Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1884-04-15

On Saturday in the Superior Court, Port
land before Judge Boney, the case of Geo.
d. Phillips against VIM. o. Alden, of C. H.
Guppy Co, druggists. was taken up, SAYS
the Portland Press. D. Fl. Meaher, ESQ.,,
and Hon. j. j. Perry opened the case for the
plaintiff, and Hon W. F. Lunt conducted
the defense. Mr.. Alden and his clerk. Mr..
Alberts. were the only witnesses examined
and their testimony recited defendants con-
nection with the business of the store
which was in brief, that he kept the books.
sold cigars. toilet articles, proprietary medi-
cines. and had general oversight of the store,
and the commanding Of prescriptions was
performed by Mr.. AIberts and two other reg
istered apothecaries.
Hon. W. F. Lunt, counsel for Mr.. Alden.
claimed that under this testimony the defend
ant was not liable. He argued at some length
claiming that the word apothecary in the act
should be construed to mean one who prac-
flces pharmacy. one who prepares drugs for
medicinal uses, and does not include person
who il merely engaged in the sale OF drugs
and who does not compound them He
moved for a non suit.
The court, after stating the facts in the
case, which were undisputed, read the law
passed by the legislature, and the penalty at
h1Shco Aot its uOu-OUscTtbDCc. he balQ ln4t
it was the duty of the court to construe
statutes, and one of the rules of construc.
ton is that the statutes are to receive such
construction as must evidently have
been intended BY the legislature, and
to ascertain that intention. 1t il
proper for the court to consider the subject
| in view and the mischief intended to be RENE
died. Judge Bonney then proceeded to de-
fine the term pharmacy" and spoke of the
purpose of the legislature in enacting the
statute. He explained the business Of an
apothecary as meaning to engage in the en-
ployment or occupation of compromising and
preparing medicines and selling the same,
and before any person in this State can en-
gage in such employment or work he must
prove his skill to the satisfaction of the Com
missioners of Pharmacy, by the kind of
evidence which the statute prescribes. To
engage in the business of an apothecary, and
to be financially interested in the business
of an apothecary, are two diferent things
In concluding, the Judge said:
PERSONALLY the defendant did not engage
in the filling of prescriptions or the COM
pounding of medicines. There is no testi-
mOny in the case that anv medicine was pre-
pared or prescription filled at the store by
any person not authorized to engage in the
business of an apothecary by the Commits
slohers OF fharmacy. Ills part OF the bus-
ness was to act salesman of various arti-
Giles in the store which did not require per-
son skilled in pharmacy to prepare and COM
pound when ordered. He had charge of the
| finances and books of the concern. He was
not within the meaning of the statute engaged
in the business of an apothecary during the
time alleged in the writ He was not re-
CURED by law to be examined and certif-
Gated by the Commissioners of Pharmacy.
He is not subject to the penalty, as claimed
by the prosecutor. and therefore grant the
motion and order a nonsuit"
The counsel for plaintiff gave notice of
their intention to file exceptions to the ruling
to present the case to the law court in July