706 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
[March 8, 1873. 
the registration of “ vermin killers ” in accordance 
with the regulations applying to poisons com¬ 
prised in part 1 of Schedule A, we had in view 
simply the interests of chemists [and druggists 
dealing in such preparations. We offered this sug¬ 
gestion as indicating a means by which they could 
protect themselves against the inconvenience and 
damage likely to result from charges of negligence 
in the sale of such poisonous materials. Practically, 
it matters little, in this respect, whether or not there 
be any grounds for charges of the kind; and those 
against whom they have been made will doubtless 
know that, however unfounded they may have been, 
it is very difficult to avoid their disadvantageous 
consequences. 
It was from this point of view, and bearing in 
mind the numerous instances in which chemists and 
druggists have been regarded as in some way 
blamable in cases of poisoning, that we regarded 
the subject when, speaking in terms of commendation 
of the course taken at Whitehaven, we remarked 
that the chemists and druggists of that place had 
earned the thanks of the trade at large for having 
set a good example. The contrary opinions ex¬ 
pressed by Mr. Tibbs appear to be the result of ex¬ 
aggerated ideas as to interference with trade sup¬ 
posed to be involved in the observance of regu¬ 
lations as to the sale of poisons. 
Such ideas we regard not only as illusory but mis¬ 
chievous, inasmuch as they make a self-protective 
proceeding appear as a grievance and a hardship. 
It must also be remembered that the demand for 
the observance of certain regulations in the sale of 
poisons was ur ged in the interest of the public, and 
that it was upon this basis that they were made 
obligatory. The law having defined what the che¬ 
mist and druggist is bound to do in order to satisfy 
the demands of the public, it is unnecessary for 
him to consider whether or not the prescribed re¬ 
gulations affect the safety of the public; his duty, 
however, is clearly that of complying with the re¬ 
gulations ; for his extra trouble in doing so he has a 
right to be remunerated by the public in whose interest 
they have been prescribed; and for his own sake 
it is desirable that his observance of precautionary 
measures should rather exceed than fall short of 
the literal requirements of the Act. It is for this 
leason that we have recommended registering the 
sale of “ vermin killers ” containing phosphorus, 
for although this substance is not a “poison ” ac¬ 
cording to the Act, it is, in fact, a very dangerous 
poison; and while the course we have suggested is 
in accordance with the spirit of the Act, its adop¬ 
tion is consistent with that careful discretion on the 
part of the Trade which we have always regarded 
as the most real and thorough safeguard against 
poisoning which the public can hope for. 
We trust that these remarks will contribute to¬ 
wards “ setting right,” not only Mr. Tibbs, but others 
who may share what we feel bound to call his mis¬ 
taken notions. "With the same object it may be well 
to correct some errors he has fallen into. First, as 
regards the interpretation of the Act by Mr. Kitchin ; 
while we cannot look upon Mr. Tibbs’s argument 
that a vermin killer containing strychnine is not a 
preparation of strychnine as anything but an evasion 
of fact, it is also necessary to remind him that he is 
totally wrong in stating that the addition made in 
1869 to Schedule A of the Pharmacy Act ignores 
preparations of strychnine, for, in fact, it specifically 
introduced them for the first time. 
Again, though Mr. Tibbs holds it to be a fallacy 
to regard paregoric as a preparation of opium, and 
is astonished that it is held to be one by so many 
chemists, we think few will be found to agree with 
him, inasmuch'asThat view would involve a disregard 
of the fact that in many of the cases where paregoric 
or even syrup of poppies are used they are un¬ 
doubtedly poisons, and should therefore be treated 
as such. 
While speaking of poisons and their sale, we may 
take the opportunity of replying to some corre¬ 
spondents’ inquiries as to the yellow prussiate of 
potash, or ferrocyanide of potassium. This sub¬ 
stance is well known not to be a poison; and for 
that reason it would be unnecessary to observe any 
of the prescribed poison regulations in selling it. 
One of our correspondents, writing from Manchester, 
says that this salt is “ beyond a doubt ” a metallic 
cyanide, and refers to Davis’s poison-book as indi¬ 
cating that its sale must be registered. He is, how¬ 
ever, in error on this point. The salt is not a me¬ 
tallic cyanide, but a ferrocyanide—a compound as 
distinct from cyanides as formates are from acetates. 
And, further, the work he quotes as an authority is 
also in error; and we may here add, that it is en¬ 
tirely a mistake to suppose that book is certified 
by Mr. Bremridge as correct. The only authorita¬ 
tive publications on this subject are the Schedules to 
the Act of 1868, and the addition to it in 1869. 
These are to be found in the Register and in the 
Society’s Calendar, and in the resume recently issued 
by order of the Council of the Pharmaceutical 
Society. 
HOSPITAL OUT-PATIENT SYSTEM. 
At a recent meeting of the Association for reform¬ 
ing the system of furnishing medical attendance and 
medicine to out-patients, it was proposed that “ a 
lay officer attached to each hospital be instructed to 
see that the charity is not abused by persons being 
admitted as out-patients while well able to pay the 
usual fees of practitioners, or to obtain medical at¬ 
tendance by provident dispensaries or otherwise. 
Also that patients shall no longer be tempted to 
crowd to hospitals by the offer of medicine gratui¬ 
tously, and therefore that no medicines should be 
supplied to out-patients at hospitals, but that advice 
and prescriptions be alone given.” 
