Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1891-02-08
poctors-Now Medicine for the Poor.

To the Editor of he Dispatch:
Now that provision has been made to
provide doctors for the poor the next and
the other necessary thing to do is TO Oh
tain medicine for them. The present plan
is so very defective, as | Will presently
show. that change must be made at once.
If the doctors are TO be elected in few
days, as you intimate i'll your to-day's
issue.
The present plan dates back to May,
1867, twenty-three years ago, two years
after the close of the war. l had noticed
so much difficulty in getting medicine for
the poor, many of whom at that time were
of the best and most refined people in the
city, that | succeeded in begging from
northern druggists $4,000 worth of medl-
cine in order 10 begin the establishment
of Quasi free dlspensaries. | established
four of them, the first from Rockets TO
Twenty-frst street second, Twenty-nrst
to Ninth; third, from Ninth to Second,
and fourth, ell west of Second street. In
q short time, about eighteen months, this
supply had 10 be added to and num-
Der of friends aided me by $50 annual
subscription. This was continued about
three or four years when l had to apply
to the Council, and $500 was voted an
nually for this purpose, and Mr.. John M;
Higgins (then member of the Council)
and myself were made committee TO see
TO the management of the charity, and TO
report quarterly to the Council. This ar
rangement stood for five or SIX years, wnen,
without complaint or notice, the dispen-
saries were turned over to the COMMITTEE
of the Outdoor Poor. AT that time about
5000 prescriptions had been put up an
nually by the four dlspensaries. Each pre-
scription cost the patient ten cents and no
more, SO that each of the four druggists
got S3l per quarter from the city and ten
cents from the patient. This plan, by the
way, let me say, has been copied by many
southern cities. Norfolk supplies the
medicine now by giving it to the lowest
bidder. 1t has but one free dispensary,,
No sooner had this change taken place
than two of the dispensaries were changed
without any complaint or notice 10 lne
men appointed by Mr.. Higgins and my
self, and then began the complaints rom
the doctors. One or these new men,
brother of member of the Chem Coun-
Gil. refused to put mp o prescription OF Dr.
Thompkins for six or eight grains OF qui,
nine because il had TO be divided into,
think, sixteen powders. The medicine cost
two or three cents. The city paid about
ten cents or more and the patient ten cents.
which would give very good pront. Inc
next complaint heard was that the dis-
pensary for the Fourth district, To-
Gated at Mr.. Forstmann's, on Main oppo-
site the park (there was then no drugstore
west of Brook avenue ON Broad, the most
central point, and Ihad selected Dir. Forst-
NANNY had been without complaint or
notice removed to the corner OF Pine
and Spring streets, as far from the centre
of the district as possible. 1t was given TO
near relative q think brother) OF
another member OF the Council. This was
such an outrage upon the. poor people
living in the northern part OF the District
near tho poornouse, and in Jackson ward,
and Sheep Hill, that protested against 1t
andgot myself invited to meeting OK the
Committee of the Poor ut the almshouse
and stated my objections to these changes
I. G., carrying the medicine as far away as
possible from the people il was designed TO
benefit, and especially when medicine had
often TO be sent for late at night. The
committee listened and that was all:
The consequence has been the most
natural. A grocer who moves his
place of business as Tar as posi-
BILE from his patrons and has no de-
livery-wagon. viii soon have no patrons.
As before said whom Mr.. Higgins and my
self had charged OF these dispensaries twelve
years ago 5000 prescriptions were put up
annually. Improperly managed there would
have been put up last year 10000. bat the
1,7o3 % The druggists got about 80 cents
for every prescription. little and big, which
would - very good proht indeed. >