The question as to whether or not Acetphenetidin is to be considered an Acetanilid derivative, is now to be determined and tried on its merits.

We feel confident that the Government will lose this case, as the Supreme Court has already held in a somewhat similar

case that a theoretical derivative substance cannot be considered a derivative substance, and construed the word "derived" as "made or obtained from."

Acetphenetidin is not "made or obtained from" Acetanilid, and can only be considered a theoretical derivative and not an actual derivative of Acetanilid. In view of the foregoing, we cannot see how it is possible for the courts to render a decision favorable to the Government's contentions."

*

"Prohibition" Amendment to Constitu

tion.

W. M. McCormick, formerly president and now active in the Flavoring Extract Manufacturers' Association, calls attention to the following proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States, introduced in the Senate by Mr. Sheppard and referred to the Committee on Judiciary:

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

That the following Amendment to the Constitution be, and hereby is, proposed to the

States to become valid as a part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of the several States as provided by the Constitution. Article Section 1. The sale, manufacture for sale, transportation, importation for sale and exportation for sale of intoxicating liquors for beverage purposes in the United States and all territories subject to the jurisdiction thereof are forever prohibited.

Section 2. Congress shall have power to provide for the manufacture, sale, transportation and importation of intoxicating liquors for sacramental, medicinal, mechanical, pharmaceutical or scientific purposes, or for use in the arts, and shall have power to enforce this Article by uniform legislation.

Mr. McCormick at once took the matter up with Mr. Sheppard and pointed out to him that the amendment if it became law would prevent the use of alcohol in flavoring extracts and have the practical effect of destroying this important industry. It also is a question whether the amendment would not ruin the perfumery business, by prohibiting the use of alcohol ically states for what purposes intoxicatin perfumes. The second section specifing liquors can be used and no mention is made of foods, toilet preparations or perfumery. None of these articles could be classified with those mentioned in the section in question.

At the suggestion of Mr. Sheppard Mr. McCormick took up the matter with E. C. Dinwiddie, legislative superintendent of the Anti-Saloon League of America and he promised to go into the subject more carefully. In connection therewith Mr. McCormick offered a strong protest against the amendment in its present form, although he did not object to the main principle which actuated the framers of the proposed amendment.

Mr. McCormick's prompt and vigorous course in this matter will meet with general approval in the trades. In the present form of the amendment there would be a ban even on temperance beverages, such as root beer, which contain small percentages of alcohol and are used generally, probably even by prohibitionists. Regarding flavoring extracts there also can be no question of the effect, for while they are not "beverages" in the strict meaning of the word, they cannot be identified as being "for sacramental,

medicial, mechanical, pharmaceutical, or scientific purposes, or for use in the arts." Bay rum might escape elimination, but ordinary toilet preparations and perfumery would seem to be excluded from consideration.

If Mr. Sheppard's amendment should. become a part of the Constitution a considerable period of time would be required for the proper machinery to operate for that end. It does not seem probable that such an amendment will be adopted for a long time, but many unexpected and long though improbable proposals have lately been approved both by legislators and voters, so that it is best to attack trouble of this kind when it begins to threaten.

-Editorial in American Perfumer.

The following bill* has been introduced in Congress as a first step in securing the fixed prices on patent, trade-marked, or copyrighted articles. It is fathered by several branches of trade and the American Fair Trade League.

SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled.

That the owner of every patent, copyright, or trade-mark shall as a condition of such patent, copyright, or trade-mark be required to file in the patent office a statement showing the price at which any article covered by patent, trade-mark, or copyright is to be offered for sale. Such statement shall show the retail price of each such article, together with a list showing all prices and rebates, commissions, or discounts of every nature whatsoever at which said article shall be sold or offered to dealers for the sale of or for the handling of

such article and such list shall be registered in the patent office under such rules and regulations as the Commissioner of Patents, with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe. A new price list may at any time be substituted and re-registered and a fee of ...... shall be paid in the manner now required by law for each price list registered

or re-registered.

