THE AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACY. 
401 
and New Zealand to get their Acts amended. The great advantages to be gained 
would be to a certain extent lost if the terms of apprenticeship were not the 
same. Surely there would be little or no difficulty for the colonies named to 
have a fourth year added. If the term of apprenticeship were made short they 
would find that boys who entered at the age of fifteen would not be capable of 
getting the necessary knowledge and experience, because their minds were not 
matured at the age of 18. It was only in the final year that a student obtained 
anything like a mastery over the simplest details of pharmacy. If, on the other 
hand, the term was four years, the student would be 19 years of age, and his 
twentieth year could be spent in college. Since the age for examination was 
fixed at 21 there would be a further opportunity of attending college, and it 
would be to the benefit of the candidates, for no one could be reckoned an 
accomplished pharmacist with only one year’s training. He trusted the term 
proposed would be strictly adhered to. 
Mr. Potts said it was optional in Queensland whether a student spent his 
final twelve months in study or as an assistant. In this respect they differed 
from Victoria. 
Mr. Sowter said that South Australia was labouring under difficulties similar 
to Queensland in regard to its scattered population. 
Mr. Melhuish contended that the Conference should study the majority, and 
not the minority. 
Mr. Pond, in withdrawing his amendment, trusted that the difficulties to be 
met with by some of the colonies would not be allowed to press too heavily on 
them. A certain amount of flexibility should be permitted. 
Mr. Potts informed the president that he could not vote on the question. His 
instructions were in the direction of the shorter term, notwithstanding that the 
Board of Pharmacy in Queensland favoured the longer term. They were 
hampered by the Legislature, which he hoped would alter the term as desired. 
The resolution was then put and carried. 
Course of Study. 
Mr. Blackett then moved clause — 
(c) “Course of study based upon the course adopted by the Pharmaceutical 
Society of Great Britain.” 
In doing so, he remarked that it required no enlargement, for it was well 
known to the delegates. A little amplification, however, might help them. 
Mr. Pond — May I ask if it necessitates any special course of study ? 
Mr. Blackett said there was no compulsory curriculum in England, but the 
leading pharmaceutical opinion was in accord with Professor Huxley and others 
on the question of education. He would not support anything that would 
encourage a system of cramming, and for that reason he looked anxiously for a 
compulsory college attendance of three years, giving students a proper scientific 
training. They would like to be ahead of England in this matter. Her legis- 
lators were unfortunately occupied with the Russian Bear and the Egyptian 
Questions, which hindered practical legislation, but in Australia they were free 
from such troubles, and within easy reach of legislation. Great Britain would 
doubtless be glad of a compulsory curriculum, and, for his own part, he longed to 
see the day when their certificates would be exchangeable with the parent country, 
and likewise with France and Germany. Adverting to the course of study, he 
introduced the name of Michael Faraday to illustrate the knowledge that could be 
gained in the laboratory. Books could not supply that teaching. The English 
system served to encourage the “ coach” too much at examinations, and the 
coaching system was reaching that stage now that a man could be posted up in 
