)  1 8  Special  Meeti)^. 
COMMITTEE  OF  THE  PHILADELPHIA  DRUG  EXCHANGE. 
Edward  H.  Hance.  H.  N.  Rittenhouse. 
H.  B.  Rosengarten. 
COMMITTEE  ON  ALCOHOL  LEGISLATION  OF  THE  PHILADELPHIA  COLLEGE  OF 
PHARMACY. 
George  M.  Beringer.  Rush  P.  Marshall. 
William  Mclntyre.  Joseph  W.  England. 
Robert  England. 
/  Am.  Jour.  Phai  m 
i    February,  1895. 
MINUTES   OF  A   SPECIAL  MEETING   OF  THE 
PHILADELPHIA  COLLEGE  OF  PHARMACY. 
Philadelphia,  January  23,  1895. 
A  special  meeting  of  the  Philadelphia  College  of  Pharmacy  was  held  this  da)-. 
On  motion  of  Robert  England,  Prof.  Jos.  P.  Remington  was  called  to  preside, 
and  T.  S.  Wiegand  was  asked  to  act  as  Secretary. 
The  chairman  stated  that  the  object  of  the  meeting  was  to  consider  the 
report  of  the  Committee  on  Alcohol  Legislation. 
The  report  of  the  Committee  on  Alcohol  Legislation  was  read  by  the  chair- 
man of  the  Committee,  Mr.  Geo.  M.  Beringer,  and  suggestions  for  a  plan  to 
carry  out  the  provisions  of  the  law  relative  thereto.  (See  Report  and  Sugges- 
tions on  preceding  pages). 
The  chairman  stated  that  the  subject  was  open  for  discussion. 
Mr.  Procter,  asking  for  information,  wanted  to  know  what  a  druggist  should 
do  about  selling  alcohol  for  burning  purposes. 
Mr.  Beringer  replied  that  the  law  did  not  contemplate  the  sale  of  alcohol  by 
druggists  and  others  who  should  get  it  tax-free  for  manufacturing  purposes. 
Other  alcohol,  on  which  tax  had  been  paid,  would  have  to  be  sold  for  house- 
hold purposes. 
Mr.  Redsecker,  in  further  explanation,  thought  that  those  who  contemplate 
using  it  for  burning,  varnishes,  etc.,  must  purchase  it  in  original  packages  if 
their  uses  warranted  getting  that  amount.  He  thought  the  suggestions  of  the 
Committee  a  fair  presentation  of  the  case. 
Prof.  Remington  said  there  could  be  no  question  about  the  desirability  of 
the  Philadelphia  College  of  Pharmacy  taking  an  active  part  in  trying  to  pro- 
cure tax-free  alcohol  for  the  pharmacist.  But  the  great  question  was  not  one 
of  excluding  the  retail  druggist,  but  of  preventing  fraud.  The  loss  of 
$20,000,000  revenue  to  the  Government  was  not  for  us  to  consider.  It  wras  not 
the  duty  of  the  College  to  point  out  how  the  Government  revenue  is  to  be 
maintained. 
Mr.  Ross  said  that  Government  inspectors  are  required  at  the  present  time 
to  detect  fraud,  and  decide  between  a  beverage  and  a  medicine,  and  they  could 
do  the  same  if  the  present  law  were  enforced. 
Prof.  Remington  said  he  thought  that  the  Committee  had  done  very  good 
work,  and  offered  the  most  practical  set  of  suggestions  of  any  he  had  seen. 
It  was  announced  that  these  resolutions  had  been  endorsed  by  the  directors 
of  the  Drug  Exchange,  and  since  then  approved  by  the  Drug  Exchange  itself ; 
