April 22, 1871.] the pharmaceutical journal and transactions. 
859 
two of these papers contained any notice of or articles on the 
subject, I will then upset your proof by naming another 
daily newspaper (which, will be enough for the present pur¬ 
pose) in which such an article did appear. 
“ I am, yours very faithfully, 
“ George Dtmond.” 
The Preliminary Examination. 
Sir> If you will kindly allow this a corner in your much- 
esteemed Journal, perhaps it may be the means of directing 
t-he attention of some one (more competent than myself) to 
the subject which I wish to lay before your readers. 
. M ^ eu U P M Bloomsbury Square for the Modified Exainina- 
tion, I heard many express regret at being compelled to pass 
the Preliminary Examination (even although successful in 
the Modified) before being eligible for the “Minor” or 
“ Major. Now, Sir, I am confident many would go in for 
the Minor and Major qualifications were it not for that great 
stumbling-block, the Preliminary. Those gentlemen who go 
up for the Modified are mostly men well up in years, and the 
greater part ot them have forgotten any smattering they may 
have had about Caesar and other Latin authors. In fact, 
many have never had any acquaintance with that ancient 
worthy. Few men in the drug business have time to spare 
tor the study of classics. But in working up for the Minor 
ai )4 Major, the student feels that he is studying subjects 
which are of practical and lasting benefit. I do not advocate 
the abolition of the Preliminary Examination; far from it. 
I think it is only fair and reasonable to expect the youn" 1 
members (who, for the most part, have just left school) to be 
able to show that they have a fair classical education. But I 
must say it is hard for us older members, who have “ grown 
grey with age,” to be compelled to «fight our battles o’er 
again,” and study up the “ History of the Gallic War,” etc. 
I hope the Council will “ be merciful,” and grant the request 
of those who have passed the Modified, and admit them to 
the Minor and Major without enforcing the Preliminary. I 
am sure they will have the gratitude of all “ Modified men,” 
and by adopting this “liberal policy” the number of Phar¬ 
maceutical Chemists will be increased threefold, and will 
crush the jealousy which now exists between Pharmaceutical 
Chemists and * Chemists by Examination,” as some indivi¬ 
duals term themselves. Therefore, let me urge upon the 
Council the propriety of sweeping away the Preliminary in 
the case of those who have passed the Modified, and I think 
that it ought to count for something. I hope that some 
one will champion our cause. g. 
Poison Regulations. 
Sir, This poison question has drawn my attention so 
forcibly to the influence and position of the Council of the 
Pharmaceutical Society, that on receiving the Journal of last 
week, I read over the names of the gentlemen who have been 
nominated for election for the ensuing year with critical 
curiosity. Some of the names are quite unknown to me, and 
as to their opinions on what I consider the vital points of 
pharmaceutical advancement, I have not the remotest idea ; 
and. in a short time I shall receive my voting-paper, drawn 
up in accordance with the bye-laws, leaving me in the same 
blissful ignorance. 
The present Council some time ago sent me a code of regu¬ 
lations as to the storing of poisons, recommended by them 
for our adoption at the next general meeting. I assumed, 
therefore, that they meant to take their stand on their prin¬ 
ciples of action. The next thing I hear is that only one 
Councillor dared to nail his colours to the mast to meet the 
coming storm. 
I ask, is the question of storing poisons to be discussed at 
the general meeting or not ? 
What is the line of policy marked out in the brains of the 
coming men who aspire to constitute, in part, the future 
Council ? 
And what is this question ? The Pharmaceutical Society 
vras founded for the advancement of pharmacy and for the 
protection of our privileges. We are becoming eminently 
■qualified by our education to undertake the dispensing of 
this country, awaiting the time when public opinion shall 
demand that the man who prescribes a poison shall not com¬ 
pound it. 
Every one knows where the great bulk of the medicine of 
this country is dispensed, and every man in our calling knows 
perfectly well what a growing dissatisfaction there is anions 
the people against secret medicine and possible secret error. 
