EXCISE INTERFERENCE IN THE SALE OF QUININE WINE. 159 
lie could obtain in the place. From Wolverhampton,—one sample, pure. I 
venture to think that the result is very creditable to the members of our profes¬ 
sion, because in the majority of cases the specimens were obtained in neighbour¬ 
hoods where it might have been supposed that adulterated samples would be 
met with ; indeed, my Bristol contributor states that he obtained his specimens 
from a locality where he was sure to be able to find adulterated drugs. It also 
shows pretty clearly that the wholesale druggists do not, in these days, supply 
their customers with adulterated white precipitate. 
To the medical profession, to ourselves, and the public, it is exceedingly satis¬ 
factory to find that the attention which the Pharmaceutical Society has directed 
to the diffusion of pharmaceutical knowledge among the chemists and druggists 
of this country, renders it difficult for any adulterated drug to get into general 
circulation among us ; on the other hand, it points to further vigilance and spread 
of pharmaceutical knowledge. 
Mr. Hanbury alluded to the different physical states in which this drug was met 
with. When in the state of lumps, these gave a characteristic ringing sound when 
shaken in a large bottle. The advantage of having it as a powder, ready for use in 
ointments, had induced one manufacturer to send it out finely levigated, and there could 
be no doubt of the advantages offered by this plan. 
Dr. Cocks considered that one of the very best results arising from such an Associa¬ 
tion had been illustrated by the paper which had just been read. That paper had 
eliminated facts, in a very few minutes, which must have cost an immense amount of 
trouble in gathering. There would be no end of mistakes in prescribing medicines were 
the medical men not sure of their qualities, and he thought the medical profession were 
more indebted to the Pharmaceutical Conferences for such papers as had been read than 
the members themselves, and, as a physician of Dundee, he had to tender his thanks, in 
the name of the profession, for the able and excellent paper to which they had listened. 
On the motion of Mr. Brough, the thanks of the meeting were voted to the author 
of the paper. 
A CASE OF EXCISE INTERFERENCE IN THE SALE OF 
QUININE WINE. 
BY MR. CHARLES KERR, DUNDEE. 
The subject I wish to bring under your notice is no new one, although I am 
not aware if it has ever been brought before the meetings of the Conference. 
It is, namely, the interference of the excise with the sale of quinine wine. 
Some two years ago there was an article on the matter in the ‘ Pharma¬ 
ceutical Journal,’ noticing the case of Mr. Waters, British-wine maker, whose 
quinine wine the excise would not allow to be sold, except by parties having a 
British-wine licence. Mr. Waters’s preparation was sold principally by grocers 
aud Italian warehousemen, who are generally licensed for such articles as British 
wines; but some chemists were customers to Mr. Waters for his quinine wine, 
and it was these the excise would not allow to sell it without a licence. A cor¬ 
respondence took place between Mr. Waters and the Board of Excise on the 
subject, and after several letters the Board came to the conclusion that a patent 
medicine licence and stamp were required for the sale of Waters’s quinine wine. 
I am not aware if these instructions were complied with, nor if the article is 
still in the market; most of those present will remember the case of Waters, so 
I need not occupy time in further referring to it. 
I wish to bring before the meeting the matter in a new light, as it occurred 
to myself some time ago. For three years I have made considerable quantities 
