764 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
[March 25,1871. 
of the trade. Certain resolutions had been prepared for 
the meeting, but they had only been drawn for the pur¬ 
pose of facilitating business, and would be open for dis¬ 
cussion. A memorial would be read, but the meeting 
would be at liberty to mar or amend it as they thought 
fit. Personally he had no very strong objections to the 
poison regulations, so long as he was allowed to do as he 
liked about them, but he should strongly object to their 
being forced on him by law. At present he was allowed, 
and did make such arrangements as he thought would 
conduce to the safety of his customers, and he had no 
doubt every other chemist in the district did the same. 
With regard to the suggestion of Dr. Simon as to angu¬ 
lar bottles, it was merely one of his crotchets. Some 
gentlemen had an idea that they could prevent cases of 
poisoning; he thought the chemists might congratulate 
themselves that of late years the cases of poisoning had 
been very few. Some of the cases occurred where rules as 
stringent as those to be imposed had been in operation. 
The Chairman concluded by referring to the memorial, 
which he read, and expressing his belief that nearly the 
whole of the seventy or eighty chemists in the town 
would sign it. The memorial is as follows:—“ The 
undersigned chemists and druggists of Hull having had 
their attention drawn to the proposed poison regulations 
which the Council intend bringing before the Annual 
Meeting of the Pharmaceutical Society in May next, 
with a view to their adoption, hereby desire to record 
their dissent from the said propositions, and respectfully 
urge upon the Council the danger and impolicy of par¬ 
tial legislation on the subject of poisons; and your me¬ 
morialists further desire to impress on the Council in the 
strongest manner that, in their opinion, no regulations 
can be deemed satisfactory to the trade which do not 
apply alike to surgeons, veterinary surgeons, hospitals 
and dispensaries (by whom, by far, the greater portion 
of medicine is supplied), as well as to chemists. The 
third regulation is very objectionable, and has a direct 
tendency to favour the conclusion that any medicine not 
in a “danger bottle” is necessarily harmless, and it 
would probably lead to serious accidents. It is very 
questionable, in the opinion of your memorialists, whether 
any regulations, capable of universal application, can be 
devised which are likely to press with such constant 
force on the minds of chemists and druggists as that of 
the tremendous responsibility now existing.” 
Mr. A. Pickering then moved the following resolu¬ 
tion :—“ That this meeting, whilst fully recognizing the 
duty of every pharmaceutical chemist and chemist and 
druggist to take all due precautions against mistakes 
and accidents, and securing the safety of the public when 
dealing with poisons or dangerous articles, does not con¬ 
sider the enforced adoption of the proposed regulations 
for keeping and dispensing poisons to be either necessary 
or desirable ; and that a memorial be prepared and pre¬ 
sented to the Council, objecting to the proposed poison 
regulations.” He observed that, in the first place, he 
considered the regulations proposed by the Pharmaceu¬ 
tical Society were absurd; in the second place, imprac¬ 
ticable ; in the next place, an unnecessary interference 
with business; and, lastly, they were regulations that 
could not be carried out. All chemists and druggists 
knew the injurious effect which a case of poisoning had 
upon a person’s business, and he believed the great ma¬ 
jority of chemists used every ordinary care to prevent 
accidents. During an experience extending over twenty 
years, he had never had a single case of poisoning or 
anything approaching to a serious mistake, in his shop. 
I he ordinary precautions which most chemists exercised 
were used, viz. labelling poisons and articles for exter¬ 
nal application as such. He was persuaded that no re¬ 
gulations could be made which would prevent persons 
from committing suicide who had once allowed such an 
idea to obtain possession of their minds. With regard 
to the dispensing of poisons, generally speaking, the 
principal of a business kept a very strict eye upon 
everything poisonous; and he was not aware that any 
alteration in the shape of bottles, or the assignment of a 
particular place in the shop for them, would have any 
influence at all in the prevention of accidents. The 
idea of keeping all poisons under lock and key was quite 
incompatible with trade. Barrels of arsenic, casks of 
sheep-dipping, and other articles largely used, could not 
be so stored. He really did not see how any regulations 
could be so universally applicable as to prevent accidents 
of the nature in question. He considered the best means 
to prevent accidents was to have those connected with 
them possessing a sufficient knowledge of the properties 
of the articles dealt in. If left in the hands of those 
educated for the business, he had very little doubt but 
that all ordinary care would be exercised, and as few 
accidents take place as was within the bounds of possi¬ 
bility. 
Mr. C. B. Bell seconded the resolution, and, in doing 
so, trusted the meeting would pardon him if he made 
any mistake, for he should endeavour to be as brief as 
possible. At the last Annual Meeting, held in May, 
they would remember that these poison regulations came 
on for discussion, and that, after a very stormy meet¬ 
ing, they were voted against; and a resolution was 
passed that the incoming Council should consider them 
during the ensuing year, and report on them to the next 
Annual Meeting. Last December a letter from Mr. 
Simon, calling -the attention of the Council to them, was 
brought forward. On the 1st of February they came on 
for discussion again, when ten of the Council voted in 
favour of the compulsory poison regulations, and four 
against them. A resolution was moved, “ That the sense 
of the members of the Pharmaceutical Society should be 
taken on the regulations,” but that proposal was outvoted. 
Personally he had strong objections to the regulations; 
and he agreed with Mr. Pickering that, though many of 
them might endeavour to carry them out, it was incom¬ 
patible to do so entirely. He considered that, if passed, 
the regulations would act very injuriously on their 
trade. Take, for instance, the town of Glasgow. If the 
regulations became law, they would press heavily on 
sixty pharmaceutical chemists and chemists and drug¬ 
gists, but they would not touch the hundred and twenty 
physicians, etc. keeping open chemists’ shops. That 
was a piece of inconsistency in legislating which ought 
not to exist. At the last Annual Meeting a beautiful 
elegy was preached by one of the Council, who asked 
them to put themselves out of the pale of the Society for 
a short time, and inquire of themselves what their feel¬ 
ings would be if they had a friend or dear child poisoned 
by mistake ; he asked what must have been the feelings of 
that poor chemist in Lancashire, who, a few weeks ago, 
lost his child by poison administered through the mistake 
of a surgeon’s dispenser? That was another reason 
why they should oppose the proposed regulations. He 
had the honour of voting against them last year, and he 
trusted every member would endeavour to be present 
and oppose them next May. 
At the suggestion of one of the gentlemen present, 
Mr. Bell read the proposed regulations. 
Mr. Gales observed that they all agreed that the 
regulations, if passed, would be a grievance inflicted 
upon the trade; they all felt they had grounds for com¬ 
plaint against those parties who were introducing the 
regulations, and endeavouring to make them law. In 
remedying any grievance, or in counteracting the effect 
of any mis-legislation, it was necessary, in the first place, 
to draw a correct diagnosis, and to ascertain the cause 
from whence the evil sprang; he took it that it arose 
from the chemists and druggists of Great Britain having 
incautiously committed the governing power to the Phar¬ 
maceutical Society. His views had been before the trade 
from the commencement of the agitation of the rights of 
chemists and druggists. Those gentlemen who possessed 
copies of the Chemist and Druggist would be able to place 
their fingers on articles he had written in that periodical, 
