9 
THE CHEMIST AND DEUGGIST OF AUSTEALASIA. Feb. 1st, 1886. 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL SOCIETY OF FEW ZEALAXE. 
' A meeting of tlie Wellington Branch of the Pharmacentical 
Society was held on the 18th December, 1885. The members 
present were— Messrs. C. D. Barrand (in tlie chair), F. 
Barraud, Allan, G. Mee, Brittaine, Evens, Anthony, and 
M‘Ferren. 
The minutes of last meeting were read and confirmed. 
Proposed by Mr. Barraud, and seconded by Mr. Allen— That 
Mr. W. H. Anthony be elected secretary. Carried. 
Proposed by Mr. Allen, and seconded by Mr F. Barraud — 
That the secretary be requested to write to the Vice-presidents 
in Auckland, Christchurch, and Dunedin, asking them to call 
a meeting of members in their immediate districts, and to 
ascertain from them if it were their desire to continue the 
New Zealand Pharmaceutical Society, and if so, to reply at 
once, after getting their opinion. 
It was also proposed by Mr, G. Mee, and seconded by Mr. 
C. D. Barraud — That the subscription be reduced. This was 
carried, subject to the answers and opinions received from the 
Vice-presidents in the other centres as to how much it should 
be reduced. 
Proposed by Mr. Evens, and seconded by Mr. Allen — 
That from December 18th, 1885, all cheques be signed by 
Messrs. C. D. Barraud and W. H. Anthony, and that the Sec- 
retary write to the late secretary, Mr. H. E. Eton, asking him 
to send a notice to the bank manager to erase his name from 
their books as regards signing cheques in future on behalf of 
the Wellington Pharmaceutical Society. Carried. 
Sundry accounts Avere passed for payment, and the meeting 
then closed. 
PHARMACY IN NEW ZEALAND. 
Legal Dis.a.bilities. 
(from a correspondent.) 
In the year of Grace 1880, the Parliament of this colony, 
which is noted for wasting time in resultless debates, passed 
the one useful measure of the session, viz., the Pharmacy 
Act ; at least, that is what the Press and the Representatives 
themselves said at the time. Whilst recognising that the 
Pharmacy Act of 1880, —a weak imitation of the Victorian 
Act of 1876 — has been of some service, the chemists of New 
Zealand have now learnt, from vexatious experience, that its 
provisions are practically unworkable. If the Act had been a 
close adaptation of that administered in Victoria, it would 
then have proved a terror to the transgressor, and been an 
incentive to pharmaceutical education. But, as the matter 
noAv stands, successive Pharmacy Boards since 1880 have 
been doing their utmost to get the undermentioned defects 
remedied. The eleventh section of the New Zealand Act 
differs from the ninth section of the Victorian Act, in respect of 
the following words added: “Provided that such Bye-Laws 
shall be confirmed and approved by a special general meeting 
of pharmaceutical chemists.” Now, the difficulty is, by Avhat 
means are the xffiarmaceutical chemists throughout the colony 
to be called together legally? The Act does not provide 
the machinery for such meeting, and legal authorities say the 
Board has no means of making bye-laws in accordance with the 
Act ! From this it will be seen that the New Zealand Board is 
not in a position to make regulations, Avhereby necessary 
details should be framed for administering the Act itself. 
Nor can provision by bye-law be made for the recognition of 
the diplomas of kindred pharmaceutical bodies, other than the 
one stated in the Act, viz., the Pharmaceutical Society of 
Great Britain. 
The other serious defect in our Act is the omission of sub- 
section 1 of section 25 in the Victorian Act, viz.: — “Any 
person not being a registered pharmaceutical chemist who 
carries on, or attempts to carry on, business as a chemist and 
druggist, or homoeopathic chemist, or either.” The only 
penal clause in the New Zealand Act is a(fcdnst assuming 
the title of “ Pharmaceutical Chemist,” cfec., &c., which means 
that anyone may carry on a dntggisVs business in Neio Zealand 
so long as he does not assume the titles usually pertaining to 
that calling. 
