APPENDIX M. FIFTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE STATE PHARMACEUTICAL EXAMINING BOARD OF PENNSYLVANIA. REPORT OF THE STATE PHARMACEUTICAL EXAMINING BOARD OF PENNSYLVANIA FOR THE YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1892. PHILADELPHIA, November 17, 1892 To His Excellency ROBERT E. PATTISON, Governor: SIR: In compliance with the provisions of section four of the "act to regulate the practice of pharmacy and sale of poisons, and to prevent adulterations in drugs and medicinal preparations in the State of Pennsylvania,” approved May 24, 1887; I have the honor to transmit the fifth annual report of the board, for the year ending June 30, 1892. Very respectfully, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. Alonzo Robbins, president, Philadelphia. ALONZO ROBBINS, REPORT. The board held the four regular quarterly meetings and examinations during the year ending June 30, 1892. The first meeting was held in the High school at Williamsport, on Tuesday, July 14, 1891. Andrew B. Burns, of Montrose, was elected secretary, and Adolph J. Tafel, of Philadelphia, was elected treasurer of the board. Fifty-one candidates appeared for examination; thirty-three applying for Registered Pharmacist's certificates, and eighteen for Qualified Assistant's certificates. Eleven of the former, and ten of the latter class were successful. Two new members of the board were present at this meeting: Charles T. George of Harrisburg, in place of H. B. Cochran, resigned; and Louis Emanuel of Pittsburg, in place of F. H. Eggers, whose term expired. The first session of the second meeting was held in the Central High school at Philadelphia, on Monday, October 19, and the second session was held in the City Council chambers at Pittsburg, on Tuesday, October 20, 1891. Two hundred and fourteen candidates appeared for examination; 105 applying for Registered Pharmacist's certificates, and 109 for Qualified Assistant's certificates. Thirty-nine of the former, and seventy-two of the latter class were successful. The third meeting was held in the Central High school at Philadelphia, on Monday, January 18, 1892. Two hundred and twenty-one candidates appeared for examination; 106 applying for Registered Pharmacist's certificates, and 115 for Qualified Assistant's certificates. Twenty-eight of the former, and fifty-seven of the latter class were successful. The fourth meeting of the year was held in the hall of the House of Representatives at Harrisburg, on Monday, April 25, 1892. Two hundred and twelve candidates appeared for examination; 151 applying for Registered Pharmacist's certificates, and sixty-one for Qualified Assistant's certificates. Seventy of the former, and twentynine of the latter class were successful. The number of persons examined during the year was 698. The number successful in passing the examination was 316; 148 obtaining Registered Pharmacist's certificates, and 168 Qualified Assistant's certificates. The total number of certificates issued up to June 30, 1892, is 6,908. This includes all persons registered by reason of being engaged in the business at the passage of the act, and those registered under the eleventh section, as well as those registered by examination. An alphabetical list of those registered during the year is herewith appended. Balance of money on hand at last report; three thousand seven hundred and seventy-four dollars and twenty-seven cents ($3,774.27); amount received during the year; one thousand two hundred and fiftyone dollars and ninety-five cents ($1,251.95); total receipts, five thousand and twenty-six dollars and twenty-two cents ($5,026.22). Amount disbursed during the year, two thousand four hundred and forty-two dollars and eighty-three cents ($2,442.83). Balance on hand June 30, 1892, two thousand five hundred and eightythree dollars and thirty-nine cents ($2,583.39). A detailed statement by the treasurer is herewith appended. The work of the board during the year was considerably increased by the greater number of applicants for examination. That so many of these applicants were unsuccessful is not owing to excessive severity of the board, but is due to the fact that many of the applicants are either entirely unprepared, or have undergone merely superficial preparation. The board does not depend too strongly upon scientific preparation, and any candidate who has had the required experience in a good store, under a practical and competent teacher, will find himself in possession of knowledge that will go far to enable him to pass the examination. As before reported, the fees as fixed by the pharmacy act are entirely too low to yield a sufficient sum to properly pay for the enforcement of the law, the amount of money received being barely sufficient to meet the expenses of the regular meeting of the board. The fee for examination and registration in most other states is five dollars, with, in some states, one or two dollars for annual renewal of registration, while in Pennsylvania, the fee for examination and registration is but two dollars, and one dollar every three years for renewal. Our board has never yet held an examination at which the expenses have not greatly exceeded the receipts. An increase of the examination fee to