234 
Editorial. 
fAm.  Jour.  Pharm. 
t       May,  1875. 
in  accordance  with  the  views  generally  entertained  by  druggists  and  pharmacists, 
with  this  qualification  :  that  if  two  or  more  formulas  for  the  preparation  in  question 
have  been  published  on  the  same  page,  the  one  used  must  be  specially  designated. 
This  is  eminently  proper,  as  the  fundamental  conditions  for  exemption  are,  that  such 
medicines  must  be  actually  prepared  by  a  known  formula,  and  that  the  formula  must 
be  readily  accessible  to  everybody  by  printing  it  either  upon  the  label  or  by  distinctly 
referring  to  the  place  where  it  may  be  found  in  any  standard  Dispensatory,  or  Phar- 
macopoeia or  Pharmaceutical  Journal  issued  by  an  incorporated  college  of  pharmacy. 
We  are  indebted  to  Mr.  Jones  for  a  copy  of  the  letter,  which  we  print  in  full  for 
the  information  of  our  readers: 
Treasury  Department,  Washington,  April  2d,  1875. 
Sir, — Referring  to  my  letter  of  the  4th  ultimo,  and  in  reply  to  the  letter  of  Alexander  H.  Jones,  Pres- 
ident of  Philadelphia  Drug  Exchange,  addressed  to  me  under  date  of  March  22d,  to  which  you  call  my 
special  attention  in  advance  in  your  letter  of  the  20th  ultimo,  I  have  to  inform  you  that  the  interpretation 
of  the  22d  Section  of  the  Act  of  February  8th,  1875,  as  contained  in  my  letter  to  you  of  March  4th  as  to 
the  scope  and  intent  of  said  Section,  the  extent  of  the  exemption  provided  for  medicinal  articles,  and  the 
conditions  on  which  such  exemption  is  made  to  depend,  are  matters  which  were  not  passed  upon  hastily 
by  this  office,  nor  without  full  and  careful  consideration. 
As  I  read  Mr.  Jones'  letter  I  notice  but  a  single  point  of  any  practical  or  vital  importance,  in  which  he 
■differs  in  his  views  from  the  views  entertained  by  this  office  as  they  have  been  officially  set  forth  in  Special 
145,  changed  or  modified  by  my  letter  to  you  of  March  4th,  which  has  been  published  in  the  "  Internal 
Revenue  Record." 
Mr.  Jones  admits  what  this  office  holds— that  all  medicinal  preparations  or  compositions  whatever,  made 
and  sold,  etc.,  wherein  the  person  making  or  preparing  the  same  has,  or  claims  to  have,  any  private  for- 
mula or  occult  secret  or  art  for  the  making  or  preparing  the  same,  or  has,  or  claims  to  have,  any  exclusive 
right  or  title  to  the  making  or  preparing  the  same,  or  which  are  prepared,  uttered,  vended,  or  exposed  for 
sale  under  any  letters  patent,  or  held  out  or  recommended  to  the  public  by  the  makers,  vendors,  or  pro- 
prietors thereof  as  proprietary  medicines,  are  liable  to  stamp  tax. 
So  much  of  the  conditions  of  taxation  under  Schedule  C,  of  the  Act  of  June  30th,  1864,  remains  to-day 
as  when  first  enacted.  These  conditions  have  not  been  changed,  altered,  or  abridged  by  any  legislation 
subsequent  to  that  time.  They  are  in  force  to-day  as  per  Revised  Statutes,  Chapter  E,  Schedule  A,  Sec- 
tion 3437. 
The  Act  of  July  13th,  1866,  Section  13,  exempted  from  taxation  medicines  compounded  according  to 
formulas  published  in  the  United  States  or  other  National  Pharmacopoeia,  etc.;  at  the  same  time  declar- 
ing that  there  should  be  no  exemption  given  by  said  Section  to  any  medicinal  articles,  no  matter  by  what 
rule,  authority,  or  formula  compounded,  if  the  same  were  put  up  in  a  style  or  manner  similar  to  that  of 
patent  or  proprietary  medicints  in  general,  or  if  advertised  as  having  any  special  proprietary  claim  to 
merit,  or  to  any  peculiar  advantage  in  mode  of  preparation,  quality,  use,  or  effect,  whether  such  claim  is 
real  or  pretended. 
