556 PHARMACEUTICAL SOCIETY OF GREAT BRITAIN V. MARWOOD. 
provided by section 12 of the 15 & 16 Victoria, cap. 56. No authority or fiat of the 
Attorney-General is necessary in reference to such action.” 
The Judge (to Mr. Blackburne).—What does the defendant mean to do? Does he mean 
to submit to the penalty ? 
Mr. Blackburne. —The defence is, that my client has complied with the Act of Parlia¬ 
ment. 
The Judge. —That is a matter of fact, and quite apart from the question of jurisdiction. 
Mr. Flux. —If we go from the question of jurisdiction, and come to the-question of fact, 
I am prepared to deal with it on evidence. 
The Judge. —If I give a judgment for the plaintiff, on the present occasiou, I shall do it 
out of respect to the Attorney-General’s opinion, and recommend the defendant to appeal. 
Mr. Blackburne. —If there is a conviction, it will be for my client to say whether he will 
take your honour’s advice, and appeal. 
The Judge. —I have no factious feeling about the matter, but I thought it was not a case 
for civil jurisdiction, and any judgment I give out of deference to any higher authority than 
my own I shall give subject to the consideration of the Court of Appeal, if the defendant 
chooses to appeal. 
Mr. Flux. —The defendant shall have every facility. I am sure your honour will give 
me credit for having respect to your wishes, looking at the very large expense incurred to 
procure the opinion of her Majesty’s Attorney-General. 
The Judge. —I remain of the same opinion, that the case was not one for civil but for 
criminal jurisdiction, and that nobody could sue for it but the Crown. 
Mr. Flux. —On the last occasion the defendant admitted that he used the name “ che¬ 
mist,” but your honour felt a delicacy about receiving his admission, so I will call a witness 
to prove the fact in deference to your honour’s wishes. 
The Judge. —There was an admission of the defendant’s attorney that his name was not 
on the register; that, I consider, was an admission. 
Mr. William Peirce was then called, and produced an order for the insertion of the de¬ 
fendant’s advertisement in the newspapers. The defendant signed the order in the witness’s 
presence. 
Mr. Flux. —If your honour will read the whole of the advertisement, you will see that 
the defendant is one of a class of men who call themselves herbalists, and profess to give 
medical advice, which is not the business of a chemist. That advertisement, I submit, 
brought him within the 15th clause of the Act of Parliament as a person who, not being on 
the register of chemists and druggists, acted as one. 
The Witness , cross-examined by Mr. Blackburne, said, that when he got the order for 
the advertisement, a paper, now produced, was shown to him. It was on the faith of that 
certificate that the advertisement was inserted. He asked the defendant if he was registered, 
and the defendant showed him that ticket as a proof. 
The Judge. —Where did it come from ? 
Mr. Blackburne. —Prom the Pharmaceutical Society. 
Mr. Flux. —I will put the registrar of the Pharmaceutical Society in the box. 
Mr. Blackburne. —The Act of Parliament says, all persons who are chemists and drug¬ 
gists within the meaning of the Act shall be registered upon certificates according to schedules 
0. and D. of the Act, and that a chemist and druggist was a person who had kept open shop 
for the making up of the prescriptions of duly qualified medical practitioners. I shall prove 
that the defendant sent certificates in conformity with the law to the Pharmaceutical Society, 
and that, owing to some underhand means or another, the Society did not put him on the 
register,—my client does not know why,—and now, forsooth, they come down upon him for 
his authority for using the title chemist and druggist. 
The Judge. —That settles it. He is not on the register ? 
Mr. Blackburne. —No. The certificate shows that he had complied with the Act, and so 
■was entitled to be on the register, and the moment he got the receipt he produced it to the 
agent of the paper as an authority for him to insert the advertisement. 
Mr. Elias Bremridge , examined, said :—I am the registrar appointed under the Pharmacy 
Act, 1868. My office is at 17, Bloomsbury Square, London. This plaint was brought by 
me under the authority of the Council of the Society. In January of last year I received 
from the defendant certain papers, and on the receipt of those papers there was sent to him, 
as a matter of course, a receipt for them. That document first produced was the receipt 
