Read Ebook: The Great American Fraud The Patent Medicine Evil by Adams Samuel Hopkins

Font size: 10 px 15 px 20 px 25 px 30 px 35 px

Background color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Text color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Apply/Save settings

Ebook has 115 lines and 13220 words, and 3 pages

Our national quality of commercial shrewdness fails us when we go into the open market to purchase relief from suffering. The average American, when he sets out to buy a horse, or a house, or a box of cigars, is a model of caution. Show him testimonials from any number of prominent citizens and he would simply scoff. He will, perhaps, take the word of his life-long friend, or of the pastor of his church, but only after mature thought, fortified by personal investigation. Now observe the same citizen seeking to buy the most precious of all possessions, sound health. Anybody's word is good enough for him here. An admiral whose puerile vanity has betrayed him into a testimonial; an obliging and conscienceless senator; a grateful idiot from some remote hamlet; a renegade doctor or a silly woman who gets a bonus of a dozen photographs for her letter--any of these are sufficient to lure the hopeful patient to the purchase. He wouldn't buy a second-hand bicycle on the affidavit of any of them, but he will give up his dollar and take his chance of poison on a mere newspaper statement which he doesn't even investigate. Every intelligent newspaper publisher knows that the testimonials which he publishes are as deceptive as the advertising claims are false. Yet he salves his conscience with the fallacy that the moral responsibility is on the advertiser and the testimonial-giver. So it is, but the newspaper shares it. When an aroused public sentiment shall make our public men ashamed to lend themselves to this charlatanry, and shall enforce on the profession of journalism those standards of decency in the field of medical advertising which apply to other advertisers, the Proprietary Association of America will face a crisis more perilous than any threatened legislation. For printers' ink is the very life-blood of the noxious trade. Take from the nostrum vendors the means by which they influence the millions, and there will pass to the limbo of pricked bubbles a fraud whose flagrancy and impudence are of minor import compared to the cold-hearted greed with which it grinds out its profits from the sufferings of duped and eternally hopeful ignorance.

THE PATENT MEDICINE CONSPIRACY AGAINST THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.

Reprinted from Collier's Weekly, Nov. 4, 1905.

"Here shall the Press the People's rights maintain. Unawed by influence and unbribed by gain."

--Joseph Story: Motto of the Salem Register.

In the Lower House of the Massachusetts Legislature one day last March there was a debate which lasted one whole afternoon and engaged some twenty speakers, on a bill providing that every bottle of patent medicine sold in the state should bear a label stating the contents of the bottle. More was told concerning patent medicines that afternoon than often comes to light in a single day. The debate at times was dramatic--a member from Salem told of a young woman of his acquaintance now in an institution for inebriates as the end of an incident which began with patent medicine dosing for a harmless ill. There was humor, too, in the debate--Representative Walker held aloft a bottle of Peruna bought by him in a drug store that very day and passed it around for his fellow-members to taste and decide for themselves whether Dr. Harrington, the Secretary of the State Board of Health, was right when he told the Legislative Committee that it was merely a "cheap cocktail."

The Papers did not Print One Word.

In short, the debate was interesting and important--the two qualities which invariably ensure to any event big headlines in the daily newspapers. But that debate was not celebrated by big headlines, nor any headlines at all. Yet Boston is a city, and Massachusetts is a state, where the proceedings of the legislature figure very large in public interest, and where the newspapers respond to that interest by reporting the sessions with greater fullness and minuteness than in any other state. Had that debate been on prison reform, on Sabbath observance, the early closing saloon law, on any other subject, there would have been, in the next day's papers, overflowing accounts of verbatim report, more columns of editorial comment, and the picturesque features of it would have ensured the attention of the cartoonist.

Now why? Why was this one subject tabooed? Why were the daily accounts of legislative proceedings in the next day's papers abridged to a fraction of their usual ponderous length, and all reference to the afternoon debate on patent medicines omitted? Why was it in vain for the speakers in that patent-medicine debate to search for their speeches in the next day's newspapers? Why did the legislative reporters fail to find their work in print? Why were the staff cartoonists forbidden to exercise their talents on that most fallow and tempting opportunity--the members of the Great and General Court of Massachusetts gravely tippling Peruna and passing the bottle around to their encircled neighbors, that practical knowledge should be the basis of legislative action?

Silence is the Fixed Quantity.

Does this throw any light on the silence of the Massachusetts papers?

