192 
Editorial. 
Am.  Jour.  Pharm. 
April,  19 19. 
aloft  the  banner  of  professionalism  while  applying  thereto  the  torch 
of  disparagement. 
Applying  specifically  our  comments  to  the  domain  of  pharmacy 
and  especially  American  pharmacy,  current  literature  demonstrates 
that  it  has  become  quite  the  fashion  for  a  coterie  of  self-styled 
leaders  who  are  possibly  "  rich  in  words  and  ideas  but  poor  in  the 
true  knowledge  and  genuine  studies,"  to  continuously  and  deliber- 
ately "  knock  "  pharmacy  in  print  and  in  public  utterances  and  some 
of  the  issues  of  "  pharmaceutical  journals  "  have  been  loaded  down 
with  disparagements  of  pharmacy. 
Constructive  criticism  is  always  welcomed  by  those  having  at 
heart  the  welfare  and  progress  of  their  vocation.  There  is,  how- 
ever, a  wide  difference  between  a  "boost"  and  a  " knock"  and  this 
is  the  fundamental  difference  between  idealism  and  disparagement. 
It  is  manifestly  unfair  and  unjust  to  lay  at  the  door  of  pharmacy 
all  of  the  pernicious  results  of  that  deep-rooted  evil  in  the  practice 
of  the  various  branches  of  medicine,  selfish  commercialism.  The 
service  of  the  pharmacist  being  the  last  stage  in  the  medical  atten- 
tion, it  is  influenced  by  the  methods  of  practice  in  vogue  by  his 
predecessors.  It  is  evident,  that  the  commercial  status  of  phar- 
macy, that  is  so  energetically  decried,  results  very  largely  from  the 
existing  commercialized  practice  of  medicine.  The  encomiums  of 
the  professional  status  of  the  practice  of  medicine  that  are  indulged 
in  by  some  of  the  contributors  to  the  pharmaceutical  press  are  cer- 
tainly not  in  harmony  with  the  criticisms  and  deserved  condemna- 
tions of  medical  practices  published  in  recent  issues  of  the  Journal 
of  the  American  Medical  Association. 
Let  us  recognize  that  "  service  is  the  base  of  all  worthy  enter- 
prise." The  pharmacist  who  conscientiously  renders  the  service 
demanded  of  him  by  the  community  in  which  he  is  engaged  and  the 
status  of  the  medical  practice  therein,  is  properly  filling  his  responsi- 
bility to  his  profession  and  his  duty  to  his  fellow  men. 
Even  a  hasty  review  of  the  history  of  the  development  of  phar- 
macy in  America  presents  a  long  list  of  names  of  pharmacists  who, 
notwithstanding  their  practical  service  with  the  mortar  and  pestle 
and  graduate,  have  applied  their  minds  and  pens  to  the  advance- 
ment of  the  profession  of  pharmacy  and  the  construction  of  its 
literature,  and  of  those  active  at  the  present  time,  many  either  are, 
or  have  been,  engaged  in  the  duties  of  the  apothecary.  American 
pharmacy  has  no  need  to  apologize  for  its  professional  evolution. 
