ENFORCING THE PHARMACY LAW. In this branch of our work the Board have held eight special sessions, as follows: Dec. 2, 1896: At this session three cases of violation of law were considered, resulting as follows: one certificate revoked altogether; one continued for sentence; one placed on file. The agent was instructed to examine the poison books kept in every drug store, as required by law, calling attention to the necessity of registering every sale of poison named in the act, and to leave a copy of the pharmacy law. Jan. 13, 1897: Three formal complaints were thoroughly investigated and discussed; but, it appearing from statements under oath that violations of law were accidental and would not occur again, definite action was delayed. Jan. 20, 1897: At this session of the Board one of the worst cases we have had was presented. The respondent was represented by counsel, who was especially interested from the fact of his ownership of the store, and, being an attorney at law, claimed he had the right to run a drug store with a registered pharmacist fifty miles away, provided he could communicate with him by telephone, and an occasional visit in person by the registered pharmacist. Objections and protests were made at every step by the attorney, until it became a necessity to rule that all facts affecting the conduct of the store and the acts of the respondent must be heard. Cross-examination was allowed to an unlimited extent. The respondent, after consultation with counsel, declined to make any statement. It appeared by our records that this registered pharmacist was before us in April, 1894, and admitted most gross and improper conduct, and was then told that any further complaint of wrong-doing would be deemed sufficient cause for the revocation of his certificate. The evidence at this time was clear and conclusive of the most flagrant violation of the pharmacy law, of acts not punishable by criminal prosecution; and his general character, as our records and admitted facts developed, was such as required "the Board, in their judgment, after due consideration of the facts, to revoke his certificate altogether." Two other cases were heard at this time and placed on file. March 30, 1897: One case suspended for six months. Another case, not clearly covered by law, was dismissed with severe reprimand and caution. June 15, 1897: Four cases were ordered for this hearing, three only appearing; two were suspended for six months; one was suspended for twelve months. June 29, 1897: Two cases. Both of these appeared from sworn statements to be of such a character that the public good did not require further punishment than had been given by the courts, and they were therefore continued without action. July 15, 1897: Two cases; one revoked, one suspended for six months. July 29, 1897 One case suspended for six months. 3 Cases dismissed as the public good did not seem to require further punishment, . Many minor complaints have been heard and adjusted without formal hearing. Special care is taken to avoid an injustice, every respondent being allowed to present his side in his own way. Full typewritten records of all the hearings are on file in the. office. We have seventeen cases awaiting the action of the courts, which will probably require suspension or revocation. We feel justified in saying there is most decidedly a helpful influence from the fear of suspension or revocation of certificates of registration in pharmacy holding many from gross violation of the law and hazard to the public. The watchful care and faithful investigations of our agent, and the earnest efforts of the Board to act promptly and justly after due notice and exhaustive hearings, seem to have established the fact that the pharmacy law is not a dead and past issue. The renewal of registration once in two years would be of special service and value to the public and reputable pharmacy. No possible objection can be made to renewals, as it simply means an exchange of certificate without examination. Our books now show 3,771 registered pharmacists, when in fact there are about 2,500 certificates honestly in use. While there are occasionally conditions apparently justifying the issuing of an assistant's certificate, we are inclined to the opinion that it would result in more evil than good. In this branch of our work, as well as the liquor certificates, we refer to the agent's report appended, and his summary of the twelve monthly reports made by him to the Board. Financial Statement from Oct. 1, 1896, to Oct. 1, 1897. Services of the Board, including daily attendance and records of the office, Clerical and stenographic service, $350 00 Expenses of the Board, 94 07 S. B. Harris, agent (services, $796.50; expenses, $418.70), Total, . $1,947 73 Vouchers in detail at auditor's office. LIQUOR CERTIFICATE DEPARTMENT. As predicted in our tenth annual report, this branch of our work is attracting the attention of many other States, and frequent inquiries are made for details and results, with the intention of adopting this corrective, reformatory and uplifting feature of the Massachusetts pharmacy law. While the examination department controls the educational standard, the enforcing of the pharmacy law confines and largely controls the sale of drugs by registered pharmacists, the liquor certificate department forces a higher moral standard, and is the strongest lever at our command in overcoming an evil which largely contributed to the necessity of the enactment of the pharmacy law. The demoralizing and degrading influence of the at one time unrestricted sale of spirituous and intoxicating liquors for other than medicinal purposes, by the comparatively few law defiers and reckless persons posing as pharmacists, has never been so successfully checked as by the present pharmacy law. That most marked and fairly satisfactory results have attended the efforts of the Board is evident by the antagonizing element we encounter, and the approval of all law-abiding citizens. So far as it may be wisely and properly done, this department should be strengthened by legislative action. This work requires a large correspondence with licensing boards, city and town officials, complainants, pharmacists, etc. Many calls are made at the office, and a large amount of detail work is required to determine the question of " proper person and public good," to avoid an injustice to the applicant or an apparent neglect of duty in an investigation as required by the statute. Several cases, where a serious doubt existed as to " proper person and public good," have been disposed of by the Board without the expense of a formal hearing, when personal explanations have been given at the office or in writing by the applicant, or careful investigation has been made by the agent. As the full daily records of the office, correspondence, typewritten hearings and every detail may be seen at the office if desired, it seems unnecessary to present them in this report. Applications received from Oct. 1, 1896, to March 1, 1897, to ex Applications received from March 1, 1897, to Oct. 1, 1897, to ex Financial Statement from Oct. 1, 1896, to Oct. 1, 1897. Services of the Board, including daily attendance and records By act of the Legislature of 1896 the adulteration of drugs or medicines and the sale of poisons were placed under the supervision of this Board (sections 19 and 20 of the pharmacy law, chapter 397, Acts of 1896). This was a new departure, and we have been unable to determine how far we are expected to exercise control, whether it should be confined to pharmacists and the drug store, or enforced in every instance where poisons are sold at retail. That none but registered pharmacists are permitted by the law to sell Paris green and many other named poisons, and must keep a record of such sale, is perfectly clear, and we are so instructed from the office of the Attorney-General. But it has for many years been the custom of grocery, hardware, grain and country stores to sell Paris green and other poisons for destroying potato bugs and other insect life, and without any record or antidote. For this Board to enter upon the |