TRANSACTIONS OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL SOCIETY. 
567 
parations, under the heading opium, elsewhere in the same Pharmacopoeia, the one is de¬ 
scribed by a name in which opium does not form part, and the other is described as tinc¬ 
ture of opium. 
The British Pharmacopoeia has been thus referred to as speaking with a weight of 
authority, but it should be noticed that to accept it as conclusive may lead to error, since 
the compilers of the Pharmacopoeia may, and in practice do, make alterations therein, 
and it clearly was not the intention of Parliament to give the compilers of the Pharma¬ 
copoeia authority to change the status of an article, and thus expand or contract the 
list of Poisons. 
The Pharmacy Act, 1868, is open to the observation that it comprises two classes of 
provisions,—the one class in restraint of trade by imposing penalties on the sale of 
poisons, by persons not registered under the Act, and thus, according to the rules of 
construction, to be construed strictissimus against the registered persons. The other class 
enacting penalties on sales of poisons by the registered persons, if not made in accord¬ 
ance with certain prescribed formalities, and according to the usual rules of construction, 
to be construed strictissimus in favour of the same registered persons. So far as the Act 
creates a monopoly, it may, prund facie, appear to the interest of registered persons that 
the widest construction shall be put upon the word preparations, but as a matter of 
convenience in the conduct of sales of poisons, and practically in the general interest of 
the registered persons and the public, it is most undesirable that a very extended mean¬ 
ing shall be given to the words “poison” and “preparations;” moreover, public safety 
will, in all probability, be best secured by a limited construction of the words. 
A class of cases at common law have been decided upon the general question how far 
articles in merchandise maintain or change their mercantile descriptions, as, for in¬ 
stance, how long grain remains properly described as wheat, notwithstanding the pre¬ 
sence of proportions of grain not wheat. The class of cases may aid in the considerations 
above suggested, say on the question, whether, when an article such as compound tinc¬ 
ture of camphor contains, as an ingredient, a very small proportion of opium, it is for 
all the purposes of the Act (if for any it must be for all) a preparation of opium. 
Compound tincture of camphor is commonly called Paregoric ; it is a useful popular 
medicine for coughs, and for the statutory requirements respecting poisons to be com¬ 
plied with on sales of paregoric, would not only be prejudicial as alarming patients 
about taking a useful simple medicine, but would go far to destroy the value of the 
word “ poison ” through too common use; applying the word poison to this and some 
other harmless preparations, which cannot correctly be deemed poisons at all, according 
to the common acceptation of the term, would naturally lead the public to regard the 
poison label as a mere formality. 
If it can be relied upon that a limited construction will be put upon the words 
“ poison ” and “ preparations,” it will be practicable to work the statute without further 
Parliamentary powers, because the case illustrated by strychnine can be covered by the 
exercise of the statutory powers created by Section 2, under which the Privy Council 
and the Pharmaceutical Society can declare that compositions containing any given 
proportions of Strychnine shall be deemed poisons within the meaning of the statute. 
In stating the foregoing, the endeavour has been to disclose the difficulty and raise 
the points with a view to suggestions under the authority of the Privy Council to the 
Pharmaceutical Society if such can be given. 
Reply. 
Medical Department of the Privy Council Office, 
6th March, 1869. 
The Secretary of the Pharmaceutical Society, 17, Bloomsbury Square, W.C. 
Sir,—I have laid before the Lords of Her Majesty’s Council the statement prepared 
for that purpose by the Solicitors of the Pharmaceutical Society, and put into my hands 
by the President of the Society, on the subject of a difficulty which the Society feels in 
applying the language of the Pharmacy Act, and particularly of its Schedule A, to the 
case of such pharmaceutical compounds as contain some scheduled “ poison in ex¬ 
tremely small and practically non-poisonous quantity. 