Now  it  is  for  this  last  class  of  medicines,  excepted  from  the  exemption  provided  for  by  the  last-named 
Act,  medicines  usually  designated  by  the  trade  as  "  officinal,"  but  "  put  up  in  the  style  or  manner  of  pat- 
ient or  proprietary  medicines,"  together  with  a  class  of  medicines  which  are  not  regarded  as  "  officinal," 
and  not  compounded  according  to  any  published  authority,  that  Section  22,  of  the  Act  of  February  8th, 
1875,  provides  conditional  exemption. 
What  are  these  conditions  ? 
With  regard  to  unofficinal  medicines,  the  law  is  sufficiently  explicit  and  plain,  and  there  does  not  seem 
,to  be  any  difference  of  opinion  between  Mr.  Jones  and  others  and  this  office.  They  admit  that  the  for- 
mula shall  be  printed  on  the  label,  and  there  shall  be  no  proprietorship  claimed.  This  is  precisely  the 
construction  given  in  my  letter  to  you  of  March  4th. 
With  regard  to  the  "  officinal  medicines,"  "put  up  in  the  style  of  patent  or  proprietary  medicines,"  for 
if  they  are  not  put  up  in  such  style  they  require  no  stamps,  even  though  the  formula  be  neither  printed  on 
the  labels  nor  referred  to  thereon.  Mr.  Jones  claims  that  a  mere  reference  to  the  formula  and  the  authority 
where  found  is  sufficient,  and  gives  his  idea  by  an  illustration  as  follows  : 
"  Tinctura  Opii  Camphorata. 
(Camphorated  Tincture  of  Opium.) 
Prepared  by  A.  B. 
Dose,  etc. 
6"^^ 'U.S.  Pharmacopoeia'  (1873),  page  315." 
But  let  me  ask  what  words  in  this  form  distinctly  refer  to  a  published  formula  ?  The  words  "  Tinctura 
Opii  Camphorata"  do  not.  'J'hey  give  the  name  of  the  article,  not  the  formula.  The  words  "Camphor- 
ated Tincture  of  Opium  "  are  a  translation  of  the  Latin  words  above — nothing  more.  The  words  "  Pre- 
pared by  A.  B.,"  "  Dose,  etc.,"  in  no  manner  refer  to  a  formula.  The  other  words — "  See  '  U.  S.  Phar- 
macopoeia,' etc." — may  distinctly  refer  to  a  book  and  the  page  where  a  formula  for  making  this  article  may 
be  found,  but  they  do  not  distinctly,  nor  otherwise,  refer  to  the  formula  itself. 
The  language  of  the  Statute  is  "  when  such  formula  and  where  found  shall  be  distinctly  referred  to  on 
the  printed  label  attached  to  such  article." 
It  is  not  one  or  the  other,  but  both,  which  are  to  be  distinctly  referred  to.  The  copulative  "  and"  not 
the  disjunctive  "  or  "  is  the  conjunction  employed  in  the  Statute. 
Sometimes  two  or  more  formulas  are  given  for  the  preparation  or  compounding  of  the  same  article.  On 
page  1471,  "  U.  S.  Dispensatory,"  13th  Edition,  two*  separate  and  distinct  formulas  are  given  for  the 
preparation  of  "  Tinctura  Opii  Camphorata." 
*0n  page  315,  "  U.  S.  Pharmacopoeia,"  there  is  but  one  formula  ior , Tinctura  Opii  Camphorata. 
On  page  1471,  "  U.  S.  Dispensatory,"  there  are  two  formulas — one  being  that  of  the  "  United  States 
Pharmacopoeia"  as  above,  the  other  that  of  the  British. 
