204 
LIVERPOOL CHEMISTS’ ASSOCIATION. 
Messrs. S. Banner, J. B. Edwards, C. Jones, and C. Higgins, were elected Members 
of Council, in the room of the members retiring by rotation. 
Mr. A. Norman Tate’s resignation having been accepted by the Council, Mr. M. 
Murpiiy was elected in his place. 
The following gentlemen were duly elected Members:—Messrs. W. J. Baker and 
Buckley. 
With a vote of thanks to the Chairman, the business terminated. 
First Meeting of the Fifteenth Session, held at the Royal Institution, October 8th, 
1863; the President, John Shaw, Esq., in the Chair. 
The following gentlemen were elected members:—Messrs. R. H. Davies, W. Taylor, 
C. H. Thomas, W. V. Ford, J. Cartwright, W. Moysey. 
Several donations to the Library were announced. 
The President proceeded to deliver the opening address of the session :— 
Gentlemen,—Twelve months have now passed away since I had the pleasure of 
addressing you at the first meeting of last session. These periodical recurrences 
should produce a salutary effect upon each of our minds, impressing upon us the great 
and important fact that our existence here is transitory, and perhaps very limited; and 
as time has often been represented as having a money value, especially to those who 
are dependent upon their own exertions, mental or physical, a duty devolves upon each 
of us of making the best use of every hour that may be given. At the request of your 
Council, I have again taken upon myself the duties and responsibilities of President of 
the Chemists’ Association for another year, and I would here beg to acknowledge the 
kindness and courtesy which I have uninterruptedly received at your hands during the 
year that is past. 
Having very recently occupied your time on two occasions, on which I have adverted 
to various subjects more immediately connected with the objects of our Association, I 
shall this evening beg to make a few remarks on the trade or profession to which the 
greater part of our members belong, namely, that of chemist and druggist. I am in¬ 
duced to do this from the circumstance that at our Annual Meeting, held a fortnight 
ago, a diversity of opinion was expressed as to the desirability of legislation as applied 
to all persons carrying on the business of a chemist and druggist, or small shopkeepers 
retailing drugs, chemicals, or pharmaceutical preparations; an opinion was also expressed 
that the late Jacob Bell, Esq., was not an advocate for such interference. This I was 
rather surprised to hear, for in the ‘Pharmaceutical Journal’I find him saying—“That 
an Act of Parliament is the ultimatum which has always been in prospect as the only 
means by which permanence could be given to an organization of chemists and drug¬ 
gists for the regulation of the affairs of that body, and the advancement of the art of 
pharmacy and in speaking on another occasion, he says: “ This society” (that is, the 
Pharmaceutical), “which was incorporated by Royal Charter in 1843, was entirely of a 
voluntary character; its powers did not extend beyond those who thofight proper to 
come within its ranks, and only those young men who desired to distinguish themselves 
came forward for examination; consequently, the influence of the Society, numerically , 
on those entering the business was small, while the result of the system of education 
and examination in the cases of those who availed themselves of it, afforded satisfactory 
evidence of its efficacy. It was therefore necessary, in order to extend that beneficial 
influence, to increase the powers of the Society, and for this purpose the Pharmacy Bill 
was introduced. The Bill confirmed the Charter of the Society. It then enacted that 
it would be unlawful for any person to assume the name, of Pharmaceutical Chemist, or 
Chemist and Druggist, etc., unless he had passed the prescribed examination, as a 
guarantee to the public that he was qualified to perform the responsible duty of dis¬ 
pensing medical prescriptions ; and although it might be proved, perhaps, that a very 
large majority were well qualified for their business, this did not invalidate the im¬ 
putation, as it still remained an open question whether qualification was the exception 
or the rule; consequently the whole suffered on account of the delinquency of those 
who, if a salutary law had existed, would not have been allowed to assume the name of 
chemists.” And in reference to the Act obtained in 1852, he says that “ it was not of 
that compulsory character which they had originally desired.” The interference with 
the sale of a few simple medicines by grocers, oilmen, and small shopkeepers in country 
