THE AUSTBALASIAN JOUBNAL OF PHABMACY. 
169 
serious thing if the sale of that article was interfered with. As regards 
the scope of the Pharmacopoeia, Professor Attfield’s evidence was to the 
effect that that work had for its object not so much the selection as the 
definition of substances which the physician prescribes, and that it did not come 
into force to supersede household drugs and remedies ; that there were qualities 
of drugs and household remedies known to and demanded by the public, and sold 
by chemists, not included in the Pharmacopoeia, which were not and could not be 
superseded by or in any way abolished or ousted by such a work ; and that, 
indeed, the Pharmacopoeia did not profess to do anything of the kind, nor was 
there any Act of Parliament investing it with such authority. It is scarcely 
necessary to say that, in view of such evidence, the summons was summarily 
dismissed ; and it is not at all likely that the question involved will be again 
put to the test in an English court of law. In connection with the Professor’s 
evidence there is one point to which it may be well to call attention. Being 
asked whether, if a physician ordered sweet spirit of nitre, he would not expect 
to get the British Pharmacopoeia article, Professor Attfield replied : “ No, I think 
not ; he should expect the old article. If he wanted the new preparation he 
-would probably order spirit of nitrous ether or spiritus setheris nitrosi, which 
would properly describe it. It is a pity that a question of this importance 
should be left to probabilities, and it would be a matter of satisfaction were 
some definite understanding arrived at on the subject between the physician and 
the dispenser. 
PHARMACY IN DENMARK. 
The Pharmaceutical Journal for 6th March contains a report of a lecture 
delivered on 1/th February, before the (London) Chemists’ Assistants’ Asso- 
ciation, by Mr. S. R. Atkins, vice-president of the Pharmaceutical Society of 
Great Britain, a brief resume of which, giving, as it does, a most instructive 
account of the condition of pharmacy in Denmark, and the laws and regulations 
affecting it, may not prove uninteresting to Australasian pharmacists. The 
controlling authority in jDharmaceutical affairs in Denmark is the Minister of 
Justice, and under him the Royal Board of Health is in function, in which two 
apothecaries have seats, and vote on all matters concerning pharmacy. Directions 
from the Board of Health have to be maintained by all pharmacies, and once a 
year every pharmacy in the country has to be visited by the medical authorities. 
A pupil generally must stay three and a half years in a pharmacy before he has 
served his apprenticeship, and when, after this period, he has passed his first 
examination, he is called Examinatus Pharmacia; when, after a year and a half of 
study, he has passed his official examination, he is called Candidatus Pharmacia; 
and when he has got a pharmacy for himself, Apothecary Pharmacist. Full 
particulars are given as to the examinations which have to be passed, which space 
will not permit of our quoting here, but which was briefly described by the 
lecturer as “ a prolonged and thorough course of training, a complete 
curriculum, and subsequently a testing examination.” Until the year 1872 
the right to carry on a pharmacy was granted so that it became the 
property of the party concerned, permitting him to sell or cede the same 
to any qualified pharmacist who had passed his examination in pharmacy, 
and obtained the sanction of the Government. In the year mentioned a 
new order of things was introduced. All new pharmacies are now granted 
to the pharmacist personally, and when he dies, the pharmacy, like other 
Government offices, has to be applied for by qualified persons, although 
it is mentioned that the Government generally permits the widow of the deceased 
