Am.  Jour.  Pharm.  J 
February,  1909.  J 
/  n  augur  a  I  A  d  dress . 
8 1 
sufficiently  far  reaching,  and  they  are  to  some  extent  weakened  by 
provisos,  which,  while  intended  to  be  of  a  proper  character,  are 
really  used  as  vehicles  of  abuses.  For  instance,  the  provision  of 
the  law  that  drugs  bearing  a  given  name  should  correspond  in 
purity  and  strength  to  the  requirements  of  the  Pharmacopoeia  is 
certainly  a  requirement  which  every  honest  pharmacist  and  every 
observing  consumer  approves,  but  the  proviso  that  follows,  which 
says  that  a  drug  may  bear  the  same  name  as  that  in  the  Phar- 
macopoeia and  yet  differ  in  strength  and  purity  if  the  character  of 
that  difference  be  stated  upon  the  label,  is  a  means  of  confusion, 
and  even  of  deception  and  danger.  It  is  true  that  when  a  physician 
writes  a  prescription  it  is  presumed  to  be  filled  by  Pharmacopceial 
remedies,  but  the  national  law  cannot  go  into  a  state  and  see  to  it 
that  this  is  done.  It  permits  a  translation  from  one  state  to  another 
of  drugs  bearing  the  name  of  Pharmacopceial  remedies  and  yet 
differing  very  greatly  in  purity  and  strength  therefrom.  Unless 
the  state  law  requires  the  druggist  to  fill  his  prescriptions  from 
Pharmacopceial  medicines  the  greatest  frauds  endangering  life  and 
health  may  be  practised.  What  use  is  there,  I  may  ask,  of  drugs 
bearing  Pharmacopceial  names  differing  from  the  Pharmacopceial 
standard?  They  certainly  are  not  to  be  used  for  medicinal  pur- 
poses, because  a  physician  in  prescribing  a  remedy,  if  he  wants  it 
weak  in  a  certain  ingredient  would  prescribe  less  of  it.  He  would 
not  prescribe  a  remedy  bearing  the  same  name,  but  differing  from 
the  standard.  He  would  not  know  whether  such  a  variable  drug 
were  present  in  the  store.  My  own  opinion  is  that  the  national  law 
would  be  very  much  strengthened  if  drugs  not  of  Pharmacopceial 
strength  were  entirely  excluded  from  interstate  commerce  except 
when  they  be  used  for  other  purposes  than  medicines. 
Again,  the  provision  of  the  national  act  that  certain  habit-forming 
drugs  should  have  their  names  and  quantities  stated  upon  the  label 
is  a  most  excellent  provision  in  so  far  as  warning  the  consumer  is 
concerned.  The  consumer  picking  up  a  package  of  this  drug  and 
seeing  that  it  contains  a  habit-forming  constituent  would  avoid  its 
use.  On  the  other  hand,  this  very  element  of  safety  to  the  normal 
consumer  becomes  an  element  of  injury  to  the  consumer  who  is 
already  a  victim  of  the  habit.  It  guides  him  in  selecting  the  very 
"  dope  "  that  he  wishes  to  get. 
This  leads  me  to  the  fourth  and  last  problem  which  I  wish  to 
present  to  you  to-night,  namely,  what  should  be  the  future  attitude 
