members who are not strong enuf to get up and declare their dissatisfaction openly, but they show their displeasure by staying away. And many of the old-timers did stay away.

RUMORS OF A NEW NATIONAL ORGANIZATION.

There was another topic of conversation which caused us great surprise. Had we heard it from one or two or a dozen members, we would have paid no attention to it and would make no mention of it here. But this topic was on the lips of hundreds, and among these hundreds there were several members of the House of Delegates. This topic of conversation concerned no less a subject than the formation of a new national organization! In some localities in the United States the atmosphere seems to be decidedly heavy and threatening. Whether this is merely idle talk, or whether this idle talk will crystallize into some definite and effective action, remains to be seen. And whether such an organization would be of benefit or not to the medical profession of the United States at large remains also to be seen. As a general principle it is a good thing to have at least two organizations in the same field. Each organization tries to emulate the other, to vie with it in the work accomplished, to surpass it in the results obtained. And it prevents the machines of the organizations from becoming too arrogant, too irresponsible in their actions. Every one will admit that we here in the United States would be infinitely worse off, if we possessed but one partyeither democratic or republican. It is true that the party which is in power does very little for the people-but it would do still less if it had no rival in the field, if it did not fear that the opposition party would take advantage of its shortcomings and would oust it from power if it did not do something, however little that something may be.

But whether a new organization is formed, or whether the plan to form one remains an unrealized thought in the brains of the dissatisfied and the disgruntled ones, those now in power would do well, it seems to us, to heed the rumbling of the gathering storm and not to ride too rough-shod over the minority. The minority, we have always claimed, has rights which the majority is morally bound to respect. When the majority wantonly and arrogantly disregards the wishes of the minority, it only shows that the majority is still in that savage state, which considers that might is right. However, we will see what we will see, and qui vivra verra.

HALLBERG OUSTED AT LAST.

The Section on Pharmacology and Therapeutics has done one good thing during this session: it has freed itself from the incubus of the secretaryship of Mr. Hallberg. While it was considered necessary to give the old man a sop, in making him the

delegate of the section for this year, it is well known to every member of the section that this is the last of Hallberg as far as the Section on Pharmacology and Therapeutics, and consequently, as far as the American Medical Association is concerned. And if you hear something about Mr. Hallberg having refused to serve further as secretary, you will know that this is the purest variety of poppycock. Mr. Hallberg was given distinctly to understand, that under no condition must he ask for a renomination, or he would be snowed under. The CRITIC AND GUIDE'S editorial as to the quality of the M. D. degree which Mr. Hallberg had attached to his name, had the proper effect in the proper circles. And long before the meeting we had been assured and promised that this would be the last of Mr. Hallberg. Well, thanks for that much.

SMALL ATTENDANCE.

The registration reached the figure of only 3241—about half of what it was last year in Chicago. The powers that be blamed the weather-but physicians living in various parts of the United States did not know that the weather would be bad in Atlantic City by the time they arrived there. Another explanation is needed.

The president's reception was a very tame affair. It was particularly flat in comparison with the president's reception in Boston. St. Louis will have to work very hard next year to come up to Boston in any way.

THE EXHIBITS.

The scientific Exhibit was good, tho not as well patronized as in former years. The tuberculosis exhibit was very fine-but as the general public was not admitted to it, what was its object? The physicians and their wives certainly don't need it.

The Commercial Exhibit was not very attractive. Since the adoption of the numerous rules, good and bad, for the admission of products, this exhibit has been losing in interest from year to year. The most popular, i. e. the most largely visited exhibits were those of Mulford's, Fairchild Bros., Horlick's, Schieffelin, the Malt-Diastase Co., the Arlington, and the Palisade Mfg. Co. The portfolio of portraits of master-minds of the 19th century (Darwin, Lincoln, Poe, Holmes, MendelsohnBartholdi and Gladstone, all born in 1809, just a century ago) distributed by the Arlington Chemical Company was highly appreciated and eagerly sought for. We must say that these portraits of the master-minds are masterpieces of art, and the idea to prepare them as souvenirs for the visiting members of the American Medical Association was a master-stroke of a mastermind in the art of advertising. The brass pin, with the initials. A. M. A. in iron, of the Palisade Mfg. Co. was also much appreciated and very much in evidence on the coats of the ladies and

gentlemen. The Antitoxin syringes given away by Mulford were in great demand and we fear that some physicians got more than one syringe.

Electric apparatus were displayed in profusion, and so were surgical instruments.

The National Formulary Criticized.

The remarks of Dr. Jacobi, who by the way was very active, attending more sections and discussing more papers than many of us younger men, at the Section of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, in the discussion on the National Formulary, were very much à propos. Here for the last fifteen or twenty years he has been prescribing and advising the medical profession to prescribe the N. F. preparations, only to be told now and by a pharmacist that the National Formulary was not an authoritative book, that it contained many worthless preparations, that many of its formulas contained incompatibilities, etc., etc. He felt dismayed,— disgusted, I believe, was the term he used-at such a state of affairs.

And well he might. The National Formulary will need a good deal of overhauling, a good deal of elimination and emendation, a whole lot of correction and improvement, before it will be a safe guide for the physician to follow, a reliable repository to take formulas from. It was gotten out in too much of a hurry, and the desire to have it present substitute-formulas for well-known proprietaries was kept too prominently in view, in this edition.