Naturally such large sums paid by the patent-medicine men to the newspapers suggest the thought of favor. But silence is too important a part of the patent-medicine man's business to be left to the capricious chance of favor. Silence is the most important thing in his business. The ingredients of his medicine--that is nothing. Does the price of goldenseal go up? Substitute whisky. Does the price of whisky go up? Buy the refuse wines of the California vineyards. Does the price of opium go too high, or the public fear of it make it an inexpedient thing to use? Take it out of the formula and substitute any worthless barnyard weed. But silence is the fixed quantity--silence as to the frauds he practices; silence as to the abominable stewings and brewings that enter into his nostrum; silence as to the deaths and sicknesses he causes; silence as to the drug fiends he makes, the inebriate asylums he fills. Silence he must have. So he makes silence a part of the contract.

Read the significant silence of the Massachusetts newspapers in the light of the following contracts for advertising. They are the regular printed form used by Hood, Ayer and Munyon in making their advertising contracts with thousands of newspapers throughout the United States.

On page 80 is shown the contract made by the J. C. Ayer Company, makers of Ayer's Sarsaparilla. At the top is the name of the firm, "The J. C. Ayer Company, Lowell,, Mass.," and the date. Then follows a blank for the number of dollars, and then the formal contract: "We hereby agree, for the sum of............ Dollars per year,........to insert in the............. published at............... the advertisement of the J. C. Ayer Company." Then follow the conditions as to space to be used each issue, the page the advertisement is to be on and the position it is to occupy. Then these two remarkable conditions of the contract: "First--It is agreed in case any law or laws are enacted, either state or national, harmful to the interests of the T. C. Ayer Company, that this contract may be canceled by them from date of such enactment, and the insertions made paid for pro-rata with the contract price."

This clause is remarkable enough. But of it more later. For the present examine the second clause: "Second--It is agreed that the J. C. Ayer Co. may cancel this contract, pro-rata, in case advertisements are published in this paper in which their products are offered, with a view to substitution or other harmful motive; also in case any matter otherwise detrimental to the J. C. Ayer Company's interest is permitted to appear in the reading columns or elsewhere in the paper."

This agreement is signed in duplicate, one by the J. C. Ayer Company and the other one by the newspaper.

All Muzzle-Clauses Alike.

That is the contract of silence. That is the clause which with forty million dollars, muzzles the press of the country. I wonder if the Standard Oil Company could, for forty million dollars, bind the newspapers of the United States in a contract that "no matter detrimental to the Standard Oil Company's interests be permitted to appear in the reading columns or elsewhere in this paper."

Is it a mere coincidence that in each of these contracts the silence clause is framed in the same words? Is the inference fair that there is an agreement among the patent-medicine men and quack doctors each to impose this contract on all the newspapers with which it deals, one reaching the newspapers which the other does not, and all combined reaching all the papers in the United States, and effecting a universal agreement among newspapers to print nothing detrimental to patent medicines? You need not take it as an inference. I shall show it later as a fact.

"In the reading columns or elsewhere in this paper." The paper must not print itself, nor must it allow any outside party, who might wish to do so, to pay the regular advertising rates and print the truth about patent medicines in the advertising columns. More than a year ago, just after Mr. Bok had printed his first article exposing patent medicines, a business man in St. Louis, a man of great wealth, conceived that it would help his business greatly if he could have Mr. Bok's article printed as an advertisement in every newspaper in the United States. He gave the order to a firm of advertising agents and the firm began in Texas, intending to cover the country to Maine. But that advertisement never got beyond a few obscure country papers in Texas. The contract of silence was effective; and a few weeks later, at their annual meeting, the patent-medicine association "Resolved"--I quote the minutes--"That this Association commend the action of the great majority of the publishers of the United States who have consistently refused said false and malicious attacks in the shape of advertisements which in whole or in part libel proprietary medicines."

I have said that the identity of the language of the silence clause in several patent-medicine advertising contracts suggests mutual understanding among the nostrum makers, a preconceived plan; and I have several times mentioned the patent-medicine association. It seems incongruous, almost humorous, to speak of a national organization of quack doctors and patent-medicine makers; but there is one, brought together for mutual support, for co-operation, for--but just what this organization is for, I hope to show. No other organization ever demonstrated so clearly the truth that "in union there is strength." Its official name is an innocent-seeming one--"The Proprietary Association of America." There are annual meetings, annual reports, a constitution, by-laws. And I would call special attention to Article II of those by-laws.

"The objects of this association," says this article, "are: to protect the rights of its members to the respective trade-marks that they may own or control; to establish such mutual co-operation as may be required in the various branches of the trade; to reduce all burdens that may be oppressive; to facilitate and foster equitable principles in the purchase and sale of merchandise; to acquire and preserve for the use of its members such business information as may be of value to them; to adjust controversies and promote harmony among its members."

