July 15, 1871.] 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
57 
freely to make use of the accommodation they afford by 
making it a general rendezvous, chemists’ exchange, 
club room, reading room, writing room, house of call, 
etc. etc., and a place of neutral ground for meeting trade 
travellers, for whose samples, if desired, one of the rooms 
may be occasionally engaged. 
“ It remains only to add, that to promote these varied 
objects, an increase of the income of the Association is 
necessary. At present 102 gentlemen are members of it. 
It will need an increased number of members and of 
subscriptions to maintain the objects in view efficiently. 
The minimum subscription is os. per annum for prin¬ 
cipals and 2s. Q>d. per annum for assistants and appren¬ 
tices of chemists. Many voluntary subscriptions, how¬ 
ever, on a more liberal scale, are already offered and 
made, as well as liberal donations towards the preliminary 
expenses of the offices.” 
A vote of thanks was passed to the Council of the 
Pharmaceutical Society for a grant of £10 in aid of the 
library fund. 
THE GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL ON 
PHARMACY AND THERAPEUTICS. 
On Thursday, the 6th inst., this body met under the 
presidency of Dr. Paget. The subject before it was the 
recommendations of the Committee on Education. Dr. 
Parkes, in bringing these forward, proposed, first: 
“ That it is desirable that instruction in pharmacy should 
be separated from that in therapeutics, and that the 
former should be attended at an early, and the latter at 
.a later, period of the medical curriculum.” The Coun¬ 
cil, he remarked, had much reason to be satisfied with 
the influence produced by the reports of the visitors of 
examinations and the report of the Committee on Pro¬ 
fessional Education in 1869. The licensing bodies had 
adopted all the more important of the suggestions made 
to them. This was but natural, as the suggestions had 
been well conceived, and had been met by the licensing 
bodies in a proper spirit. As to the proposal now before 
the Council, he said that it was obvious that instruction 
as to the drugs used in medicine, and the means of com¬ 
pounding them, should be separated from instruction as 
to their use, which could be adequately understood only 
when the student had attended courses on physiology, 
medicine and surgery. The majority of the more experi¬ 
enced teachers of these subjects had, in the Committee’s 
Report of 1869, strongly recommended the teaching of 
phaimacy at a different stage of the medical curri¬ 
culum from the teaching of therapeutics. Dr. Christi- 
.son, whom the Council should respect as much as any 
English or Eui’opean authority, had expressed himself 
strongly in favour of the proposed separation. Dr. 
Aquilla Smith had given the same opinion. The edu¬ 
cational report had recommended that the teaching of 
pharmacy should be made more practical and tutorial 
than hitherto; but this was a point for the licensing 
bodies to deal with. That such a plan, however, was 
desirable was proved by the manner in which the course 
was carried on in the University of Aberdeen. Dr. 
Harvey, the professor there, might publish his account 
-of the course with advantage ; while Dr. Macrobin, the 
member of Council for that University, would corrobo¬ 
rate his opinion as to the satisfactory working of the 
plan. 
Dr. Christison seconded the motion. The defects of 
the present system he had been the first to see, and the 
first to suggest its improvement. Materia medica had 
formerly a very comprehensive signification, including 
the natural history and character of medicines, and the 
mode of preparing them for use; their action, so far as 
it was known, and the diseases to which they were 
.applied, to which was afterwards added the subject of 
dietetics as a remedy. For a long time materia medica 
continued to be so understood in Scotland, whose seats 
of learning borrowed the system very largely from the 
Dutch school. Materia medica, however, was not now 
regarded in the same way; and he was much surprised, 
on engaging in his present professorship, to find that the 
London Apothecaries’ Society gave it a totally different 
meaning. The students were required to attend a course 
on this subject the first year. Now, materia medica, 
properly understood, could not possibly be studied in the 
first year. The more important parts of it could be 
taken up only at an advanced period. On making in¬ 
quiry he found, what the shortness of the London course 
had led him to suspect, that it was almost always only a 
course of pharmacy. It was sometimes argued that the 
branch of pharmacy having attained such perfection in 
the hands of pharmaceutical chemists, practitioners 
might leave the subject unstudied. It appeared to be 
forgotten, that in many parts of the country, medicines 
were not to be obtained from a chemist but only from 
the practitioner, who ought, therefore, to know their 
distinctive characteristics. The subject should be studied 
practically as well as by lectures. This, however, was 
not always possible. Edinburgh University lacked (in 
the mean time, at least) the requisite accommodation. 
In a good practical dispensary the students could be 
well taught in a body, if there was adequate accommo¬ 
dation. It was not necessary that the patients should 
swallow all the prescriptions made up by the students. 
The subject might be taught in a short time, so as to 
obviate the necessity of the student obtaining instruction 
at a chemist and druggist’s, which was now generally 
required when an apprenticeship had not been served. 
Thus the student's work -would be really lessened. Of 
course the period of study should be early,—after che¬ 
mistry and botany. With regard to therapeutics, some 
persons thought it beneath consideration. This was 
partly due to the way in which it had been taught. He 
declined to say anything specific on that subject; but he 
knew that in many schools therapeutics had been greatly 
neglected. The subject might be made highly attrac¬ 
tive ; and it included many points beyond the sphere of 
the lecturer on the practice of medicine, unless he went far 
out of his way. Therapeutics, as a course, should come 
near the end. It was most important in giving effect.to 
the other branches. Without it the most accurate dia¬ 
gnosis would be incomplete. 
Dr. Macrobin supported the motion. 
Dr. Humphry moved, and Dr. Abjohx seconded, as 
an amendment, “ That practical instruction in pharmacy 
may, with advantage, be substituted for formal lectures 
on "the subject, and should be attended at an early period 
of the professional curriculum; and that instruction in 
therapeutics should be conducted at a later period of the 
professional curriculum, cither by a special course of 
lectures, or as an essential part of the course of lectures 
on medicine and surgery.” 
Dr. Andrew Wood and Dr. Aquilla Smith supported 
the original proposal and criticized the amendment. 
Ultimately, after a desultory and slightly acrimonious 
discussion, Drs. Parkes and Christison carried their point 
by a decisive majority. 
prlranwntM! stilt itato Uromimigs. 
HOUSE OF LORDS. 
Petroleum Bill. —July 7. —The report of amend¬ 
ments in the Petroleum Bill was brought up and agreed 
Nitro-Glycerixe Act (1869 ).—July 10.— The Earl 
of Shaftesbury presented a petition from proprietors, 
managers, miners and others interested and employed in 
ironstone mines at Whitehaven, praying that so much 
of the Nitro-Glycerine Act of 1869 as extends its pro- 
visions to dynamite may be repealed, or that an Act 
