als; bulky and valueless transactions, occasionally containing papers which had been previously printed; violent partisanship; the effort to pass resolutions pledging the Association to one side or another of a mooted question; and the democratic principle of its organization by which representation was denied to hospitals and colleges.

The following propositions were made with a view to changes which were much needed:

The sections should perform their critical duty by preventing the transactions from being burdened with papers of small value, and thus not permit writers to fail of the highest standard of scientific attainment. Though the sections have in many directions proved themselves of great value, still he did not believe that the desirable result would ever be obtained by trusting to them alone. To obviate the difficulty, the wise regulations of the Smithsonian Institution were recommended; viz.,

1. The publication of only such papers as, after approval by the sections, shall have been submitted to experts whose names are unknown, and whose decision shall be final.

2. The rule that no paper should be published unless it either (a) contributed something new, or (b) made a valuable analysis or arrangement of facts already known.

The incalculable value of the establishment of the judicial council, in 1873, was pointed out; and the following proposition submitted to them:

The appointment of a standing committee for the purpose of procuring scientific papers for each annual meeting, from the ablest men in the various sections of the country, such papers to have precedence over voluntary papers, which latter were not for that reason to be discouraged. It was suggested that a small committee, of five, for example, could be constituted in such a manner that each member might hold office for five years, one leaving annually. Originally created by the judicial council, this committee might afterward itself fill vacancies, the oldest in service acting as chairman in the last year of his office; one or more of the older members of the profession might be there represented, the majority being

made up of earnest, accomplished, middle-aged, or younger men. The committee should hold its sessions, each year, during the week of annual meeting, and should, if possible, select the best men at one meeting, and engage them to prepare papers for the next ensuing. All these papers should be referred to experts after reading, and wide public notice should be given, months before the meetings, of their titles and the names of their authors.

The speaker thought that in two points the Association would do well to follow the lead taken at Louisville, in 1875, (1) in abstaining from all intoxicating drinks, and (2) in extending an invitation to women to meet with members in social intercourse. Even those not believing in the propriety of total abstinence or prohibition, should be willing to make concessions for the sake of the weaker brethren; and such a step taken by the Association would have an indirect but powerful effect on the cause of temperance.

Two other suggestions: (1) Every honorable, well-educated physician in the United States, should become a member of the Association by the very fact of his having become a physician. Every member of a State society should become a permanent member of the Association. (2) The honor of becoming a delegate would be greater, if each society could send one representative only for each 20, or perhaps 30, members; and possibly the best men of the profession would be willing then to accept the honor.

The following reasons were given against the proposed union with the Canada Medical Association: 1, the large dimensions of the American Association; 2, the two languages employed in Canada; 3, the difficulty of arranging for expenses incidental to such union; 4, the distance between places where meetings might be held.

On the other hand, in favor of the plan were: 1, the high standard of the British schools; 2, the evident fact that the large Canadian constituency might send delegates precisely as a new State Medical Society in a distant State; 3, the value of such a union in the way of promoting good-will between the two countries; 4, the opening up of such cities as Mon

treal and Quebec as places of meeting. He suggested that the whole matter be referred to the judicial council, to report upon the feasibility of union, or of biennal or quinquennial congresses of the two bodies; with the nomination of a committee to act with one chosen by the Canadian Association, the joint committee to draft a plan for submission subsequently to the two bodies.

Proceeding next to the question of the American Pharmacopoeia and the relations of the Association to it, the speaker detailed the resolutions proposed, the previous year, by Dr. E. R. Squibb, of Brooklyn, N. Y., and carried by the Association. He then proceeded to sketch the history of the Massachusetts, New York, and Philadelphia Pharmacopoeias, and the method by which the last-named which has survived the others, is still published by the Decennial Convention of delegates from incorporated colleges of medicine and pharmacy. The American Medical Association had never taken any action upon the work of the two conventions held since its organization, first, because it was not invited to do so; and, second, because, never having been incorporated, it had no right to do so.

