MONTANA.

No legislation. The Montana State Pharmaceutical Association recommended legislation (1) regulating the selection of dispensers of medicine in public institutions, such as the insane asylums, prisons, etc., (2) an anti-narcotic law, (3) various changes of penalties for violations of the State law, and (4) an issue of permits to country merchants for the sale of patent medicines, drugs and preparations along the lines of the Oklahoma law.

NEBRASKA.

Passed March 28, 1905, a cocaine law (House Bill No. 104). No cocaine to be sold except upon the prescription of a physician, the said prescription not to be refilled.

NEW HAMPSHIRE.

An amendment to Section 15 of Chapter 112 of the Public Statutes relating to the better enforcement of the liquor law was passed. Not passed: Act (1) to regulate the sale of Jamaica ginger, (2) to regulate the sale of patent and proprietary medicines, (3) to amend Section 22, Chapter 95, of the Laws of 1903, entitled "An Act to Regulate the Traffic in Intoxicating Liquor," (4) to amend Chapter 95, Law of 1903, relating to the sale of intoxicating liquor, and (5) to amend Sections 2 and 8 of Chapter 135 of the Public Statutes of New Hampshire relating to the sale of drugs and medicines.

NEW JERSEY.

A bill to provide for the manufacture and free distribution of diphtheria antitoxin by the State was introduced into the Legislature, but defeated. Subsequently a substitute bill providing for the purchase and free distribution of diphtheria antitoxin by the State Board of Health was introduced and passed, an appropriation of $5,000 being made. A bill to regulate the sale of drugs and providing for the inspection, analysis and regulation, and an act to regulate the manufacture and sale of patent and proprietary medicines. The bills were very drastic in their provisions, but were defeated by the united opposition of the pharmacists of the State. In one of the bills the Board of Health of the State, and not the State Board of Pharmacy, was empowered to see that the provisions of the act were carried out, the bill being offered and advocated by the physicians of the State and editors of papers and magazines outside of the State. Many of the members of Boards of Health are physicians.

NEW YORK.

The recent New York State Legislature presented 18 bills inimical to the interests of the retail pharmacists, but through the efforts of the legislative committee of the N. Y. S. P. A., they all were killed.

The recent meeting of the N. Y. S. P. went on record as in favor of the Hill-Harowitz law, favoring the restriction of sales of narcotic drugs.

NORTH DAKOTA.

(1) Pure Food Law, amended and re-enacted; (2) Pure Drug Law, passed; (3) Formaldehyde Law, passed; and (4) Paris Green Law, passed.

OHIO

Passed: Bill to amend Sections 2 and 3 of an act entitled An Act to provide against the adulterations of foods and drugs," passed March 20, 1884, and Section 3 of said act as amended April 22, 1890, and April 20, 1904. Did not pass: several bills to regulate the manufacture and sale of patent and proprietary medicines.

OKLAHOMA.

In small towns where there is no registered pharmacist located, permits are granted to

physicians and to druggists of satisfactory reputation and experience to conduct country drug stores. These permits are granted without examination. Under these permits 105. drug stores are conducted principally by physicians.

Passed: An amendment to Section 1 of Pharmacy Law as follows: "the grand jury shall have inquisitorial power to investigate violations of this act, and the circuit and criminal judges shall give law in charge to the grand juries in their respective districts."

UTAH.

A bill was introduced into the legislature requiring formula on label of patents con-taining alcohol and narcotics, but failed to pass.

VIRGINIA.

A bill similar to the Utah bill reported upon above was introduced, but failed to pass.

With reference to the data obtained by your Secretary from the Schools of Pharmacy (71 schools replied out of 80), the following summary is of special interest:

Exceeding care should be used in drawing deductions from these figures. From the very varied quantity of instruction given at the different schools, it is reasonable to believe that the quality varies equally as well, and that any conclusions that are based solely upon the number of hours of instruction must be misleading, and will be, until there are more uniform methods of teaching, both in quality and quantity. In other words, it is apparently necessary to subject the instruction of the American pharmaceutical schools to careful qualitative and quantitative analyses, and standardize the conditions of teaching. Until this is done, a school teaching a few hours, comparatively, may be giving a higher grade of instruction, and really more of value, than another school teaching many more hours. The value of the teaching depends upon the kind and number of branches of instruction taught, their proper "balancing" in the curricula, according to relative values, and the judgment or teaching-skill employed in training the students.

