February 8, 1873.] THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
G35 
of Parliament in this respect, "but constituted an un¬ 
warrantable innovation, and as the Council no longer 
represented a small voluntary association, he would urge 
upon them not to be too hasty in making new regulations 
which had not been proved to be either necessary or 
•expedient. He was well aware that the Board of Ex¬ 
aminers had recommended these changes, and that those 
recommendations were adopted, but he contended that 
they were not properly discussed, but were passed with 
unusual precipitation. Therefore he considered he was 
quite justified in discussing the matter on this occasion. 
He had more faith in the examiners than they had in 
themselves, and thought they were fully competent to 
test the qualifications of the candidate without arbitra¬ 
rily fixing the age and intervals between the examina¬ 
tions, or prescribing that he should have passed any 
specified time in the business. He had not a word to 
say against the propriety and usefulness of the ordinary 
mode of entering the business, if it were done volun¬ 
tarily, but he had the strongest possible objection to 
tying down the hands of the candidates in this way, and 
was sure that no good results would accrue from 
this source. He might be excused for remarking 
that if these regulations had been in existence some 
years ago, he should not have been a member of the 
Council or in the trade at all. He felt positive that this 
was a retrogressive step, and as other bodies, such as the 
Apothecaries’ Company, no longer required a term of 
apprenticeship, he thought it was a great pity to intro¬ 
duce these limitations. He moved an amendment that 
the second paragraph be rejected. 
Mr. Savage seconded the amendment. 
Mr. Bottle submitted that the proposed alteration 
was strictly in accordance with the terms of the Act of 
1868, referring especially to clause 4. If the Legislature 
contemplated that a man, in order to pass the Modified 
examination, should have been three years in business, 
it could not be inconsistent to ask that a young man who 
came forward subsequently should serve three years 
before passing the Minor examination. There were 
•other clauses giving the Council power to make such 
bye-laws as they thought fit, and therefore he con¬ 
tended it was fully within their power to make the pro¬ 
posed alteration. 
Mr. Mackay, on the whole, agreed with the proposed 
.amendment, though he should have preferred the age 
being fixed at twenty instead of twenty-one. At the 
same time he would not take a vote upon that subject, 
especially as it would not come into operation until after 
1874. His own idea, however, would be to make twenty 
the age for the Minor, and twenty-one for the Major. 
With regard to the objection to the term of apprentice¬ 
ship, he thought that matter would right itself before 
the new bye-law came into operation, because there 
was a great feeling in Scotland, and he believed it would 
be so in England, that no apprentices should be taken 
who had not passed the Preliminary examination. Now, 
after he had passed that examination, it was quite 
right he should spend three years in practical acquaint¬ 
ance with the business before passing the Minor. In 
some branches of the legal profession it mattered not 
what was the age of the person applying, whether it was 
twenty, thirty, forty, or even sixty, he must serve a 
certain number of years and give evidence of having 
been so engaged before he could obtain the qualification 
he desired. 
Mr. Shaw said this matter was fully discussed three 
months ago, and he did not think it ought to be re¬ 
opened. He believed the proposed alteration was in 
strict accordance with the spirit of the Act, and it was 
impossible that a person could have a practical know¬ 
ledge of the business without serving three years in it. 
With regard to the age, that had been fully discussed, 
and it had been almost unanimously decided that twenty- 
one should be the limit. He must say, however, he 
took exception to the last paragraph. 
Mr. Ukwick said it was true this matter had been 
previously discussed at the Council when ho was in a 
minority, and he supposed he should be so still, for ho 
had a strong objection to seeing industry and intellect 
weighted. By this clause they put a weight on young 
men who were persevering and intelligent, confining 
them to three years’ experience and the age of twenty-one, 
when they might be fully qualified at an earlier period. 
He did not think in all cases three years were necessary to 
learn the business. It depended somewhat on the age 
at which a young man entered, and also on the education 
the lad received beforehand. It was very different now 
when youths were educated up to the age of sixteen or 
seventeen to what it was years ago, when boys were ap¬ 
prenticed at thirteen or fourteen. If a young man were 
apprenticed at sixteen or seventeen, and applied himself 
diligently to his business, so that he could pass the 
Minor at nineteen or twenty, he was worth to himself at 
least £10 a year more, and it was not fair to prevent 
him getting that. lie thought the examiners them¬ 
selves ought to be able to test the competency of a young 
man without reference to his age. 
Mr. Williams was astonished at the discussion on 
this clause, since it was simply for the purpose of 
giving legal force to the regulations adopted by the 
Board of Examiners which the Council had already 
adopted. 
Mr. Sandford said he thought the matter had been 
already settled. As to the age of twenty-one years, ho 
might say that at the time the Act of Parliament of 1868 
was under consideration the Government were very 
anxious, in the interest of the public safety, to introduce 
that requirement for passing the examination, but it 
was then waived in obedience to the wishes of the 
Council. However, he believed the Council were now 
pretty well convinced that the introduction of such 
a limit would be beneficial. The great point was to 
ensure the proper education of youths coming into the 
business, and therefore it was proposed to require an in¬ 
terval of three years between passing the Preliminary 
and the Minor, which would ensure not only sufficient 
education to begin with, but in effect a certain amount of 
practice in the business. It had been proposed to substi¬ 
tute the words “ engaged and employed ” for the word 
“registered,” but he thought registered was the proper 
word, as a man would not register himself as an apprentice 
unless he intended to follow up the business. Registration 
was the legal thing, and he should prefer that word being 
retained. They did not require apprenticeship to any 
particular men, they only insisted that the candidates 
should have been occupied a certain time in the busi¬ 
ness. He had no doubt about their power to make the 
bye-law. 
Mr. Greenish would have preferred fixing the limit 
of age at twenty. 
Mr. Shaw said it was stated that it was illegal to 
admit persons under age to the qualification of chemists 
and druggists. 
Mr. Baynes said the great point was that directly a 
man had passed the Minor examination he could imme¬ 
diately commence business, and he thought twenty-one 
was quite soon enough. 
Mr. Hampson having briefly replied, 
The President then proposed to put the amendment, 
but 
Mr. Savage stated that he had only seconded it 
because he objected to the age of twenty-one years as 
the limit, and not with the intention of defeating it 
altogether. 
The amendment, therefore, fell to the ground, and 
the paragraph was adopted. 
With regard to the third paragraph, the President 
said he should recommend the rejection of it altogether. 
He thought that if youths were either obliged to pass 
the Oxford or Cambridge examinations, or to go to 
Edinburgh or London to be examined, it would put 
them to a great deal of inconvenience. 
Mr. Greenish said there was a general impression that 
