was in earnest and very, very courteous, but the first thing he did was to tell us that the Victor motor was the simplest of all. He might have let it go at that, but he insisted on going into details. We listened patiently to a veritable cascade of information about cranks, gears, pistons, and what not (not very good "simplicity" talk to a man who is not a mechanic), and then endeavored to turn him to other matters. Does John McCormack sing for the Victor? Oh, yes; he sings for the Victor exclusively, but as I was sayingand back he went to the crank and the driving rod. What other artists are singing for the Victor? All the leading artists of the day. And the Victor motor wears better than any other motor in the world. The extreme simplicity of the action of the downward drive. We gave it up.

Of course it is necessary to talk; a dumb man can't sell goods. But there's a limit of volubility beyond which it isn't best to go. Usually the policy of the store or the condition of stock makes it desirable to push certain goods or certain classes of goods, and such factors should be borne constantly in mind. As Toilet Requisites advises, "Don't tell the customer everything there is in the store. Go over and grab the package you make the most money on—and sell it to him!”

A New Coin Suggested.

This is a bad time to inaugurate reforms, but it has been suggested that as a nation we ought to have a new coin the value of which should be 21⁄2 cents. It is contended that we need this in our struggle to adjust prices.

It has long been the custom in drug stores where price cutting is not indulged in to ignore the penny and base prices on the decimal or half decimal. Very often, however, it is felt that an advance of 5 cents is not quite justified, and very often, again, an advance is not made at all on this account, the druggist, possibly, pocketing a loss.

The new coin might be used to advantage in this connection. Prices could be advanced 21⁄2 cents much more readily than they could be advanced twice that amount. And particularly, it is pointed out, would this coin relieve a number of situations that are bound to develop when Congress has finally passed its tax measure. A 10-cent article might be advanced to 121⁄2 cents, a 15-cent article to 171⁄2 cents, and so on up the line.

But, of course, this is all beside the question, so far as actual use at the present time is concerned. We haven't such a coin now, and we are not going to get it right away. But

it might be well to bear the thought in mind. At some later date sentiment may have become so crystallized that a half-nickel key will appear on the cash register.

The Druggist as a Bond Broker.

A company has been organized in New York for the purpose of selling "little bonds" through retail stores. "In denominations as low as $10," the advance notice says, "these thrift bonds will be put on sale in department stores, cigar shops, drug stores, banks, and express offices-wherever people go to spend or deposit money. 'Safety and 3 per cent' is the company's motto." Certificates are to be issued, backed by tax-secured bonds. The company is to undertake an energetic, nation-wide campaign of education, aiming to reach the

small investor.

Are we soon to hear complaints from bankers that the drug stores are getting their business away from them?

The Gift Shop.

An idea that is rapidly gaining in favor is what is known as a "gift department," or a "gift shop." We are told that the ideal way is to have a booth, prominently placed and appropriately decorated, and that at least once a month window space should be devoted to the display of certain goods comprising the "shop" stock. Show-cards are used, bearing such phraseology as "Gifts that 50 cents Will Buy," "Gifts for the Folks Back Home," and "Gifts for Travelers." A druggist with whom we talked claimed that there are more than 2000 novelties from which a stock may be selected.

As ordinary mortals go, it may be truly said that no man does his best until he has to; and this may be applied with a certain degree of force, perhaps, to the industries. Before the war we were dependent on Germany for porcelain ware for chemical work; until recently Prussian porcelain has never been equaled; "Royal Berlin" has been the standard. But when our supply was cut off American pottery manufacturers saw the opportunity and exerted themselves to the utmost. The result is that we can now manufacture porcelains equal to any ever produced.

A patent has been defined as a contract by which the government secures to the patentee the exclusive right to vend and use his invention for a few years, in consideration of the fact that he has perfected and described it and has granted its use to the public forever after.

In harmony with constitutional provision we now have a patent law which gives ample protection and therefore incentive to American research workers in the field of chemistry, medicine, and pharmacy. And what sciences deserve more encouragement than these, affecting as they do the health and lives of our people?

It therefore seems remarkable to the lawyer, and even to the intelligent layman, that a movement is actually on foot to deprive those who, above all others, should have the effectual protection of our patent laws, and to single them out as unworthy of the reward granted to inventors in other fields of discovery. That such a bill as the Paige Bill has been introduced and seriously considered seems unexplainable.

WHAT MR. PAIGE PROPOSES.

The Paige Bill provides that no patent shall be granted "upon any drug, medicine, medicinal chemical, coal-tar dyes, or colors or dyes obtained from alizarin, anthracene, carbazol, and indigo, except in so far as the same relates to a definite process for the preparation of said drug, etc." In other words, Mr. Paige proposes to grant a "process" but not a "product" patent.

To those who have some knowledge of medical and pharmaceutical history the matter is not so astonishing, and two explanations appear:

1. Medico-pharmacal prejudice founded on tradition.

2. The exploitation of the American public by German chemical concerns.

Treating of these in the order given, we are brought to remember that until very recent times the physician could not recover for his

*Extracted from a paper read before the Indianapolis Branch of the A. Ph. A.

services upon an implied contract. He was supposed to be practicing from a higher motive than the despised tradesman. Doctors who did not have independent sources of income depended upon honorariums from patients who were grateful enough and able enough to give them. If it was a goose from a peasant or a crown from a gentleman, it was all the same. all the same. This custom worked out poorly for both the public and the profession, and so, like a great many rules of the early common law, it was changed when a courageous judge, defying precedent, declared that the laborer was worthy of his hire-in other words, that a professional man, in the absence of an express agreement, was entitled to recover what his services were proved to be reasonably worth.

For the same reason that a doctor could not recover for his services on a quantum meruit, he did not seek compensation of any kind for any discovery he might chance to make. This, however, was merely a matter of ethics and never a rule of law. What was a rule of ethics with respect to the relation between a physician and his patient was formerly also a rule of law, it is true; but the law changed beethical physician sending out his bills periodcause it was not just, and we now find the most ically, entirely satisfied with the new order of things.

He is not so quick, however, in abandoning the companion rule of ethics respecting medical and pharmaceutical discoveries. On the contrary, he would enforce his ethical tenets upon his fellows by a severe rule of positive law.

In this the physician is the successor of the religious zealot who sought to make the world believe as he believed, by the power of the State, the result being that it took centuries of

religious wars for control of the State to demonstrate that both the State and religion would best prosper by absolute separation.

When we look at the matter from the broader view-point of political economy and weigh it in the scales of jurisprudence-which is the formal science of positive law-the eth