Students of pharmacy may have observed that 'Dispensing' figures in smallest bulk in the examination schedules of the Pharmaceutical Societies. In that for Great Britain we read that candidates for the Minor certificate are required 'to weigh, measure, and compound medicines; write the directions in concise language in a neat and distinct hand; to finish and direct the package.'

The syllabus of the Irish Society is even more laconic, 'to compound and dispense medicines' being all the information vouchsafed to the candidate. This paucity is neither wholly accidental nor wholly intentional, yet when contrasted with the detailed information given in other subjects one is led to inquire why dispensing, the be-all and end-all of the pharmacist as a practitioner, should be treated so barely. The explanation is that every other part of the examination syllabus is applicable and leads up to the subject of dispensing, because this is the art upon which are focussed the pharmacist's knowledge of science, especially of chemistry and materia medica, his intimacy with the Latin language, and his dexterity as a pharmaceutical manipulator. A fair routine dispenser may get along without such accomplishments, but it is the man who knows the chemical relation of substances to each other who is best able to deal with unusual prescriptions and to dispense the medicine in the form most elegant from the pharmaceutical standpoint and most certain of exerting its full therapeutic action in the time required.

These are facts which students of pharmacy should bear well in mind when they are pursuing their scientific studies; and if they endeavour to piece together what they read or hear in lectures on chemical matters, and what they have done at the dispensing-counter, they will find their understanding of the different subjects become much clearer.

It will be observed that the Irish syllabus requires candidates for the diploma to compound and dispense. Two distinct actions are implied. In Ireland the men who work at the dispensing - counter are called 'compounders'; in Great Britain we talk of them as 'dispensers.' The Irish expression is nearer the truth. The dictionaries describe a compounder as 'one who compounds drugs according to a prescription.' The narrow definition of 'dispenser' is the same, but the general meaning is 'one who dispenses, distributes, or deals out,' and in the specific sense the pharmaceutical dispenser is one who compounds drugs according to a prescription and deals the compound out to a customer. The Minor syllabus, in fact, gives the true definition of the art of dispensing, for it is to weigh, measure, and compound medicines according to prescription, write the directions, and finish and direct the package of compounded medicine. It is sometimes called' extemporaneous pharmacy,' an expression which at least serves to show that the dispenser who receives a prescription to dispense must bring to bear upon it without hesitation the scientific knowledge and manipulative skill which he has acquired through learning and practice.

The prescription is the order of the medical attendant of the patient to the dispenser for the supply of a remedy. In this country the medicinal ingredients are usually written in Latin, prefaced by the sign which may originally have implied an invocation to Jupiter, but is now regarded as a contraction for Recipe- 'take thou.' The quantities are expressed by the old apothecaries' signs for ounce, drachm, scruple, grain, and minim ; the directions as to compounding, in abbreviated Latin, and instructions as to administration, most frequently in English after the abbreviation Sig., complete the prescription. This book does not profess to deal with the construction or rendering of prescriptions, and throughout its pages the initial sign and the final directions after Sig. are omitted, although the latter may occasionally be given if the directions in any way elucidate points which the prescriber's style may leave doubtful.

Property In Prescriptions

Certain considerations in respect to prescriptions may here be discussed. The property in the prescription is occasionally doubtful, some saying that as it is the order of the physician to the dispenser, the property in it does not pass to the patient. This is erroneous, because a prescription is rarely what the law of contract considers to be an order for the supply of goods. If the physician, say Dr. Brown, gives his patient, Mr. Smith, a prescription to take to Mr. Jones, a chemist, who supplies Mr. Smith with the medicine, and gets payment for it from Dr. Brown, the prescription is an order,1 and Mr. Jones may legally keep possession of it until Dr. Brown pays. The prescription then ceases to be requisite as proof of Dr. Brown's obligation to pay, and might be treated as most orders are under such circumstances- that is, destroyed- were it not that it may have intrinsic value as a prescription. As such Dr. Brown might reasonably demand its return; therefore it is always advantageous, when such arrangements as that between Dr. Brown and Mr. Jones are entered into, that an understanding should be come to regarding this matter.

'This is the legal position of National Insurance Act prescriptions, which panel chemists retain, and present to the Insurance Committee as proof for payment.

Such arrangements, though common, form the smaller proportion of prescription-giving, it being more general for the patient to consult the physician, who gives advice or a prescription in return for his fee, so that the prescription becomes the patient's property, to have and to use within reasonable limits. It would be unreasonable for a patient to get a prescription from Sir Lauder Brunton for, say, a digestive derangement, and offer the medicine to all and sundry as Sir Lauder Brunton's Indigestion-cure. The prescriber in this case would have just cause for legally restraining the patient, or even for securing monetary reparation, because the implied agreement between the prescriber and the patient was solely in respect to the treatment of the latter.

When the prescription is taken to the dispenser it is in some cases retained, especially when the prescriber directs the patient to go to a particular chemist. If the prescription is one which any chemist could dispense, its retention would be considered illegal, unless the patient were informed before he received the prescription that it was to be retained by the chemist. But this only seems to emphasise the rule that the prescription is the patient's property, for he may have it dispensed by a chemist who will willingly return it to him; although the patient thus risks losing the prescriber's services.