Under the circumstances, therefore, the Association might either, (1), procure an act of incorporation before 1879; (2), send delegates to the convention of 1880, and ask for their admission, or, (3), adopt the plan of Dr. Squibb, and appoint a pharmaceutical council, with the co-operation of the army and naval medical men, and the American Pharmaceutical Association.

The complaints against the present pharmacopoeia are: first, that it is not sufficiently cosmopolitan; second, that it is too unfrequently published, a demand being made for an annual tentative selection of formulæ, in accordance with the plan followed by the publishers of the German Codex; third, that the pharmacopoeia is not really national in authority and scope; finally, that the dispensatory of 1870, fails to meet the edition of the pharmacopoeia of that year.

The plan suggested by the Chicago College of Pharmacy involved the selection of two committees one of physicians,

the other of druggists, to divide between them the labor of devising and directing the preparation of formulæ, and of publishing the results-the chief objection stated was the implied limitation of the druggist to the remedies proposed by the physician.

The objections and suggestions stated above could not be applied to the Dispensatory, which was a private work, valuable in character, and remunerative to its copyright holders.

The protests of the Philadelphia County Medical Society, the Philadelphia College of Physicians, and the Philadelphia College of Pharmacy, were laid before the Association-all against any action by the latter in the premises.

In conclusion of this subject, the speaker urged the appointment of a committee to the convention of 1880, with instructions to report upon the result of their inquiries into the matters connected with the pharmacopoeia. The presumption to be formed from the not rapid sale of the previous publications of the American Medical Association, did not promise much success in an undertaking of the kind proposed.

The speaker then briefly referred to three important subjects: first, the committees on State Boards of Health, who were doing a good work; second, the influence to be exerted upon members of Congress, relative to the museum and library of the Surgeon General's office, U. S. Army, its need of national support, its great value and usefulness; third, the interest from funds collected to keep alive the memory of the first ovariotomist, Caldwell, and its disposal in premiums, not merely to writers upon the uterus and its appendages, but to those "who have confessedly promoted the welfare of mankind by original conceptions, essays or contributions to medical science." This was considered liberal, but the speaker thought the subject of gynecology in its broadest sense, sufficient to satisfy the desires of all.

The President concluded by saying that the future of the Association depended mainly on the way in which the physicians of this country, and especially the young physicians, did their duty toward it. If the best men in the profession would not come to its meetings and work for the common good of

sneered at it, it would acBut it should certainly love

all; if they stood aloof and complained of the inferiority of its work, or actually scoffed or complish less than it could wish. to invite to its meetings every prominent physician in the .country, and if those who did attend the meetings would determine that nothing but what was excellent should be published in its works, then they would be doing a really noble work, and the Association would eventually claim the highest respect of the whole profession. [Applause.] It was growing stronger every year. It had enjoyed a perpetual youth, a stalwart manhood, and, he sincerely trusted, it would live to a genial old age. [Applause.]

On motion made by Dr. Brodie, of Detroit, the thanks of the Association were returned to its President for his interesting address. The address was referred to the Committee on Publication.

Dr. Brodie further moved that a committee of seven be appointed to report upon the recommendations embraced in the President's address.

The first Vice-President, Dr. N. J. Pittman, of North Carolina, announced the committee, as follows: Dr. W. B. Brodie, of Detroit; Dr. S. D. Gross, of Philadelphia; Dr. E. Grissom, of North Carolina; Dr. J. R. Smith, of U. S. A.; Dr. J. R. Bartlett, of Minnesota; Dr. J. P. White, of Buffalo; Dr. J. M. Toner, of Washington,

A number of papers were then read by title and referred to their appropriate sections; after which the Association adjourned to meet at 9:30 A. M. on Wednesday, June 6, 1877.

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 6.-SECOND DAY.

The Association was called to order at 9:30 A. m. by the President. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and approved. A recess of ten minutes was taken to allow the delegates opportunity to select their representatives for the Nominating Committee, and report such selections to the Secretary.