134 
THE CHEMIST AND DRUGGIST OF AUSTRALASIA 
May 1, 1887. 
Apologies for non-atteudaiice were read from Messrs. 
Blackett and Nelson. 
ELECTION OF NEW MEMBERS. 
The following were duly elected : — 
Charles Bendelack, Collingwood. 
Bichard Henry Hawke, Gawler, S.A. 
The resignation of the following members was accepted 
subject to the certificates being returned : — 
H. J. Fowler. 
W. J. Clewer. 
G. A. Pritchard. 
REPORT OF THE EDUCATIONAL COMMITTEE, 
A lengthy report from the committee was received and 
adopted. 
THE CHEMIST AND DRUGGIST DEFENCE FUND. 
The Pharmacy Board forwarded a progress report, and the 
response to the circular issued some time since having been 
satisfactory, it was notified that subscriptions should now be 
forwarded either to the registrar, to the Board, or to any of the 
wholesale drug firms in Melbourne. 
The resignation of Mr. Bowen as a member of the Council 
was received and accepted with regret. 
Correspondence and financial business closed the meeting. 
THE PHAEMACY BOAItD AND THE FEDERAL STORE 
The case of The Queen v. Panton ex parte Shillinglaw was 
heard before the Supreme Court on April 4 and 5. It was an 
application to make absolute a rule nUi granted by Mr. 
Justice Holroyd to compel Mr. Panton and the magistrates of 
the Melbourne District Court, to state a case in which the 
Federal Store Limited was prosecuted, on February 15, for 
carrying on the business of a chemist and druggist. The 
magistrates dismissed the information and refused to state a 
case on the ground that no point of law was involved. 
Mr. Hodges and Mr. Isaacs, instructed by Emerson and 
Barrow, appeared for Mr. Shillinglaw, and Professor Elking- 
ton, instructed by Mr. Woolf, for the Federal Store. 
Professor Elkington reviewed the facts of the case and 
argued that the magistrates had merely to determine a ques- 
tion of fact as to whether the Federal Store did or did not on 
the occasion referred to, carry on the business of a chemist and 
druggist. No point of law was involved. There was a great 
difference between the case of the Equitable Co-operative 
Society and the Federal Store, as in the former case a dis- 
penser was kept on the premises ; in the latter the prescrq> 
tion was sent out and dispensed by a chemist outside, and 
there was no pretence of dispensing by the store. 
Mr. Hodges argued that “If it can be proved that there was 
one fairly debateable point we are entitled to the rule. A com- 
pany can not be registered under the Act, as the qualification 
is personal. This company is not registered, but a customer 
going to the Store sees all the insignia of a chemist’s shop. 
He is supplied with various articles which are sold only by 
chemists, pays for them to the Store, and to the Store only. 
All this is undisputed. It is true that the articles bear the 
label of Simpson and Davenport, and they were not supplied 
from stock. But what does it matter where the Store have 
their pharmaceutical department ? So far as this case is con- 
cerned, Simpson and Davenport was their pharmaceutical 
department. The Store might say to a customer, our chemist 
is not here, but we can get it made up. The Store does not 
say, * Our chemist has resigned, and the department is closed, 
but we will get the prescription made up, and charge you what 
we think the chemist will charge us.’ If Simpson and Daven- 
port were servants of the company, and had a shop of their 
own and got so much a week for the Federal Store, it would 
undoubtedly be the Federal Store keeping open shop.” 
Mr. Justice Kerferd : Section 2 defines carrying on the 
business of a chemist and druggist as keeping an open shop 
for the compounding and dispensing of prescriptions. Does 
not this limit the sense of the words in section 18 ? 
Mr. Hodges : Section 18 is dealing with persons who wish 
to obtain certificates, and require that they shall not merely 
have carried on business, but shall have been in the habit of 
compounding and dispensing prescriptions. 