In a few instances, there seems to have been a misunderstanding of some of the questions asked, and your Secretary would suggest that "proofs" of this paper be sent to all

the parties affected, with a request to carefully examine the figures, and correct, if necessary. He would suggest, also, that the work of collecting these data be continued in the future, and to facilitate the work, he would recommend that standard blank forms be printed and sent out for answers.

Concerning future questions on "Entrance Requirements,” and “ Drug Store Experience, etc.," it would be well to supplement these with a question on " Requirements for Graduation."

More important than these, however, should be the collection of information upon the quality of instruction given. This is an exceedingly delicate question to handle, but it is not impossible of solution if the parties at interest meet together in a spirit of mutual good will and mutual helpfulness. The logical body to do this work would be the American Conference of Teaching Faculties.

Concerning the State Boards of Pharmacy, only 39 replies were received out of 50, despite repeated letters. The reports are, in many cases, very meager in information. Apparently, detailed records, regarding the work of the State Boards, are not generally kept.

The opinions expressed upon the practicability of interchanging State certificates, generally unite in saying that such an exchange is desirabie, and probably practicable. The methods of exchange proposed, however, are quite variable. Probably the most comprehensive one is that of the Secretary of the Ohio Board of Pharmacy, W. R. Ogier, who urges a standardization of the work of the State Boards by a National Commission with authority to act in a supervisory character in the matter of uniform standards for all State Boards, and which should labor systematically to secure such changes in the pharmacy laws of all the States as would make them relatively uniform.

If there is not greater activity by the State Boards of Pharmacy, generally, with reference to enforcing the Section on Adulteration in the State laws, it is more than probable that this work will be generally transferred to the State Boards of Health, as has been done in Indiana and other States.

Your Secretary would suggest the use of standard printed forms for collecting the data on the State Board work in the future.

Regarding the State Pharmaceutical Associations, 39 reported out of 44. The reports indicate commendable activity on the part of the legislative committees of the different Associations. The necessity of amending many State pharmacy laws, to make them conform to the new Pure Food and Drug Law, is here suggested.

In conclusion, your Secretary would herewith attach, for reference, a copy of the New Pure Food and Drug Law (Public, No. 384), which goes into effect on January 1, 1907; and also, a copy of the new law providing for tax-free denatured alcohol for use in the arts and industries, but not in the manufacture of beverages or liquid medicines, which goes into effect in January 1, 1907.

The former law is of particular interest to the drug trade by reason of its provisions against the adulteration and misbranding of drugs. The latter law has been generally regarded as of no special value to the drug trade, save to permit the selling of denatured alcohol for fuel purposes, but a careful reading of the act shows that under the provisions it should be possible to use denatured alcohol, not only for the manufacture of certain solid medicinal material, but also, for the manufacture of certain liquid chemicals and other materials unfit for use as beverages, that is, if the Commissioner of Internal Revenue and the Secretary of the Treasury exercise their legal prerogative of allowing the use of denaturing agents other than pyridine and wood alcohol. Thus, ether could be used as a denaturing agent for alcohol intended to be employed for the manufacture of ether and oleoresins, and the crystallization of certain chemicals, and chloroform for denaturing alcohol intended for the manufacture of chloroform and the crystallization of certain chemical compounds, and doubtless other illustrations could be found.

THE PURE FOOD AND DRUG LAW.

AN ACT

For preventing the manufacture, sale or transportation of adulterated or misbranded or poisonous or deleterious foods, drugs, medicines and liquors, and for regulating traffic therein, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That it shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture within any Territory or the District of Columbia any article of food or drug which is adulterated or misbranded, within the meaning of this Act: and any person who shall violate any of the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and for each offense shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not to exceed five hundred dollars or shall be sentenced to one year's imprisonment, or both, such fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court, and for each subsequent offense and conviction thereof shall be fined not less than one thousand dollars, or sentenced to one year's imprisonment, or both, such fine and imprisonment in the discretion of

the court.

