378 
THE AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACY. 
had to be adjourned to Friday, 15th, in order to see that everything connected 
therewith should be attended to. Great interest appears to be manifested in it 
by the delegates and the chemists generally. 
The Medical Practitioners Bill passed its third reading in the Assembly on 
29th September. 
Objection has been made by the chemists here to the last clause of the Act, 
it being considered prejudicial to their business. The clause referred to reads 
thus: — “Nothing in this Act contained shall extend or be construed to extend 
to prejudice, or in any way affect, the lawful occupation, trade, or business of 
chemists and druggists so far as the same extend to selling , compounding , or dispens- 
ing medicine." It will thus be seen that the clause prohibits the chemists from 
prescribing, &c., and restricts them to the dispensing of prescriptions and selling 
of medicines. What the chemists require is the striking out of the italicised 
words. 
Messrs. M‘Carthy, Watt, Melhuish, and others have been doing their utmost 
to have the clause altered, and several interviews have taken place between 
Dr. Tarrant, the promoter of the bill, and the chemists with reference to the 
matter. 
The following letter, which appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald on the 
5th October, clearly expresses the demands of the chemists in regard to this 
matter : — 
“ To the Editor of the Herald. 
“ Sir, — Will you kindly allow me space in your columns to draw attention to 
the last clause in the proposed Medical Bill before it comes on for its second 
reading in the Legislative Council. I may mention that some time ago, and before 
its second reading in the Assembly, a deputation, consisting of Mr. Reid, M.L.A., 
Mr. Watt, and Mr. Kebblewhite, president and vice-president respectively of the 
Chemists’ Association, and myself, waited upon Dr. Tarrant, and pointed out to 
him the injustice of the clause referred to, and, in fairness to Dr. Tarrant, I must 
add that he cordially acknowledged the justice of our position, and promised the 
deputation to alter the clause from its present form to the following, viz., “ That 
nothing in this Act contained shall extend, or be construed to extend, to prejudice, 
or in any way affect, the lawful occupation or calling of chemists and druggists, 
who are at the time of the passing of this Act, or who shall thereafter become 
members of the Pharmaceutical Society of New South Wales, and registered by 
the Pharmacy Board of New South Wales.’ You will observe, on reference to 
the second reading of the Act in the Assembly, that Dr. Tarrant gave notice of 
his intention so to amend the clause ; but unfortunately the bill has been hurried 
through without the promised alteration. I cannot conceive that this has been 
done intentionally, and have, therefore, drawn attention to it so that Dr. Tarrant 
may comply with his promise by having the promised alteration made in due 
course in the Upper House. I do not think it necessary or desirable to go over 
the grounds again upon which we claim this right, as they were fully discussed 
by me in your columns in reply to Dr. Anderson Stuart’s article on the proposed 
Medical Bill, which appeared some months ago, and are, no doubt, familiar to 
your readers. — I am, &c., . __ „ 
^ “R. T. BELLEMEY, Pharmacist, Newtown. 
In moving the second reading of the Pharmaceutical Society's Incorporation 
Bill in the Assembly, on the 8th inst., Mr. Burns said that he understood that 
the Minister for Public Instruction intended to move some amendment in the 
bill, which he had not yet prepared, and therefore at present it was only his 
intention to take the bill into committee pro forma. Dr. Renwick made some 
remarks, from which a good guess can be made at the nature of the proposed 
