The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1896-03-03
o MEDICINES AND POISONS.
Hearing on the New Bill Before. Senate
Judiciary Committee.


The Senate judiciary committee
granted second public hearing to those
interested in the passage of the bill for
an act relative 10 the sale of medicines
and poisons.
Freeman. of Central Falls; Senator Woods
of Providence; Senator Read of Glocester
and Senator Currier Of Cumberland.
Mr. Norman l.. Mason. who has been
on the state board of pharmacy since 1870
said that the law is not Tor the protection
of the pharmacists nor to make their busi-
ness easier-it is for the protection of the
public and drawn with the object in view
of placing every restriction about dan
gerous business. The man who conducts
such q business should have the respons-
ibility of proprietor.
Section three of the bill provides that
every member of the board shall be a
pharmacist actually doing business ss the
proprietor of store and Chairman Free
man wanted TO know IL that would not
exclude men qualified to serve in every
other respect. He cited the case Of the
physician at the State institutions, who
dispenses drugs every day, and yet as he
is not the proprietor of store he would
not be eligible to the board OF pharmacy
under the proposed law.
Mr.. James O'Hare, who had the floor
at the time, did not directly answer SEN
ator Freeman's questions, bat explained
that the bill asked for was practically the
same as was agreed to by committee
representing all of the associations Of
pharmacy in the State.
MIR. O'Hare said that physicians would
not be precludeo II they were also regis
tered pharmacists.
Attorney Cushing opposed section 3 on
the ground that 1t would make q close
corporation of the druggist and force the
fn har of 4 he, hao orH
from list of men approved nv those
men who are rich enough and sufficiently
fortunate to set upa business of their own.
He said that the bill made the oaly differ
ence between the registered pharmacist
and the assistant registered pharmacist
property qualification; while in reality
the assistant may be as well quail ed to
serve the public as the proprietor.
MIR. Mason denied the statement that a
close corporation was sought and in re-
gard to the difference between proprie-
tors and assistants he explained that the
question OF pharmacy is involved. The
proprietors are more apt to he permanent
In their location and therefore more re-
sponsible and 1t is very necessary for tho
Golfers of the town to definitely know
who Is the proprietor of each store and
responsible for the manner in which its
business is conducted.
Mr.. Z. Ii. Daggett said that man of
experience no is a registered assistant
should be just as eligible to membership
on the board as the man who is fortunate
enough TO be proprietor.
Mr.. Cushing observed that the assist
ant and proprietor are obliged To pass the
same examination and upon the same re-
suits receive the same certificate and en-
dorsement and should therefore receive
the same consideration in other respects
Section provides that the board may
in its discretion refuse registration or d is
continue registration already granted.
Mr.. Cushing objected TO the discretion
ary clause and claimed that a mans busi-
ness should not 90 left at the discretion
of any board but that his case should be
fairly tried at hearing in which he may
be rep resented.