All such articles covered by the registered price list shall be plainly marked with the retail price at which the same are to be offered for sale and the words "Price Registered" followed by the date of such registration. *N. A. R. D. Journal.

Such marking shall be made under such rules and regulations as the Commissioner of Patents with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe, and may be on the article itself, the label, the container, or the

wrapper.

SEC. 2. It shall be unlawful to sell, or offer for sale any article covered by such registered price list at a price different from that named in said list. It shall be unlawful to give or receive, or to offer or demand any rebate, commission or discount of any nature whatever for the sale of any article covered by any patent, copyright, or trade-mark registered in connection with said article. Provided, however, that this section shall not apply to legal public sales made in pursuance to judicial executions. And provided, further, that all articles purchased at such judicial sale shall, in case they are again offered for sale be subject to all the provisions of this act, as if no judicial sale had taken place.

SEC. 3. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall upon conviction thereof be fined not less than $100 nor more than $1,000 for each and every offense. Any person falsely marking an article as having a registered price, or who marks any article with a price other than the one registered shall upon conviction thereof be fined not less than $200 nor more than $2,000 for each and every offense.

Any owner of any patent, copyright, or trade-mark who fails to comply with the provisions of this act, shall, after due notice by the Commissioner of Patents forfeit such patent, copyright or trade-mark, and such patent, copyright, or trade-mark, shall be cancelled.

"Who Filches My Good Name.'

By WILLIAM H. INGERSOLL. Since the inception of trade the great struggle has been for the buyer to be sure of getting the quality he paid for. In the nature of things the seller knows more about the goods than the buyer. It is the tailor's business to know clothes, not the wearer's. The wearer is dependent upon the tailor.

law have licensed the seller to lie about And through the ages, custom and

Mr. Ingersoll, who is Marketing Manager for the "Ingersoll" watch, has made an exhaustive study of the subject of "Price Maintenance" and writes with authority on this interesting topic. Like Louis D. Brandeis, the great People's Lawyer, Mr. Ingersoll be lieves that uniform prices to all encourages individual enterprise: and, in the face of uneducated public opinion, he has taken a bold stand for this principle which he believes to be for the greater good of by far the greater number.-Am. Fair Trade League.

his wares.

"Let the Buyer beware" runs the old legal maxim, saying in effect, "how can you expect the seller to confine himself to the truth about the thing he seeks to sell you?"

The day has only dawned when it is respectable to be in business at all. Trade has been the despised calling of the cheat and trickster. Nobility was restricted to idleness or statecraft or learning. Even the teacher, the lawyer, and the doctor of this day affect to look down upon the commerce which withal supplies their daily needs.

What an advance then in human affairs when men came to think enough of the products they wrought to mark their names upon them, that buyers might identify them for repeated purchase when, after trial, their quality had proven satisfactory.

What a saver of labor has the trademark become, sparing us the need of perpetual experimentation with strange and unknown qualities and economizing time spent in testing and examining what after all we are qualified to judge only after use.

With the help of the trade-mark a simple name has come to stand in place of lengthy specifications and the littlest child can say "Ivory," "Uneeda," "Heinz," "Arrow," "1847" with the assurance of getting precisely the same as the seasoned grown-up.

How great a wealth it is to the people in modern life to have these familiar guide-marks as signs of the maker's confidence in his handiwork and how great a wealth to the maker to have the public confidence in exchange.

But centuries of deceitfulness could not but have left their mark upon emerging business and the wolf of the marketplace, feigning benevolent value-giving, contrives to ply his trade under cover of the fair names of the country's com

merce.

"Bargain" is his store cry; and to bolster up his claims on the myriad unknown values in his stock, he quotes the favorite, standard trade-marks at half price, suffering a temporary loss on the things we know, to cast a spell under which we may believe what he says of the worth of what we do not know.

A Bargain! But at a double price! We buy our friendly trade-mark cheap

only to pay back our momentary saving with usury on nondescript commodities, for the economic law is no respecter of persons, and what is sacrificed in one place must needs be recouped in another.

