July 22,1871.] 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
79 
No notice can be taken of anonymous communica¬ 
tions. Whatever 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. 
Metropolitan Chemists’ Defence Association. 
“ The Bill intituled an Act to amend the Pharmacy Act, 
1868,” is now numbered with the things of the past, and for 
a considerable time will probably cease to cause excitement 
and contention in the pharmaceutical world ; but as is often 
the case, warfare makes friends and cements into closer union 
those who have hitherto known one another by repute alone, 
so has the battle just fought, in resisting the attempts ruth¬ 
lessly to fetter the members of our trade, been eminently 
conducive to the same happy result. 
That “union is strength” has again been amply exempli¬ 
fied, and whatever may be the taunts and sneers of our op¬ 
ponents, “ that the Bill has been massacred in company with 
many other innocents, and is only deferred for a more strin¬ 
gent and objectionable form of legislation on a future day,” 
the fact remains beyond dispute—and facts are stubborn 
things—that, thanks to the efforts of our own and kindred 
associations, the Government has been compelled, in the first 
place, so materially to alter the Bill as virtually to constitute 
it a new Bill, which the House refused to read, even pro 
forma , without time being given for reconsideration, and 
subsequently, through our continued resistance to its impo¬ 
sition, entirely to abandon. 
“ Sufficient to the day is the evil thereof;” a danger met 
us in our usually quiet course of life, it was faced manfully 
and has been defeated effectually. What has been done may 
yet be done again, and instead of fainting at the prospects of 
a phantom, we will look back with thankfulness and forward 
with courage and confidence; not desiring to court fresh 
encounters, but prepared, should the emergency arise, to 
meet it with the same determination as heretofore. 
Congratulating our friends upon the result of their co¬ 
-operation and support, 
I am, Sir, faithfully yours, 
Edwin B. Vizer. 
63, Lupus Street, Belgravia South, 
July 18 tli, 1871. 
The Pharmacy Bill. 
Sir,—Although the Pharmacy Bill was withdrawn, with 
many others, on Monday night, from the present session, be¬ 
cause, as Mr. Gladstone remarked, it could not be passed 
without discussion, I think it right to send the accompany¬ 
ing letter,* which was posted to members of Parliament on 
Saturday last, in order that you may insert it in the next 
issue of the Journal. Several gentlemen whose names did not 
appear on the list sent me their approval, but too late to be 
recorded when the letter was sent out. 
47, Piccadilly, London, George W. Sandford. 
July 1 9th, 1871. 
Sir,—Mr. Gladstone stated in the House of Commons on 
Monday last that the Pharmacy Bill was withdrawn. For 
•the present year, therefore, the danger of being placed under 
any compulsory regulation is averted. It will be well for 
cevery member of the Society carefully and dispassionately to 
weigh over the events of the past few weeks. 
It has been asserted that when the Pharmacy Act, 1868, 
’Was passing through the House of Commons, “ a tacit under¬ 
standing” was come to between Dr. Simon and Mr. Sandford 
that he (Mr. S.) would require all the registered pharmaceu¬ 
tical chemists and chemists and druggists to conform to 
«certain compulsory regulations for the storing of poisons. 
If such was the case, and certainly the course of action 
taken by Mr. Sandford, and so zealously pursued, seems to 
verify the statement, it must be apparent that Dr. Simon, as 
.the medical officer of the Privy Council, asked of Mr. 
Sandford a promise, the nature and magnitude of which had 
evidently not struck the learned Doctor, and when Mr. 
* See p. 67. 
Sandford assented to the promise it was apparently without 
due thought and consideration. 
If this is a correct interpretation of the facts, it is obvious, 
in endeavouring to persuade the Society to carry out his 
promise, Mr. Sandford has only been actuated by honourable 
motives. The number of petitions presented to the House ot 
Commons against the Bill must have satisfied Mr. Sandford 
that he has misinterpreted the feeling of the trade, and 
having that fact forced upon him, we can hardly suppose that 
he will revive the question at any future time. 
The far-seeing policy of the Executive Committee of the 
Defence Association, through whose untiring energy, per¬ 
severance and management the withdrawal of the Bill is in 
a great measure due, cannot be too highly commended, and 
if next year it is necessary to defend our rights, I hope the 
same zealous committee will have charge of our interests. 
Edwin Yewdall. 
Sir,—For the present the attempted tyrannical interference 
with our business has been defeated. It is not to be sup¬ 
posed, however, that the question is settled. This is only one 
amongst many other attempts of the same character for the 
last forty years, and the strong (unprovoked) hostility which 
a small section of the medical profession entertain towards 
us is seen in one or two of their journals. This unhappy 
feeling can only be traced to that desire too commonly mani¬ 
fested,—the natural desire of one man to tyrannize over and 
oppress another. Once let the chemists submit to this kind 
of interference, and they will have to submit to it to the 
bitter end, and will probably be glad, to throw up their 
pharmaceutical privileges altogether. It is not, however, to 
be supposed that the medical profession generally entertain 
these sentiments towards us. We know that thousands of 
them do not; and now that the Privy Council and the 
Government have seen that we shall not quietly submit to 
be blotted out of the political world, it is not unlikely they 
may be more disposed to deal with us as with any other 
class of men deserving of some reasonable consideration in 
the land, and that a timely effort on the part of the new 
Council may succeed in some satisfactory arrangement being 
effected. Our greatest danger is from those amongst our¬ 
selves who seem to invite control and interference from with¬ 
out, and those juniors in the trade who have stepped a little 
too far out of their position to dictate to the whole body of 
chemists. 
Oxton, July 19th, 1871. Joseph Ball. 
Seeing versus Feeling and Hearing. 
Sir,—An ingenious correspondent in last week’s Journal 
suggested the attachment of a bell to all bottles containing 
active poisons; may I be allowed to further suggest that 
instead of one bell, there be connected with the bottle several 
bells, to ring muffled peals during the time a bottle is being 
used by the dispenser ? Another excellent plan for attracting 
the dispenser’s attention to the deadly nature of the prepara¬ 
tions he is handling, would be to have musical boxes con¬ 
nected with the bottles, so that upon removal of a stopper the 
box would tinkle out the * Dead March in Saul ’ in all its 
awful solemnity. If this plan failed to collect a dispenser’s 
wandering thoughts, I am sure no other would succeed. 
Putting aside all joking on so important a subject, however, 
is it not humiliating that we should each week publicly ad¬ 
mit an inability to dispense correctly, without being sur¬ 
rounded with such extraordinary safeguards (?) as sandpaper- 
covered bottles, ingeniously locked stoppers, bottles of in¬ 
artistic shape, covered with spikes of glass, or with balls 
attached to them, and dozens of other such childlike toys ? 
Are our eyes less trustworthy than formerly, that we are com¬ 
pelled to substitute the sense of feeling for that of seeing ? 
Of what use is our pharmaceutical training if we require the 
aid of machinery to remind us which are poisonous and which 
harmless drugs ? 
But, although I hold all these fanciful inventions in ab¬ 
horrence, I am an advocate for arrangement and precaution. 
By all means separate the poisons from the less dangerous 
drugs, and place them in a cupboard by themselves. Avoid 
having two preparations similar in appearance side by side, 
and carefully extra-label the stronger tinctures, such as 
hyoscyamus, conium, digitalis, etc., with such labels as those 
published by Mr. Silverlock, printed on red paper. 
In conclusion, may I express a hope that the literary 
