_The Food and Drugs Act, June 30, 1906_, continues to be the leading topic for discussion in pharmaceutical journals and in pharmaceutical circles generally. In many of the larger cities special meetings have been held at which the probable effect of the law, directly as well as indirectly, on the several branches of pharmacy have been discussed at length. Wholesale druggists and manufacturing pharmacists appear to be heartily in favor of the underlying principles and of the general provisions of the Federal pure food and drug law, despite the fact that it has imposed an enormous amount of additional work and expense for which they can scarcely expect to be adequately recompensed. The proposition to endorse the Federal law, by corresponding laws in the several States, has aroused considerable opposition on the part of retail pharmacists, who appear to be either indifferent or else fearful lest the additional obligations that would be imposed on them might be too exacting or else involve an undue amount of work or expense to comply with. In this connection we should remember that pharmacists, as such, have taken little or no part in securing the enactment of the Federal pure food and drug law, and that, as a consequence, they have thus sacrificed no little of their professional independence and prestige. This apathy on the part of pharmacists is even now being taken advantage of by members of boards of health, Food and Dairy Commissioners and well-meaning but frequently misinformed reformers who are actively at work to secure food and drug legislation along the lines of the National law. In by far the greater number of State legislatures, now in session, bills for laws of this kind have been introduced, and whether enacted into laws or not, will tend to show the wants or desires of retail pharmacists, and, if opposed or ignored, will seriously reflect on the ability and professional disinterestedness of pharmacists themselves. Retail pharmacists should, and if they desire to maintain their standing in the community they must, favor pure food and drug legislation that is designed to protect the public. By themselves taking an active interest in the securing of legislation along these lines they could readily prevent the enactment of ill-advised measures that would tend to hamper or restrict them in the pursuance of their business. That the medical profession in all sections of the country is clearly in favor of pure food and drug legislation was plainly evidenced at the Conference of the Committee on Medical Legislation, of the American Medical Association, with the National Legislative Council, held at Washington, D.C., December 13th to 15th inclusive. State legislation was discussed at some length and the representatives of the several State Medical Associations who were present expressed themselves in no uncertain way as being in favor of the individual States endorsing the Federal Food and Drugs Act.