THE ATJ STEAL ASIAN JOUENAL OF PHAEMACY. 
327 
law-suit. Under the circumstances set forth, we do not think that any but the 
publishing firm referred to will blame our decision to withdraw from an unprofit- 
able position, even at a little cost, preferring to devote our funds to the advance- 
ement of pharmacy, rather than the vindication of a sentiment, however justly 
founded. 
Our contemporary further complains that the notices, which have been 
published in our pages on the subject, have produced the impression that it was 
“ hostile to the Society,” an impression which, it states, is “ proved to be 
absolutely baseless.” How far the latter statement is true can be judged by 
our readers from the letter, which we published in our last issue, from Mr. H. 
T. Tompsitt, in which he exposed the efforts that had been made in 
its pages to misrepresent the motives by which himself and other members of the 
Pharmaceutical Society of Australasia were actuated in labouring to bring about the 
forthcoming conference. If further evidence be required of that hostile spirit, 
we need only refer to a circular recently issued from its offices, the introduction 
into which of such paltry questions as the title of the Society leaves little doubt 
that the intention of its framers is to create a feeling of jealousy against Vic- 
toria throughout the other colonies — an attempt which we have too much faith in 
the good sense of pharmacists generally to believe will be attended with 
any success. Indeed, our contemporary makes no secret that the cause of 
pharmaceutical progress, which we have so deeply at heart, is a matter 
of, at least, but secondary interest to its conductors. “We come here,” 
it tells us, “to vindicate the commercial honour of our proprietors” (whatever that 
may mean). . . . “We have accomplished the purpose for which we came, and 
remain to maintain the reputation of our firm,” &c. How far a journal, which thus 
cynically announces its indifference to everything but the interests of its 
proprietary, is deserving the support of colonial pharmacists we leave to 
them to decide ; but, on its own showing, there is no call for us, as 
yet, to alter the page in which we announce ourselves as “ the only organ of 
'pharmacy in the Australasian Colonies .” 
THE PHAEMACY BOAED OF VICTOEIA. 
The monthly meeting of the Pharmacy Board of Victoria was held at the 
College of Pharmacy, Swanston-street, Melbourne, on Wednesday, the 8th 
September, 1886. 
Present — Messrs. Blackett, Brind, Francis, Owen, Strut, and Tompsitt. 
The president (Mr. C. Blackett) in the chair. 
The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. 
APPLICATIONS FOR REGISTRATION. 
The following applicants having furnished the necessary statutary declarations 
as to their qualifications, were duly registered as pharmaceutical chemists : — 
George Bunyon Sirett, Melbourne, pharmaceutical chemist, Great Britain. 
Bichard Bichardson, registered under the Pharmacy Act of Great Britain, 
34 Lonsdale-street, Melbourne. 
The following applications also were dealt with : — 
Phillip Adam Cadell, Carlton, eligible to pass the modified examination. 
Abraham Taylor, Elmore ; Henry Marks, Berr-street, Fitzroy ; and John 
Batty Hudson, Corowa, postponed. 
APPRENTICES INDENTURES REGISTERED. 
William John Pollard Lee, apprenticed to Mr. W. Mercer, Daylesford. 