But as we respond to the lure of the cut price on the known value, the important thing is not that, in the gamble for more than our money's worth, we lose on subsequent turns of the wheel what we were permitted to win on the first. That is only the old story, for if the novice could but stop while he's ahead, the gambler would go out of busi

ness.

It is the after-effect that is important. A wrong has been perpetrated wherein the good names of the market's choicest brands are tossed into the pot for the exploitation of our cupidity. For a pretty evanescent saving, we suffer hard-won reputations to be bled and permanently sacrificed. Unknowingly, our love of gain makes us accomplices in the device of the conjurer whereby, to serve his ends, we are led to deprive ourselves and neighbors of the future benefits of the markets' trusted brands. For the cut price on the standard article is a travesty on merchandising. It is not a bona fide bid for business. It incurs a loss on the one who offers it, and its purpose is to mislead.

How can we know that the reason for selling it without profit is to spread the erroneous impression that we suffer extortionate charges when we trade with our home merchant who may not indulge in the pea-and-shell game, but who exacts no greater profit on the goods that we don't know than on these that we do?

How can we be expected to reason that the artificial price-reduction lowers the worth of the brand in public estimation, and makes business thereafter impossible at the true worth? And with the profit gone, who will keep on sale the trademarks that have meant so much to us?

The Cut Price, emblem of the guilded emporium which underpays its salesgirls, fattens off the products of the sweat-shop, grinds down the factory toiler and makes for the lower levels of civilization and living! It's hour has struck. The light of day is dissipating its shadows. and we are coming to learn that our safety lies in holding fast to the names

that we have found good and, upon "bargain days," to take only the brands of proven worth, avoiding promiscuous strangers that seek an introduction on the strength of their companionship on the bargain counter with old acquaintances.

Prosecution Under the Federal Insecticide Act.

Insectos. Manufactured by Wm. Branson, Bloomington, Ill. Alleged misbranding. Plea nolo contendere. Fine imposed of $25.00

Peterman's

Peterman's Ant Food: Roach Food: Manufacturers, Wm. Peterman, Incorporated, New York City.

Alleged misbranding; plea of guilty;

suspended sentence in both cases.

Roach Sault: Barrett Chemical Co., New York City. Alleged misbranding; plea of guilty; fine of $25.00 imposed.

Persian Insect Powder: Lewey Chemical Co., New York City, shippers. Alleged adulteration and misbranding; plea of guilty; fine $50.00.

White Tar Moth Balls: White Tar Co., of New York City, shippers. Alleged to be misbranded. Court imposed a fine of $10.00.

Rat Biskit Paste: Rat Biskit Co., Springfield, Ohio. Charged with alleged misbranding; plea of guilty; fined $25.00.

Odell's Roach Powder: Pittsburgh Insect Exterminator Co., Pittsburgh, Pa. Alleged misbranding; plea nolo contendere; fined $25.00.

Conkey's Lice Liquid: Conkey's Bug and Moth Killer: G. E. Conkey Co., Cleveland, Ohio, shippers. Plea of guilty; fined $10.00 and costs. Dr. Hess Dip and Disinfectant: Shipped by G. Hess and J. L. Clark of Ashland, Ohio. Fined $10.00 and costs.

Orchard Brand Atomic Fungicide: Thomsen Chemical Co., Baltimore, Md., shippers. Charged with adulteration and misbranding; plea of guilty; fined $5.00. Two other products of the same company, viz: Orchard Brand Arsenite of Zinc and Orchard Brand Atomic Sulphur combined with Arsenate of Lead, were declared to be adulterated and misbranded and the defendant entered a plea of guilty. A fine of $5.00 was imposed in each case. Misbranding was also charged against their Bordeaux Mixture and Bordeaux

Arsenate of Lead Mixture. The defendant plead guilty to each of these charges and was fined $5.00 in each case.

Kerosene Oil Emulsion: Shipped by Benj. Hammond, Fishkill-on-Hudson, N. Y. Misbranding charged; plea of guilty; sentence suspended.

