9G2 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
[Hay 27, 1S7I. 
the Council last year, and, consequently, I approve of 
what they have done in the interval, in changing their 
regulations into recommendations. We are now told 
that if these recommendations do not satisfy the Privy 
Council, we shall have some dreadful system of inspec¬ 
tion forced upon us in exchange, and we are taunted 
v ith the fact that it will serve us right. I disbelieve it 
altogether. My opinion is that any application to Par¬ 
liament for compulsory powers, such as would he impe¬ 
ratively necessary in order to make any such regulations 
compulsory and effectual, would ho met with such a 
storm of opposition from all sections of the medical and 
pharmaceutical bodies, that it would have to he with¬ 
drawn , that, in tact, it would receive precisely the same 
treatment with which the recent attempt in Parliament 
was recei\ed to place the regulations of railways under 
the inspection of the Loard of Trade. I dare say gentle¬ 
men will remember that only a few weeks ago an at¬ 
tempt was made to introduce a system of regulation and 
management of railways, hut it was rejected almost 
tumultuously; and the grounds upon which one member 
of the Government opposed it were precisely the same 
as those upon which, as I understand, the chemists and 
druggists of England rest their objections to these com¬ 
pulsory regulations, viz. that in the first place it would 
invoh e the recognition of something like a handing' over 
of a portion of the responsibility which each individual 
feels ho is xmder if left to himself; and, on the other 
hand, that in order to make it in the smallest degree 
efficient you must have a system of inspection. “ How¬ 
ever good the regulations may be,” said Mr. Chichester 
Fortescue, “it is no good pressing them upon the rail¬ 
way interest, unless you establish a system of inspection 
to see they are carried out.” And precisely the same 
here. Ihc sole legal power to enforce these regulations, 
should . they become law, rests with Mr. Dremridge. 
There is no one else who has power to prosecute any 
individual who infringes that Act. Upon Mr. Bremrido-e 
alone rests the responsibility of doing so, and I ask what 
can ho do f He can do simply nothing. I may obey 
the 1 cgulations, and my next-door neighbour may leave 
them alone. Is ot a creature w T ill know anything about 
it, and unless ho poisons some one, every one may do 
precisely as he likes. Then, what is the use of them F 
A law alieady exists which deals with any one who 
commits an offence. If any one by mistake, accident or 
default poisons another he is amenable to the law, and 
has to pay a heavy penalty. This Bill makes it possible 
that he may. have to pay an additional £5 fine, after, 
perhaps, having to pay £2000 as compensation. What 
is the good of that ? Simply nothing at all. If these 
things mean anything, they mean that care should be 
taken that men exercise those precautions which should 
T re } ent accidents; and, in order that they may answer 
~: eu - P ur P 0Se > there must be a system of inspection. 
That I rebel against vehemently and strongly. I would 
not allow the smallest end of the wedge to intrude itself 
between me and the conduct of my own business. I 
should not vote for any regulations at all, for it seems 
to me that they would become merely a dead letter. I 
believe we are not. necessarily compelled as a body to 
frame these regulations at all. I am aw r are that that is 
a moot question; but I never held the opinion that it 
was obligatory. It is. a matter referred to the future, 
ffiently for consultation by the members of the Phar¬ 
maceutical Society, and if the Society, in its entire and 
corpoi ate capacity, chooses to determine that compul- 
sory regulations are unwise, there is no obligation in 
that Bill to make it a point of honour in the smallest 
degree to introduce them. 
“J: ? X ' C^teighe: Gentlemen, I hope you will sup- 
port this resolution, there is one question raised now by 
Mr. Schacht on which I cannot remain silent. He says 
he believes that if such regulations as are contemplated 
were ever brought before the Legislature, they would bo 
scouted and laughed at. Let me tell him that in the 
lobby of the House of Commons four members of the- 
Parliamentary Committee of this Society watched every 
stage of the Bill, and every alteration suggested by the 
medical officer of the Privy Council; that they were in 
telegraphic communication with every local secretary 
throughout the country; that Mr. Brady, Mr. Reynolds, 
and many others were working with all their might to- 
get members up;. but in the face of all that we could 
not, on a vital principle of the Bill, got forty members 
in the. House when there was a division. In fact, the 
Council resisted every alteration as much as they possibly 
could, and endeavoured to do without these regulations, 
but it was simply a question of a bargain: we were told, 
either you must have these regulations, or you shall not 
have a monopoly without. You may not think it was a 
right thing to do; it may have been a wrong thing, but 
the Act is now law, and it would be found very difficult 
to undo the law. If you pass this resolution, you may 
save the Council from immediate action on the part of 
the Privy Council, and I do adjure you, therefore, to 
pass it. As Mr. Randall has told you, it does not impose* 
any regulations; it simply asserts a principle, and there¬ 
fore many, who could not vote for Mr. Giles’s amendment 
can go. with us on this point. By so doing, I am sure- 
you will save the Council from considerable difficulty. 
Where will you find men who would have done more 
for you with the Privy Council than they have ? It 
was said that these regulations were not what was re¬ 
quired, and that they ought to be referred back again to* 
the new Council. Why the same thing was done last 
year; and Mr. Vizer and his friends did all they could 
to send new men to the Council, and from that very new 
Council we got recommendations practically the sama 
as we had last year. 
Mr. Yizeii : I had nothing whatever to do with influ¬ 
encing the elections last year. 
„ Mr. Carteigiie : I only go by what you said last year. 
Aou said send fresh men to the Council—I am speaking 
from memory—and these fresh members have brought, 
before us to-day in substance the same recommendations* 
as were brought forward last year. It is really a ques¬ 
tion of your power of resisting the Government. If you. 
are sure that you can resist a Government measure if it is* 
introduced, then do nothing; because recommendations, 
are utterly worthless to the Privy Council. Once admit 
the principle that you ought to do this, and they will, I 
think, give you time to consider what regulations you: 
will adopt, and to make them as lenient as you think de¬ 
sirable. But do acknowledge the principle, or else say 
deliberately that you reject it. If you do so by so nar¬ 
row a majority as you have had to-day, you may guess- 
what will happen if any unfortunate chemist should 
happen by accident to poison a bishop. Contemplate- 
the smallest thing of the kind occurring, and what will 
be the result, with the energy which the medical officer 
of the Privy Council possesses. You all know what 
immense power he has, and that he is not a man to be 
balked. I do not sympathize with the regulations, I 
only look at it as a matter of policy, of prudence and of 
wisdom. Where do you find pharmacy without restric¬ 
tions, that is, on a professional basis P Go to the United 
States ; you find restrictions there. Go anywhere on 
the Continent, and you find restrictions on the sale of 
poisons much greater than these would be. You cannot- 
blow hot and cold. You cannot be both free-traders* 
and monopolizers. 
A Member: We are not monopolists. 
Mr. Carteigiie : You have a monopoly of examina¬ 
tion. I do not say we should not have secured it unre¬ 
stricted if wo could, but we tried and failed. As for the* 
notion that the words do not mean it, all I can say is, as 
a member of the Council at the time and as a member 
of the Committee—and there are several other mem¬ 
bers hero who, I think, will agree with me—that was* 
not only the distinct understanding, but the under¬ 
standing in writing, and the clause was drawn up id 
