by  other 
presents.— Editor  Amer.  Jour.  Phar. 
