August 31, 1872.] 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
177 
-deplorable state of things, another power than the Act of 
Parliament must be employed. The Board of Examiners 
could do much if they had time to make the examinations 
more practical. They would, I know, be glad to enforce 
on the candidates the requirement of a period of actual 
service in a chemists’ shop. Dr. Attfield wnuld have a 
period of study in some particular school, but he must 
not blame the Pharmacy Act for not requiring this, 
because when that Act was passed there was no such 
school in existence except that of the Society itself. 
As bearing on this question, I may just allude to the 
report of Dr. Greenhow, which appears in the last Phar¬ 
maceutical Journal. Among other good things, he 
says there, “It would, in my opinion, greatly conduce 
to the advantage equally of masters and apprentices if a 
general understanding could be arrived at, that no 
young men should enter on employment either as appren¬ 
tices or assistants, who had not previously passed the 
Preliminary examination.” 
You cannot make men perfect by Act of Parliament; 
you may restrain them from evil, you may even keep 
them in a straight line of conduct by the letter of the 
law; but if you imbue all concerned, masters as well as 
apprentices, with the spirit of the Pharmacy Act—and 
I know no organization more powerful to do so than 
this Conference—you will have done much to promote 
.the objects for which the Pharmaceutical Society has so 
long laboured. 
Notes read by Mr. Robert Hampson, of London. 
Owing to the zeal—I will not say over zeal—of the 
friends of pharmaceutical education, there has arisen 
something of the nature of a crisis on this question, 
which it is desirable to tide over, without taking false, or 
injudicious steps. 
The very suggestive paper contributed by Professor 
Attfield is deserving of thorough discussion, and as he 
.asks for free criticism upon it, and the general question, 
I will very briefly comment upon the “ situation.” 
I regretfully agree with the statement that there ds 
not “ a wide-spread demand by assistants and appren¬ 
tices for pharmaceutical education,” although I believe 
the demand has slightly increased since the passing of 
the Pharmacy Act of 1868. 
"Whilst dwelling upon this fact, I have a lively recol¬ 
lection of the recent zealous efforts of the Manchester 
■Chemists’ Association in the very laudable endeavour 
to found a school of pharmacy in connection with 
Owens College. These efforts were considered to be 
well-timed, and necessary, and were very cordially 
supplemented, by the managers of the important insti¬ 
tution to which the school was attached. Notwithstand¬ 
ing that Manchester is the centre of a notably wealthy 
district, including many thriving towns, the aggregate 
population equalling London in number, these very 
hopeful efforts ended in comparative failure. Funds 
were abundant in this instance , but the students were 
not forthcoming. In the face of this discouraging ex¬ 
perience, and experience of a like character in other 
important places, to attempt to establish a comprehen¬ 
sive scheme of pharmaceutical education, however ably 
the scheme may be planned, is simply to court defeat, to 
jeopardize the interests of the school at Bloomsbury 
Square, which does not flourish to our satisfaction, and 
to spend money fruitlessly. 
In trying to discover the cause, or causes, accounting 
for this evident want of demand for pharmaceutical edu¬ 
cation, no great distance, in the way of research, need, I 
think, be traversed. 
The chief cause is a very palpable one, if we open 
our eyes to look for it, and not live in a maze of ‘ great 
■expectations.’ 
It is simply this. The very limited , and slowly-grow mg 
demand on the part of medical men , and consequently on the 
Fart of the public also , for improved , or even passable phar¬ 
macy. 
If the medical profession, or the public, were loud, or 
only gently pressing in their demands for improved phar¬ 
macy, or for pharmacy at all in the majority of places, 
there would be no lack of zealous students, willing, 
yea eager, to pay the full value for instruction received, 
—no subsidies being required—whether in metropolitan, 
or provincial schools of pharmacy. 
When this demand shall have grown, and this de¬ 
mand is the only safe basis on which to build, and the 
laboiu’er in pharmacy is considered to be more worthy 
of his hire, then, and not till then, will pharmaceutical 
education flourish. 
We must not therefore be so irrational as to expect a 
rapid growth in the demand for pharmaceutical educa¬ 
tion. The improvement we so much desire, will be 
gradual, and in exact proportion to the demand for 
genuine pharmacy. 
I think there is no doubt, that the unsatisfactory rela¬ 
tionship, or rather want of relationship, which exists be¬ 
tween the medical profession and those who practise 
pharmacy, is the most constant, and influential cause of 
the deficient demand, for pharmaceutical education. 
An abiding interest in pharmaceutical education and 
progress is not to be expected, when, in many towns and 
whole districts, a physician’s prescription is almost a 
novelty, and the Pharmacopoeia processes are unprac¬ 
tised, as their is absolutely no use for any but the most 
simple pharmacopoeia preparations. 
Is the much-to-be-deprecated process of cramming a. 
very venial offence, when the student is aware that ordi¬ 
nary practical knowledge, with the possession of the 
legal entrance into the trade, is all, in the majority of 
cases, that is likely to be required from him by his client 
when in business P 
The examination-room is the place to check cram¬ 
ming. 
Compulsory attendance at lectures will not remedy 
the want of demand for pharmacy. The time is not 
ripe for the proposed change of compulsion—a change 
that would press so severely upon the hard-working 
self-reliant student, who, in spite of all difficulties, passes 
the examinations with credit and honour. 
The ordinary but imperious laws of demand and 
supply rule this question, and we must not wilfully 
ignore them. _ . . 
Can nothing therefore be done, to bring the physician, 
md the pharmaceutist, into more intimate mutual rela¬ 
tionship ? Cannot this Conference, as it assembles year, 
by year, do something in this direction P 
Much more depends upon the removal of this defec¬ 
tive relationship, than the premature establishment of 
schools of pharmacy; for when the demand comes, the 
supply will follow, 1 in good time.’ . . 
I would say in reference to provincial pharmaceutical 
education, that I think the Pharmaceutical Society 
svould willingly aid, in the establishment of central 
schools of pharmacy, according as a genuine demand 
for these schools arises. This aid being given, only ten¬ 
tatively, as these institutions should be self-supporting. 
The scheme adopted by the Pharmaceutical Council 
in November of 1870, had it been carried out, would 
aave been an excellent one for the purpose. 
I object to grants being given to pay lecturers 
md class-teachers. The students’ fees ought to cover 
these expenses. We have no right to unjustly cheapen 
pharmaceutical education. . „ 
There is no prospect of establishing a large number ot 
efficient schools of pharmacy. It is better to have one 
or two situated in important centres, well supported and 
conducted, than a great number of small evanescent 
schools, which may be here to-day, and gone to-morrow. 
We must bear in mind, that if aid be given to establish 
schools and classes in a diffusive manner, central schools 
of pharmacy will never be formed, as a diffusive pseudo- 
philanthropic scheme, will prevent the requisite aggrega¬ 
tion of students into educational centies. 
