March 15, 1873.] 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
739 
•ceutical Society was not whether women should be allowed 
’to become registered chemists or pharmacists, but whether 
they should be admitted as members of the Pharmaceutical 
Society—a body in which, through its Council, are vested 
certain legislative powers; and the Council has stepped in 
and wisely refused such an innovation. 
Now, at the risk of being called a “ benighted obstructive ” 
by your Plymouth correspondent (Mr. Balk will), I would 
maintain that it is not desirable to lift woman out of that 
sphere which she is well qualified to fill as the help-meet of 
man, and place her in the unlovely position of his rival. I 
■would even question the propriety of admitting her in com¬ 
mon with male students into the lecture theatre, as I think 
the indiscriminate intermixture of the sexes at that age with¬ 
out proper female supervision is fraught with serious moral 
and social evils. Mr. Balkwill admits that the cases of girls 
requiring pharmaceutical education would be comparatively 
few;—might they not be met by the appointment by the 
Society of a competent lady teacher ? 
It is surely unnecessary to drag in the names of such men 
as William Allen and Jacob Bell into such a discussion as 
this ; but as Mr. Balkwill has drawn certain inferences from 
the fact of their being members of the Society of Friends, I 
would remind him that that body, whilst recognizing many 
of woman’s gifts, which have been largely ignored by former 
generations, still studiously denies her any legislative power 
in the body. 
I venture boldly to dispute the correctness of the state¬ 
ment that we are behind the other learned bodies in not 
granting degrees to women; for whereas a lady of my ac¬ 
quaintance has passed the examination of the University of 
•Cambridge with mathematical honours, but is denied her 
degree of Bachelor of Arts (possibly from the incompatibility 
of the title with the sex), there is nothing to prevent any 
lady with the necessary ability from taking our highest 
academic degree (such as it is), and announcing herself 
-as “ Pharmacist with honours.” 
I trust that these remarks may tend to place the ques¬ 
tion of admitting women as members of the Society on its 
proper footing. 
Chas. Fryer. 
Scarborough, March 10th, 1873. 
Sir,—In your issue of the 22nd February I notice a letter 
signed “ Pharm. Brit.” on the subject “ Pharmaceutical 
Women.” 
Now, Sir, although it might be pertinent to argue that in 
such a case the sex has a fair title to be considered “persons 
within the meaning,” etc., and that they are the more ac¬ 
ceptable sex of advisers in most of the simple cases which 
come before the druggist, I feel disposed to ask “Pharm. 
Brit.” only for a little stretching of his imagination, which 
I trust may console him for his fancied “ loss of cash.” 
Let him then picture himself enjoying his future “ on his 
own account,” avenging his past in the present, by receiving 
service from one entirely confidential and trustworthy, wholly 
devoted to his interests, and of qualifications equal to his 
own; and all this at the cost of not even a low salary for 
mere “ pin money /” May he attain it! 
Deva. 
Mr. Hugh M. Williams writes to say that he would admit 
the ladies by all means, and that he thinks they would be as 
harmless to the trade as they used to be prior to the com¬ 
pulsory examination. 
Apprentices and Members. 
Sir,—I send you a few “ notions ” from the country upon 
two matters which are now receiving attention. Imprimis— 
the apprentice. 
