Vol, X., No. 9. 
THE CHEMIST AND DRUGGIST OF AUSTRALASIA. 
221 
devised of affording chemists more recreation, but it did not 
seem that the clause was suited to the case. As there were 
chemists present who represented the town, the suburbs, 
and the country, he would be glad to hear some expressions 
of opinion. 
Mr. W. Taylor said he had come to the meeting to 
suggest that they should petition the Legislative Council to 
expunge the clause, or to so amend it that it would not 
interfere with chemists carrying on their legitimate busi- 
ness. He thought the majority of chemists would not find 
it worth while remaining open to dispense urgent prescrip- 
tions only. 
Mr. W. G. Clapperton referred to the sending out of 
circulars by the editor of “ The Chemist and Druggist,” 
London, and said that less than a third had been returned, 
and of these the opinion was about equally divided.* But 
if early-closing was desirable in the old country, he con- 
sidered it was a positive cruelty in a climate like that of 
Queensland to compel persons to do their shopping before 
six o’clock. Many mothers of families could not get away 
during the day, and preferred the cool of the evening to 
make any necessary purchases. He considered the clause 
affecting chemists most objectionable, and was sure that if 
the bill became law this particular clause would be 
frequently broken. He was of opinion that chemists as 
professional men should be no more interfered with than 
doctors, and hoped that the Government would be asked to 
exclude the clause. 
Mr. G. \V. Marshall was in favour of chemists’ shops 
being closed at eight o’clock ; six o’clock was, he thought, 
too early. 
Mr. S. H. Vaughan considered the clause a most absurd 
one. The purpose of the bill was to shorten the hours of 
work, but the chemist was expected to be in attendance to 
make up prescriptions. How would the word “ urgent” be 
defined? There were times when a hair brush ora tooth 
brush might be “urgently” required. The clause had evi- 
dently been put in the bill at the instigation of persons who 
were afraid that chemists would go outside their scope. He 
thought he might, speaking for the majority of chemists, 
say that they considered themselves something better than 
ordinary storekeepers, and were not likely to undertake the 
sale of jams, candles, i^c. As professional men they should 
be exempt from trade legislation. If the promoters of the 
bill wanted to protect the assistants the difficulty could be 
met by fixing a certain number of hours a week during 
which they could be allowed to work. If the chemists could 
do nothing but dispense urgent medicines after 6 o’clock 
many of them would close altogether, and this would cause 
the doctors to do their own dispensing, 
Mr. A. S. Denham said that, as a suburban chemist, he 
felt very strongly in the matter. It was after 6 o’clock that 
a large proportion of the business was done in the suburbs. 
The hours of the assistants and apprentices could be re- 
stricted if that was the purpose of the bill. He thoroughly 
agreed with the presenting of a petition to the Upper 
House. 
Mr. M. Ward said that some of the members who opposed 
the clause when it was introduced in the Assembly had 
expressed surprise that no steps had been taken by the 
chemists. He had not heard that the chemists had re- 
quested the Government to include them in the Act, nor 
had he heard that the public had expressed any wish to 
have the chemists’ shops practically closed at 6 p.m. 
Sometimes the simplest drugs were of the most importance, 
but they could scarcely be termed urgent medicines. He 
considered the Act a most un-English measure ; it 
would permit an inspector to enter a house, after the shop 
was closed, to examine an assistant or apprentice, and on 
this alone an employer might be fined. He would be glad 
if they could close at 5 o’clock, but they all knew that their 
duties did not allow this. If the clause became law, he 
would, if the others agreed, close altogether at 6 o’clock, and 
not open after that hour. 
Mr. Watkins knew that some such provision, as was 
contained in the clause before them, had been previously 
suggested, but he understood from the Secretary of the 
Traders’ Association that the matter had been allowed to 
Not strictly accurate — 13.^ in favour of comxjulsory closing, 734 
against, ami 103 neutral; and later— 243 in favour of the Shop Hours 
( Farly Closing) Bill, 27 against, and 12 neiitral. — Eoitor. 
