Just who put forth the dictum that it is unlawful, unprofessional, unethical, for a physician to advertise is unknown. It was probably some old codger of antiquarian ideas. At any rate the rule—and it is a rule—is so old it reeks with decay. But, among progressive physicians, it is fast coming to be recognized as a rule which is “more honored in the breach than in the observance.” Other professional men who were once held in bonds of the same nature are breaking away. We find in the public press the cards of attorneys, architects and civil engineers, all callings which are legitimately dignified with the name of “professions.” No exception is taken to these men making their talents known, although at one time—and it is only a few years ago—they were held in ethical bonds just as strong and binding as those with which the medical practitioner is now enchained. But time changes all things. It has changed to a degree the code of ethics which formerly obtained in the 62professions of law, architecture, and civil engineering, and it is slowly, but surely, changing that of medicine. True the wording of the various codes remain the same, but there is a growing tendency to wink at, to overlook evasions. It has become a matter of convenience to the public to know where to find a competent lawyer, or architect, or civil engineer. Hence the appearance of their business cards in newspapers. On the same grounds publicity by physicians is justifiable. It is more than justifiable. Mankind can, in a pinch, get along without attorneys or architects or engineers. That is to say it is rarely imperative their services should be requisitioned in a hurry. The trial of a law case, the plans for a building, or the construction of a bridge can generally be put off for a few days at least without serious injury or inconvenience to any body. When a doctor is needed he is generally needed badly. It may not always be an emergency case, but almost invariably when the services of a physician are required, even in chronic ailments, delay only aggravates the patient’s condition. If a medical man has, by special study, equipped himself to handle a certain class of diseases more intelligently and satisfactorily than the general practitioner it becomes his duty to let the public know about it. If we accept the dictum of the censors of medical propriety as they present it—that the obligation taken by the physician binds him to serve the public to the best of his ability—then surely we can not get away from the proposition that men of unusual ability are in duty bound to make the public 63acquainted with that ability. The successful physician does not live up to his obligation if he “hides his light under a bushel.”