This distressing complaint shows a variety of remarkable 
phases, phases which change as rapidly as those of the moon, 
and from the extreme absurdity they at times exhibit they 
might be supposed to be influenced by the lunar body. A 
short tune ago the malady was at its height in representing 
the poor fellow as being dreadfully imposed upon and com¬ 
pelled to submit to scandalous indignities, even to soiling his 
fingers by handling a duster. Now we have the other ex¬ 
treme, that the master in the form of a local secretary (in 
condonation of former cruelties ?) is unlawfully assisting or 
■by his absence tacitly acquiescing in the future apprentice 
illegally passing the Preliminary examination. Were this 
latter charge a myth, members of the Council would not have 
spoken so pointedly of it. But Mr. Whitfield, in the intensity 
of his indignation, boldly puts his heart outside his waistcoat 
to be pecked at, and invites his confreres to follow his ex¬ 
ample. As a local secretary, I politely decline his invitation, 
because I, in common with the “ insulting ” members of the 
Council, not only believe the statements to be true, but that 
the facts were stated in much milder terms than the abuses 
merited. And I also wholly disapprove of the Preliminary 
examination as at present conducted. Following the example 
of the College of Surgeons, I should prefer seeing this ex¬ 
amination placed under the management of the College of 
Preceptors. I can see no hardship in adopting this plan, for 
the fact of going to one of the “centres” where the college 
holds the examinations, would not prevent a parent or 
guardian allowing a youth to enter the trade. Moreover, the 
trifling expenses connected with the journey are scarcely 
worth notice, and those connected with the Minor or Major 
examinations might as reasonably be objected to. But would 
there not be substantial satisfaction to the neophyte in pre¬ 
senting himself before a properly constituted examining body 
and finding the examination fairly conducted ? Would he not 
conceive a greater respect for the trade and its examinations 
than the present slovenly system suggests ? And would he 
not also learn that such unworthy aids as “cribs” and 
“ crams ” would be of no avail, whilst industry, coupled with 
straightforward, honest conduct, could not pass unrewarded 
among a body of examiners who gave to all “ a fair field and 
no favour ?” If the Preliminary examination be necessary, 
as much care should be bestowed over it as over the two sub¬ 
sequent ones. 
2nd. The relative positions of chemists and druggists 
and of members of the Pharmaceutical Society:— 
We have read much in the pages of this Journal upon the 
subjects of “pharmaceutical titles” and of “outsiders.” I 
can only see one satisfactory solution of the difficulty in ar¬ 
ranging the former titles, and that is by entirely abolishing 
the latter class. We members who have passed our examina¬ 
tions must not approach this subject with narrowed views, 
but endeavour by a bold and generous policy to at once snuff 
out all these petty misunderstandings and jealousies respect¬ 
ing trade status. Previous to the passing of the Pharmacy 
Act of 1868, the Pharmaceutical Society governed those only 
within then.' fold. Now that they have the sole management 
of the drug trade throughout Great Britain, they ought to 
be assisted in that responsibility by every chemist and drug¬ 
gist in the country. Therefore, I would suggest that we 
should make, not permit to be made, every druggist in Great 
Britain a member of the Pharmaceutical Society. This 
membership should be a sine qua non to his being in business. 
There should be an annual sum payable, which should include 
registration and membership and also the weekly receipt of 
the Journal. The annual payment would not be a heavy one, 
and when accustomed to, would be looked upon as a protection 
to the trade as much as the payment of' licences for other 
matters. The duties of compiling the Register would be 
materially lightened, and absolute accuracy might be attained 
in its compilation if in the keeping open shop it should be 
made necessary to pay such registration fee before a given 
day in each year. The circulation of the Journal throughout 
the whole of the trade would also create a greater interest in 
the higher bi'anches of pharmacy amongst those who more 
need that taste encouraging. And the knowledge that we 
were not only under one pharmaceutical government, but that 
each and all of us had a voice in the formation of such 
government would conduce to healthier legislation upon 
purely trade matters, and lead to the speedy abandonment of 
sentimental grievances. Being all “ Members of the Phar¬ 
maceutical Society,” the title of “ Pharmaceutical Chemist,” 
would remain unchanged, while such pretentious designations 
aa “ Fellow,” “ Licentiate,” etc., would be unneeded. 
Following the rule observed at our trade gathering, I 
imagine, though with the greatest respect for the fair sex, 
that “ success to pharmacy ” is at our meeting entitled to the 
precedence of “ the ladies.” Hence I suggest these subjects, 
which I consider calculated to advance our improvement and 
success, as more suitable for ventilation at our ensuing annual 
meeting than the wasting of the time of the members upon 
the question of admission of female students to the laboratory 
at Bloomsbury Square. 
A Country Pharmaceutical Chemist. 