Mr. Justice Holroyd : The Company charges a certain sum 
for getting the medicine made up, and does not know if it is 
the sum charged them. It is a debateable question if that is a 
breach of the Act, 
Mr. Hodges : If the case were left there, they might be 
merely agents ; but in this case the medicine is made up and 
the purchaser is charged a sum quite independently of what is- 
charged to the company, and the person who makes it up 
looks to the company, and the company only, for payment. 
Mr. Justice Kerferd : You establish the position that the 
Federal Store were principals, and you then go on to say that 
this transaction was carrying on business. 
Mr. Hodges : Here is the account given to us : — 
Bought of the Federal Store Drug Department. 
s. 
d. 
Prescription 
.. 3 
0 
Glycerine 
.. 0 
6 
Carbolic acid 
.. 0 
10 
Paid 
|4 
4 
The Federal Store, Limited. 
Mr. Justice Williams : That is very strong evidence, but I 
don’t agree that it is all one way, for the evidence shows that 
the medicine was not made up at the drug department, but at 
Simpson and Davenport’s, who were independent chemists,, 
paid neither by salary nor commission. 
Mr. Hodges : The evidence stands uncontradicted that we 
bought from the Federal Store, and the Store sold to us. The- 
person who sells drugs is carrying on the business. 
Mr. Justice Williams : That raises the debateable point, 
and opens a very wide question, including the sale of patent- 
medicines. 
Mr. Justice Holroyd : In section 2 a chemist and druggist 
means a person carrying on business, with an open shop, for 
! the compounding and dispensing of prescriptions. You say, 
j chemist and druggist, in a later section, has a wider sense, 
I Mr. Hodges: Yes; in the first case the Legislature wished to 
save the right of certain persons, but would not include 
everyone who might have sold drugs. In the other case the 
object is rather the other way, and the carrying on of business 
means not only that the person compounds medicines, he may 
get them compounded. He is not limited to keeping open 
shop for the compounding of prescriptions, but may merely 
deal in them. 
Mr. Justice Williams : Do you mean to say, as a matter of 
law, that a person would be carrying on the business of a 
chemist, if he sold medicines made up elsewhere, even in 
England. 
Mr. Justice Holroyd : And even innocent drugs ? 
Mr. Hodges : A person in the habit of supplying customers 
with prescriptions, and getting them made up elsewhere, is 
carrying on the business of a chemi.s-t and druggist. 
Mr. Justice Williams : We all think that there is a debate* 
able point of law taken in conjunction with the undisputed 
facts of the case, and the justices will be required to state the 
case. The rule nisi will be made absolute without costs. 
Eucalyptus Oil. — Mr. Joseph Bosisto, the founder of the 
eucalyptus industry in Australia, will be interested to learn,, 
on the authority of the Ame.rica)i Druggist, quoting from the 
Essential Oil circular of Schimrael and Co., of Leipzig, that 
he has transferred his residence to Europe, in order to be able 
to superintend the organisation of the industry in person. It 
it intended to put on the market two qualities of oil of Euca- 
lyptus globulus, an inferior sort in large packages as hereto- 
fore, and another in small vials, holding one or several ounceSr 
as a medicinal specialty. Schimmel and Co. doubt the wis- 
dom of this last-named form of package so far as Germany is- 
concerned. The ordinary quality of oil of Eucalyptus amyg- 
dalina has been chiefly used as a perfume by soap-makers, 
though it has never attained to any importance, as there is no- 
lack of cheaper ethereal oils of an agreeable odor. It is, how- 
ever, possible that it may find practical employment as a de- 
stroyer of insects, since it has been found by Schultz to have- 
strong insecticidal properties. One of the Eucalyptus oils, 
obtained from Eucalyptus corymbosa, is reported to have a 
very pleasantodor, resembling that of roses andlemons. Schim- 
mel and Co. attach the remark that, if this report is true, it 
seems strange that the oil has never made its appearance in 
commerce. 
Government Analyst. — At a meeting of the Executive 
Council on April 19 Mr. C. R. Blackett was appointed Govern- 
ment analyst in succession to the late Mr. William Johnson^ 
Mr. Blackett will be called upon to abandon all private prac- 
tice so long as he may continue in the public service. 
