PHARMACEUTICAL LEGISLATION. 
37 
be taken as any guide as to their real opinion. In the ‘ Chemist and Drug¬ 
gist ’ for April, one correspondent ridicules the idea of a man being elected 
to membership, and at the same time refusing him the title of Pharmaceutical 
Chemist; while the following is an exact copy of a part of the speech of Mr. 
J. T. Holmes, at the dinner of the North Staffordshire Chemists and Drug¬ 
gists, as reported in the May number of the same journal:—“ He must say 
that he, for one, w'as not absolutely in favour of the proposed arrangements, 
because, although chemists might all become members of the Pharmaceutical 
Socie'ty, they would still be excluded from using the title of ‘ Pharmaceutical 
Chemists/ which was at present held by very many who had no other claim 
to the distinction (if such it might be called) than from the mere fact of their 
having paid so much per annum. He wished to know what objection the 
Pharmaceutical Society could have to allowing that title to all who were 
willing to pay an amount of money into their funds equal to the average of 
that paid by such members. He said that such was the general opinion of 
the trade in Sheffield, and such was the opinion of all who studied the mat¬ 
ter impartially.” 
There are some other points I would have discussed were it not for fear 
of making this letter too long. 
Yours truly, 
Chester, May 22, 1867. JOHN MlLLS. 
TO THE EDITOR OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL. 
Gentlemen,—When I entered the Lecture Hall on Wednesday last, it was 
with a prejudice in favour of keeping to the old tracks; but before leaving the 
meeting my views were considerably modified. 
The gentleman who, having been himself recently admitted to the privileges 
of the Society, wished to exclude all others from enjoying the same opportuni¬ 
ties of obtaining membership, completely refuted his own arguments. Mr. 
Abrahams and Mr. Pedler, however, entered into the subject in a fairer manner, 
and, I am free to confess, expressed views much in accordance with my own. 
But it was not until Mr. Edwards came to the rescue, with his clear logical 
and comprehensive enunciation of the policy adopted by the Council, that I felt 
how utterly untenable the old prejudices were. 
It is a source of great satisfaction that we have such a body of gentlemen as 
those who sit at the helm of affairs: and I trust that nothing will be allowed to 
interfere with their free action. 
This was the first occasion on which I have attended a business meeting of the 
Society ; every one present must acknowledge the candour, patience, and the 
forbearance shown towards the various speakers, and feel it incumbent to sup¬ 
port. the Council in their highly responsible position, both for the interests of 
our noble Society, and of society at large, so as to render united efforts of per¬ 
manent benefit to all classes. 
I remain, Gentlemen, yours obediently, 
Richmond , S.W., May 20, 1867. E. Goodwin MuMBRAY. 
TO THE EDITOR OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL. 
Sir,—So much has been said on both sides regarding our forthcoming Bill, 
that I will not trouble your readers with a long letter. I now write what I 
intended to have said at the Special Meeting, but felt too much annoyed with 
some of the speakers to do so. 
Legislation is necessary, all admit, and as we are to give up theory, we 
certainly ought to have some practical graduating scale to work upon. 
