Am.  Jour.  Pbarui.  I 
January,  1S95.  J 
Carres po  n  de  n  ce . 
5 1 
Is  it  good  business  policy  for  the  retail  druggists  of  this  country 
to  ask  for  Tax-free  Alcohol  ?  In  case  the  Government  accedes  to 
the  request  and  allows  the  withdrawal  and  use  of  alcohol  in  the 
manufacture  of  medicine,  the  law  provides  that  it  be  done  under 
regulation  and  supervision  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and  the 
Collector  of  Internal  Revenue.  Who  will  defray  the  expense  of 
this  supervision  ?  Certainly  not  the  Government,  who,  in  granting 
a  franchise,  will  not  draw  upon  its  treasury  for  the  expense  of  its 
distribution.  While  the  manufacturing  pharmacist,  who  uses  bar- 
rels of  alcohol  to  that  of  the  dispensing  pharmacist's  gallons,  will 
cheerfully  and  willingly  bear  this  expense,  it  will  be  out  of  the 
question  for  the  retailer  to  do  the  same  on  account  of  a  personal 
government  supervision,  which  undoubtedly  will  be  required. 
Cannot  we  learn  a  lesson  from  the  past  ?  We  petitioned  Con- 
gress for  the  removal  of  the  "  stamp  tax  "  from  proprietary  medi- 
cines; being  promised  by  the  manufacturers,  that  the  retailer  would 
receive  the  benefit  in  the  less  cost  of  goods.  It  was  done,  the  tax 
was  removed,  and  when  we  asked  for  the  promised  rebate,  we  were 
told  that  the  money  was  being  expended  for  advertising,  and  the 
retailer  would  thus  be  benefited.  Then  we  took  up  the  subject  of 
having  laws  passed  in  the  several  states  for  the  regulation  of  the 
practice  of  pharmacy.  The  laws  have  been  in  existence  for  a  num- 
ber of  years,  and  I  ask  in  all  candor,  who  has  been  the  beneficiary  ? 
Therefore,  my  advice  is  to  the  retailer,  ask  for  no  tax-free  alcohol; 
if  the  Government  .grants  it  under  favorable  regulations  to  us,  all 
right  ;  if  otherwise,  we  will  protest  in  having  legislation  that  is 
injurious  to  our  trade  and  profession,  and  not  be  placed  in  the  posi- 
tion of  being  told  you  petitioned  for  it  and  you  got  it,  as  in  the 
fable  of  the  frogs. 
Albert  E.  Ebert. 
Chicago,  December  16,  1894. 
To  the  Editor  of  American  Journal  of  Pharmacy. 
Sir: — With  pleasure  I  noticed  that  the  question  about  the  presence 
of  an  active  principle  in  Cerens  grandiflorus ,  has  been  taken  up  in 
England.  I  would  like  to  call  your  attention  to  an  article  in  the 
Pharm.  J.  and  Transactions  for  Nov.  24,  1894,  p.  416,  by  Gordon 
Sharp.  • 