That is as innocuous a statement as ever was penned of the objects of any organization. It might serve for an organization of honest cobblers. Change a few words, without altering the spirit in the least, and a body of ministers might adopt it. In this laboriously complete statement of objects, there is no such word as "lobby" or "lobbying." Indeed, so harmless a word as "legislation" is absent--strenuously absent.

Where the Money Goes.

But I prefer to discover the true object of the organization of the "Proprietary Association of America" in another document than Article II of the by-laws. Consider the annual report of the treasurer, say for 1904. The total of money paid out during the year was ,516.26. Of this, one thousand dollars was for the secretary's salary, leaving ,516.26 to be accounted for. Then there is an item of postage, one of stationery, one of printing--the little routine expenses of every organization; and finally there is this remarkable item:

Legislative Committee, total expenses, ,606.95.

Truly, the Proprietary Association of America seems to have several objects, as stated in its by-laws, which cost it very little, and one object--not stated in its by-laws at all--which costs it all its annual revenue aside from the routine expenses of stationery, postage and secretary. If just a few more words of comment may be permitted on this point, does it not seem odd that so large an item as ,606.95, out of a total budget of only ,516.26, should be put in as a lump sum, "Legislative Committee, total expenses"? And would not the annual report of the treasurer of the Proprietary Association of America be a more entertaining document if these "total expenses" of the Legislative Committee were carefully itemized?

Mr. Cheney's Plan.

"We have had a good deal of difficulty in the last few years with the different legislatures of the different states.... I believe I have a plan whereby we will have no difficulty whatever with these people. I have used it in my business for two years and know it is a practical thing.... I, inside of the last two years, have made contracts with between fifteen and sixteen thousand newspapers, and never had but one man refuse to sign the contract, and my saying to him that I could not sign a contract without this clause in it he readily signed it. My point is merely to shift the responsibility. We to-day have the responsibility on our shoulders. As you all know, there is hardly a year but we have had a lobbyist in the different state legislatures--one year in New York, one year in New Jersey, and so on." "There has been a constant fear that something would come up, so I had this clause in my contract added. This is what I have in every contract I make: 'It is hereby agreed that should your state, or the United States Government, pass any law that would interfere with or restrict the sale of proprietary medicines, this contract shall become void.'... In the state of Illinois a few years ago they wanted to assess me three hundred dollars. I thought I had a better plan than this, so I wrote to about forty papers and merely said: 'Please look at your contract with me and take note that if this law passes you and I must stop doing business, and my contracts cease.'" The next week every one of them had an article, and Mr. Man had to go....

I read this to Dr. Pierce some days ago and he was very much taken up with it. I have carried this through and know it is a success. I know the papers will accept it. Here is a thing that costs us nothing. We are guaranteed against the ,000 loss for nothing. It throws the responsibility on the newspapers.... I have my contracts printed and I have this printed in red type, right square across the contract, so there can be absolutely no mistake, and the newspaper man can not say to me, 'I did not see it.' He did see it and knows what he is doing. It seems to me it is a point worth every man's attention.... I think this is pretty near a sure thing.

THIS IS THE FORM OF CONTRACT--SEE --THAT MUZZLES THE PRESS OF THE UNITED STATES.

I should like to ask the newspaper owners and editors of America what they think of that scheme. I believe that the newspapers, when they signed each individual contract, were not aware that they were being dragooned into an elaborately thought-out scheme to make every newspaper in the United States, from the greatest metropolitan daily to the remotest country weekly, an active, energetic, self-interested lobbyist for the patent-medicine association. If the newspapers knew how they were being used as cat's-paws, I believe they would resent it. Certainly the patent-medicine association itself feared this, and has kept this plan of Mr. Cheney's a careful secret. In this same meeting of the Proprietary Association of America, just after Mr. Cheney had made the speech quoted above, and while it was being resolved that every other patent-medicine man should put the same clause in his contract, the venerable Dr. Humphreys, oldest and wisest of the guild, arose and said: "Will it not be now just as well to act on this, each and every one for himself, instead of putting this on record?... I think the idea is a good one, But really don't think it had better go in our proceedings." And another fellow nostrum-maker, seeing instantly the necessity of secrecy said: "I am heartily in accord with Dr. Humphreys. The suggestion is a good one, but when we come to put in our public proceedings, and state that we have adopted such a resolution, I want to say that the legislators are just as sharp as the newspaper men.... As a consequence, this will decrease the weight of the press comments. Some of the papers, also, who would not come in, would publish something about it in the way of getting square....."

Now what were the "matters and suggestions" which Dr. Pierce "would not wish to have published broadcast over the country for very good reasons?"

