In a Missouri case, a question was raised as to the validity of a legislative act which conferred upon a board of health the power to judge applicants to practice medicine, as to their moral character as well as to their literary and scientific attainments. It was contended that such a power was of a quasi-judicial nature, and that the exercise thereof by a board of health was repugnant to the constitution. The opinion of

Mr. Justice Gantt in this case presents a learned discussion of the question and sustains the validity of the act.1 Since boards of health, medical boards, and boards of pharmacy perform duties somewhat similar in this respect, the principle is of very general application with regard to this class of statutes.

It will be apparent from the decisions cited in this chapter, that the general question, as to whether the laws regulating the practice of pharmacy in the different States of the Union are constitutional, has been answered by the courts in the affirmative. The statutes of the several States, on this subject, have been intended to accomplish the same purpose in each, and they agree in their main features; therefore, except in a few isolated cases where some special feature of the law, peculiar to some particular State, has been the point under examination, the decisions of the tribunals of the different States, with re

1 State v. Hathaway, 115 Mo. 36, 21 S. W. 1081.

gard to the constitutional status of these laws, are available as authority throughout all.

It may be received as settled, that the legislatures of the different States have authority to enact laws, of uniform operation, regulating the practice of pharmacy within their several jurisdictions. In pursuance of this authority, the State may declare that no person shall engage in the practice of this particular calling, without being first duly licensed thereto, and may fix the terms upon which such license may be obtained. To this end it may designate what degree of skill and learning shall be required of the licentiate, and may create or provide for the creation of a board of pharmacy, among whose duties shall be that of examining applicants for admission to the profession. It may likewise authorize such board to collect a fee from each applicant, which fee "is merely an equivalent for the service rendered by the commission in making the examination and issuing the license, and cannot be considered as a tax upon the business, or as depriving the applicant of his property without due process of law."

We find that the terms "drugs, medicines, and poisons," as used in statutes regulating the prac tice of pharmacy, have been held to mean “articles whose primary and principal use is medicinal, or which are commonly understood as medicines;" or, if the meaning is to be extended to

other articles, "it must be limited to cases where they are prepared and sold for medicinal purposes."

"Practice of Pharmacy," in the title of one of these statutes, is held to include not simply the compounding and dispensing of medicines, but to embrace, also, "the commercial aspect of the business in the sale of the 'drugs, medicines, and poisons' referred to in the body of the statute." In fact, they express the entire usual field of operations included in the business of the modern druggist.

In regard to a physician's status relative to the practice of pharmacy, it has been decided that he "has no more right than any other person to step into a drug store, and to compound or sell drugs, medicines, or poisons to one not his patient."

The courts have upheld the authority of the legislature to make exceptions to the general rules embraced in these statutes, so long as such exceptions have not been arbitrary in their nature, but have operated upon uniform principles, consistent with the purposes of the general statutes.

It will be apparent from the decisions referred to in this chapter, that the courts will uniformly sustain "the constitutional authority of the legislature, in the exercise of the police power of the State to enact such regulations as are reasonably necessary for the security and protection of

the lives and health of all persons within the State." Nevertheless, each new provision in this class of laws will probably be contested by those who are unfriendly to such restrictive regulations; and occasionally the judicial pruning knife will be applied to cut away some development that shall be deemed repugnant to the constitution.

CHAPTER VII.

LICENSE UNDER STATUTE.

The prevailing statutes regulating the practice of pharmacy provide for the issuing of two grades of licenses, corresponding to pharmacist and assistant pharmacist.

He

The license issued to a pharmacist confers upon the licentiate the legal right to practice this profession in the broadest and fullest sense. is thereby privileged to conduct a pharmacy, either as proprietor or as manager for another; to sell drugs, medicines or poisons, and compound and dispense the prescriptions of physicians.

The license issued to an assistant pharmacist confers only limited privileges. His position is simply that of an assistant, and, while acting in that capacity, he may manufacture, compound, sell, or dispense any drug, poison, medicine or chemical for medicinal use, or dispense or compound the prescriptions of medical practitioners, but he is not permitted to assume the management or take permanent charge of any store, office or any place where these things are done. The extreme limit allowed to him, in this respect, is that he may be left in charge of such a place during the temporary absence of the pharmacist.

As explained in another part of this work, the power to issue license under these statutes is lodged in a board or commission of pharmacy.