465 
ORIGINAL AID EXTRACTED ARTICLES. 
CHEMISTS’ ASSOCIATIONS. 
TO THE EDITOR OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL. 
Sir,—The above subject having been brought into prominence by the failure 
of an attempt to organize a Chemists’ Association at Birmingham, it seems to 
me that an appropriate and favourable opportunity is presented for a few re¬ 
levant remarks, with a view, if possible, to “point a moral, or adorn a tale.” 
That “union is strength” all will admit, and that “knowledge is power” 
none will deny. After many years of hard work, on the part of the pioneers of 
pharmaceutical progress, these facts are beginning to dawn upon the trade. 
The process, however, is slow, tediously slow; and, even now, one could almost 
believe that were it not for the untiring exertions of a few (happily an in¬ 
creasing few) active, energetic, and powerful minds, the whole fabric of phar¬ 
maceutical progress would ignominiously fall to the ground. Such is the 
apathy of the trade—such the indifference to all but a certain forced and 
monotonous routine. If an apt illustration were required, it would be found at 
once in the listless and unsatisfactory condition of Chemists, and Chemists’ 
Assistants’ Associations. The work that is dope is done by a few, and empty 
chairs and a sprinkling of silent members make up the rest. The introduction, 
even, of elements of a purely social character fails to bring with it the antici¬ 
pated success. Why, then, should this be, amongst a body of presumably edu¬ 
cated and intelligent men? Why should chemists and druggists feel so little 
interest in that which so nearly concerns them? Mr. Deane has told us that 
at the outset of his career he wisely determined that his business should afford 
him his chief pleasures. How few of us can say so much! How comparatively 
few of us there are, who derive any real or genuine pleasure from the prosecu¬ 
tion of the life-task we have set ourselves to perform ! We work well with our 
hands, it is true, (there is no alternative, and we cannot afford to be idle,) but 
our hearts do not respond. It is all stern, practical reality,—all unpoetical, dry, 
tedious work, behind the chemists’ counter. Not, then, until we feel more 
interest in matters practical at home, shall we be likely to pursue with any zeal 
or enthusiasm the science and theory which invite our consideration elsewhere. 
And this, I imagine, is the chief circumstance or condition that stands in the 
way of our progress, and makes the able efforts of our best men so comparatively 
unavailing. We do not care much for the counter—we care nothing for the 
laboratory. And so we go on from day to day, because, forsooth, we are im¬ 
pelled on by the force of circumstances; our minds, in reality, seeking pleasure 
and profit from matters of a more congenial nature. Self-preservation and the 
desire for independence carry us on, not, as it should be, the love of our occu¬ 
pation, and the ambition to become “a help and ornament thereunto.” 
But to alter all this, and acquire the needful interest in our daily work, what 
must we do? We must make our business a more attractive one. We must 
lessen the hours of labour, close our doors on Sundays, and be less ready to com¬ 
pete for the the stray pence that may come in at unseasonable times. As things 
are now, we can only excuse ourselves on the plea that “our poverty, not our 
will consents.” But can these suggested reforms be effected by any direct pro¬ 
cess with which we are acquainted? It would seem not. We have no choice, 
then, but to struggle on with things as we find them, falling back for our chief 
encouragement on the maxims with which we started, and feeling well assured 
they will prove triumphant in the end. It will be slow work—it will be hard 
work; but, happily, there are those with large minds and indomitable hearts, 
who are not discouraged by paucity of attendance or lukewarmness of support, 
