6G 
DEBATES ON PHARMACY BILL. 
unknown to the seller, unless he gives evidence that he requires it for a legitimate pur¬ 
pose, and is aware of the uses, danger, and proper dose, as the case may be, of such 
poisons ; and it shall be unlawful to sell any poison either wholesale or by retail, unless 
the box, bottle, vessel, wrapper, or cover in which such poison is contained be distinctly 
labelled with the name of the article and the word “ poison,” and with the name and 
address of the seller of the poison, and any person selling poison otherwise than is herein 
provided, shall, upon a summary conviction before two justices of the peace in England 
or the sheriff in Scotland, be liable to a penalty not exceeding £5 for the first offence, 
and to a penalty not exceeding £10 for the second or any subsequent offence ; and, for 
the purposes of this section, the person on whose behalf any sale is made by any appren¬ 
tice or servant, shall be deemed to be the seller; but the provisions of this section, ex¬ 
cept as regards labelling and the word “ poison,” shall not apply to articles to be ex¬ 
ported from Great Britain by wholesale dealers, nor to sales by wholesale to retail 
dealers in the ordinary course of wholesale dealing, nor shall any of the provisions of 
this section apply to any medicine supplied by an apothecary to his patient, nor apply 
to any article when forming part of the ingredients of any medicine dispensed by a 
person registered under this Act, and nothing in this Act contained shall repeal or 
affect any of the provisions of an Act of the Session, liolden in the fourteenth and 
fifteenth years in the reign of her present Majesty, intituled “ An Act to Regulate 
the Sale of Arsenic.” Now, I think it is a very inconvenient way of designating 
poison by means of an asterisk, but rather that they should be divided and stated 
in two classes in the schedule. The restrictions as to whom the poisons are to be sold 
are absurd, for how can an old woman, in a village, who sells these things, ascertain the 
truth or falsehood of the person’s statement requiring these articles ? The chemist and 
druggist is to take evidence upon this point, but I see no clause in the Bill empowering 
him to administer an oath, and it is not at all probable that a man who wants to commit 
suicide or murder will state the real purposes for which the poison is required, and, that 
being so, where is your security ? Again, although a man might want it for the most 
legitimate purposes, he is not to have it unless he is aware of the uses, danger, and the 
proper dose, as the case may be, of such poison. The remainder of the clause I do not 
so much object to, but why not follow the provisions of the Arsenic Act, which has not 
been of very extensive application, because it only applies to a single poison ? but if you 
apply it to all poisons you will be extending a very salutary piece of legislation. The 
provision was made that if a false statement was made as to the use to which the arsenic 
was to be applied, that it should be good evidence against the party in a court of justice. 
There was nothing in arsenic beyond its cheapness that rendered it necessary to guard 
against its indiscriminate sale. 
Lord Elcho : This clause, as amended, has been drawn, after a long interview with 
the medical officer of the Privy Council. I am much mistaken if my right honourable 
friend does not know to whom I allude, and I am much mistaken if his objections to 
the amended clause have not been founded on the gentleman’s representation. The 
amended clause proposes a middle course, and, with regard to the Arsenic Act, I am told 
it is unreasonable to follow its provisions, because they are so stringent as to make the 
Act in a great measure a dead letter. It is to provide against that evil that the new 
clause has been drawn up. I can therefore only ask the Committee to decide between 
the clause proposed by my right honourable friend as representing, practically, the medical 
officer of the Privy Council, and that proposed by those gentlemen who are practically 
engaged in this business. Whatever orders or regulations are in existence in this country, 
relative to the sale of poisons, are entirely due to these gentlemen who form the Phar¬ 
maceutical Society. They have done great public service since their incorporation. 
They have a most excellent school of pharmacy; they have excellent and extensive 
laboratories; lectures of the highest class are delivered at the institution, and it is a 
body whose opinions are entitled to respect and consideration. 
Lord Robert Montagu : There is no security in the clause as proposed by the noble 
lord. The intention of the clause is no doubt good, but I think that the clause proposed 
by the right honourable gentleman, the Member for Caine, is rather better, and carries 
out the noble lord’s intention. 
Mr. M. Chambers : The words proposed by the right honourable gentleman, the 
Member for Caine, raise a question that does not appear to have been touched upon 
during the debate. The word “ poison ” is used, and it appears to me that every person 
