The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1889-03-08
The Apothecary Bill.

The Senate did well yesterday in
tabiing the apothecary bill, measure well
meant, no doubt, but full Of incongruities
and absurdities. 1t should kill it,
The purpose of the measure was.
undoubtedly, to prevent the sale of
liquor by apothecaries for other than medic
inal uses. There is an impression, and it is
probably correct, that great many apothe-
carries do large business in intoxicating
liquors In violation of law, and in spite of
all that can be done or is likely to be done
under existing statutes; and this measure
was intended to put a stop to this business.
It's intention was good. But the practical
operation OF the bill would almost inevitably
have been bad. BY the present law apothe-
carries are forbidden to sell liquor for any
purpose whatever. Nevertheless they sell
1t, not for medicinal purposes
alone, but TO be drunk as
beverage. If convicted they are liable to
fire and imprisonment. The penalties are
severe enough to deter every apothecary
from violating the law. Yet they do not do
SO. The explanation is that experience has
taught that the danger OF having to
undergo the penalties is not very great.
Does this new measure increase that danger2
IL Is difhcult to see where or how. On the
contrary 1t is more likely to diminish il.
Now the mere fact that an apothecary has
on MS premises large quantities of liquor of
inherent varieties raises strong presump-
ton that he Is selling in violation of law.
Indeed 1t amounts practically ito conclusive
proof. Therefore the apothecary who sells
liquor as the law now is. is always in
danger from the search and seizure process.
Under this new measure this danger would
be removed. for be could always explain
tnat the liquors were kept to fill
prescriptions. Again, as a rule there are
only two persons knowing to an illegal sale
OF liquor by an apothecary, the apothecary
himself or bis clerk, who is the seller, and
the purchaser. Evidence of sale must gen.
orally come from the purchaser. Under the
present law 1t Is difficult to get evidence
from this source, but under the naw
measure 1t would be practically impossihle
FOR THIS new measure makes the purchasar
participant in the crime and liable To az
severe penalty as the seller. He coula
therefore, always refuse to testify on the
ground that to do so would criminate him.
self. Thus the apothecary would be re-
lieved entirely from the danger of his Gus
toners 'giving him away" Again, when
the apothecary was a physician as
is frequently the case in small
places he could sell liquor, If he
was disposed, ad libitum, with very slight
danger Of punishment Proof could sell
dom be obtained that his prescriptions were
not furnished in the regular course of his
practice, and nobody would know 1t IL he
failed to record them.
One of the incongruities of the law is the
provision that makes a man who buys
liquor of an apothecary except up
on physicians prescription liable to
heavy fine. while If he buys of saloon or
MOTEL he incurs no penalty. For partcipat-
ing In one mans violation Of the law he is
punished, while he can assist In another
mans violation Of practically the same law
with IMMUNITY.