CORRESPONDENCE. 
501 
considerably ilie taking of opium and laud¬ 
anum. 
What I would suggest, then, are these 
four propositions:— 
First, “ That there should be a most de¬ 
cided opinion as to what a patent medicine 
really is.” 
Secondly, “That all patent medicines 
should be labelled agreeably with the pro¬ 
visions of the Pharmacy Act, that the public 
may know the nature of the remedy they 
are using, and be cautious accordingly.” 
Thirdly, “ That the retail licence should 
be uniformly ten shillings per annum;” 
and—- 
Fourthly, “ That wholesale dealers in 
London should pay £5, and wholesale deal¬ 
ers in the country £1, per annum, inclusive 
of retail licence.” 
These views I think will be endorsed by 
many country firms, and would not fall 
harshly on any. The fatigued mammas 
would still be able to adminster Steedman’s 
powders and Mrs. Winslow’s syrup to their 
restless infants, and Holloway w T ould remain 
in his glee. 
Apologizing for the length of these re¬ 
marks, believe me, 
Yours very faithfully, 
Alfked William Smith. 
Rye, Jaim ary 8, 1870. 
Poison Act. 
Sir,—I am located in a large village ; am 
expected to dispense (although very little is 
done); take charge of all poisons; and am 
held responsible for any error that may 
arise upon the sale of them. Now, as there 
are more restrictions respecting the sale of 
poisons, consequently more trouble, time, 
and expense are incurred, and, what is 
to be regretted, without any additional 
income to the legitimate tradesman, but 
a diminution of profits; for the follow¬ 
ing reason, viz.:—Persons send for pa¬ 
regoric ; a label with “ Paregoric—Poi¬ 
son” is put on the bottle, an explanation 
is given (perhaps to a servant) about the 
word “ Poison,” and very often two or three 
interviews take place concerning it; at last, 
the customer thinks it unnecessary trouble, 
and feels annoyed. Again, chloric ether, 
chloroform, etc., are often sent for, and these 
I serve according to the Act, consequently 
in many cases give offence; then such per¬ 
sons go to a dirty huckster’s shop (of which 
there are eight or nine in this place), where 
the drugs are sold, for simple medicines 
which are in much request, such as magne¬ 
sia, rhubarb, senna, castor oil, ess. pepper¬ 
mint and pennyroyal, spirits of nitre, tinc¬ 
ture and syrup of rhubarb, antibilious, ape¬ 
rient, and other pills, seidlitz powders, etc., 
which are inferior and sold at a lower rate. 
This brings the respectable tradesman in 
bad repute, because he charges a remunera¬ 
tive price for better drugs. The sale of 
drugs by such hucksters takes away a large 
amount from the right course. 
Therefore, it is my opinion that no par¬ 
ties except chemists should be allowed, to 
sell drugs. I think the sale of patent medi¬ 
cines should be confined to us, and one 
uniform charge for the licence should be 
adopted. 
I am, yours truly, 
Alpha. 
January 20 In, 1870. 
Sir,—I fear that the Pharmaceutical 
Council, by their recent additions to the 
poison schedule, have greatly increased our 
difficulties in the matter. I have referred 
to the “ Case” published in the Journal for 
April, 1869, but a reperusal of it and the 
articles relating to it has by no means in¬ 
creased my satisfaction with the policy of 
the Council. In the Journal for this month 
the promoters of the Act are given great 
credit for having successfully resisted the 
introduction of the word “ preparations” in 
all except five instances, whilst a few lines 
further on the Council is congratulated on 
having now added it no less than six times. 
Now this word “ preparations” is perhaps 
the most objectionable word in the whole Act, 
as it is almost impossible to say what may 
not be held to be a preparation of a substance, 
provided any portion of it is contained in the 
mixture. It is all very well to refer us to 
Mr. Simon’s opinion, which just amounts 
to this, “ that we must use our own judgment- 
in the matter, and act on our own responsi¬ 
bility,” which is about as unsatisfactory a 
reply as could well have been devised. 
What we want is authority, not opinion ; 
and we do not leant the responsibility of de¬ 
ciding for ourselves what is properly in the 
schedule and what is not. 
We have lately had abundant proof that 
magistrates, coroners, newspaper writers, et 
id genus omne, are only too ready to trounce 
a poor druggist if they can by any means 
get the chance of doing so; and the word 
“preparations” gives every opportunity, for 
whatever may be the opinion of the Privy 
Council or its officers, it does not alter the 
fact that the word is in the schedule, and 
that its interpretation rests entirely with 
the magistrate or his advisers, from whose 
decision an appeal, even if successful, would 
involve an amount of cost and trouble few 
of us are in a position to incur. 
Besides, many will ask what do the Coun¬ 
cil mean by “ preparations of prussic acid, 
or of the cyanides, or of the other substances 
enumerated” ? Surely the word was quite 
needless in most of the cases where it has 
been added. 
Further, how is the new regulation re- 
