EDITORIAL. 
469 
took  place,  causing  blood  to  lodge  in  the  abdomen  to  a  degree  sufficient  to  cause 
death.  This  defense  was  presented  in  a  manner  calculated  to  require  serious 
consideration.  The  Court  here  referred  to  the  testimony  of  various  physicians 
examined  as  experts — of  Dr.  Tibbat's  (who  made  the  post-mortem  examina- 
tion), that  deceased  was  laboring  under  a  cancerous  affection,  from  which  he 
would  not  probably  recover — of  Dr.  Muscroft,  who  thought  death  might  have 
resulted  from  the  tumor  or  the  ammonia — of  Dr.  M.  B.  Wright,  who  would 
think  it  strange  if  the  stomach  should  be  seriously  affected  by  this  quantity  of 
ammonia—  and  supposed  the  suddenness  of  the  death  arose  from  a  lesion,  which 
threw  blood  into  the  abdomen — of  Dr.  Potter,  who  did  not  think,  in  a  healthy 
man,  so  small  a  quantity  of  ammonia  would  produce  death — of  Mr.  Wayne, 
chemist,  who  did  not  think  this  ammonia  produced  the  death — of  Dr. 
Comegys,  who  said  a  teaspoonful  of  ammonia  would  produce  much  distress  in 
the  stomach,  but  thinks  the  cancer  might  have  resulted  in  death,  and  that  the 
disease  was  hastening  to  a  crisis;  also  the  testimony  of  Drs.  Baker,  Cooper, 
Fries,  Foote,  Cox,  Cary,  Newton  and  Blackman,  the  latter  being  of  opinion  that 
no  one  could  tell  whether  death  was  caused  by  ammonia  or  the  disease. 
Though  the  deceased  had  an  incurable  disease,  if  his  death  was  materially 
hastened  by  any  act  of  negligence  on  the  part  of  defendant,  the  latter  would 
be  responsible  to  the  personal  representatives  for  the  pecuniary  damages  sus- 
tained by  the  widow  and  next  of  kin,  in  such  sum  as  the  Jury  '  should  deem 
fair  and  just/  not  to  exceed  $5,000.  In  the  absence  of  any  special  averment, 
no  recovery  could  be  had  for  any  injury  to  the  business  of  deceased,  and  it 
could  be  only  for  the  general  value  of  the  life  of  the  individual,  growing  out 
of  the  situation  of  those  who  were  dependent  on  him. 
The  jury  then  retired,  and,  after  a  deliberation  of  some  hours,  brought  in  a 
verdict  for  plaintiff  for  $500." — Eclectic  Medical  Journal. 
It  will  be  seen  at  once  that  this  case  involves  points  that  should  be  care- 
fully considered  by  our  pharmaceutical  institutions,  who  have  the  good  of 
the  profession  in  view.  The  allegation  that  the  prescription  was  clearly 
written,  comes  from  the  prosecution  in  the  account  we  quote  from.  In  how 
many  instances,  in  the  experience  of  every  apothecary,  has  the  illegible 
writing  of  prescriptions  caused  error.  If,  however  imperfectly  written,  the 
apothecary  is  to  be  held  responsible  for  errors  arising  from  this  cause,  there 
is  but  one  safe  course  to  pursue ;  to  decline  to  dispense  such  prescriptions, 
until  the  physician  has  decyphered  them ;  a  course  entirely  safe  for  the 
apothecary,  which  will  bring  home  to  the  physician,  better  than  any  other, 
the  necessity  of  care  in  writing  his  prescriptions.  We  do  not  wish  to 
screen  the  apothecary  when  careless  or  blamably  ignorant,  but  we  do  think 
that  juries  should  be  enlightened  in  such  cases  as  to  the  true  position  in 
which  the  apothecary  is  placed.  In  this  instance  we  should  be  glad 
to  know,  whether  the  direction  to  "  take  a  teaspoonful"  was  appended  to 
the  prescription  ?  If  it  was,  that  fact  would  condemn  the  apothecary,  even 
if  the  writing  had  appeared  to  mean  ammonia,  because  he  should  know 
that  liquor  ammoniae  is  not  given  in  such  doses.  Again,  it  might  be  argued 
that  liquor  morphise  and  liquor  ammoniae,  are  not*  prescribed  together  in 
such  proportions ;  but,  in  our  experience,  no  rule  of  this  kind  will  hold 
good,  as  it  is  easy  to  produce  the  most  absurd  incompatibilities,  therapeuti- 
cal as  well  as  chemical,  by  reference  to  the  prescription  file.  The  result 
should  be  another  warning  to  apothecaries,  to  use  all  diligence  in  girding 
themselves  with  the  power  of  knowledge  and  skill,  and  then  use  such  pre- 