QUEENSLAND. 
drop. If the Government would take all the responsibility, 
the chemists would be glad to close at six o’clock. The 
point raised by Mr. Vaughan about the doctors doing their 
own dispensing was a strong one. He was sure that the 
laws would be broken continually if the clause was not 
struck out of the bill. (One chemist said he would break it, 
and they could take the fine out in Boggo Road Gaol.) Who 
was to be the judge of urgency? Was the chemist to 
catechise each customer to arrive at a decision, or would 
the onus of proving “ urgency” rest with the purchaser. 
They would have inspectors coming round to lay traps for 
them, and he hoped the clause would be thrown out 
altogether. (A voice : Throw out the inspector.) If they 
had to keep open for supplying urgent medicines, he 
thought they should be allowed to keep open to supply 
anything that was required. 
Mr. Costin said that the other speakers had put the case 
so well that it left nothing to be said. He thought it would 
be advisable to ask the Government to recommit the bill 
with a view to striking out the clause, as they might not 
like to be compelled to this course should the Legislative 
Council comply with the request of the petitioners. 
Mr. Watkins remarked that the bill would prevent per- 
sons selling tobacconists’ goods after the closing time, so 
those who had instigated the clause need not fear the 
chemists in this direction. 
Mr. Field thought that, as a profession, they should not 
be dictated to as to when they should open or close their 
businesses. If difficulties arose as to the “ urgency” of a 
case, he thought the matter would have to be settled by the 
bench. He moved— “ That a petition be drawn up and 
presented to the members of the Legislative Council, pray- 
ing that clause 23 be omitted from the Early Closing Bill, 
and that chemists be exempted under the first schedule.” 
Mr. Costin seconded. 
After a short discussion, with the consent of the mover 
and seconder the words “ and that a deputation wait on the 
Colonial Secretary asking him to have the clause struck 
out in the Assembly,” were added. The motion, on being 
put to the meeting, was carried nem, con. 
Mr. Ward moved — “That the deputation consist of the 
President and Secretary of the Pharmaceutical Society and 
Messrs. Field, Watkins, Fitzgibbon, Denham, Clapperton, 
Tronton, and Vaughan.” 
At the request of several gentlemen, Mr. Ward added his 
own name to the members of the deputation. 
Mr. Fitzgibbon seconded. He thought the deputation 
should be as large and representative as possible. 
Carried. It was resolved to ask Messrs. Kingsbury and 
Midson, Ms L.A., to introduce the deputation. 
On the proposition of Mr. W. Taylor, seconded by Mr. 
Vaughan, it was resolved that the petition to the Legislative 
Council be gone on with. 
The Veterinary Bill was briefly referred to, but no dis- 
cussion took place. 
After the meeting had terminated, some of the members 
of the deputation went to the House with a view to making 
arrangements for the Colonial Secretaty to receive them 
next day. Through Mr. Midson, M.L.A., it was ascer- 
tained that the Colonial Secretary intended eliminating the 
chemists’ clause from the bill. 
(It is since reported in the press that the Colonial 
Secretary has circulated a sheet of amendments, one of 
which is to omit clause 23— “Chemists’ shops may be 
allowed to remain open for the purpose of supplying 
medicines and surgical appliances which shall be urgently 
required,” and in the first schedule— exemptions— to omit 
the word “retail” in the item, “Retail chemists’ and 
druggists’ shops.” Other important amendments are to be 
made, but not affecting the chemists.) 
Speaking in the Legislative Council on the Suppression of 
Gambling Bill, Mr. Macdonald Paterson is reported to have 
said : “ Why not tackle the drink traffic or the homceopathic 
evil.” Query — What did he mean ? 
Mr. Thomas, of Croydon, has just returned from his rural 
residence in the suburbs of Melbourne, and is remaining in 
Brisbane for a few days prior to going north. His business 
in Croydon has been in charge of Mr. A. F. Campbell. 