SEC. 2. That the introduction into any State or Territory or the District of Columbia from any other State or Territory or the District of Columbia, or from any foreign country, or shipment to any foreign country of any article of food or drugs which is adulterated or misbranded, within the meaning of this Act, is hereby prohibited; and any person who shall ship or deliver for shipment from any State or Territory or the District of Columbia to any other State or Territory or the District of Columbia, or to a foreign country, or who shall receive in any State or Territory or the District of Columbia from any other State or Territory or the District of Columbia, or foreign country, and having so received, shall deliver in original unbroken packages, for pay or otherwise, or offer to deliver to any other person, any such article so adulterated or misbranded within the meaning of this Act, or any person who shall sell or offer for sale in the District of Columbia or the Territories of the United States any such adulterated or misbranded foods or drugs, or export or offer to export the same to any foreign country, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and for such offense be fined not exceeding two hundred dollars for the first offense, and upon conviction for each subsequent offense not exceeding three hundred dollars or be imprisoned not exceeding one year, or both, in the discretion of the court: Provided, That no article shall be deemed misbranded or adulterated within the provisions of this Act when intended for export to any foreign country and prepared or packed according to the specifications or directions of the foreign purchaser when no substance is used in the preparation or packing thereof in conflict with the laws of the foreign country to which the said article is intended to be shipped; but if said article shall be in fact sold or offered for sale for domestic use or consumption, then this proviso shall not exempt said article from the operation of any of the other provisions of this Act.

SEC. 3. That the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Agriculture, and the Secretary of Commerce and Labor shall make uniform rules and regulations for carrying out the provisions of this Act, including the collection and examination of specimens of foods and drugs manufactured or offered for sale in the District of Columbia, or in any Territory of the United States, or which shall be offered for sale in unbroken packages in any State other than that in which they shall have been respectively manufactured or produced, or which shall be received from any foreign country, or intended for shipment to any foreign country, or which may be submitted for examination by the chief health, food, or drug officer of any State, Territory, or the District of Columbia, or at any domestic or foreign port through which such product is offered for inter-state commerce, or for export or import between the United States or any foreign

port or country.

SEC. 4. That the examinations of specimens of foods and drugs shall be made in the Bureau of Chemistry of the Department of Agriculture, or under the direction and supervision of such Bureau, for the purpose of determining from such examinations whether such articles are adulterated or misbranded within the meaning of this Act; and if it shall appear from any such examination that any of such specimens is adulterated or misbranded within the meaning of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall cause notice thereof to be given to the party from whom such sample was obtained. Any party so notified shall be given an opportunity to be heard, under such rules and regulations as may be prescribed as aforesaid, and if it appears that any of the provisions of this Act have been violated by such party, then the Secretary of Agriculture shall at once certify the facts to the proper United States district attorney, with a copy of the results of the analysis or the examination of such article duly authenticated by the analyst or officer making such examination, under the oath of such officer. After judgment of the court, notice shall be given by publication in such manner as may be prescribed by the rules and regulations aforesaid.

SEC. 5. That it shall be the duty of each district attorney to whom the Secretary of Agriculture shall report any violation of this Act, or to whom any health or food or drug officer or agent of any State, Territory, or the District of Columbia shall present satisfactory evidence of any such violation, to cause appropriate proceedings to be commenced and prosecuted in the proper courts of the United States, without delay, for the enforcement of the penalties as in such case herein provided.