Lime, Sulphur and Salt, or Horicum: Shipped by same party was alleged to be misbranded. Plea of guilty; sentence suspended.

Lead Arsenate: Shipped by L. Lavenburg, New York City. Misbranding charged. Plea of guilty; fined $25.00.

Formaldehyde: Shipped by J. T. Baker Chemical Co., Phillipsburg, N. J. Misbranding charged; plea of non vult; fined $25.00.

by the Sherwin-Williams Co., Newark, N. Powdered Arsenate of Lead: Shipped J. Misbranding charged; plea of non vult; fined $25.00.

Early Adjournment of Kentucky Legislature.

Lexington, Ky., January 18-There is a rumor afloat here to the effect that a number of the members of the General Assembly have come to the conclusion that, inasmuch as the tax amendments and convict labor amendments to the constitution have been declared invalid, little can be accomplished in the way of reform legislation at this time and they are trying to secure sufficient support to justify them in offering a resolution to adjourn the present session until later in the year, that is until after the Senatorial primary election in August.

-Cincinnati Enquirer.

Birds of A Feather.

As you well know, "birds of a feather flock together." Like attracts like, and men of a similar way of thinking will drift together by the natural law of attraction. Bear that in mind and when you find yourselves chumming with some one of questionable honesty it means that you lean that way yourselves, or you wouldn't be there. You know that you are straying from the right track, and in order to satisfy the complaint of the mental monitor known as Conscience, you try to make your action seem all right by saying, "Well, he does it!"-Robert Lloyd.

DE

National Drug Trade Conference.

The National Drug Trade Conference, representing the various national organzations in the drug world, held a meeting in Washington City on January 8.

Among the matters given attention were the Harrison Anti-Narcotic Bill and various other bills now pending in Congress; control of the sale of bichloride of of mercury tablets; postal regulations on the mailing of posions and a registered price act.

Our readers are familiar with the controversy which arose last summer at the A. Ph. A. and N. A. R. D. Conventions regarding the Harrison Anti-Narcotic Bill, the minority claiming that it disdiscriminated in favor of the dispensing physician as against the retail pharmacist as construed in sub-section "a" of Section 2 of the bill.

As adopted by the Conference, approved by the A. Ph. A., passed by the House and approved by the majority report of the N. A. R. D., the wording was as follows:

Nothing contained in Section 2 shall apply

"(a). To the dispensing or distribution of any of the aforesaid drugs to a patient by a physician, dentist or veterinary surgeon registered under this act in the course of his professional practice only: provided however that such a physician, dentist or veterinary surgeon shall be in personal attendance upon such patient".

The same objections to this clause that were brought before the conventions last

With a few other amendments the Harrison Bill was approved for passage.

BICHLORIDE LEGISLATION.

Resolutions were adopted by the Conference recognizing the need for controlling the sale of bichloride of mercury tablets, but recommending that Federal legislation on the subject be deferred until the revision committees of the U. S. P. and N. F. have made their reports so that there will be no conflict between the laws and the standards adopted for the laws.

MEDICINAL POISONS BY MAIL.

and ordered brought to the attention of The following resolution was adopted the Postmaster General with the request that it be made one of the postal regulations:

"Poisons intended for internal or medicinal administration when packed in a metal container bearing the address of the sender together with a label bearing the word "poison" may be admitted to the mails under first class postage rates."

Conference at its recent meeting and after a long continued discussion and the consideration of several substitute measures which lost out by vote, the clause was finally changed to read as follows:

"(a) To the administration of any of the aforesaid drugs to a patient by or under the supervision of a physician, dentist or veterinary surgeon in the course of his professional practice only; provided, however, that such physician, dentist or veterinary surgeon shall personally attend upon such patient."

tional Convention.

On September 17, 1913, there assembled at The Hague a noble gathering of those interested in pharmacy in one of the other of its varied occupations, at the Kurhaus, Scheveningen. The attendance was larger than usual and, of course, The Netherlands, Belgium, and near-by countries sent the largest number of delegates. The proceedings were conducted with harmony and were pervaded by a spirit of internationalism.