May 27, 1871.] 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
9GI 
dispensing and sale of poisons, in accordance 'with the 
provisions of the Pharmacy Act, 1868. 
Mr. Giles : I beg leave to second that resolution. 
Mr. Reynolds (Leeds): After the most impressive 
■way in which Mr. Mackay has spoken of the duty of 
this meeting towards those members who are absent to¬ 
day upon the faith of an understanding, and his illustra¬ 
tion ot the intended deputation from Glasgow, I feel it 
difficult to add anything upon the point. Mr. Randall 
has represented the same view from the south of Eng¬ 
land ; and it is my duty, on behalf of my fellow-members 
in Leeds, to protest against the principle of compulsion 
being voted in their absence, which is due to their faith 
in the late vote of the Council. If a matter has under¬ 
gone free discussion, and it is put to the vote, after 
■every member has had the privilege of expressing his 
opinion, I will bow to the opinion of the majority as 
readily as any man, but I am quite sure that what has 
been said by the Council, the acceptation of the resolu¬ 
tion already passed by it, with only one dissentient, and 
the statement by the Journal that this question was prac¬ 
tically settled, have induced gentlemen to stay away; and 
.after the resolution which has been passed, I can see no 
reason why we should commit ourselves for the future, 
ns this resolution would do. If notice is given I do not 
object to any motion whatever, only let us act fairly 
towards those who are not here. I will add one word 
as to the recommendations themselves. I believe the 
great mischief in connection with them as they now 
.stand is that they adopt the poison schedule A, which was 
•drawn up for a totally different purpose, and, I think, we 
should start on a simpler basis. 
Mr. Giles : I rise to second the resolution, because I 
believe it has not yet been done. And I must protest at 
people coming here and saying that because their friends 
are not here, it is not competent for the meeting to trans¬ 
act the ordinary business of the Society. Such a thing I 
never heard of in all my life, and I have been a good deal 
accustomed to public meetings. I never did hear such a 
ridiculous proposition as that. If that were the principle 
to be acted on, why should we come here at all ? why not 
transact our business through the post by means of postal 
cards ? We are met here to discuss anything and every¬ 
thing connected with the business of the Society which 
may have arisen during the year, and if the Council, or 
governing body, choose to bring forward any subject, that 
subject being on the tapis is sufficient to justify anybody 
in bringing forward his own views upon it, and carrying 
them if he can. Do not, then, let us make such children 
of ourselves as to talk such stuff as that. I am ashamed 
of being a member of a meeting which fills this room, and 
to hear it seriously argued that we are not competent to 
deal with any question that is brought before us. This 
resolution is not the same as the one which was proposed 
before, but it is one which has my assent and approval, 
rather more even than the amendment I myself moved, 
because it leaves entirely open what the nature of the 
regulations shall be, and contemplates their being 
thoroughly ventilated, and that if thought desirable, as 
has been suggested, you may call in the assistance of 
persons from without. Persons may be appointed at 
this meeting, or there is no reason why any person 
should not write to the Council; in fact, I do not know 
that the Council have not already been inundated with 
suggestions. Some persons say that these suggestions 
are not satisfactory, but no one has said why, except 
one gentleman who said so under a mistake. And 
although we have heard, over and over again, that many 
firms adopt superior precautions to those recommended 
here, I defy anybody to indicate a possible precaution 
which is not contained within the four corners of this 
-paper. I admit the elasticity of that paper. Our excel¬ 
lent and generally sagacious friend, Mr. Squire, rather 
complained of their not being sufficiently matured, and 
wanted a hard-and-fast system of regulations. But that 
is exactly the thing we do not want. We want some¬ 
thing that shall comprehend everything necessary, and 
not bind us to anything in particular. I do think, there¬ 
fore that we are justified in passing this resolution, and 
that it is not pressing the old question in a new form. 
The old question was whether we should, on this present 
occasion, prescribe for ourselves certain specific regula¬ 
tions, and now the new question is, that this Society 
should acknowledge the duty which lies upon it of pre¬ 
scribing regulations at a convenient time. Those are 
totally distinct things. If not, gentlemen, I am a donkey, 
and do not understand the English language. That is 
my misfortune, and I am very sorry it should be inflicted 
on the meeting. I do think we ought now to give a dis¬ 
tinct indication to the Privy Council that we are not 
going to evade the obligations which they think lie upon 
us. If, on the other hand, we do mean to evade them 
let us say so in downright terms, so that there may be 
no mistake about it. 
Mr. Randall (Southampton) : In the first place, Mr. 
Chairman, let me say that I do not bring to this meeting 
any authority, save and except such as I bring in my 
own person, and I do not pretend to represent anybody. 
We have had no meetings, but I believe, as far as I 
know, the majority of those near me would be quite sa¬ 
tisfied to have compulsory regulations passed. I think 
so, but I am not quite sure. In the next place, I look 
at this resolution as a perfectly different matter from 
the former one. I feel that it would be dishonourable 
in us to do anything to bind the Society to-day, after it 
has been understood that no such thing would be brought 
forward. If the first resolution had passed, it would have 
bound the whole body, but this will simply bind the pre¬ 
sent meeting. 
Mr. Edward Burden : We have committed ourselves 
to certain recommendations which are to be forwarded 
to the Privy Council. I was going to ask, suppose the 
Privy Council set their seal to them, and render them 
compulsory. How should we be placed then ? 
Mr. Squire : I think the Council are placed in this 
position. They will have to give some answer to the 
Privy Council, but we do not commit ourselves under 
this resolution to do anything immediately, but simply 
that regulations should be made for the storing, keeping 
and dispensing poisons, according to the provisions of 
the Act; and we on the Council may frame, with the 
advice of others, such regulations as should not be so 
obnoxious as these, and present them to the Privy Coun¬ 
cil. It simply says, we do propose to make some regu¬ 
lations. We are not compelled to make them as strin¬ 
gent as these, and I do not, therefore, see any reason 
why the meeting should not adopt Mr. Linford’s resolu¬ 
tion. There is nothing in it which commits us to any 
particular line,—it only says the regulations are to be 
framed ; and surely it is not such a very hard case to 
frame such as should be satisfactory to the Society by 
another year. 
The Chairman : This motion says nothing about time, 
and therefore I apprehend it really implies that we are 
to set to work at once. I cannot say how soon we may 
be called upon. 
Mr. Schacht : It strikes me that there is a very im¬ 
portant principle involved in this resolution. We have 
voted once, I thought, on the principle,—we have argued 
on the principle; and now this is a modification of the 
old principle again. It says this meeting is of opinion 
that it is the duty of the Council to do so-and-so ; but it 
was upon that very consideration, whether it was a duty 
or not, that I went into one lobby instead of the other. 
I am of opinion that there is no obligation on the Phar¬ 
maceutical Society to do anything of the kind. I am 
quite aware that there is an awkward legal phrase in 
the Pharmacy Act, which may be interpreted in two 
ways. There is a word there written “ may, which 
some individuals choose to read “ shall. In my opinion 
the latter reading is incorrect; and on that interpreta¬ 
tion I held my objection to the original proposition 0 £ 
