34 
PHARMACEUTICAL LEGISLATION. 
Our Society would lose all title to public respect if its object were tlie pro¬ 
tection of its members against competition. And any member w'ho makes the 
attainment of the three titular letters M. P. S. the object of his study and ex¬ 
amination, is little more worthy of their distinction than they who wish to 
enjoy the same without the attainment of that knowledge the possession of 
which these letters are supposed to indicate. 
The first object of the Society should be the reduction, into one concrete body, 
of all dealers in dangerous drugs, with the view to the subsequent regulation of 
their proceedings in accordance with the requirements of public safety. And 
the first element of these regulations will of necessity be the requirement of an 
education of such degree and kind as will enable the dealer to carry on his 
business with all possible safety to the public. The reservation of the title 
M. P. S. to those wdio have earned it by their attainments, though abstractly 
desirable, is an object not to be compared with the reservation of the right to 
sell daugerous drugs, to those who have proved their knowledge of materia 
medica. 
I am glad to hear that the Society at its late meeting did not commit itself to 
anything which is narrow-minded or illiberal. For my own part I should feel 
that any efforts which I have hitherto made for the good of the Society would 
be degraded if I were now to make the Society in any way subservient to 
my personal interests. I am, yours, etc., 
Barnard S. Proctor. 
TO THE EDITOR OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL. 
Sir,—I must express surprise at the line of argument adopted in a leader 
of this month’s ‘ Pharmaceutical Journal,’in reply to the objections raised by 
a Major Associate and myself, in reference to some parts of the proposed 
Pharmacy Bill. In the first place we are told that we start with a false as¬ 
sumption, viz. “ That membership is the highest grade granted by the Coun¬ 
cil .” For my ow n part, I do not see how r it can be considered otherwise ; 
there are two positions—that of Membership, and that of Pharmaceutical 
Chemist. To obtain the former, a man must qualify for the latter; if he does 
not, he cannot be elected. Such being the case, is the assumption that mem¬ 
bership is the higher grade so very absurd ? Is it not rather the common- 
sense view of the question? 
A great mistake we are said to have fallen into is, that the public cannot 
be made to understand the difference between the two titles. In reply to 
this objection, I can only say that I have repeatedly asked my friends (not 
connected with the trade) the question, “ Suppose I put over my door 
* Pharmaceutical Chemist,’ and my next neighbour puts over his, ‘ Member of 
the Pharmaceutical Society,’ should you understand there was any difference 
in our respective qualifications ? ” The answer in each case was in the nega¬ 
tive ; and not unfrequently the persons asked said they supposed it was two 
ways of expressing the same thing. I certainly think that if we could enter 
into a long explanation with each member of the public, they could be 
brought to understand the difference ; but this would be utterly impossible. 
Exception is also taken to my quotation from the President’s reply to one 
of the deputations on the 19th of February. I merely quoted the passage 
literally , and assume it to be correct^ reported. He distinctly said that 
they had nothing to gain by opening the doors, and were satisfied to go on 
prospering as of late. 
After this there follows a passage that for cool assurance I think it w^ould 
be difficult to surpass, if indeed to equal. It is as follows :—“ It may seem 
inconsistent for this Journal to ignore the title of ‘ Member of the Pharma- 