Last session no trouble was spared to procure an amend- 
ment in the direction indicated. With the Bill for Amendment 
of the Pharmacy Act, a new Sale of Poisons Bill, on the lines 
of the Victorian Act, was also brought forward by Mr. Hatch, 
a chemist and “member of the House,'* who represented an 
Invercargill consfituency. Mr. Hatch stuck very manfully to 
his measures, and his arguments were logically sound on all 
points; but he had to yield to the “ear-tickling” talk of 
“ advanced liberal views,” as enunciated by Sir George Grey. 
This great cliampion of advanced democracy advocates in one 
breath that the State should }orovide higher education for the 
children of the people, whilst in the next breath he proposes 
opening up the learned professions to all comers, Avhether 
educated or not. 
Sir George Grey thought, in regard to our measures, that 
those who had not money should not be kept from “ entering 
a xuof-ssion of this kind by heavy fees or regulations, which 
rendered the jprofession a close one.” He also thought “the 
nature of the examination should be fixed by the Executive 
Government and the Education Board.” Noav, in regard to 
the matter of fees and regulations it is obviously misleading, 
as there are none so poor that a fee of £.8 3s. Avould deter them 
from attempting to pass by examination. The other brilliant 
idea that the Government and Board of Education should 
decide the nature of the examinations is conceived in ignor- 
ance of the 'character of pharmaceutical examinations. 
I trust that one of these days Sir George Grey may visit 
Melbourne, and see with his own eyes the excellent results of 
a good Pharmacy Act admirably administered. The subject 
that remains for the New Zealand pharmacist to consider is, 
what are we to do in the future ? Our most energetic leaders 
have lost heart, and we find it sorry work to carry on as “poor 
druggists,” without any immediate prospect of making the 
pharmaceutical chemist of New Zealand as good a man 
educationally as his brother in Victoria and elsewhere. 
Pharmaceutical Workers. 
By this I mean the men in this colony who have taken up 
the role of organizing the trade, with the laudable object of 
elevating its status to that of the mother-country or of ad- 
vanced colonies, such as Victoria, and making it an auxiliary 
profession to the profession of medicine. 
Wellington is the centre that deserves prominence, in 
this respect; to Mr. C. D. Barraud, the first President of the 
Pharmacy Board, and Mr. J. A. Allen, its energetic Secretary, 
belong well-earned merit for their untiring exertions; in truth 
it may be said that there would not now be any organised 
Pharmaceutical body but for them. Mr. Henry Brittaine, 
the present local member of the Pharmacy Board, is new 
blood, and wbhal a careful and active associate, 
Auckland has now the honor, such as it may be, of possessing 
the head office of the Pharmacy Board, consequently she 
enjoys the privilege of having four seats on the board, which 
is necessary, in order to secure a quorum. The members are 
Mr. Graves Aicken, president, and Messrs. Edson, Pond, and 
King. The president, who is also president of the Chamber 
of Commerce, was elected to the qiosition because of previous 
experience on the old board, and general interest displayed in 
the work. Mr. John Edson. however, had, iDi’ior to the passing 
of the act, given valuable time without stint to a local Phar- 
maceutical Society, which prepared the way for a legally con- 
stituted body. Mr. J. H. Hudson was then local secretary, 
and equally enthusiastic and self-denying. 
Mr. J. A. Pond is ahomceopathic chemist, government analyst, 
and x>resident of the Auckland branch of the New Zealand 
Institute, therefore it may be inferred that his services in 
connection ^vith the chemistry papers of the board are of 
considerable value. Mr. J. P. King, the other local member, 
has recently received the commission of the peace, and is not 
in the least likely to lower the honor of the bench, or do 
discredit to the profession of pharmacy. 
Christchurch has always extended to pharmacists and its 
workers the right hand of cordial friendship. It was at 
Christchurch that a conference was held in 1882, and with 
candour it may be said that much good resulted therefrom. 
Those who met there on that occasion will remember the 
kindly interest exhibited by Mr. J. V. Ross and Mr. George 
Bennington. It is certainly no fault of theirs that the 
Pharmaceutical Society was allowed to lapse — “prevailing 
apathy” must be the verdict as to cause of death. Mr. 
Bonuington is now the local representative of the Pharmacy 
Board, and an exceedingly painstaking member he is. 
Dunedin, although not so prominent in matters pharmaceu- 
tical, has many active pharmacists who have been fully alive 
to everything relating thereto. Mr. T. M. Wilkinson was 
delegate at the Christchurch conference, and is now acting as 
