February 25, 1871.] THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
GOD 
concerned, under the greatest possible difficulties. The entire 
“stock in trade” of a surgeon in what is termed a good prac¬ 
tice will often not exceed five pounds sterling, whilst the 
heterogeneous character of the storing bottles would utterly 
appal the “public” were it admitted to a private seance. 
The most dangerous drugs or compounds may be seen stand¬ 
ing side by side with the most harmless, both of them bear¬ 
ing a dirty paper label, illegibly written, and only distinguish¬ 
able upon the minutest inspection. The morphia or strych¬ 
nine will be dispensed by a neophyte in the shape of an 
errand-boy. Yet, forsooth, these “establishments” are to 
be exempt from any supervision, whilst the well-conducted 
and expensively-fitted shop or dispensary of the chemist, 
where neatness, order, cleanliness, and everything that is 
calculated to ensure the public against accident is strictly 
observed, must be periodically invaded by some officious Mr. 
Bumble. At whose instigation, I wonder, or for whose be¬ 
hoof are those changes to be made ? To my mind, it seems 
something very like an “understanding” somewhere or other, 
which should be most vigorously protested against by the 
trade, and that, too, in good time. I should much like to 
see our Council change their position, and, instead of any 
“understandings” with the Medical Council, trying only to 
fulfil their trust by seeking to advance the practice of phar¬ 
macy, and to protect the interests of our trade. 
Chemist. 
[*** Whatever may be the proper view to take as to the 
proposed regulations, we cannot agree with the opinion that 
they should not be adopted because medical men neglect them. 
That argument, at least, appears to be fallacious.— Ed. 
Pharm. Journ.] 
Sir,—So many opinions have been expressed in your 
Journal for and against regulations for the storage and dis¬ 
pensing of poisons that I almost blush to add to the corre¬ 
spondence, but the time seems to have arrived for inquiring, 
“ What is it all about ?” 
We have had proposals, counter proposals, appeals to com¬ 
mon sense, and appeals to the Council of the Pharmaceutical 
Society. We have “ caught the ear” of the Council. A docu¬ 
ment is forwarded to us, setting forth the absolute necessity 
of passing poison regulations; and what is more, it assures 
us that the regulations, only passed, can become a dead letter. 
Is there any necessity to doubt the word of our Council after 
such a manifesto ? Is it not apparent that the whole affair 
has been a practical joke, Mr. Simon and our Council shaking 
their sides with laughter while we have been shaking with 
apprehension. At least, no other conclusion can be drawn by 
M.P.S. by Election. 
Brighton, February 8th, 1871. 
Sir,—Are pharmaceutical chemists considered capable of 
managing their own businesses, and is it intended to exempt 
“examined members” from the proposed restrictions regard¬ 
ing the storage of poisons (thus placing them on an equal 
footing with surgeons) ? If not, of what earthly use is our 
Society, and for what purpose has our time and money been 
spent? I protest against interference on the part of a 
clique, who always want something to do, feeling convinced 
if personal considerations fail to ensure carefulness every¬ 
thing else must. Edward Beers Eord. 
Rontypool, Feb. 20th, 1871. 
Sir,—May I ask why chemists and druggists are picked 
out by Government for surveillance by the Privy Council 
while oilmen, etc., though selling equally dangerous poisons 
unlabelled and without a caution, are permitted to go scot 
free? George Eade. 
72, Gosioell Road, February 1 Oth, 1871. 
Sir,—Permit me, as an old hand, to suggest to the Council 
the propriety of sending a printed paper to each chemist in 
the kingdom, through the respective secretaries, to solicit 
their ideas relative to the using and storing of poisons ; also 
to ascertain, as far as practicable, the number of deaths 
known to each, traceable to chemists. 
I believe if this was done, the Council and also Government 
would be satisfied to leave us alone, and not burden us with 
rules and regulations, which, in the end, would produce more 
loss of life than there is under the present circumstances. 
Cheltenham, February 17th, 1871. JonN Finch. 
The Application of Disinfectants. 
