710 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
LMarch 8, 1873, 
the translation and dis¬ 
pensing of Prescriptions, 
Pharmacy, General Che¬ 
mistry, the Chemistry of 
Poisons, and Posology, 
which examination shall 
he called the Major Ex¬ 
amination. 
Clause 16. 
Clause 16. 
All persons before regis¬ 
tration as Apprentices or 
Students shall pass the 
First Examination, and 
shall pay a fee of Two 
Guineas, whereupon they 
shall be registered as Ap¬ 
prentices or Students. 
All persons before regis¬ 
tration as Apprentices or 
Students shall pass the 
First Examination, and 
shall pay a fee of Two 
Guineas, whereupon they 
shall be registered as Ap¬ 
prentices or Students. 
After the 31st day of 
December, 1874, no person 
shall be admitted to the 
Major or the Minor Exa¬ 
mination who shall not 
have attained the full age 
of twenty-one years; and 
after the 31st day of De¬ 
cember, 1876, no person 
shall be allowed to pass 
the Major or the Minor 
Examination unless he shall 
satisfy the Examiners that 
for three years he has been 
registered and employed as 
an Apprentice or Student 
or has otherwise for three 
years been practically en¬ 
gaged in the translation 
and dispensing of pre¬ 
scriptions. 
Persons who have passed 
the Minor Examination at 
least three months pre¬ 
viously may be admitted to 
the Major Examination, 
and all other persons de¬ 
sirous of passing the Major 
Examination may make 
application to the Board of 
Examiners for special leave 
in that behalf. 
Mr. Sandford moved: 
“ That the bye-laws shall be altered in the sections 
numbered respectively 1, 3, 4, 9, and 10, by erasing 
therefrom the several portions of the said sections 
in that behalf appearing in the first schedule hereto, 
and substituting for the respective portions of 
sections so erased, the several clauses and words in 
that behalf appearing in the second schedule 
hereto.” 
Mr. Williams seconded the motion. 
Mr. Betty then proposed another alteration which he 
thought would be generally accepted, although, when 
he mentioned the same matter at an earlier period of 
the meeting, it came upon some members by surprise. 
It was to add to the 2nd clause of section 8, which de¬ 
fines the duties of the Finance Committee, the words 
“ with the assistance of a professional accountant,” so 
that the last clause would read as follows : “ This Com¬ 
mittee shall also prepare with the assistance of a profes¬ 
sional accountant a balance-sheet for the auditors pre¬ 
vious to the annual meeting.” 
Mr. Williams suggested the'addition'of the words 
“if necessary.” 
Mr. Mackay said the motion as proposed by Mr. 
Betty would render it imperative on the Committee to 
obtain professional assistance. 
The Vice-President thought it would be perfectly 
out of the question to pass such a bye-law. 
Mr. Urwick seconded the proposition, thinking it was- 
much more desirable to call in a professional auditor 
when everything was going on smoothly, and when all. 
were satisfied with the way in which the accounts were 
kept, than it would be to do so if it should ever happen. 
that things were not so satisfactory. As they were alter- • 
ing the bye-laws, he thought this addition might easily 
be made. 
The Vice-President said the present alterations of' 
the bye-laws had been referred to a committee, which, 
after discussion with the solicitor, had sent them back 
to the Council, and he considered it was perfectly out of 
order to add to them any other matter without notice 
having been given. He had no doubt that if the com¬ 
mittee really required the assistance of an accountant 
they might obtain it at any time without a bye-law 
being made for the purpose. 
Mr. Betty then withdrew the motion, saying he- 
would introduce the matter in another form. 
Mr. Hampson moved the following amendment:— 
“That the proposed new bye-laws be accepted, save- 
and except the one,—viz. section 10, clause 16,— 
beginning at the words ‘after the 31st day of De¬ 
cember, 1876, no person shall/ etc., to the end of 
the paragraph.” 
He said the solicitor had endeavoured to carry out the> 
wishes of the majority of the Council by the proposed; 
alterations, and to which he objected he was using 
a process of “ fine steering” to keep as near to the law r 
as possible, rather than preparing such bye-laws as* 
would carry out the full intention of the Act of Parlia¬ 
ment. He contended that this restriction as to the three; 
years, this hard and fast line, was unnecessary, and was. 
not the intention of those who framed the Acts of Parlia¬ 
ment. In the majority of cases, a youth entered the busi¬ 
ness in the usual manner as an apprentice, and acquired, 
practical knowledge. But cases might occur in which it 
would be difficult to conform to the three years’ regula¬ 
tion, and why should a man who was capable in two and 
a half or two years of qualifying himself be restricted 
from passing his examination ? He maintained that the 
examination might be, and was about to be, made tho¬ 
roughly practical. It appeared also that whereas some- 
months ago it was usual for forty candidates a day 
to be examined, now only twenty were examined in a 1 
day. This showed that greater time was taken, and 
that a more practical turn was given to the examina¬ 
tions. The position he took was this, that the Statute did 
not give power to the examiners to inquire into the ante¬ 
cedents of any man who presented himself for examina¬ 
tion, but only to test his practical knowledge, and this 
he maintained the examiners were perfectly competent 
to do without insisting on a three years’ apprenticeship. 
He therefore asked the Council to pause before they 
stretched the powers of the Act of Parliament in this- 
way, especially as it appeared to him there was no- 
imperative necessity for such a change. 
Mr. Williams said this subject had already been dis¬ 
cussed several times and voted upon, and he did not- 
think it was in order to bring it forward again. 
The Vice-President said it was perfectly in order to* 
propose an amendment at this stage of the proceedings, 
though he did not agree with the one brought forward 
by Mr. Hampson. 
Mr. Bottle called attention to the 4th section of the 
Pharmacy Act, 1868, to show that the Legislature did 
intend that persons should have been three years engaged 
in the business before they were admitted to pass the- 
Modified examination. He therefore thought it must 
also be their intention that any one entering the business, 
in future should conform to the same rule. 
Mr. Urwick. said he had great pleasure in seconding 
the amendment, and he did not think Mr. Bottle’s obser¬ 
vations at all touched the point, as they referred entirely 
