December 3, 1870.] THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
459 
that drug administered to him by refusing to take a draught 
containing it! 
I was in the habit formerly of prescribing in the usual 
style, but so many cases were brought to my notice, which 
induced me to adopt, under certain circumstances, my present 
system of cognomens. One patient, a lady, had been taking 
4 grains of blue pill twice a week for two years. Another, 
whenever he had the smallest ailment, would rush to an old 
prescription, for which, some time or other, he had invested 
a guinea, and commence to take 80 minims of liq. potassse 
daily. Such practices I consider fraught with much danger 
to tiie physic-taking community, and I consider also that any 
check which can be imposed upon prescription-holders from 
getting their favourite recipes dispensed at random, ought to 
be rather hailed as a happy omen than otherwise. 
This observation applies to all the “ obscure ” prescriptions 
which have been so eagerly thrust upon your notice; that is 
to say, the ingredients therein contained were only intended 
to be taken under my guidance, and not to be had recourse 
to on every promiscuous occasion. Why do not such patients 
go and consult another medical man when they are at a dis¬ 
tance remote from the prescriber, and not endeavour to do a 
little quiet flirtation with a village chemist ? It is true 
some disappointment must be felt, when a man, whose ex¬ 
press function it is, cannot decipher an “obscure” prescrip¬ 
tion ; but he can only, at most, suffer the loss of a stray 
shilling or two, whereas he might quietly allow the patient 
to swallow 4 grains of pil. hyd. twice a week for tw T o years, 
or to take 80 minims of liq. potassae daily, when he might 
require very different treatment. The practice of medicine 
is a grave and responsible vocation, and it is quite as desir¬ 
able to counteract the random use of nocuous medicines, as it 
is incumbent on the man of medicine to study and know 
aright the uses of his various therapeutic agents; and pa¬ 
tients themselves cannot be too forcibly reminded of this 
fact, that when they try to “do” the doctor, they only “un¬ 
do ” themselves. 
Watson Bradshaw, 
Formerly Surgeon Royal Navy. 
L. W. A. (Newcastle) writing on this subject, expresses his 
•opinion that the silly druggists with whom Mr. Watson 
Bradsliaw r professes to think it infra dig. to “enter the 
arena,” would probably go through an examination on the 
British Pharmacopoeia better than he could, and that they 
apparently pay more respect than he does to that important 
work. J. W. A. also thinks Mr. Bradshaw’s admission that 
his “ patients are invariably reminded they can only have 
their medicines compounded by the especial druggists to whom 
he hands them over,” is one that does not do much credit to 
him, and is decidedly a breach of medical etiquette. 
Sir,—The following prescription was this morning brought 
to me by one of my customers to dispense :— 
Lin. Tereb. Bellad. n.m. 
Mist. Menstruments No.j. (Sic.) 
It had been written by one who signs himself M.A. and 
M.D., one who professes to give “advice gratis to the poor.” 
May I ask is it honest on the part of a physician to compel 
these patients to go to a particular chemist, he (the doctor) 
receiving a percentage upon the transaction ? 
Is it such a great crime for a respectable chemist to do a 
little prescribing when such an example is set us by our 
■“betters”? I think not; yet, Sir, this M.A. and MkD. is 
■one of those who would prevent us. I call such a one a 
hypocrite and a sham philanthropist. 
Sheffield. Edward Barber. 
[*** We insert some of the foregoing letters more for the 
satisfaction of correspondents than for the sake of any light 
they throw upon the question originally put forward by 
E. J. B., and we must decline to publish any further letters 
which do not bear directly upon that. Perhaps Mr. Bradshaw 
or his especial druggists will supply this desideratum.] 
As to the other subjects more or less obscurely touched 
upon in the above letters, it would seem that the present ex¬ 
citement of the political world in regard to secret treaties is 
contagious, and a similar state of mind is being developed 
among pharmacists as to the nature of the relations which 
sometimes exist between prescriber and dispenser. This is a 
question of great importance, and so well worthy of further 
ventilation that we shall recur to it at an early date.— Ed. 
Pn. J.] 
