80S 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
[May 6, 1371. 
*** No notice can be taken of anonymous communica¬ 
tions. Whatever is intended for insertion must be authenti¬ 
cated by the name and address of the writer ; not necessarily 
for publication, but as a guarantee of good faith. 
The Society axd the “ Outsiders.” 
Sir,—The defence committees, metropolitan and provincial, 
have effected their object—all fear of compulsory resolutions 
concerning the storage of poisons being extinguished,—and 
the selected representatives for the new Council are pledged 
to resist Government interference. Having, on request, 
allowed myself to be put in nomination for the Council for a 
special purpose, which no longer exists, I now beg to state 
my desire to withdraw from competition against those gentle¬ 
men who have been considered best fitted to represent the 
interests of pharmacy for the ensuing year. 
Being no longer a candidate, I feel at liberty to remark 
that, confident as many arc in their security under the pro¬ 
tection of the new Council, there will never be either safety 
or repose whilst the trade is divided against itself. Why is 
the Society to stand in its chilly isolation, a mournful spec¬ 
tacle of mistaken purposes ? Why does it not endeavour to 
draw within its embrace the strength and power of numbers, 
that when interference is attempted, it may present an un¬ 
broken front and a formidable opposition? As it exists it is 
useless for any great effort. It may drag uphill an educa¬ 
tional element, but its weakness is apparent so long as there 
is a pharmaceutic body and an army of “outsiders.” 
The first round only of the poison battle has been fought, 
and, fortunately for the Society, there wa3 no difference of 
opinion in the trade,—another instance of the benefit arising 
from unity. But it is not to be supposed that the Privy 
Council will consent to have its requirements ignored, and 
our danger lies more in the division amongst ourselves than 
even in the power of Government officers. The Society is 
indebted to the “outsiders” for their antagonism, which 
gave them power over the education of the future pharma¬ 
cist; but it was never intended to constitute or establish a 
Society with one idea only. Education is of primary im¬ 
portance, but protection to trade interests and convenience 
is equally great; and if the members of the Society are to be 
gratified with their success in placing men of their choice on 
the governing board, what guarantee will the outside trade 
have that their position will be considered? In your leader 
of the loth ult., you very justly pointed out that the out¬ 
siders’ inability to influence the action of those in power was 
“voluntary;” and that if they did not “avail themselves of 
their capability of legitimately influencing the action of the 
Society” their abstinence arose from “indifference,” while 
their apathy rendered them unworthy of the sympathy ex¬ 
pressed on their behalf. 
I quite agree with you that “ outsiders ” did obtain that 
concession legally, as a reward for the assistance given to ob¬ 
tain the Pharmacy Bill; and there was also “a tacit under¬ 
standing” between the leaders of the two parties, quite as 
clear as that with the Government respecting the poisons, 
that there should be every facility given to “ outsiders ” to 
swell the list of membership of the Society, but no sooner 
was the power vested in the Council, than they treacherously 
put aside “ a tacit understanding ” and created a disgust not 
easily to be effaced. 
This short-sighted policy of the conservative Councillors is 
now producing thistles where there might have grown figs. 
If the petty jealousy which animated these gentlemen in 
their desire to keep the Society for the future generation and 
their own domination, had given place to a broad and liberal 
spirit, there would now have existed one united body of che¬ 
mists, haying a common interest to support. The strength 
political is not in the education of its members, but in the 
number; and if the miserable policy which has hitherto pre¬ 
vailed could be exchanged for one which recognized every 
member ot the trade, then not only would the revenue be 
doubled, but a friendly feeling would spring up, and when 
interference was attempted, there need be no division,—all 
would fight under the same banner. It is very odd that 
hitherto those belonging to the Society from its formation, 
have been chiefly instrumental in retarding its growth and 
preventing the dream of its founder from being fulfilled. 
May 3rd, 18 / 1 . John Wade. 
Paper Notes for Circulation. 