five dollars seems like a reasonable request. In case of failure to pass, the applicant might have the privilege of re-examination free within a year. The eleventh section of the pharmacy act, if unrestricted, will render the entire act nugatory. The board has limited registration under this section as much as possible, yet it is so unfair to the pharmacists that its presence is a cause of continual complaint. At the recent annual meeting of the State Medical Society, that association of representative physicians passed resolutions strongly favoring the repeal of this obnoxious section. The State Pharmaceutical Association will present a bill for its repeal at the approaching session of the legislature, which, if enacted, will remove the one really unjust part of the pharmacy act. Upon evidence furnished by the State Pharmaceutical Association, the board commenced prosecutions against several persons for violating the ninth section of the act, by the sale of adulterated medicines. The persons accused were arrested and held under bail for court. True bills were found against them, but whilst awaiting trial, Frederick J. Knaus, an attorney employed by the board, went to the District Attorney's of fice in Philadelphia, and made such statements as induced that officer to submit the bills, and ask for an acquittal without any real trial. The action of Mr. Knaus was taken entirely without the knowledge or consent of the board, and as soon as it was learned of, every effort was made to have him punished, but chiefly through lack of funds to pay counsel, the matter has been allowed to rest. To the President and Members of the Pennsylvania Pharmaceutical Association: GENTLEMEN: I feel it my duty to report as briefly as possible the facts resulting from the evidence procured by your former committee on adulterations. This evidence was placed in my hands about the first of July, 1891, and upon my request to Mr. Wallis, the chairman of the committee, Dr. Henry Leffman sent to me on July 8, the report of his analysis of the samples of laudanum on a separate paper, with an affidavit attached thereto. This report is as follows, omitting the names of two persons not yet prosecuted: ALONZO ROBBINS, Esq. 715 WALNUT ST., PHILADELPHIA, July 8, 1891. DEAR SIR: I transmit herewith the report of the analysis of the samples of laudanum sent to me by Mr. R. A. Wallis: In the last sample no weighable quantity of morphine could be obtained. The sample from Clement & Hinchman was provided with a label stating that the preparation was of officinal strength. Yours, HENRY LEFFMAN. Dr. Henry Leffman, being duly affirmed according to law, deposes and says that the above figures, to the best of his knowledge and belief, are correct, and that in his opinion said samples were not prepared in accordance with the requirements of the United States Pharmacopoeia. HENRY LEFFMAN. Affirmed and subscribed before me, the eighth day of July, Anno Domini 1891. THOMAS D. SIMPSON, Notary Public. The foregoing report from Dr. Leffman was laid before the State Pharmaceutical Examining board on the 14th of July, 1891, at its meeting in the city of Williamsport, and as it appeared that all of the samples reported contained much less than one-half of the officinal percentage of morphine, the Board directed that proceedings should be commenced against the persons named in the report. Three of these persons were engaged in the retail drug business and three in the wholesale. According to the directions of the board, immediately upon my return to Philadelphia I placed the matter in the hands of Frederick J. Knaus, an attorney-at-law, of that city, and directed him to prosecute at once. As prior to engaging in the profession of law Mr. Knaus had been a pharmacist in Philadelphia, it therefore seemed to me that he was especially fitted to appear in these cases. After various delays, Oliver B. Server was arrested last fall and upon a hearing at the city hall was held for trial at court. Then, although I visited the attorney's office once or twice a week until March of the present year, I could not induce him to commence prosecutions in the other cases. Finally, late in March, I went to the city hall myself and had the warrants issued and the arrests made. At the hearing C. H. Butterworth and Clement & Hinchman were held to bail for trial in court, Mr. Knaus was present at the hearing and managed the cases very well. D. S. Wiltberger was sick and could not be present at the central station, but his case was heard the following week at the magistrate's court. Mr. Knaus was present then also and asked me to drop the case against Mr. Wiltberger, and as I declined to do so he said he would drop it, which he did; this left me without any lawyer, but the hearing was not finished that day, and when it came up again I had another attorney, but when the case was called the magistrate said that he would dismiss it. The accused admitted that he had sold weak laudanum, but claimed that after Server's arrest he had made it full strength. He further stated that the weak laudanum was not sold to physicians or druggists, but only to country stores. Upon being asked why people who purchased from such stores should not have pure medicines, he made no reply. |