Beware of Swindlers. 
Sir,—Allow me to corroborate the communication of Mr. 
Long in your last week’s issue, respecting a man going about 
the country to appoint agents to sell an “Infallible Vermin 
Killer ” for the firm he represented. 
It is about six weeks since a very gentlemanly-looking 
sort of a fellow, elegantly plumed in the fashion of the day, 
drove up to my shop door with a horse and gig, of first-class 
appearance, of such a style and in such a good condition as 
would not be degrading for the use of any nobleman. This 
gentlemanly rascal intimated that I should seldom see tra¬ 
vellers from any respectable firm with such a grand equipage. 
He professed to represent a firm of the name of Messrs. 
Newman, Howard and Co., Bath Row, Birmingham, stating 
that he was nephew of one of the partners, and that the Mr. 
Howard in the firm was a near relative of the well-known 
Messrs. Howard and Sons, the celebrated quinine manufac¬ 
turers. He showed me several advertisements in newspapers 
respecting the vermin killer, with agents’ names appended, 
and said it was also advertised in the Pharmaceutical 
Journal. He also displayed some very handsome posters, 
with blank spaces at bottom for the insertion of agents’ 
name. An agent’s district was to comprise a circuit of five 
miles, in which posters and handbills were to be circulated 
free of expense to agent. 
Other special advantages, too numerous to mention, were 
also offered. I purchased only half of what he seemed anxious 
for me to take, and after he had gone I proceeded to examine 
all the numbers of the Pharmaceutical Journal I had, 
but, to my surprise, failed to meet with a single word con¬ 
cerning the matter. 
I have written twice to this celebrated Birmingham firm (?), 
who it appears from invoice are “ Manufacturers of Chemical 
Preparations,” but have not received any reply. 
I trust my brother-chemists will be on the alert, and be 
able to detect these profound rogues and impostors before 
they are duped by them, should any present themselves in 
their shops. 
Rawtenstall, November 14 th, 1870. H. Halstead. 
Sir,—A letter on this subject appeared in the Lancet and 
has since been copied into several of the daily papers. It ap¬ 
pears that one chemist charged 4s. for a mixture for which 
another charged but Is. 6d., and, for this act of a single man, 
the whole fraternity are charged with extortion. In reply, I 
am quite ready to admit that the charge was exorbitant, 
provided the mixture contained only simple ingredients; it 
may, however, have contained expensive articles, or have been 
prescribed in a concentrated form; but, probably, it was not 
obtained from a dispensing chemist at all, but from a sur¬ 
geon or apothecary keeping an open shop; and this class of 
practitioners get a “ very fair ” profit, as the following instance 
may show:— 
A surgeon keeping an open shop told me that he frequently 
got 2s. 6 d. for a blue pill and black draught, the usual price 
charged by chemists being only 9 d. There have been cases, 
too, brought before the public in which doctors’ bills have 
been disputed solely because the patients considered they had 
been overcharged; but who has ever heard of a chemist’s 
bill being disputed on this score ? 
Chemists are not infallible, nor are they free from extor¬ 
tioners and unjust men, any more than lawyers and medical 
men are; but, as a class, they are a hardworking, honest, 
thoughtful body of men,—not overpaid for their responsibility, 
as the scarcity of retired chemists shows,—whose services are 
daily becoming appreciated more freely by the public. Add 
to this that all now wishing to become chemists are compelled 
to pass examinations, and it will at once be seen that the 
business of a dispensing chemist in England is rapidly on its 
way to become a profession ranking as high as on the Conti¬ 
nent. A Dispensing Chemist. 
Druggists’ Charges. 
Sir,—The Lancet complains of the excessive charge made 
by chemists for dispensing, while many of us complain of some 
of our brother-chemists for cutting down the prices. Mr. Ap¬ 
plegate’s letter gives a fresh illustration of the fact that we 
ought not to take for granted all our customers say about 
the prices charged by other chemists, but follow his example 
and firmly refuse to reduce the price because the customer 
says that Mr. So-and-so has charged so much less. 
Reliable testimony may, however, sometimes be got con- 
