CONVICTION UNDER THE PHARMACY ACT, 18GS. 
493 
Mr. Flux said lie would first take the summons for unlawfully dispensing. 
Mr. Elias Bremridge, of 17, Bloomsbury Square, was then sworn. He stated, that 
on the 9th of December last, lie attended at the shop of the defendant, No. 1, Little 
St. Andrew Street, Seven Dials, and presented a prescription to be dispensed, and 
that it was dispensed, and he received the bottle B, the prescription lie now produced. 
The mixture as he received it w T as handed to Professor Attfield for examination, as 
detailed on the last examination. The defendant did not know his (prosecutor s) name 
nor address ; neither name nor address was on the prescription. He w T as not aware 
that the defendant made any entry regarding it. He did not find the defendant s 
name on the Begister of Chemists and Druggists, and, therefore, he could say he was 
not so qualified. 
Mr. Beard said the defendant was not charged with that. 
Cross-examined by Mr. Beard .—Is this the kind of book (producing one) the che¬ 
mists and druggists use for the purpose of making entries of the sale ot poisons ? 
Mr. Bremridge. —No, and, moreover, the name and address ot the vendor was not 
on the bottle. 
You never knew an instance of an accidental omission to make an entry, I suppose. 
In this case I must say I do not believe it is an accidental omission, because 1 have 
found that the defendant has been systematically sending out poisons without putting 
his name and address on them. 
He appears to have labelled them “ Poison.” 
That is not sufficient. 
Have you known Mr. M‘Call long ? 
I have never known Mr. M'Call. 
Have you ever had any application from him P 
I never had any application from him at all that 1 am aware of. 
Mr. Flux .—Does Mr. Beard raise any question as to the defendant being the pro¬ 
prietor of the shop ? 
Mr. Beard. —No. » 
Mr. Knox.— Then, that being admitted, the whole case is proved, except as to his 
being a Chemist and Druggist or not. 
Mr. Flux said, if he were, he must still make an entry with regard to the dispensing- 
of a medicine containing poison, and so make it in a book to be kept by him lor the 
purpose of entering medicines dispensed. 
Mr. Beard said it was quite true his client was not a Chemist and Druggist,’ 
but he had applied to be examined, and was perfectly competent, having been in* 
the medical profession twenty-five years, although he had only recently been f'ft 
business as a chemist. The best proof which could be shown of the bona fides 
of his client was the production of the book, which he now begged to show to the 
magistrate, which contained entries from time to time of the sale of different poison¬ 
ous articles, which were specified by name as required by the statute. As he had before 
said, he was not cognizant of having been guilty of any neglect; but it turned out 
that in this particular instance he had omitted to make the entry required ol the 
name and address of the party. He could only say he very much regretted having? 
done so, and he could have had no motive for making it whatever. There was- 
hardly any profit attached to it, and there could be no motive whatever for exclud¬ 
ing the entry. It was one of those unfortunate things that would occur sometimes 
in the hurry of business, or from some other accidental cause. Mr. M‘Call was very 
sorry to have in any way infringed the statute, which he was not at all desirous of 
doing, and he ventured to think under the circumstances that his Worship would 
come to the conclusion that it was done without any wrong intention, and, that, there¬ 
fore, the infliction of a mere nominal penalty would satisfy the justice of the case,., 
and he could only say further on his behalf, that every care would be taken that- 
nothing of the sort should occur again. 
Mr. Knox said he had better hear the other summons before giving his decision. 
Henry Haines , 185 E., was then sworn, and stated that on the 17th of December, 
1869, he attended at the shop of the defendant and purchased the article now pro¬ 
duced (namely, the packet of oxalic acid deposed to by Dr. Attfield on the previous 
occasion, and marked A. by the magistrate). 
