THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. [December it, 1872 , 
438 
Mr. Flux said hardly so, because medicines were dis¬ 
tinct from chemicals. 
Mr. Lumley said one consideration was that the 
articles to be analysed would be drugs supplied by 
chemists, and thus a gentleman would be analysing 
articles furnished by persons in his own trade. Was 
it contemplated that he should give up his business ? 
Mr. Flux said that consideration would apply equally 
to a medical man. They did not contend that only 
gentlemen on their own Register should be eligible, for 
there were many men of eminence as practical analytical 
chemists who were not on the Register. He would also 
submit that there was no reason to imagine that a prac¬ 
tising chemist and druggist would not duly discharge his 
duty equally as well as a practising medical man; because 
they might be called upon to analyse medicines. Their 
contention really came to this—there was no objection 
applicable to the one body which did not apply to 
the other, and that in fact a chemist should in respect of 
these appointments stand on a level with a medical man. 
A medical man might be presumed to have a kind of 
medical knowledge which the other did not possess, 
whilst on the other hand, the chemist might have a kind 
of knowledge which the medical man did not possess. 
Again, there was nothing to show that the medical men 
as a body were examined in chemistry. 
Mr. Lambert said it appeared to him that before a 
medical man’s election could be approved, some proof 
would have to be given of his competent knowledge of 
chemistry. And in like manner, if a chemist was appointed 
some proof would be required that he had competent 
medical knowledge. 
Mr. Flux said his contention was that the whole matter 
was a question of fact. The person to be appointed 
must have three qualifications, and if he possessed any 
two without the third, he was not competent; this was 
to be ascertained, not by reference to any register, but 
by such evidence as the electing bodies could obtain. 
Mr. Lumley said he could understand that a gentle¬ 
men’s medical knowledge could be ascertained by a re¬ 
ference to the Medical Register, and in the same way 
that his chemical knowledge might be ascertained by a 
reference to the Register of the Pharmaceutical Society. 
Could not microscopical knowledge be proved in the 
same way by reference to the register of some microsco¬ 
pical society P 
Mr. Flux said as far as he could understand, admis¬ 
sion to the Microscopical Society w r as not subject to any 
test. It was merely a matter of voluntary subscription. 
The same was, to a certain extent, the case with the 
Chemical Society. 
The Presidext said that in any election which would 
take place, the persons competing, would bring forward 
■what certificates they could in proof of their qualifications, 
and the electing body would decide probably from 
those certificates and any other knowledge they might 
be able to obtain. "With regard to the w r ord “ medical,” 
he thought it might almost be left out of the question, 
because he believed it referred not to a knowledge of 
medicine in the therapeutical point of view, but to a 
knowledge of the nature of medicines either to be used 
as adulterants or as being themselves adulterated; and 
also a knowledge of the action of these medicines upon 
the human frame. He contended that chemists and 
druggists, w r hen properly educated, did possess that 
knowledge, and probably in a greater degree than 
ordinary medical men, and he thought this view was 
borne out by the opinions of the Attorney-General, 
Solicitor-General and Mr. Langley. 
Mr. Lambert said he did not quite gather that from 
the opinion itself. 
The Presidext said he thought it would appear so 
from the opinion w T hen read in connection with the 
case upon which it was given. He had nothing 
to say against their medical friends; on the other 
hand, he did not wish them to be unduly favoured, 
but that all should be put on the same footing. 
Mr. Lumley said it must be remembered that the • 
analyst had not only to report as to whether drugs 
were adulterated, or used to adulterate other matters, 
but also w r hether adulterations of other articles were 
injurious to health. One adulteration might be very 
slight, and yet very injurious to health, another might 
be very gross, and yet harmless. Some articles were 
poisonous in certain quantities, but not in others. 
Mr. Flux said his contention was that the know¬ 
ledge of materia medica possessed by a chemist and 
druggist would enable him to deal with such matters. 
Every chemist had upon his shelves works stating what 
were the proper doses to be employed of strychnine 
or any other poisonous compound when used for medi¬ 
cinal purposes, and it not unfrequently happened that 
chemists were called upon to correct by their own 
knowledge errors made in prescriptions. 
Mr. Lumley said he could quite understand that; 
they had, however, to deal not only with drugs and 
medicines but with articles of food of all kinds. 
Mr. Greexish remarked that if a medical mani 
studied microscopy, he generally did so in connection 
with the minute structure of the human body; whereas 
a chemist used the microscope habitually to detect 
adulteration in the practice of his business. 
Mr. Williams said there was one point which had not 
been touched upon, viz., that the main function of the 
person to be elected was that of analysing. Now analy¬ 
sis was a thing which required great experience, long 
study and much special knowledge. Medical men were 
rarely conversant v/ith this branch of science, whilst 
many chemists were. He held in his hand a cutting 
from London newspaper containing the remarks of a 
medical officer of health declining the office of analyst 
for his own district, for which he had been proposed, on 
the ground that he was not qualified. In so saying he 
was not to be understood as stating that he was not per¬ 
fectly qualified as a medical officer, but candour com¬ 
pelled him to say that he had never made an analysis in 
his life, and he even went so far as to add that in his 
opinion there were only two medical officers in London— 
Dr. Letheby and Dr. Stephenson—who were really quali¬ 
fied for the office of analyst. This was an honest 
admission of the truth which the deputation contended 
for. 
After a few remarks from Mr. Hills, 
Mr. Lumley asked what were the qualifications of 
any of the gentlemen appointed under the former Act ? 
Mr. Williams said he believed there were only two ■ 
appointments made in London, one of Dr. Letheby, 
a medical practitioner, and one of Dr. Muter, who held 
no medical qualification. 
Mr. Flux said as far as he could gather no inference 
could be drawn from the appointments made under the • 
former Act. 
Mr. Lambert said he thought the subject had been 
very fully discussed, and he and Mr. Lumley would sub¬ 
mit to Mr. Stansfeld the resolutions which had been 
drawn up, together with the case submitted to the 
Law Officers and their opinion, and also lay before 
him as fully as they could the views of the deputa¬ 
tion. He would add that he believed as yet there 
had been very few appointments, none having been 
submitted for the approval of the department. The 
whole question was at the present time under conside¬ 
ration, so that a more opportune moment could not 
have been chosen for the deputation. 
The Presidext suggested in conclusion that the ob¬ 
jection to a chemist being appointed because he ndght 
have to analyse articles sold by his fellow-tradesmen 
applied equally to medical men as officers of health, 
since they might be required to inspect and report upon 
property in whiph some of their best patients were inter¬ 
ested. 
Having thanked Messrs. Lambert and Lumley 'for 
their courteous reception, the deputation then with- - 
drew. 
