The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1910-04-26
THOMAS REFUSED
DRUGGIST LICENSE
Action OF Board Of Pbap.
macy Sustained
DECISION SUPREME COURT

he Board OF P~larna4- f.r ..
State Of North Carolina has t.a r....
to refuse TO renew 4 I-i.eu... ID. .r.
druggist who has been r,....taf. a..
selling cocaine. This Was Thu. 5..
sion of the Supreme Court f.. m. ....
Of Thomas against the Board urra.~.
macy, decided on WEDNESDAY.
Thomas was \ druggist All .r.um.,-
Vile. \. C., and was indicted for s..-
cocaine without any pre-. riut.u.
Four several indictments 4ara
brought against him for the rn.awr.l
sale Of cocaine at the August term
1909. Of the Superior court u. Ds-
VidSOn county. He pleaded g.nf.
TO all the indictments and VAS rual
by the trial judge.
The law requires all druggist, t.
have their license as Il druggist
renewed on the first daE OF Snpt"mber
Of each Year. Ia Il lev DAYS after
his conviction, Thomas who was il
licensed druggist or p~hurma,iSt.
made application To the BOARD of
Pharmacy for 4 renewal Of his license
and the Board of Pharmacy refused
to do SO. lie then applied for "a writ
Of mandalnus to comDe the Hoard az
Pharmacy to issue him q renewal pf
his license and the trial Gud2r held
that he was not entitled 10 amy writ
Of mandamus fog such purpose.
On appeal the Supreme tourt holds
hat the Judgment Of the trial judge
was correct; that Thorla is not rE-
titled to have his licens" rt." N"i
The opinion is written by 'hia. jus
tice Clark and he says that Chapter
II, Laws Of 1907, as um"ud~i hF
Chapter I13, Laws Of 1909. nla@"- IL
unlawful for any person. firm or r'r-
poration to sell, furnish or 2IN" away
cocaine, except pom pres rlpl1a,
and tina the Lerson who shall violate
he law is guilty Of Il mt~iem A.ar.
and upon conviction "ShaIl ii" i.'"'
or imprisoned in the djscretnu H| Ihr
court, and If a licensed pnarnD@
his license shall be removed.
Thomas pleaded guilty l."
cocaine without a prescriptions. avn. 'E
the terms Of the statute, tn" '"'
ton upon q plea Of guilty was "
vocation of the plaintiffs license. '.
Revisal, 4480-44S1, all p|harna -.'
must renew their licenses D." apn"''
ton to the Board Of PHARMACY
fore the first of September OF "-
year, which renewal is granted 1E".
the payment of $500, IF tn" h'..'
OF Pharmacy shall find that the 4
plicant is entitled TO renewal ih''."..
Here the Board, in view Dbl '''
conviction. and the proNisIouS '' ."
law which makeS the coN\t't'I
revocation Of the license, found ..'
he was not entitled and proper 70
fused to grant the renewal th"
nuaI renewal would be a useless
mality if the Board were '''.l'|
grant it in all cases.
The opinion by Chief JUSl'r" ..
f,,rthnr SarS. 1.-The selling o.. '..-
is an important matter to I'd"
and lives of the public. Ihr L"-
turc has carefully guarded u. w.
provisions to be found III t;"|
4490. The sale Of cocaine aNfi "."
deleterious drugs is the sH"y.'
carefully drawn proVis}"n-.
plaintiff (Thomas) knew that
lation of these provisions S."t
him to fine and i"mprisonmfh' ."
discretion of the court, ana
vocation of his license-the -.l."
being discretionary. but the ...
result of his conviction. |.
dence was so clear that tn"
pleaded guilty. and the la'l
by his honor show a cas-
turpitude, yet the p%laihtlF '|.
in less than ten days thef"a
piled for a license and %"ht
the payment of $500 ehji''
sun the important I"-
selling drugs"
In short, the Court decide
a druggist is convicted ...
cocaine unlawfulIy and -
druggist. the conviction TORI. ,
revokes his license and thai l0-
of Pharmacy must refuse ''
renewal Of the license thL7
This ends a hard-fought cas- .
much public interest has o+'" -
and If iS aafjnitalN decided |t .t
preme Court that h mere -
Of $500 does not entitle Il pI'. ..1
who has been convicted a.
cocaine to have his IcenS'
but that such conviction f'.."
license absolutely. If q dfo--
ter conviction by merely Hah..- &c.,.
ment Of the annual $500 r'..' .l
be licensed to sell drugs, TN
would be "a useless foTWat- .-
the court says that the an. .-gs
nawaI rennirp1 bE law Is MOI "a