Am.  Jour.  Pharm. 
Oct.,  1880. 
Editorial, 
Physicians  and  Pharmacists  in  Council.— In  answer  to  a  call  issued  by  the 
Medico-legal  Society  of  Philadelphia  a  number  of  physicians  and  pharmacists  met 
in  the  hall  of  the  Philadelphia  College  of  Pharmacy.  Mr.  W.  B  Thompson  was 
>called  to  the  chair,  and  Dr.  Stretch  requested  to  act  as  Secretary. 
The  discussion  was  opened  by  Dr.  Swayze  in  a  lengthy  discourse,  in  which  he 
more  particularly  referred  to  the  display  of  signs,  the  recommendation  and  selling 
of  patent  nostrums,  to  the  selling  of  homoeopathic  specifics,  the  collusions  between 
jphysicians  and  pharmacists,  to  the  unauthorized  renewal  of  prescriptions  and  to  the 
unnecessary  pres'cribing  over  the  counter  by  pharmacists.  The  subjects  were  dis- 
cussed separately,  and  in  regard  to  patent  medicines  a  resolution  was  passed  request- 
ing the  Philadelphia  Medico-legal  Society  to  send  a  committee  to  all  respectable 
pharmacists  in  the  city  for  ttie  purpose  of  ascertaining  their  willingness  to  place  out  of 
sight  all  patent  medicines  and  to  thus  discourage  their  sale  In  our  opinion  the 
request  might  very  properly  go  farther  and  include  also  the  discarding  by  pharma- 
>cists  of  all  signs  and  circulars  relating  to  and  recommending  patent  medicmes.  It 
seems  curious  to  us  that  the  prescribing  by  physicians  of  specialties,  many  of  which 
are  protected  by  trade  mark,  and  the  working  formulas  and,  in  many  cases,  the  cor- 
rect composition  of  which  are  withheld  by  the  manufacturers,  was  not  alluded  to. 
Can  the  line  between  these  and  the  common  nostrums  be  distinctly  defined  ? 
The  sale  of  homoeopahthic  specifics  by  pharmacists  in  Philadelphia  was  stated  to 
'be  quite  insignificant,  and  the  subject  was  dropped. 
The  percentage  compact  between  certain  physicians  and  pharmacists  created  con- 
siderable discussion,  in  which  prescriptions  written  in  cipher  were  alluded  to.  No 
action  was  taken  upon  this  subject,  the  difficulty  being  to  reach  the  evil.  On  the 
subjects  ot  prescribmg  over  the  counter,  and  the  renewal  of  prescriptions,  tiie  views 
seemed  to  differ  considerably.  It  was  evident  that  prescribing  over  the  counter  is 
not  encouraged  by  those  present  .-.t  the  meeting,  and  as  to  the  renewal  of  prescrip- 
tions it  was  thought  by  some  that  a  printed  request  upon  the  prescription  not  to 
renew  it  without  special  order  would  not  always  meet  the  case.  The  abuse  of 
dispensaries  and  other  charities  by  able  and  even  wealthy  persons  was  likewise 
alluded  to. 
We  trust  that  in  the  discussion  of  whatever  grievances  may  exist,  or  be  supposed 
to  exist,  a  liberal  spirit  may  prevail  which  does  not  shut  the  eyes  against  its  own 
shortcomings.  The  misdoings  of  the  grasping,  illiberal  and  ungenerous  in  either 
profession  should  not  be  burdened  on  the  profession,  but  on  the  individual  where  it 
properly  belongs  5  and  we  apprehend  that  dark  spots  will  not  unfrequently  be  found 
in  places  where  least  expected. 
The  End  of  two  Bogus  Colleges.— On  September  30th  replications  were  filed  in 
Court  of  Common  Pleas  No.  3,  to  answers  submitted  by  the  "  Eclectic  Medical 
College  of  Pennsylvania"  and  the  "American  University  of  Philadelphia."  The 
.answers  of  the  defendants  set  out  that  they  claimed  to  exercise  their  rights,  privi- 
leges, franchises,  etc.,  by  virtue  of  an  Act  of  Assembly,  dated  Mar.  26,  1867,  in- 
corporating the  latter  college,  and  an  Act  of  February  25,  1850,  incorporating  the 
former. 
It  was  to  these  answers  that  counsel  fur  the  Commonwealth  filed  replications. 
They  aver  that  the  above  corporations  have  forfeited  their  charters,  because  of  first, 
the  conferrmg  of  degrees  upon  persons  not  possessing  the  qualifications  such  as  are 
prescribed  by  their  chaiters.  Second,  the  sale  of  diplomas  5  third,  the  granting  of 
degrees  of  Doctor  ot  Medicine  and  antedating  such  diplopias,  in  order  to  make  it 
appear  that  the  recipients  had  the  right  to  practice  medicine  ;  and  fourth,  the  is.^uing 
of  diplomas  with  forged  signatures.  After  the  replications  were  filed,  counsel  for 
both  of  the  defendants  confessed  judgment  of  ouster  in  favor  of  the  Commonwealth, 
and  filed  as  a  part  of  the  record  a  letter  from  Dr.  Buchanan,  authorizing  him  to  do  so. 
