-52 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
[July 15,1871. 
"believe that I shall, at least, he favoured with a fair me remind you, has been struck out of the dispensing 
hearing if I venture on the somewhat unusual course of clause) will be the best settlement we can hope to get of 
addressing my fellow-members at this very important the question, and that an early settlement will be con- 
epoch in the existence of the Society. I think I am j ducivo to the good of our Society, to signify to those 
who represent you in Parliament that these fair Amend¬ 
ments being made, you no longer desire to obstruct its 
progress. In order that you may see exactly the scope of 
the Amendments, I enclose herewith a copy of the origi¬ 
nal Bill, side by side with a draft of that which will he 
submitted to the House on Monday next by Mr. Forster. 
We know the nature and extent of the regulations; we 
if you know that they are already adopted in very many esta- 
please, that the notion of a duty undertaken is my own' blishments both in London and the country; that they 
merely; all Members of Parliament with whom I have j are so elastic that almost any pet method of storing 
justified in calling the present conjuncture of affairs an 
epoch, because the Act of ’68, which gave us great privi¬ 
leges, affixed as a condition thereto the performance of a 
certain duty, and this being the period when, by some 
means or other, regulations are to be commenced, I 
think it may fairly be called an epoch. This brings me to 
the question, all important at this moment, how shall 
those regulations be made ? Do not imagine, 
talked on the subject, whether they be favourable or 
adverse to the new Pharmacy Bill, agree in such an 
interpretation of the first section of the Act of ’68. 
“ The facts of the case stand thus:—The Pharma¬ 
ceutical Society declined at its last Annual Meeting to 
prescribe regulations , but set its seal of approval on cer¬ 
tain methods of storing and dispensing poisons which 
had been most carefully set down by men knowing on 
the one hand the dangers, on the other the difficulties, 
in the way of dispensers. The Privy Council, who arc 
in fact concerned in carrying out the Act of ’68, said, 
naturally enough, you have not done your duty, and we 
must either urge you to do it, or do it ourselves inde¬ 
pendently of you. Hence the origin of the Pharmacy 
Bill which passed the House of Lords a few weeks ago, 
and is now in progress in the Commons. I would not 
have you under any misapprehension respecting the 
delay which has arisen. When the Bill came for second 
reading last Thursday, it was not postponed for any 
reason 'which concerns the Bill itself, as you may see by 
the discussion which has been published in the Phar¬ 
maceutical Journal, but merely because many mem¬ 
bers wished to protest against a growing infringement 
•on the forms of the House, i.c., reading Bills which are 
to be extensively altered, without giving the House a 
previous opportunity of seeing what those Amendments 
are. 
“ The Bill originally proposed is short and simple. It 
gives to the Council of our Society the power to submit 
regulations, from time to time, to the Privy Council for 
approval, and, if need be, to amend or revoke such regu¬ 
lations. It then states that if no regulations are in force, 
the Privy Council may call on us to frame some; and if 
we fail to do that and obtain the approval of the Privy 
Council thereto, that body may act without reference to 
us. 
“When this Bill was first brought to our notice, the 
Council discussed its merits and demerits, resolved to 
watch its progress and endeavour to improve it. 
poisons which is not named in them w r ould not be ex¬ 
cluded by them; and further, that at a very full meeting 
of our Society a majority of nineteen only decided against 
making them at once compulsory. Beyond all this, we 
know that if, owing to the late period of the session, the 
Bill be shelved nov r , it will surely be reproduced at the 
very commencement of next session, when time will be 
in favour of the supporters rather than the opponents of 
the Bill, and perhaps ‘ Inspectors,’ the necessity for whose 
appointment was so kindly suggested to Mr. Forster by 
the deputation a fortnight ago, may be provided for us. 
“ I could find many members of our Council—perhaps 
even a majority—to sign this letter with me, but as I 
am already a marked man for venturing to uphold what 
I believe to be the best interest both of the Society and 
the trade, in opposition to the last voting of my col¬ 
leagues, I prefer standing alone in this communication, 
and I am sure you will believe me always 
“ Very faithfully yours, 
“George W. Sandford.” 
Original Clause. 
And the Council of the 
said Society may from time 
to time submit to the Privy 
Council regulations as to 
the keeping, dispensing and 
selling of poisons within 
the meaning of the princi¬ 
pal Act, and as to revoking 
or amending any such re¬ 
gulations previously made, 
and the Privy Council may, 
if they think fit, by order 
approve of such regula¬ 
tions. 
If at any time it appear 
to the Privy Council that 
there are no regulations for 
the time being in force un¬ 
der the principal Act as to 
“ I was deputed, with the President, to see the officials 
of the Privy Council; and on doing so, we were met 
freely and fairly by concessions at once. First it was the keeping, dispensing and 
proposed to take away all initiative power from the 1 selling of poisons within 
Privy Council, by embodying our oxen regulations in a the meaning of the princi- 
schedule to the Bill, and giving us authority to amend j pal Act, the Privy Council 
and revoke them from time to time, with approval of the may serve a notice on the 
Privy Council. Next it was agreed to add a clause 1 Council of the Pharmaceu- 
which would compel all persons keeping open shop to tical Society requiring them 
observe the same regulations 
Thus the two grievances 
were removed, and chemists would not be branded with 
what had been called the indignity of conforming to 
rules from which others were exempted. I thought we 
had thus succeeded admirably; but at a future meeting 
the Council, by a majority of one. decided still to oppose 
rather than amend, although generally admitting that the 
objections to the Hill had been removed; and you have had 
circulars, asking you, as plainly as possible, to confirm 
them in this opposition. It is at this conjuncture that I 
.ask you to exercise your free and independent judgment 
in the matter,—not simply to continue your agitation if j gulations, or obtaining the 
you disapprove, but if you approve, and think with me, | approval of the Privy Coun¬ 
ihat the Bill in its amended form (the Poison bottle, let oil thereto, the Privy Coun- 
to frame and submit for the 
approval of the Privy Coun¬ 
cil regulations as to the 
matters aforesaid; and if the 
Council of the Pharmaceu¬ 
tical Society, within the 
time limited by such notice, 
not being less than two 
months from the date of the 
service of the notice, make 
default in framing such re- 
Amended Clause. 
After the first day of Oc¬ 
tober, 1871, the regulations 
as to the keeping, dispens¬ 
ing and selling of poisons 
within the meaning of the 
principal Act, which are 
set out in the schedule to 
this Act, shall be observed 
by all persons who keep 
open shop for the retailing, 
dispensing or compounding 
of poisons, and shall have 
the same effect as regula¬ 
tions prescribed in manner 
specified in the principal 
Act, and the provisions of 
the principal Act relating 
to such regulations shall be 
construed accordingly. 
Every person who keeps 
open shop for the retailing, 
dispensing or compounding 
of poisons, and fails to con¬ 
form with any of the said 
regulations shall, notwith¬ 
standing anything con¬ 
tained in section sixteen of 
the principal Act, or in sec¬ 
tion one of the Pharmacy 
Act, 1869, be liable to a 
penalty not exceeding in 
the case of the first offence 
five pounds, and in the case 
of a second or any subse¬ 
quent offence ten pounds, 
which penalties may be re¬ 
covered on summary convic¬ 
tion as penalties under the 
principal Act may be re¬ 
covered. 
