182 
BRITISH PHARMACEUTICAL CONFERENCE. 
cutive Committee as to the issue of such a record. He felt some hesitation as to the 
equal acceptance of the opinion that the Conference should be its own publisher, and he 
thought this part of the scheme might be reconsidered. 
Mr. Brady (Newcastle-on-Tyne) said that although he was not a member of the Sub- 
Committee which had taken charge of this question, yet that Committee had, from time 
to time, consulted him as Treasurer of the Conference, and it was evident that from hold¬ 
ing such an office, the subject had a peculiar interest for him. It was on the ground 
that self-publishing was the cheaper plan of the two that the Committee recommended 
its adoption, a decision which was based upon the comparison of actual estimates ob¬ 
tained. 
Mr. Schacht inquired if offers had been asked from more than one publisher. 
Mr. Reynolds said that the Sub-Committee had thought it proper in the first place 
to consider the question of the two systems of publication, rather than. the merits of 
rival publishers. Upon the evidence, there was no other conclusion to be arrived at than 
that the Conference must be its own publisher, unless, as already expressed in the report 
of the Committee, better terms were offered. He believed that a publisher could afford 
to take the work for less money, and the Executive Committee would take care that any 
revised estimates were duly considered. The present resolution did not bind the Con¬ 
ference to either plan. . 
Mr. Savage (Brighton) expressed his confidence that the Executive Committee would 
decide rightly in the matter. 
Mr. Balkwill (Plymouth) remarked that the sum requisite to produce such a work 
was a mere trifle for the chemists of this country to bear. The main question which 
occurred to his mind was, what should be its scope ? Should it embrace theoretical 
chemistry, for instance, or therapeutics ? He should be very glad if the latter subject 
could be introduced. 
Mr. Stoddart (Bristol) pointed out that the introduction of therapeutics would be a 
departure from the domain of pharmacy, and an encroachment upon the province of the 
medical profession. 
Mr. Atkins (Salisbury) said that amongst many members there would be a desire for 
practical business hints, as well as for more scientific information. If such matter were 
to be included, he could vouch for the cordial reception which would be given to the 
work. _ . 
Professor Attfield said that he would attempt to give a clearer conception of the 
scope of the proposed ‘ Year-book.’ As was known to all members, the Proceedings of 
the Conference were now issued as an annual volume soon after each meeting. This 
would be continued; but, in addition, it was proposed to bind up with it an abstract of 
all papers upon pharmaceutical subjects published during the year, whether at home or 
abroad. Such an abstract was properly described by the name that had been adopted 
for it, viz. ‘ A Year-book of Pharmacy.’ By way of illustrating the exact nature of 
such an abstract, he would refer the meeting to the Report on the Progress of Pharmacy 
contained in a recent volume of ‘ Proceedings of the American Pharmaceutical Associa¬ 
tion,’ which was alluded to in the Report of the Executive Committee. The abstract 
now referred to occupied about 150 pages, the subjects being duly classified under the 
following heads:— 
1. New Books on Pharmacy and allied subjects, home and foreign. 
2. Pharmacy. Subdivided into Apparatus; Processes; Cerates, Ointments, etc. ; 
Extracts, Mixtures, Pills, Plasters, Tinctures, etc. etc. 
3. Materia Medica. Subdivided into Vegetable Drugs,—these classified by Natural 
Orders, Animal Drugs, Minerals ; Medicinal Chemicals, viz. Inorganic Compounds, Or¬ 
ganic Compounds. 
4. Inorganic Chemistry , classified according to the elements. 
5. Organic Chemistry. Acids; Bases; Alcohols ; Hydrocarbons; Starch, etc.; 
Glucosides ; Chromogens ; Proteine Compounds. 
Researches which had been published during the year upon the above subjects were 
briefly noticed, the salient points being given, and the author’s name and a reference to 
the periodical in which his paper had been published. 
Mr. Andrews (London) expressed the opinion that such a publication would greatly 
increase the influence of the Association in places which it did not visit. 
The resolution was unanimously agreed to. 