Can Mr. Cheney Reconcile These Statements?

Letter addressed to Mr. William Allen White, Editor of the Gazette, Emporia, Kan.

Dear Sir--

I have read with a great deal of interest, to-day, an article in Colliers illustrating therein the contract between your paper and ourselves, Mr. S. Hopkins Adams endeavored very hard to find me, but I am sorry to say that I was not at home. I really believe that I could have explained that clause of the contract to his entire satisfaction, and thereby saved him the humiliation of making an erratic statement.

This is the first intimation that I ever have had that that clause was put into the contract to control the Press in any way, or the editorial columns of the Press. I believe that if Mr. Adams was making contracts now, and making three-year contracts, the same as we are, taking into consideration the conditions of the different legislatures, he would be desirous of this same paragraph as a safety guard to protect himself, in case any State did pass a law prohibiting the sale of our goods.

His argument surely falls flat when he takes into consideration the conduct of the North Dakota Legislature, because every newspaper in that State that we advertise in hid contracts containing that clause. Why we should be compelled to pay for from one to two years' advertising or more, in a State where we could not sell our goods, is more than I can understand. As before stated, it is merely a precautionary paragraph to meet conditions such as now exist in North Dakota. We were compelled to withdraw from that State because we would not publish our formula, and, therefore, under this contract, we are not compelled to continue our advertising.

Extract from a speech delivered before the Proprietary Association of America.

"We have had a good deal of difficulty in the last few years with the different legislatures of the different states.... I believe I have a plan whereby we will have no difficulty whatever with these people. I have used it in my business for two years, and I know it is a practical thing.... I, inside of the last two years, have made contracts with between fifteen and sixteen thousand newspapers, and never had but one man refuse to sign the contract, and by saying to him that I could not sign a contract without this clause in it he readily signed it. My point is merely to shift the responsibility. We to-day have the responsibility of the whole matter upon our shoulders....

"There? has been constant fear that something would come up, so I had this clause in my contract added. This is what I have in every contract I make: 'It is hereby agreed that should your State, or the United States government, pass any law that would interfere with or restrict the sale of proprietary medicines, his contract shall become void.'... In the State of Illinois a few years ago they wanted to assess me three hundred dollars. I thought I had a better plan than this, so I wrote to about forty papers, and merely said: 'Please look at your contract with me and take note that if this law passes you and I must stop doing business, and my contracts cease.' The next week every one of them had an article.... I have carried this through and know it is a success. I know the papers will accept it. Here is a thing that costs us nothing. We are guaranteed against the ,000 loss for nothing. It throws the responsibility on the newspapers.... I have my contracts printed and I have this printed in red type, right square across the contract, so there can be absolutely no mistake, and the newspaper man can not say to me, 'I did not see it.' He did see it and knows what he is doing. It seems to me it is a point worth every man's attention.... I think this is pretty near a sure thing."

To illustrate: There are 739 publications in your State--619 of these are dailies and weeklies. Out of this number we are advertising in over 500, at an annual expenditure of ,000 per year . We make a three-year contract with all of them, and, therefore, our liabilities in your State are ,000, providing, of course, all these contracts were made at the same date. Should these contracts all be made this fall and your State should pass a law this winter prohibiting the sale of our goods, there would be virtually a loss to us of ,000. Therefore, for a business precaution to guard against just such conditions, we add the red paragraph referred to in Collier's.

I make this statement to you, as I am credited with being the originator of the paragraph, and I believe that I am justified in adding this paragraph to our contract, not for the purpose of controlling the Press, but, as before stated, as a business precaution which any man should take who expects to pay his bills.

Will you kindly give me your version of the situation? Awaiting an early reply, I am,

Sincerely yours,

FRANK J. CHENEY.

Valuable Newspaper Aid.

"The benefits of such a working bureau to the Proprietary Association," said Dr. Pierce, "can be foreseen: First, a systematic plan to acquire early knowledge of pending or threatened legislation could be taken up. In the past we have relied too much on newspaper managers to acquaint us of such bills coming up.... Another plan would be to have the regulation formula bill, for instance, introduced by some friendly legislator, and have it referred to his own committee, where he could hold it until all danger of such another bill being introduced were over, and the Legislature had adjourned."

Little wonder Dr. Pierce wanted a secret session to cover up the frank na?vet? of his son, which he did not "wish to have published broadcast over the country, for very good reasons."

EXAMPLE OF WHAT MR. CHENEY CALLS "SHIFTING THE RESPONSIBILITY."

Share on: WhatsApp @Hash Facebook Tweet