ON THE CHEMISTS AND DEEGGISTS BILL. 
433 
Sir Fitzroy Kelly.'] 388. Would you for a moment lay aside the question of the 
sale of poisons, and tell the Committee, whether in your opinion, as a result of your 
experience, you think the public require protection against incompetence and ignorance 
in chemists and druggists in the case of making up medical prescriptions ?—Against 
ignorance in that particular direction the public does not, I think, require protection 
so much as against carelessness; but, in one respect (that, I think, Dr. Taylor did not 
advert to), it is of great importance to the public that pharmacists should be well 
educated in their business. I admit that the highest quality of pharmaceutical know - 
led^e can hardly be expected to be obtained universally throughout the country ; but, 
nevertheless, it is most desirable for the public that the pharmacist should be com¬ 
petent to examine chemically the drugs and preparations which he sells, so as to know 
whether (through adulteration or otherwise) they are below their standard strength, 
and so forth. 1 think the absence of that knowledge leads to inefficiency in the mak¬ 
ing up of prescriptions, and to much needless uncertainty in medical practice , foL 
some very important medicines may be greatly stronger in some shops than in others. 
This want of uniformity is a serious practical evil. 
389. The question I meant to ask you was, whether you think it necessary tor the 
safety of the public, that chemists and druggists in general hereafter should be per¬ 
mitted to make up prescriptions indiscriminately; that they should be subject to 
some examination as to fitness and as to knowledge?—I think it desirable, as part of 
390. Do you think there would be any difficulty in framing the kind of examination, 
and appointing competent examiners to conduct these examinations m the case oi 
chemists and druggists before they should be considered entitled, in the way of trade, 
to make up the prescriptions of medical men ?—I think there would be no great dif¬ 
ficulty in that; indeed, some of the difficulty I have heard adverted to to-day might 
be met by giving to the authority that regulated the examination a power for relaxing 
conditions in respect of certain thinly populated districts. , 
391. Without entering into details, you think it is desirable to legislate on the sub- 
392. At present, you are aware there is no restriction whatever by law on chemists 
and druggists for carrying on their business, both in the making up of prescriptions 
as well as in the sale of poisons ; but you think, with regard to the making up of pre¬ 
scriptions (I will trouble you with a question about poisons afterwards), it is desirable 
to legislate, in order to secure the public against the consequences of ignorant and in¬ 
competent people carrying on this business ? As part of a system, yes. 
Dr. Richard Qeain, examined. 
Chairman.] 415. You are a Doctor of Medicine, I believe, and one of the Members 
of the Medical Council ?—Yes. o 
416. One of the Members appointed by the Crown (—Yes. 
417. Have you directed your attention to the qualification of chemists and drug- 
S1 418. DcTyou consider that some examination is necessary with respect to persons 
who deal in drugs, or in certain classes of drugs ?—Yes j I joined m a recommendation 
to the Home Secretary to that effect by the Medical Council. . 
419. Will you state the grounds of your opinion ?-It was felt to be important, that 
chemists and druggists who had to deal with matters that may be dangeious to life, 
either from ignorance or carelessness, should be under some centre and be required 
to cove evidence of their competence to deal with drugs and chemicals. ... 
420 And when you say chemists and druggists should be submitted to such a test, 
where’ would you draw a line with regard to chemists and druggists ; would you 
oblige any one who dealt in any sort of drug m retail to pass an examination or would 
vmdnr/a line?—I should think there might be a difference in the character of the 
examination, but all persons who deal in poisons should know the properties of such 
P °42D In respect of drugs not poisonous ?-With regard to dealing in them, I think 
