310 
CORRESPONDENCE. 
consisting of little trade jealousies which do 
arise and will continue to do so, I am at a 
loss to conceive. What I understand to be 
the duty of the local secretary is this :—To 
protect the interests of the Pharmaceutical 
Society, to see they are not infringed upon, 
to give notice to the chemists of his town of 
anything having occurred likely to affect 
their interests, of which he is duly advised 
by the secretary of the Pharmaceutical 
Society. 
Yours faithfully, 
Fred C. Moss Millar, 
Torquay. Son. Local Sec. 
“The Sale or Poisons Act.” 
Sir,—Kindly grant me space to exemplify 
a risk to which retail chemists are exposed 
under this Act. One of my regular cus¬ 
tomers purchased of me this day some pare¬ 
goric elixir mixed with syrup of squills, the 
bottle brought for which had on it my label 
for the article first-named, but without the 
word Poison; from which I concluded that 
the quantity last had in it was obtained 
prior to the passing of this Act; I therefore 
explained the necessity for me to label the 
same Poison. Whereupon my customer 
stated that she knew quite well about the 
“new law,” and that I had twice before 
labelled it poison, but that, because she 
thought it nonsense and likely to make those 
who used it unnecessarily timid, she had each 
time washed off the ugly word poison. 
Now, Sir, supposing mischief to have re¬ 
sulted from the use of the said paregoric, 
should I have been believed when I said 
that I invariably labelled it poison, or how 
could I have proved it in that particular 
case? The label was one of Bird’s patent 
circular with the word poison together with 
the famed death’s head and cross-bones very 
prominent. 
I think this case proves the superiority of 
a label with both the name of the article 
and the word poison on it, over a separate 
label with the word poison only; as also the 
importance (if a separate slip “poison” be 
used) of sticking it on the bottle first, and 
then making it as secure as possible by the 
over-wrapping of the second label; but this 
latter plan would not prevent the word 
poison being readily removed by scraping 
or other methods. 
I am, Sir, yours truly, 
G. W. T. Arrowsmith. 
1leading, August 23rd, 1869. » 
Modified Examination Certificate. 
Dear Sir,—Having recently passed the 
Modified examination of the Pharmaceu¬ 
tical Society, I was greatly surprised to 
receive from the Secretary a shabby morsel 
of printed matter in the form of a receipt 
for my fee. Now, I had hoped to have had 
a more substantial relic to admire for all the 
efforts I have for months been making to 
pass. At the least, I expected to have a 
certificate as a chemist fit for framing, some¬ 
what after the Members’ Certificate of the 
Society. I am sure it would give no little 
pleasure to those who have to pass, and have 
passed, to know they would have a decent- 
looking certificate to hang up for their 
friends to admire, instead of the now unut¬ 
terably mean production which is the only 
reward of their efforts. Even if a charge of 
5s. or 10s. w r as made for it, no one would 
grumble. Certainly not— 
Your obedient servant, 
A Modified Man. 
Manchester, Oct. 21 st, 1868. 
[We advise our correspondent to make a 
further effort and pass the regular examina¬ 
tion, when he will be able to gratify his 
ambition.] 
Prevention of Accidental Poisoning. 
Sir,—In the last month’s Journal is an 
account of a paper on the “ Prevention of 
Accidental Poisoning,” by Mr. Burrell, in 
which he suggests the enveloping of the bot¬ 
tles containing the active poisons in wooden 
or cardboard cases. This, in my opinion, 
would be a very doubtful advantage, as it 
would shut out one means of detection. His 
suggestion of marking the maximum dose 
on each bottle is not a bad one, but the 
limited means suggested give little security 
against accidents. 
If all the active medicines he placed in a 
cupboard either enveloped in cardboard or 
naked, with the dose marked on each, and 
with labels different from all the other labels 
in the pharmacy, would there not be danger 
in the cupboard P With strychnine and its 
congeners in power, morphine and its con¬ 
geners, and emetic tartar and its congeners 
together, would it not be quite as possible for 
the dispenser to take one of the strong alka¬ 
loids instead of emetic tartar, or a morphia 
salt, as to take strychnine instead of James’s 
powder or nitrate of bismuth, in the open 
pharmacy ? And if such a mistake were to 
be made, can there be any doubt as to the 
result, especially if a full dose were pre¬ 
scribed ? Then there have been fatal acci¬ 
dents caused by substances of which such 
partial means take no cognizance, and are, 
with such an arrangement, as likely to occur 
again. 
The same objections apply equally to the 
other limited means which have been advo¬ 
cated from time to time. What we require 
is some plan which will give as much secu¬ 
rity against poisoning with saltpetre, com- 
