PROSECUTIONS UNDER THE PHARMACY ACT. 
157 
the chemists generally before this step was taken. Mr. Brydges having read the entry 
of the sale of the poison in this instance, from which it appeared that the poison was 
sold for the destruction of vermin (and which was in proper legal form with the ex¬ 
ception of the disputed point), proceeded to say that one of the main objects of the new 
Act was to give a ready means for the detection of crime; and yet, to point out another 
omission of the Act, there was no provision compelling chemists to show their books. 
Mr. Hands had at once shown his, not knowing but that he had thoroughly complied 
with the law ; but if chemists were to be made the subject of these proceedings, the 
very purpose of the enactment would be defeated, and chemists would refuse to show 
their books when called upon. 
In reply to a question from the Magistrate, the Clerk said that by the 17th section it 
was provided that the address should be entered, which had not been done. There 
could be little doubt that it was intended that the address should be given in the column 
for the name. Mr. Brydges had no doubt that was the intention of the Act, but the 
form prescribed was calculated to mislead, there being no column for the address. No¬ 
tice should have been given to chemists before any proceedings had been taken. Mr. 
Brydges remarked on the faulty construction of the Act; any chemist might, if he 
chose, give away poison to any one without any entry. The Magistrates, after consul¬ 
tation, desired the defendant and other chemists of the town should conform to the Act 
in the particular in question. The information was then dismissed. 
Sale of Syrup of Poppies. —On Tuesday, July 6th', before Thos. Richardson 
and Thos. Richards, Esquires, Wm. Crussell, grocer, was charged by Inspector Robert 
Mitchell with selling certain drugs in violation of the Pharmacy Act. Police-constable 
Thacker, Benwick, deposed that on the 14th ult. he went to the shop of Wm. Crussell 
and asked for a pennyworth of syrup of poppies, and that he was supplied with 
the same. Mr. W. Richardson appeared for defendant. Mr. P. Langman, Pharma¬ 
ceutical Chemist, Chatteris, stated that he had examined the contents of the 
bottle and found that it contained syrup of poppies, the manner of making which 
he described. Mr. Richardson contended that not one of the articles supplied 
by his client contained any poison. Mr. Sturton, wholesale druggist, of Peter¬ 
borough, supplied Mr. Crussell with those drugs, but they were only substitutes. 
Mr. Sturton, who was present, was asked if he informed his customers that the drugs 
were only substitutes, and not genuine articles ? he replied that he did not. A 
second charge was then gone into. Police-constable Thacker stated that on the 4th 
ult. he also purchased twopenny worth of paregoric from defendant, who entered the 
sale in his book, but placed no label on the bottle, giving as a reason that it contained 
no poison. Mr. Langman said that he analysed the paregoric, and found that it con¬ 
tained some opium. Police-constable Thacker further deposed that he purchased on the 
same date sixpennyworth of laudanum, and that it was put in a vial bearing a label 
with the word poison on it, but no name or address.—Mr. Richardson said that as there 
was nothing in any drugs produced contrary to the Act, and as the case was not a wilful 
one, he asked that the second case might be carried to the Queen’s Bench.—The Bench 
said that on a former occasion when Mr. Crussell was before them, he promised not to 
sell such articles again. After a short consultation, the Bench decided that the defendant 
should be fined 40s. in each case with costs, and allowed Mr. Richardson’s request in the 
second case.—The costs in the first case amounted to £1. 7s. 7 cl .; in the second, to 
£1. 12s. 7 d.; and in the third, to £1. 7s. 7 d. Total fines and costs, £10. 7s. 9 d. 
Sale of Essential Oil of Almonds. —On Saturday, July 24th, Dr. Hardwicke 
held an inquest in Broad Street, Bloomsbury, on the body of Thomas Smith, who was 
found dead in a coffee-house. It was proved, from a post mortem examination, that 
death had been caused by essential oil of almonds, which had been obtained from Mr. 
F. Wilson, of Old Street, St. Luke’s, a surgeon and chemist, who had sold it to the 
deceased, on the pretext that it was required for confectionery. Mr. Wilson said that 
he seldom sold poisons, but in this case he was taken off his guard by the rational 
manner of the applicant. He produced a small memorandum book in which were 
several entries of poisons having been sold. The coroner observed that he had not 
complied with the Act relating to poisons: if he acted as a chemist he must conform 
to the law. After some other evidence had been given, as to the state of mind of the 
