Page images

Manual of Laboratory Practice.

For Students of Pharmacy.

A revised and extended edition of the Laboratory Manual by Kauffman, Beal and Koch. The work is divided into seven parts as follows:


PHYSICAL OPERATIONS: A series of experiments in pharmaceutical operations for junior students, including practice in metric linear measures; comparison of metric and apothecaries weights and fluid measures; practice in the weighing and tying of packages; specific gravity of liquids; of solids heavier than and insoluble in water; of solids lighter than and insoluble in water; of solids heavier than and soluble in water; specific gravity of liquids without the use of bottle; specific gravity of solids in powder form; specific gravity with hydrometer; operations involving temperature changes; sublimation; determinations of melting and boiling points; flask distillation, etc.

PART 2. GALENICAL PREPARATIONS: Formulas and directions for preparing in quantities suitable for students' work, of the various classes of galenicals, as waters, solutions, decoctions, infusions, syrups, mixtures, tinctures, fluidextracts, wines, glycerites, solid extracts, official pills, troches, oleoresins, resins, ointments, etc. PART 3. PREPARATION AND PURIFICATION OF CHEMICALS: Including such as ammonium chloride, sulphate of iron, sulphur, Rochelle salt, mercuric iodide, sodium salicylate, solution of potassium hydroxide, hypophosphorous acid, tartar emetic, zinc acetate, zinc oleopalmitate, solutions of ferrice hloride, ferric sulphate, ferric citrate and dialyzed iron; scaled ferric citrate, lead plaster, spirit nitrous ether, sulphurous acid, pyroxylin, phosphoric acid, precipitated sulphur; solution of zinc chloride, solution of hydrogen peroxide, etc.

[blocks in formation]

In selecting the various experiments and preparations, such have been chosen as are fairly typical of a class of operations, and the formulas have been so constructed that the student may be able to work without the immediate supervision of an instructor.

The book is handsomely bound in cloth, with illustrations of apparatus; every alternate page blank for notes.




Midland Druggist Tramaceutical Review



written by

The Retail Druggists' Mutual Fire Insurance Co.


[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]

When writing advertisers, please mention the "Midland Druggist and Pharmaceutical Review."






Including Pharmaceutical Review, 26 volumes; Pharmaceutical Archives, 6 volumes;
The Midland Druggist, 10 volumes.



United States, $1.00; Canada, $1.35 per annum.

Foreign countries in Postal Union, $1.50 per annum.

Remittances with subscription.

Published on the 1st of each month by The Midland Publishing Company, Columbus, Ohio.
Entered at the Postoffice at Columbus, Ohio, as second class matter.


The opinions and policies of this publication are given expression in its editorial columns. Our remaining columns are open to contributions upon any topic of pharmaceutical interest, it being understood that the views there expressed are those of the contributors, and do not necessarily imply editorial endorsement.



REMIUMS, coupons, trading stamps and other similar so-called profit-sharing plans used by retail merchants will be subjected to close analysis in many States this winter through proposed legislation to eliminate all such schemes.

Sentiment against premium devices has been growing for some years, but until the U. S. Supreme Court made its decision last spring upholding the right of individual States to control the trading stamp business, there existed no legal basis for action. Taking this decision as authority and the law of the State of Washington as a pattern, many states are preparing to enact similar laws.

Merchandising methods have been in evolution for some years and the premium idea-something for nothing as a phase of that evolution gained a wonderful hold in the minds of the buying public. But just as the old method of marking retail. prices at a high figure to enable the dealer to meet the "jewing abilities" of his customers and still leave him a good profit, was rejected because it was unsound in principle, so modern business has taken a step toward the ideal in merchandising in its revolt against the double transaction as involved in the giving of premiums of various sorts.

A sale at retail should never be complicated beyond the simple exchange of money (or its equivalent) for value received in merchandise, and when the buying public can be made to recognize the advantage of a sale without any strings attached, the premium system will have to go.

There is something wrong somewhere when it becomes necessary to negotiate a secondary deal to make a sale of honest merchandise and when it is done the opportunity is increased for deceiving a customer who at best is none too well posted on his purchase and whose mind is occupied with the idea of getting "something for nothing."

Those who favor the premium method of making sales say they do not know where the idea originated that a premium was "something for nothing" and intimate that it is not or ever was such.

We have an idea that Noah Webster had this conception of the term when he defines it as a "reward, recompense or prize" and Roget in his authentic work on synonyms of the English language includes among other equivalents of the word. premium "sop, hush money and tribute." If the originators of the premium plan were unfortunate in selecting a name for their plan it is rather late in the day to attempt to set the public mind aright.

The trade definition of a premium is an article which a dealer does not permit to be sold in direct sale, even at the price he places upon it, but which is sold in connection with some other article. It is doubtful if in many cases the premium would bring the price named for it if it were offered in direct sale.

There is a difference between a trade inducement and a premium in that the former need not necessarily be a premium. If a dealer has two articles for sale at regularly advertised prices, which he sells to all comers at these prices, but wishes to stimulate his sales by offering the two at a figure less than the combined separate prices, he is offering his customer a bona fide profit-sharing deal which the customer can readily understand; a deal which has no future strings to it.

We have read the definition of the word premium as generally accepted; we have its trade application and it remains to know how the courts have defined it. We quote the following paragraph from the decision of Justice McKenna, of the U. S. Supreme Court in upholding the Washington statute:

[ocr errors]

"The schemes of complainants rely upon something else than the article sold. They tempt by a promise of a greater value than that article and apparently not represented in its price, and it hence may be thought that thus by an appeal to cupidity lure to improvidence. This may not be called in exact sense a "lottery,' may not be called "gaming." It may, however, be considered as having the seduction and evil of such, and whether it has may be a matter of inquiry and judgment that it is finally within the power of the legislature to make."

Aside from the inherent wrong referred to in this decision, there is the same injustice as comes through the operation of the mail-order houses and all outside. concerns which live off the labors of the retailers without being subject to the taxes and expenses of operating a business house and contribute nothing to the upkeep of the community. The same energy and money necessary to handle trading stamps, premiums, etc., if directed to local channels, would build up a more substantial business and improve living conditions of the community in which the dealer resides.

We are informed through the literature of the National Premium Association that retail houses in some of the States which prohibit by law the use of premium devices are dissatisfied with conditions existing under the operation of that law and will ask its repeal.

They base this statement on the fact that the law prohibits the manufacturers from packing coupons redeemable in merchandise, in goods sold through the dealers,

« PreviousContinue »