Make the National Formulary scientific and reliable, make it stand on its own merits, take away from it the stigma of being a collection of substitute-formulas, and the book will have no stronger champion than the Editor of the CRITIC AND GUIDE.

Radam's Microbe Killer Seized by the Government.

In the April issue of the CRITIC AND GUIDE we had an editorial on that arrant fake, Radam's Microbe Killer. We called there attention to the fact, that the statements on the label that the nostrum was a cure for all human ills were in direct violation of the Pure Food and Drug Law. Evidently the U. S. Government thought so too, for from a telegram from Washington dated June 5th, we learn that several cases of that nostrum were seized by the Government and the proprietors will have to stand trial for violation of the law.

The Official and the Private Journal.

Yes, I do demand much more from an official than from a private journal. Official and private journals may be compared to relatives and friends. Our relatives we must take as they are,

whether we want to or not. In our friends we can exercise a free choice. If we don't like them, we drop them. If a private journal displeases us, is not up to our ideal, we discontinue the subscription. But the State journal we get by the very fact of our membership. Hence we must make greater demands on the official journal. And the broadest, ablest and best literary man in the profession is not too good for the important office of Editor.

Dr. Jervey was forced or forced himself to resign the editorship of the South Carolina Medical Journal. Good. We are assured that his successor, Dr. McLeod, is a man of much broader caliber. Next in order-for resignation-is our good, well-meaning (perhaps) friend, Philip Mills Jones. There is a very decided field for state journals, but they should not be edited by vituperative, narrow characters or picayune minds.

A Stomach is a Stomach.

To those estimable gentlemen who would condemn a drug, a ferment or a combination of ferments because they do not give satisfactory results in the test-tube, we would suggest the following words of William Hunter, "Gentlemen," said he, "Physiologists will have it that the stomach is a mill-others, that it is a fermenting vat-others again that it is a stew-pan, but in my view of the matter, it is neither a mill, nor a fermenting-vat, nor a stew-pan-but a STOMACH, gentlemen, a STOMACH."

An Infallible Remedy against Pessimism.

Whenever you feel pessimistic about the present-study the past. This is an absolutely infallible remedy, and is applicable to every department of human activity, to every branch of science, to every line of human endeavor. Is medicine still in a rather unsatisfactory condition? See what medicine was a hundred or two hundred years ago. Are our hospitals and dispensaries not fully up to the ideal? See what they were fifty or even only twenty-five years ago. Is there still some cruelty and brutality in our insane asylums? Read how lunatics were treated in the first half of the 19th century. Your hair will stand on end and your blood will congeal-almost. Are our jails still conducted in a brutal, miserable manner? Yes, but not half as miserably as they were a half century ago. Things are still bad, some of them pretty bad, but wonderful progress has been made and there are still greater hopes for the future. Hence is the Editor of the CRITIC AND GUIDE an optimist.

Honesty Alone Not Sufficient.

Sometimes when in the course of discussion we criticize a certain person we are met with the remark that he is "thoroly honest," or "perfectly sincere." Cheerfully granted. But un

fortunately, very unfortunately, honesty or sincerity alone, is not sufficient; not sufficient in any man, and decidedly not sufficient. in anybody who aspires to be a leader. We must have honesty and sincerity plus information. A honest and sincere but misinformed or non-informed man can do an awful lot of damage to the very best cause. History is full to overflowing of such examples. Ignorance is deplorable in everybody. In a leader it is a crime. Mere willingness to do right is not enuf. It is the duty of the would-be leader to set about getting all possible information, and from all possible sides, on any subject which is of importance to his constituency, or the public at large. If he fails to do so, he is an unsafe leader, and his activity may become very pernicious, no matter how honest and how sincere he may be, and no matter how great he may be in his purely scientific attainment.

Will some of our medical leaders kindly read the above with due attention?

The Laboratory versus the Bedside a Hundred Years Ago.

It is hard to explain why it is so, but it is a fact that a certain charm is present in old and ancient books which is as a rule absent in modern ones. Perhaps it is due to the fact that centuries ago only those people wrote who were capable of writing and who had something to say that was worth while saying. Now everybody who is capable of spelling thinks it his duty to humanity to write a book-or at least a pamphlet. Be this as it may, we personally take much more pleasure in old than in modern books. And looking thru recently Paris' Pharmacologia (Third American, from the Sixth London edition, 1825), we came across several passages, which are very much à propos our present-day controversies. It will be seen that the problem of chemical analysis versus clinical experience was a sore one at that time, and I believe that our Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry would do well to read the following paragraphs carefully. They are very much to the point to-day even tho Dr. Paris said and wrote chymist instead of chemist. Here are some

passages:

And I shall protest against the prevailing fashion of examining and deciding upon the pretentions of every medical compound to our confidence by a mere chymical investigation of its composition, and of respecting, as fallacious, every medical testimony which may appear contradictory to the results of the Laboratory. There is no subject in science to which the maxim of Cicero more strictly applies, than to the present case: let the Ultra Chymist therefore cherish it in his remembrance, and profit by its application-Praestat Naturae voce doceri, quam ingenio suo sapere. (Page 55.)

Whenever a medicine is found by experience to be effectual,