92  Correspondence. 
Am.  Jour.  Pbarm. 
Februarv,  1901. 
A  memorial  in  enduring  bronze  would  be  handsome,  but  would 
exert  influence  only  in  one  community.  A  travelling  fellowship 
would,  of  necessity,  be  of  influence  to  individuals,  for  no  matter  how 
great  a  work  would  be  ultimately  performed  by  the  fortunate  recip- 
ients of  the  fellowship,  the  main  object  of  the  memorial — the  tribute 
to  the  memory  of  the  greatest  of  American  pharmacists— would  be 
obscure  to  public  mind. 
Far  better  would  it  be  to  conform  the  memorial  to  the  ideas  ex- 
pressed by  the  A.Ph. A.  Committee  on  U.S. P.  Revision  at  the  Balti- 
more meeting  of  1898.  Could  we  not  erect  a  research  laboratory 
for  Pharmacopceial  work,  say,  in  the  city  of  Washington,  dedicated 
to  the  memory  of  our  great  pharmaceutical  mentor  ? 
An  expensive  undertaking,  I  grant  you,  but  would  it  not  be  better 
to  devote  a  large  sum  to  a  grand  memorial  than  a  smaller  sum  to 
an  object  of  limited  influence  ? 
To  establish  a  fellowship  at  the  low  rate  of  interest  now  prevail- 
ing, at  least  $15,000  would  be  needed.  Why  not  double  this 
amount  and  purchase  and  equip  a  building  to  be  called  the  Procter 
Memorial  Laboratory,  which  would  be  an  object  of  as  much  local 
pride  as  would  a  bronze  statue  and  an  ever-present  memorial  of  the 
great  man  to  every  pharmacist  and  physician  in  this  broad  land  of 
ours?  Let  the  running  expenses  be  defrayed  by  the  U.S.P.  Com- 
mittee on  Revision,  supplemented  by  the  donation  of  time — say  a 
month  each  year — by  leading  investigators  of  this  country,  many 
of  whom  I  am  very  sure  would  be  willing  to  perform  such  service. 
Think  what  a  glorious  object-lesson  in  pharmaceutical  progress 
such  a  memorial  would  be,  especially  if  it  could  be  operated  in  con- 
junction with  the  Lloyd  Library.  Such  a  combination  would  make 
America  the  centre  of  pharmaceutical  thought. 
H.  V.  Arny. 
Dear  Sir: — In  regard  to  commemorating  the  life  and  work  of 
Professor  Procter  I  am  inclined  to  favor  the  monumental  form. 
A  monument  erected  to  perpetuate  the  memory  of  him  who  has 
unselfishly  labored  for  the  benefit  of  his  fellow-man,  whose  life  has 
been  devoted  to  instructing  the  ignorant,  in  aiding  the  weak,  in  re- 
calling the  erring  and  in  raising  the  fallen,  is  an  inspiration  for  good 
to  all  who  look  upon  it. 
The  tendency,  however,  is  to  erect  monuments  to  keep  alive  the 
memory  of  man's  passions.    War    is    passion,  not    reason.  To 