Ihe Parliament has passed a Poison Bill and the Privy 
Council are desirous its provisions should be carried out. It 
appears to be met by the chemists with a determined oppo¬ 
sition. Could anything, as a matter of policy, be more emi¬ 
nently suicidal ? A greater blow could not have been delivered 
at .the surgeries of this land than the adoption of a system of 
fusp7L7d UMl ° nS m Chcmists ’ sho P s where Prescriptions are 
Many ot us who know the heavy responsibilities resting 
upon us adopt some system of poison closets; but we are a 
slow people. I instance the question of poison bottles and 
S e stupid arguments brought against them some years a^o. 
How has that opposition died ? Are poison bottles adopted 
by dispensing-houses ? Here and there possibly some obsti¬ 
nate chemist will uot use them,—and it is just so with our 
poisons. Some obstinate employers will keep their tincture 
of aconite next their tincture of orange, their laudanum next 
the tmctuie ot rhubarb, or their arsenic not far from the 
magnesia, and so long as they uso them themselves it is their 
own matter ; but if they believe the Privy Council will allow 
them to impose such terrible risks on others, they are very 
much mistaken. Parliament, now that attention has been 
called to it, will see the necessity ot enforcing some plan and 
who are so able to design it as ourselves ? hence the vast im¬ 
portance w r e ought to attach to the election of the Council 
this year arises. Who are the men ? What is their standing 
in the trade and the Society? and above all, what are their 
opinions ? Are they the right men to meet the emergency 
or is this spasm of discontent but a nightmare of apathy ? 
~ , _ George Mee. 
iv, G rosvenor Hoad, Hu/Jiburg New Park N 
April 18th , 1871. 
Sir,— I heartily congratulate the Council on the wise course 
it has taken in abandoning the intention of proposing any 
compulsory poison regulations at the next General Meeting. 
Mr. Reynolds s letter in the Journal of February 18th quite 
prepared me for the President’s retirement, and I deeply re¬ 
gret he has left on record any animus towards a largo majo¬ 
rity of our brethren, whom he accuses of raisin"- “a wild un¬ 
reasoning clamour on a mere sentimental grievance,” stieer- 
ingly stating that he w r as not shaken by the 1 tall talk’ 
resounding about him.” 
It is most clear Mr. Sandford is not the man to uphold our 
reputation and independence. He plainly tells us “that 
should other parties try their hand at the work of compulsory 
poison regulations, ho, for one, should be unable to say there 
is no cause foi interference, I, therefore, fully a°Tce with, 
his explanation as touching his immediate retirement, “ that 
in doing so he best advanced the interest and honour of the 
Society.” 
I forbear making any further comment, as these few lines 
are written more for the purpose of tendering my best thanks 
to the members of the Council for the manly course they have 
taken m upholding our position, and I shall be most happy 
in supporting them all at the next General Meeting. 
Kilburn, April Yith. John Beaton. 
The Adulteration Bill. 
Sir, Allow me, through the medium of the Journal to 
urge upon the Council of the Pharmaceutical Society imme¬ 
diate action against Mr. Muntz’s Adulteration Bill. I do 
not hesitate to affirm that it that Bill should become law r , no 
chemist, however straight he might desire to keep, would 5 be 
safe. We have already an Adulteration Act, which answers 
all practical purposes. It is w-ell knowrn that nearly all adul¬ 
terations of drugs take place abroad, and therefore if this Bill 
is to pass, it must be insisted that all drugs shall be analysed 
befoie imported into this country; there must be supervision 
of chemical manufactories, and there ought also to be ap¬ 
pointed a staff of analysts to examine and test drugs and 
chemicals for those who have not the time or the skill to 
do so. 
Is it not much better to take the bull by the horns than 
calmly to wait till mischief is done? According to our pre- 
sent laws no chemist dare prescribe for a patient over the 
counter a cough mixture of oxymel of squills and paregoric 
Avithout labelling the same with the ominous word “poison,” 
unless he renders himself liable to a fine! All chemists may 
not be aware of this fact. Neither must ho sell a 6d, bottle 
