The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1910-03-21
ITEM RIGRr TO SEE DmUGS.

L -"
recently handed down an important de-
cision In favor Of the constitutionality Of
section of the pharmacy law not previ-
Oualy passsd upon. The suit was one for
penalties brought by tho state Board Of
Pharmacy against Gardiner d. Matthews
and othsrs due 10 the violation BY the do
PENDANTS Of certain provisions Of what 10
nos known under the new Consolidated
Lava as the public health Law. The charge.
In brief. was TINT q snieswomAn In q depart
meat store who was not licensed by the
state Board OF Pharmacy had sold on .
certain day tincture OF Iodine. tincture of
arnica and spiFita Of camphor: furthermore.
! that the saIs was not made In the presence
or under the supervision Of . licensed drug
gAst or pharmacist.
The trial In the Municipal Court resulted
In = verdict for the dsfsndahta. The
ground Of the decision was not stated.
On appeal the Appellate Term reversed
! and directed Judgment for the plaintiff.
Leave was granted for an appeal by de-
PENDANTS 70 the Appellate Division. which
court sustained the Appellate Term, al
though Justices LAu9hlin and HONaEhton
dfasented. The defendants then Obtained
leave 20 appeal to the Court Of Appeals.
which has Just unanimously affirmed the
validity 0f the law In an extensive opinion
by Judge willard Bartlett.
PENDANTS: First. arc articles line tincture
Of iodine. when sold In seAled bottles. ex-
cepted from tho ovisionN Of the statute
which prOhibtts the sale OF medicines or
pois0ns except In the presence or under the
supervision Of q licensed pharmacists; and
u not. secondly. ID the restriction on the sale
% domestic remedies or other perfectly
harmless preparations q valid exercise Of
tho police power or an unwarrauted In
vasion Of private rightsf
Judge Bartlett decides both questions
In favor Of the constitutionality of the art.
He holds that the articles In auesEicn are
medicines, and tincture Of arnica az Iease n Q
poison. The fact thai they are houNehold
remedies In no way le~sens their medicinal
character. The same autionary wgu-
l1ions. the court says, may not ha re-
CURED In respect to the sale OF medicLNss
which are harmless n pure and property
used a. would be appropriate in respert
to the sale Of poisonous substances but \
can see no reason Why " the police power
embraces the regulation Of The sale OF medl-
zines of a dangerous character u may not
also he legitimRtely extended over the sale
Of medicines generally. II only in order 20
insure their purity THIS In effect is the
answer 0f the court to the FIRST question.
In taking up the question Of cOnssitu-
tionality the court finds that the validity
Of an enactment such 90 the present has
never come up before the Court of Appeals
for review. Judge willard Earliest. how
ever, cites text book authorities and Judi
otal decisions recognizing the right Of the
Legislature to ccntrol and limit tho sale
Of drugs and medicines. Ne quotes from
the of7fcial reports Of other state courts, In
Guiding those OF Wisconsin. Oregon. IIlinol..
New Hampshire. Nevada and Others. The
Court says.
The Rnt,tvx, 10 an. -,,Aa.. h..,.s 49, -.
ensas u such medicines were carelea.ly or Isno-
rAnuy Compounded 20 contain deleteriotss
Ingredients, OF decspssveiy IS IA be something
Inherent from what they purported ~ hs. II
manifest The police power logically esasna.
W such medicines M less Than 20 pOi~ons ana
other letnal medicinal agents
The court h finally called upon 70 disooae |
Of the objection of unjust discrimination |
In that under the Law the sale Of certain |
well known poisonous domestic remedies |
IL permitted by merchants or traders in I
villages or villages OF the 1
fourth class. provided their places OF bust
nea= 30 three miles away from the nearest 4
drug store. In answering this serious OBJ I
lection Judge Bartlett relies on a der-ision
Of the supreme Court Of Minnesota. where .
the court dealing with . similar situate
aAtd:
Doubtless the use " Impure nnedIr.nea or dan \
Ferrous drugs h just a. Injurious 20 those who I
buy them one mile fr0u . drug store a. 70 thour
who buy them within That distance: and. ~ this
sas the oaly thing TO be taken into the account.
he Discrimination would be purely arbitrary
But the Legislature Tad 20 deal with this az a :,
practical question. and had q right 20 take into
n nssderatiOn the convenience OF the public In
,parseiy settled districts frequently there is no
or drug store near al hand. In case Of
1chness u Il often absolutely neccssary To OBTAIN
medicinal remedies promptly In order 10 save Hfe \
Tae question WAS how far uaa Il uFaetiranle "A