Sir,—May I crave a corner of the Journal to indicate to 
our brethren the necessity that at present exists for careful 
examination of the paper that is daily passing through their 
hands? I do not allude to the daily press, or the paper cur¬ 
rency, but to the paper in current use for the purpose of 
wrapping powders. The demies and other makes of white 
paper now in use in the trade are very generally impregnated 
with sulphur compound, introduced for bleaching purposes; 
and such paper, when used for wrapping pepsine or other 
powders containing free acid, will in a short space of time, 
and particularly so upon a damp day, give off sulphuretted 
hydrogen in unmistakable quantity. My attention has been 
drawn to this fact by the circumstance of detecting the vile 
smell of this gas in a recently-dispensed packet of pepsine 
powders, and fortunately prior to their having been sent out. 
A first impression led lo the inference that the pepsine, 
although recent stock, wa3 either impure or undergoing spon¬ 
taneous decomposition; having satisfied myself to the con¬ 
trary, my attention was naturally directed to the paper in 
which the powders were folded, a demy of presumed good 
quality, and which, to the unassisted nose and eyes, appeared 
to be as good as could possibly be dosired for the purpose; 
but, upon placing a small roll of it in a test-tube, and satu¬ 
rating with dilute acid, it gave out unmistakable evidence of 
the source of the annoyance. 
I have since tested, with similar result, several other papers 
which I had in stock, and some obtained in the district, also 
the samples of a London dealer,—and, I may add, the paper 
now being used for the Journal, which will, in a minor de¬ 
gree, afford illustration. 
A prompt and facile mode of examination is to sprinkle 
a few drops of dilute acid upon a small piece of the paper to 
be examined, and in about one minute evidence will be ob¬ 
tained by the olfactory organs more than sufficient to damage 
the historic reputation of any first-class dispensing establish¬ 
ment using such paper for containing pepsine powders. It 
may be remarked that the gas is more freely eliminated from 
the under surface of the paper than the upper and sprinkled 
one, illustrating the high density of this obnoxious gas. 
Alexander Bottle. 
Dover, April 23th, 1871. 
Poison Regulations. 
Sir,—You will oblige by allowing me a small space to ad¬ 
dress my fellow pharmacists again upon the poison regula¬ 
tions. I think I may say we are all agreed that they have' 
lost their most objectionable feature in ceasing to have the 
character of iron shackles. But it must be remembered that 
that is not the only question we have to ask ourselves regard¬ 
ing them. Could it be proved that they were free from evil 
tendencies, I should still protest against their being put forth as 
the recommendation of our Society, unless it were also evident 
that they were practically useful, and the most desirable that 
could be suggested. It is not my wish now to go over the 
whole argument again; enough has been said to show that 
the proposed code has been found wanting in many respects, 
besides the want of liberty to adopt any other precautions in¬ 
stead of them, if others were found to be more applicable. It 
was stated in the circular of Reasons which the Council 
issued that the regulations, when proposed to ho made com¬ 
pulsory, ■would not be enforced ; how then can we expect that 
the same regulations, brought forward as a simple recom¬ 
mendation, can meet with general adoption? Enough haa 
been said against them to show that, as a code, they will be a 
dead letter. 
I do not think we could expect the outgoing Council to 
bring forward any modification of the code, nor do I think 
that the Society would do well either to pass the code as it 
now stands, or to attempt to modify it at the annual meeting. 
More satisfactory results would probably be obtained by re¬ 
questing the incoming Council to examine the objections 
raised and the suggestions made in the correspondence you 
have already published, and in the reports of meetings 
already held, and endeavour to frame a code which would 
be more generally useful. 
I have no hesitation in saying that recommendations would 
be of more value if made more definite, and if based upon the 
use of a poison label, a label stating the dose, and a label 
“ not for internal use,” and if every article to which any of 
these labels was recommended to be applied was distinctly 
specified. 
