208 
Oct. 1, 1895. 
THE CTTEIMTRT ANE DEUOGIBT OF AUSTEALABIA. 
“GONDY’S FLUID ” 
Contains no PERMANGANATE of POTASH. 
ELEVEN INJUNCTIONS 
With damages and costs have been obtained against Chemists 
selling a solution of Permanganate of Potash in execution 
of orders for “ Condy’s Fluid.” 
CONDY & MITCHELL, Ltd., 67 Turnmill St, London, England. 
I'tvo Ihjum’tions recentli/ obtained hi Australia, 
GOLD MEDALS 1884-1885-1886-1888. 
“ SANITAS ” 
DISINFECTANTS, 
Fragrant— Non-PoisonouS“Do Not Stain. 
Kingzett’s Patent Sulphur Candles. 
Kingzett’s Patent “ Sulphugators.” 
Kingzett’s Patent 
Preserved Peroxide of Hydrogen. 
PRICE LISTS AND PAMPHLETS FREE. 
THE SANITAS C0„ LIM,, Bethnal Green, LONDON, E. 
tlitofial motes 
4 
THE DENTAL BOARD OF VICTORIA. 
CADBURY’S 
COCOA 
“ The Typical Cocoa of English Manufacture— Absolutely Pure -Analyst, 
NO CHEMICALS USED 
(4s in many of the so-called Pure Foreign Coer as.) 
Messrs. CADBURY BROS., Melbourne and Sydney. 
The relations of the Dental Board of Victoria to the 
Government afford an interesting and valuable illustration 
of the powers and duties of boards appointed under Act of 
Parliament. Tinder the Dental Act, the Dental Board was 
authorised to frame regulations, defining among other 
things the subjects in which dental students were to be 
examined. Among those first appointed to the Board were 
some who had had much to do with the framing of the Act, 
and were therefore thoroughly familiar with the intentions 
of its promoters. Although these intentions had been par- 
tially defeated by errors in drafting, or alterations in 
passing the Act, they set themselves to carry out with 
as much energy as possible, not the actual wording of 
the Act itself, so much as the original aims. They 
have displayed a fine talent for passive resistance. The 
wording of the Act undoubtedly gave pharmacists who 
could prove they had been engaged in the practice of 
dentistry the right to registration, but this had to be 
applied for within a limited time, and under regulations to 
be made by the Board. Some of our readers will remember 
that the necessary regulations were published only a very 
short time indeed before the expiry of the period during 
which they could make application for registration, but, 
owing largely to the promptitude with which we issued a 
circular to all the chemists in Victoria, a considerable pro- 
portion of them secured their rights in this direction. This 
deviation from the wishes of the promoters was accepted 
with a fairly good grace, and representatives of the pharma- 
ceutical section of the registered dentists were admitted to 
the Board. 
Baffled in this direction, the Dental Board set themselves to 
remedy the errors of the past as far as possible, and although 
they had found it impossible to keep out of their ranks 
many whose company they did not desire, they seem to 
have decided that they would make the entrance to the 
dental profession in the future as narrow as possible. They 
framed regulations which imposed upon would-be dentists 
the necessity of pupilage, preliminary examination, and an 
extensive curriculum, which, it is stated by so good an 
authority as The Australian. Medical Journal, would have 
fully occupied a period of six years, and have cost £250 in 
fees. To provide for the decoration of registered dentists, 
they also made a regulation which would have authorised 
them to bestow the title of Licentiate of Dental Surgery of 
Victoria. 
For several years the Board has quietly persisted in this 
course of action. By some undeclared means they secured 
the approval of their regulations by the Attorney-General 
for the time being, and got them gazetted by the authority 
of the Governor-in-Council. Twice were the regulations 
approved in this form, and the Board cannot be blamed for 
concluding that the regulations had now the force of law. 
In the meanwhile a large number of dental students had 
been gradually accumulating, and no provision had been 
made for the curriculum demanded by the regulations, and 
finally their numbers and interest increased so much that 
they got together, organised themselves, and have appealed 
first to the Dental Board, and then to the Chief Secretary 
of the colony, that their case might be promptly dealt with. 
This, and the energy of one or two gentlemen who have 
espoused their cause, has led to the reopening of the whole 
question of the regulations, and on the last day of August 
the Under-Secretary for the colony forwarded to the 
Kegistrar of the Dental Board a letter which stated that in 
many respects the regulations were ultra vires, that 
they should be repealed, and new regulations framed, 
so as to accord with the provisions of the Act, and 
especially that the subjects in which students are 
to be examined by the Board should be specified with 
sufficient clearness and detail to enable them to under- 
stand the nature and extent of the examination. It stated 
that, in the Attorney-GeneraTs opinion, this regulation is 
the only one needed. The letter is published elsewhere, and 
there is no doubt that it is a very severe reflection on the 
past proceedings of the Dental Board, although nothing can 
be drawn from it in any way detrimental to the character of 
the respective members. By some means or other they 
have been misled into following the wrong track, and will 
now have to retrace their steps. As will be seen from the 
report elsewhere the Board by a majority have again adopted 
a policy of passive resistance, though we believe this will 
only have a temporary effect. 
The moral is that Pharmacy Boards and other bodies 
which are authorised to frame regulations under the Act of 
Parliament must regard, not the theoretical desirability of 
any course of action, but the precise wording of the Act 
under which they work. Even if an Attorney- General or a 
Governor-in-Council should approve of any regulation, and 
it should be gazetted, and thereby acquire force of law for 
the time being, it will still be open to revision by the courts 
of justice, and if anyone was aggrieved and chose to appeal 
to the judges, the Board would find that it was subject to 
this extraneous authority, and could not do things for which 
express provision bad not been made by the law. 