EC. 6. That the term "drug," as used in this Act, shall include all medicines and preparations recognized in the United States Pharmacopeia or National Formulary, for internal or external use, and any

substance or mixture of substances intended to be used for the cure, mitigation, or prevention of disease of either man or other animals. The term " food," as used herein, shall include all articles used for food, drink, confectionery, or condiment by man or other animals, whether simple, mixed, or compound. SEC. 7. That for the purposes of this Act an article shall be deemed to be adulterated:

In cases of drugs:

First. If, when a drug is sold under or by a name recognized in the United States Pharmacopeia or National Formulary, it differs from the standard of strength, quality, or purity, as determined by the test laid down in the United States Pharmacopoeia or National Formulary official at the time of investigation: Provided, That no drug defined in the United States Pharmacopeia or National Formulary be deemed to be adulterated under this provision if the standard of strength, quality, or purity be plainly stated upon the bottle, box, or other container thereof, although the standard may differ from that determined by the test laid down in the United States Pharmacopia or National Formulary.

Second. If its strength or purity fall below the professed standard or quality under which it is sold. In the case of confectionery;

If it contain terra alba, barytes, talc, chrome yellow, or other mineral substance or poisonous color or flavor, or other ingredient deleterious or detrimental to health, or any vinous, malt or spirituous liquor or compound or narcotic drug.

In the case of food:

First. If any substance has been mixed and packed with it so as to reduce or lower or injuriously affect its quality or strength.

Second. If any substance has been substituted wholly or in part for the article.

Third. If any valuable constituent of the article has been wholly or in part abstracted.

Fourth. If it be mixed, colored, powdered, coated, or stained in a manner whereby damage or inferiority is concealed.

Fifth. If it contain any added poisonous or other added deleterious ingredient which may render such article injurious to health: Provided, That when in the preparation of food products for shipment they are preserved by any external application applied in such manner that the preservative is necessarily removed mechanically, or by maceration in water, or otherwise, and directions for the removal of said preservative shall be printed on the covering or the package, the provisions of this Act shall be construed as applying only when said products are ready for consumption.

Sixth. If it consists in whole or in part of a filthy, decomposed, or putrid animal or vegetable substance, or any portion of an animal unfit for food, whether manufactured or not, or if it is the product of a diseased animal, or one that has died otherwise than by slaughter.

SEC. 8. That the term "* misbranded," as used herein, shall apply to all drugs, or articles of food, or articles which enter into the composition of food, the package or label of which shall bear any statement, design, or device regarding such article, or the ingredients or substances contained therein which shall be false or misleading in any particular, and to any food or drug product which is falsely branded as to the State, Territory, or country in which it is manufactured or produced.

That for the purposes of this Act an article shall also be deemed to be misbranded:

In case of drugs:

First. If it be an imitation of or offered for sale under the name of another article.

Second. If the contents of the package as originally put up shall have been removed, in whole or in part, and other contents shall have been placed in such package, or if the package fail to bear a statement on the label of the quantity or proportion of any alcohol, morphine, opium, cocaine, heroin, alphaor beta-eucaine, chloroform, cannabis indica, chloral hydrate, or acetanilide, or any derivative or preparation of any such substances contained therein.

In the case of food:

First. If it be an imitation of or offered for sale under the distinctive name of another article. Second. If it be labeled or branded so as to deceive or mislead the purchaser, or purport to be a for eign product when not so, or if the contents of the package as originally put up shall have been removed in whole or in part and other contents shall have been placed in such package, or if it fail to bear a statement on the label of the quantity or proportion of any morphine, opium, cocaine, heroin, alpha- or betaeucaine, chloroform, cannabis indica, chloral hydrate, or acetanilide, or any derivative or preparation of any of such substances contained therein.

Third. If in package form, and the contents are stated in terms of weight or measure, they are not plainly and correctly stated on the outside of the package.

Fourth. If the package containing it or its label shall bear any statement, design, or device regarding the ingredients or the substances contained therein, which statement, design, or device shall be false or misleading in any particular: Provided, That an article of food which does not contain any added poisonous or deleterious ingredients shall not be deemed to be adulterated or misbranded in the following

cases:

First. In the case of mixtures or compounds which may be now or from time to time hereafter known as articles of food, under their own distinctive names, and not an imitation of or offered for sale under the distinctive name of another article, if the name be accompanied on the same label or brand with a statement of the place where said article has been manufactured or produced.