Sir,—A few days since a Darmstadt physician called on 
me, and said that he had just arrived from Germany, in con¬ 
sequence of his brother having been seized with typhoid fever. 
The patient, a clerk in a City house, occupied good apart¬ 
ments, and his medical attendant desired that he should not 
be removed. The inmates objected to having their dwelling 
rendered uninhabitable by strongly-smelling disinfectants, 
and insisted on the use of an odourless disinfectant, or the 
removal of the patient. Under these circumstances I was 
asked to suggest what might be done. Chlor-alum was 
placed in cloths and in dishes in the room; it was diffused as 
a spray, and employed in the chamber utensils. The patient 
died, and the bedding and other articles were dipped in chlor- 
alum, then washed out in pure water, and lastly boiled and 
washed with soap and water. 
My reason for publishing these details is to draw attention 
to the fact that the agents mentioned in your recent article,* 
with the exception of Condy’s lluid, which is firmly be¬ 
lieved by some good authorities not to be a fever-poison 
destroyer, could not have been used, and are often not used, 
when on sanitary grounds the application of a disinfectant is 
of paramount importance. 
Since you have furnished a statement of the methods 
adopted in using carbolic acid, chloride of lime, sulphurous 
acid, and other disinfectants, it may not be uninteresting to 
your readers to have, in a few words, the rules which may be 
laid down for the employment of chloride of aluminium and 
its compounds. 
We all know the importance of clearing a sick-room of 
superabundant furniture and trappings. If to light muslin 
curtains over the doors, windows and bed, cotton-wool or 
wadding, treated with chlor-alum, be pinned, antiseptic air- 
filters of great value are readily improvised. 
A slight modification of Dr. Siegle’s inhaler, made by 
Messrs. Krohne and Sesemann, of Duke Street, Manchester 
Square, affords a means for purifying every particle of air in 
a chamber by volatilizing a solution of one part of chlor-alum 
to twenty of water. 
In the chamber commode and utensils some chlor-alum 
solution, or a powder which contains 30 per cent, of chloride 
of aluminium, will be of the greatest advantage. The late 
Mr. Francis Taylor, of Hornsey, Hampshire, was the first to 
use chlor-alum powder in earth-closets, and wrote me repeat¬ 
edly concerning the great efficacy of the material. He had 
long been seeking an agent for this purpose, and his un¬ 
timely death prevented the fulfilment of a kind wish he had 
expressed of paying London a visit, with a view to discuss 
with me the whole subject of the disinfection of the excreta 
of the sick, and the application of the earth-closet system. 
Dr. Septimus Gibbon was the first to draw attention to the 
fact that chlor-alum acted under certain circumstances very 
actively on vegetable fibres, and lie was led to doubt its 
applicability to the disinfection of clothing. I have sought 
information from Manchester people, and was astonished to 
find that drying wet clothes before a fire, and many r other 
simple expedients commonly resorted to, rotted the cotton 
fibre. This rotting is the bane of the bleacher. From the 
fact that we had used cotton-filters for months without injury 
to their structure, I was led to try some experiments, and I 
find chlor-alum the most harmless of disinfectants for clothes 
and bedding. The following rules must be attended to, viz.: 
A solution of 1 part of chlor-alum (which is a 30 per cent, 
solution of chloride of aluminium) in 20, 30, or even 40 parts 
of water should be used in which to steep the articles to be 
disinfected. The longer they steep, the better; but a few 
minutes of complete submersion suffice. A golden maxim 
in disinfection is that liquid contact is more effectual for de¬ 
struction than dry contact between fever germs and the dis¬ 
infectant. The clothes thus steeped are allowed to drip, or 
the liquid wrung out of them. They are then placed in pure 
water, and, having been well steeped, may be placed again in 
pure water. Warm water washed the chlor-alum out most 
rapidly. After this, the articles may be boiled and washed 
as usual. The most delicate fabrics can be treated in this 
way, and not a particle of contagious matter can escape attack. 
Chlor-alum, being odourless and harmless, can be used in 
the sick-room wdthout danger or inconvenience. 
John Gamgee. 
1, Great Winchester Street Buildings, F.C. 
* See ante, page 625. 
