176 PHARMACEUTICAL INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS AT VIENNA. 
the terra “school,” as the provisions made for the instruction of the junior 
and senior classes might be confounded. He thought it of importance that 
none but pharmaceutists should be engaged as professors for the instruction 
of pharmaceutical students, as they were best acquainted with the require¬ 
ments of such classes. 
Mr. Faber explained the conditions of pharmaceutical schools in America. 
The schools, where they existed in that country, were established by the 
pharmaceutists themselves, and they were independent of the medical insti¬ 
tutions. The instruction also was generally given by pharmaceutists, and 
the means thus provided were often very efficient. Certain privileges had 
been granted to pharmaceutical associations, and it was the duty of these to 
watch over the education of the rising generation. Regulations were made 
by these bodies with reference to the sale of poisons and the examination of 
apprentices, and these from time to time were authorized by the Govern¬ 
ment. 
Dr. Schlosser advocated the creation of lower and higher classes, the 
lower for apprentices, and the higher for advanced pharmaceutical students 
in the Universities, but distinct from the other University faculties. 
Mr. Dittrich agreed with Dr. Schlosser with regard to the higher phar¬ 
maceutical classes,"but thought the arrangement for the lower classes was 
hardly comprised in the question before the meeting. 
Mr. Kalbrunner thought that apprentices might obtain instruction in the 
natural sciences at the schools called “ real Schulen .” 
Mr. Reimann thought the pharmaceutists of North Germany would not 
desire the establishment of independent schools, as the students were accus¬ 
tomed to learn what and where they pleased. 
Mr. Wolfrum made a similar statement to that of the previous speaker, 
with reference to South Germany. He thought it was not new schools, but 
more independence from control in those which existed, that was wanted, 
and especially that there should be able pharmaceutists as professors. 
Mr. Jarmay thought that too much freedom in the means of acquiring pro¬ 
fessional knowledge, although theoretically just, would not be practically of 
advantage to pharmaceutists. 
Mr. Schiffner considered that the creation of independent pharmaceutical 
schools would afford the means for talented and well-instructed but poor 
pharmaceutists to establish themselves as professors, and this would be a great 
advantage to the profession, and would act as a stimulus to rising young 
men. 
Mr. Robinet thought that everything should be done that was possible for 
promoting scientific education among pharmaceutists. He believed that 
the profession once free, pharmaceutical schools would be a necessity. 
Professor Redwood explained what had been done in England towards 
providing the means of instruction for pharmaceutical students. Before the 
establishment of the Pharmaceutical Society no separate and independent 
pharmaceutical schools existed, and the instruction that could be obtained at 
the medical and other existing schools was not found to meet all the require¬ 
ments of their students. It had always been the object of those who took 
the most active part in extending pharmaceutical education in England to 
encourage the establishment of independent professional schools, and he be¬ 
lieved it was very important to the interests both of the medical and phar¬ 
maceutical professions that students in those professions should be educated 
separately. 
Dr. Mirus advocated the appointment of pharmaceutists as professors in 
those departments of the Universities appropriated to the teaching of phar¬ 
maceutical subjects. 
