September 2,1871.] THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
199 
* 0 * 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. 
Poison Regulations. 
Sir,—From reading Dr. Greenliow’s report upon tlie ex- 
aminations of tlie Pharmaceutical Society, published in your 
last Journal, I am led to presume that that gentleman will 
entertain views entirely opposed to those expressed by Messrs. 
Simon, Sandford and the other promoters of the “ Compul¬ 
sory Poison Regulations.” On remarking upon the difference 
which exists between the grade of chemist and druggist and 
pharmaceutical chemist, he says, “ I am of opinion further, 
that inasmuch as the increase of practical pharmaceutical 
skill is what will most conduce to the service of the public,” 
etc. etc. Now I think he has there hit the right nail upon 
the head, and expresses the views of by far the larger portion 
of our profession. 
If a man by observation, study and practice, so educates 
himself that he is able to pass the requisite examinations, it 
seems only natural that, of his own free will and in his own 
interests, he will use his utmost endeavours to prevent mis¬ 
takes, and will have his business regulated and carried on in 
the best style suited to his own particular case. We must 
take into account the gi-eat difference there exists between 
each and every business; regulations suitable for a business in 
London would not at all do for the majority of country busi¬ 
nesses. 
I believe, as it has been frequently stated, that whatever 
regulations maybe enforced, they will in no way diminish the 
number of accidents, that number being so small in com¬ 
parison with the amount of business transacted. I would 
•suggest that the agitators for compulsory poison regulations 
should accept the concluding passage of Dr. Greenhow’s 
report as a sufficient guarantee, and that they should turn 
their attention more to the education of forthcoming che¬ 
mists, to fit them for examination. I think, then, they will 
do far more service to their country. 
B. II. COWGILL. 
jBurnley, August 20th, 1871. 
The Pharmacy Bill. 
Sir,—Like a good many others, I am thoroughly tired of 
the poison controversy going on in your Journal, and would 
not have added a single word if it had not been for the poi¬ 
soning case now under investigation in Brighton. 
I have no desire to reason or argue with opponents who do 
not wish to be convinced; I feel certain that sooner or later 
the Privy Council will relieve us all by passing a law com¬ 
pelling every chemist to adopt precautions similar to those 
already carried out in every well-conducted and reputed 
establishment. I place also very little importance in the 
voluminous lists of our opponents, judging from the way in 
which returns were obtained in this town, for I am led to be¬ 
lieve that should the poison regulation question be once more 
seriously discussed, the numbers would disappear like mist, 
leaving a few leaders in unenviable distinctness. Anyhow, 
the names of those who at a moment’s notice signed the pe¬ 
tition in favour of legislative interference, when compared 
with those who were against it, leave not a particle of doubt 
in the mind of any sensible man, of what really should be 
done. Names like Bell, Corbyn, Dinncford, Godfrey and 
Cook, Hanbury, Savage, etc. etc., carry more weight than all 
the chemists of the back streets of London and other towns 
taken together. 
That the principles upon which these great houses manage 
their business differ from those of the great number of smaller 
houses is nothing new or surprising; it is just this occasional 
difference which has brought them their present world-wide 
reputation, a difference which usually consisted in being a 
few steps in advance of others. The public, moreover, is a 
very good and competent judge in those matters, and requires 
no mouthpiece to tell them where to go for the best and most 
carefully-prepared medicine, and to whom to apply for poisons. 
The leading houses refuse to sell poisons to anybody except 
those who are personally well known to them; their poison 
register book is a great blank, while small indifferent places 
of business are so powerfully influenced by the fear of losing 
a customer as to have their sense of responsibility most 
wonderfully blunted. To preach to these about the useless¬ 
ness of legal interference and to praise their own discretion, 
only leads to mischief. It would have been more salutary 
and wise to insist on the necessity of adopting the strictest 
rules and precautions in the selling and keeping of poisons, 
and to render such sales as rare and difficult an occurrence as 
possible. Every objection on that head should be met with 
the reply, “ The greater the opposition, the clearer the neces¬ 
sity for lawful compulsion.” 
Brighton , August 20th, 1871. J. Schweitzer. 
The Council of the North British Branch of the 
Pharmaceutical Society. 
Sir,—I beg most respectfully to decline taking the advice 
Mr. Mackay tenders me through the columns of last Satur¬ 
day’s Journal. There was nothing in my last letter to convey 
the idea that I did not know the constitution of this Council; 
while the fact of my being a young member of the Society is 
no reason whatever that I should be ignorant of what he 
states. I fancy his ideas of the intelligence of his Scottish 
brethren in trade, myself in particular, must be of the lowest 
order, if he considers that we would really become members 
of a society, and months afterwards require to wander over 
the back volumes of its Journal for its history. But I shall 
not comment further on the manner in which Mr. Mackay 
has treated my communication, as any person comparing the 
two letters will see, at a glance, that his is not a direct reply 
to mine, but a mild attempt to snub what he possibly con¬ 
siders an aspirant to fame. I will, however, endeavour to 
supply a few omissions I consider he has made in his state¬ 
ment, in the hope that he may make use of them the next 
time he expounds the constitution and history of the North 
British Branch. They are as follows :— 
Taking into consideration the facts that this very Council’s 
report of our transactions, together with the proceedings of 
our annual meetings, were sent to the May numbers of the 
Journal and published, and that the Scotch have proverbially 
good memories, we did not think it at all necessary to ad¬ 
vertise this meeting in the Journal previous to the meeting 
being held in April, nor for many years have we seen fit to 
send out circulars inviting all the members of the Society in 
Scotland to attend these meetings; this would have put the 
Society to considerable expense, not to say of extra trouble 
to its secretary, while we found it was quite unnecessary. 
We have always held our annual meetings in the evening, 
as we know our friends do not object to come to Edinburgh 
and spend a night in the ‘Douglas’ for the purpose of attend¬ 
ing them, and asserting their rights with regard to the elec¬ 
tion of the Council of the North British Branch. 
I need not say we made all comers welcome who were 
members of the Pharmaceutical Society, and we, of course, 
always managed to get a few gentlemen from some of the 
small burghs in the immediate neighbourhood of Edinburgh 
to attend these meetings, whose names in the report in the 
Journal, with the towns they belonged to attached, looked as 
if we had an array of talent from all parts of the country; 
for we know it is a natural failing of our friends south of the 
border that they have but little geographical knowledge of 
Scotland. You will thus see that though the pharmaceutists 
of Glasgow, and perhaps other towns, were asleep, it was not 
our fault; indeed, some of us even went the length of making 
an occasional tour round, to endeavour to awaken them out 
of their state of stupor; but this had not much effect, till at 
length, rather than disturb our brethren in their slumbers, 
and not wishing to be called illiberal, we took upon ourselves 
the responsibility of electing to the Council Board a gentle¬ 
man or two to represent Dundee and Glasgow. We did not 
ask these gentlemen whether they could attend our Council 
meetings or not; we, however, sometimes sent a notice to 
them, requesting them to come to the meetings of Council, 
but finding them always asleep, we neglected doing so 
when anything of importance was to be discussed, making 
the hurry our excuse, for we had a secret instinct telling us 
that if we aroused the fellows properly, it was just possible 
they might take Museum, Library, money grant, honour 
and all from us; for though I have said the clause in the 
Act of 1852 gives Edinburgh an examining body, the clause 
also says that Glasgow, or other place or places in Scotland, 
may be selected at the discretion of the Council in London. 
1 have heard it whispered that the hundred and odd pounds 
