1002 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
[June 10,1871. 
feropftmte. 
*#* No notice can be taken of anonymous communica¬ 
tions. JV7iatever 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. 
Poison Regulations. 
Sir,—I beg the favour of your inserting copy of the ac¬ 
companying correspondence in relation to a letter published 
in the Journal of June 3rd. 
Clifton, June 6th, 1871. Richard W. Giles. 
(Copt.) 
Clifton, June 3rd, 1871. 
Sir,—Permit me to ask what you wish to be understood 
from your letter in the current No. of the Pharmaceutical 
Journal, headed “ Poison Regulations.” Allow me also to 
direct your attention to a letter in the Journal of May 13th, 
signed by Mr. Baldock, who seconded the amendment pro¬ 
posed by myself at the Annual Meeting, to which amend¬ 
ment your letter appears to point. 
Your reply is requested for the purpose of inserting it in 
the next No. of the Journal, and I shall therefore feel obliged 
if you will favour me with it as early as possible. 
Your obedient servant, 
Barnard S. Proctor, Esq. Richard TV. Giles. 
Neio castle-on-Tyne. 
(Copt.) 
Grey Street Newcastle-on-Tyne. 
Dear Sir,—I have just received your note, and in reply, all 
I wish to be understood by my few lines in last No. of Jour¬ 
nal is that- it is dangerous to have any “ tacit understand¬ 
ings ;” they are as slippery as ghosts and about as indefinite. 
Yours truly, 
R. TV. Giles, Esq. Barnard S. Proctor. 
Sir,—In your last number Mr. Hucklebridge advocates the 
use of a red band of colour as the simplest and most efficient 
check against mistakes. 
Now as I decidedly differ from him on this point (whilst 
agreeing with the rest of the letter), it will not perhaps be 
unfair to endeavour to turn his own illustration against him. 
Let me ask now if the lady whose finger had been so very 
rudely used for a tobacco stopper, had been anxious to guard 
against the repetition of such a mistake, would she have been 
more likely to effect this by colouring the top of her finger 
red, or by wearing two or three rings with sharp points or 
roughened edges properly placed ? 
Having written so recently on poison regulations, I should 
not have troubled you again, only I think the distinction 
drawn is worthy of consideration. 
TV. C. H. 
Sir,— I have a strong feeling against the “ Poison Bottle.” 
I fear that such a bottle becoming familiar in households 
will be used for general purposes. There is a general re¬ 
luctance to smashing a bottle of whatever kind, and when 
the sign of danger becomes familiar it loses its caution. The 
Poison-Bottle may be used for an innocent medicine (or other 
contents), and this practice may lead to awful mistakes, be¬ 
cause the sign of poison being associated thus with an inno¬ 
cent medicine may lead to the swallowing of poison instead 
ot the innocent medicine, as both may be in the same kind of 
bottle. 
To pay for a bottle or phial, so long as one has a bottle or 
phial fit tor the purpose in hand, is “ against tho grain,” and 
there is a too common trust in mere remembrance as the re¬ 
conciliation for departure from strict propriety. 
Common beer-bottles are used for furniture oil, and ink 
(and I know of a mistake of a serious nature caused thereby), 
and even vitriol, and I have seen a castor-oil bottle used for 
ardent spirits. I have seen blacking-bottles hardly distin¬ 
guishable from stone ginger-beer bottles, and, so far as I 
know, the one bottle was used for both purposes, from tho 
reluctance to pay for the proper bottle. 
Suppose a “stingy” man, or a “hard up” man, or an 
economical (!) man, wants something in a bottle, for which 
bottle he must pay if he have not one. Suppose he has a 
“poison-bottle,” and gets that filled with non-poisonous con- 
tents, what is the harm? It is this, that trusting to the 
familiar use of such a bottle, he may be some day off his. 
guard and use a “poison-bottle,” with poison in it, believing 
he is using the innocent stuff. 
I believe in a poison-bottle only if it can change its cha¬ 
racter tvhen the poison is no longer in it, and is so decidedly 
alarming in appearance, lohile the poison is in it, that even/ 
in the dark its characteristic tvarning ivill be felt. 
The nearest approach to such a thing, that I now conceive, 
is a broad black tape tied round the neck of every bottle con¬ 
taining poison (whether as stock in the shop, or dispensed), 
and that such tape shall have two long ends hanging down 
over the bottle. When such a poison-bottle is no longer 
used for poison the tape can be removed, and the bottle looked 
upon as a safe bottle. The deliberate removal of the tape* 
will be the surety that the poison also is removed (unless 
criminality is involved), and the familiar idea of poison also re¬ 
moved, leaving such a symbol with its full terrors when seen- 
The accidentally removable “ Poison ” label would not 
only be there (subject to obliteration), but there w r ould tena¬ 
ciously remain a peculiar symbol of poison, which only de¬ 
liberation or design could remove, while, for convenience, 
when no poison existed, the removal of the tape (impossible* 
by ordinary accident) would restore the washed bottle to a 
common purpose. 
I hold that tho symbol of poison should vanish w r ith the 
poison. 
Alfred W. P. Smith. 
Edinburgh, May 31st, 1871. 
Poisons in Surgeries. 
Sir,—Just now as there is a deal of agitation respecting the 
manner in which chemists store their poisonous preparations, 
it may not be out of place to say a few words respecting the 
w T ay in which surgeons keep their preparations. 
As a traveller for a provincial wholesale drug house, L 
have good opportunity for observing the manner in which 
their preparations are stored in their surgeries. 
In the first place, I frequently find the bottles, pots, etc. 
labelled very illegibly and imperfectly; and as regards their 
juxtaposition, you will find ext. belladon. and ext. anthem, 
embracing each other ; whilst on the other hand, tinct. opii,. 
liq. ammonite and sp. aether, nit. are close companions with, 
lin. belladon., lin. aconit. and tinct. rhei. co., in fact they are- 
jumbled together in hopeless confusion; and when this is. 
coupled with the bits of scribbled paper stuck on by way of' 
apology for a label, I am surprised that fatal mistakes do not, 
occur more frequently than they appear to do. 
I do not wish to say one w-ord against our surgeons which 
they do not deserve, but we know that sometimes “ very un¬ 
favourable symptoms set in,” or perhaps “ the fever is in¬ 
creased with wonderful rapidity,” or something of that sort. 
Ltcopodium. 
The Benevolent Fund. 
Sir,—Much has been written on this subject lately, some of 
it in a spirit likely to do good, and some with a very different- 
tendency, for I cannot think that the cynical, conceited, dog¬ 
matic tone adopted by some correspondents, whose chief aim 
appears to be to make themselves’very prominent in every¬ 
thing,—if not by popularity, then by notoriety,—can elicit 
any good result. 
I fully agree w T ith the sentiments of “ Senricus .” There- 
are some people who, in these matters, not only “let their- 
right hand know what their left hand doeth,” but they seerm 
little pleased if everybody else does not know it too. I am 
quite willing that they should be gratified, even by having 
their names embalmed in printer’s ink with heavier type than 
those of their less magnanimous neighbours, if that Gan be con¬ 
veniently carried out; but let them be satisfied with their own. 
distinction, and concern themselves less about others. TYhen 
they ask that the names of others shall be printed in a manner 
to show that they do not subscribe as much as Mr. Biglittle, I. 
think they are asking what they have no right to ask, and what 
they would not like others to ask if they were differently con¬ 
cerned. There are many who have not yet subscribed to the 
Benevolent Fund, and others who have contributed only small 
