February 3,1872.] THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
639 
for working in the fields of science should at least include 
Euclid, algebra,—were it only as far as simple equations,—and 
the translation of the * Iliad.’ Decimals also should occupy 
a more prominent place, and the whole arithmetical test be 
much further advanced. The extraction of square and cube 
roots, the laws of arithmetical, geometrical and harmonical 
progression and logarithms should be insisted upon. Many 
persons complain of the loss of time and futility of spending 
so much money in acquiring a superficial knowledge of the 
dead languages. But in the case of a pharmacist who neces¬ 
sarily employs Latin daily, and who should not be puzzled by 
the first long word occurring in a prescription or in descrip¬ 
tive botany, both Greek and Latin are very necessary to en¬ 
able him to seize the meaning of all the terse and definite 
terms which render the botanical description of a plant so 
precise as to picture in tire eye of one familiar with them, the 
exact form and arrangement of the leaves, flowers and fruit 
of a plant described in a dozen words or so. 
A knowledge of the metric system of weights and measures 
might judiciously be included in the Preliminary examina¬ 
tion, and if prizes were offered for those who distinguished 
themselves as classical or mathematical scholars, we should 
probably hear less of subsequent failures in the Major and 
Minor ordeals. Not that by any means other branches of edu¬ 
cation should be neglected in order to raise the standard of ma¬ 
thematical or classical knowledge,—English composition and 
French or German ought to be encouraged, as specially useful 
in after-life. The writer has abundant pecuniary proof of 
their value in a business point of view. In furthering a 
higher standard of scientific education for pharmacists, we 
are expressing the views and ardent hopes of the rising and 
present generation of pharmaceutical chemists. 
Ernest J. T. Agnew. 
The Poison Clauses oe the Pharmacy Act and 
their Official Exponents. 
Sir,—It was with feelings of great indignation that I read 
the case of “ Censure of a Chemist by a Coroner” in your 
impression of Saturday last. Within the last few months 
several chemists have been called over the coals by coroners 
for simply doing their duty, and acting (if we take for 
granted that the cases are truthfully reported) strictly in 
accordance with the Pharmacy Act. The apprentice in this 
case seems to have done everything that was necessary in 
selling such a poison as laudanum. There is no doubt that 
an affair such as is reported would do a great amount of 
harm to many chemists in large towns were it to happen to 
them. In my case, for instance, I am situated in the midst 
of a thickly-populated neighbourhood. Supposing I was 
summoned before the magistrates for selling twopennyworth 
of laudanum (after cautioning the purchaser, and doing what 
I am compelled to do by law), and highly censured for same, 
what would be the result ? Why, the papers would contain 
a long account of it,—especially the sensational ones,—and I 
should be looked upon as a man who did not know his own 
business; the greater part of my customers would leave me, 
thinking I was not capable of dispensing or handling poisons. 
But my indignation arose from the fact that the coroners and 
magistrates seem to be entirely ignorant of the regulations 
respecting the sale of poisons, and through their ignorance a 
chemist is bound to submit. One thing has always struck 
me,—the chemist is censured, the coroner is left in ignorance, 
and there the matter seems to be allowed to drop. We hear 
occasionally of counsel being engaged to prosecute some un¬ 
fortunate being who has been so unlucky as to break the law, 
hut we never hear of counsel being engaged to defend a 
chemist who is unjustly reprimanded hy those persons who 
are supposed to be conversant with the law, but who are con¬ 
tinually showing their ignorance of it. 
If such a thing is to continue, we are all at the mercy of co¬ 
roners and magistrates. Is there no fund of the Society out of 
which some able barrister might be engaged to defend, in 
such a case,—at least, until the public and the coroners seem 
to understand the Pharmacy Act better ? I asked one of the 
members of the Association in this town, “ if such a case had 
to happen here, would the Association do their best to defend 
that man P” and the reply was, “ He could not tell, they were 
too poor.” But such cannot be the case with the Pharma¬ 
ceutical Society. As to the youth being too young to sell 
two-pennyworth of laudanum, I cannot say a word; such 
an idea is simply absurd, and any right-thinking person who 
knew anything of the trade would say so. Leeds. 
Labelling. — The Poison Regulations. 
Sir,—Your correspondent, W. R. F., writing from Scar¬ 
borough, seems to propound a doctrine which has been fre¬ 
quently held before, but which I consider to be altogether 
unsound, and one which I am anxious to protest against. 
He describes a case in which a lady of weak constitution 
sends her servant to a chemist for an ounce of paregoric, 
which he supplies. He labels it “paregoric elixir,” with 
name and address of seller, and one of the new poison-labels. 
What would your correspondent or the law require more ? 
He says that this was only “half doing it,” and that the 
chemist ought to have had the dose printed on the label, 
when no ill-effects from an overdose would have occurred. 
He insinuates also, that if a bottle containing an ounce of 
paregoric so half-labelled had been sold to one in the coun¬ 
try, where medical aid could not easily have been procured, 
and the buyer had chosen to take six drachms in four hours, 
and afterwards had become, from whatever cause, “ very un¬ 
well, and, of course, very uneasy,” the chemist so halt-label¬ 
ling the bottle would have been branded with a bad name in 
the locality, and a “ good blowing up ” might, I suppose 
deservedly, have happened. 
Now, putting aside any question about the danger of 
taking six drachms of paregoric in four hours, or as to 
whether an overdose would make the patient too easy or 
“very uneasy,” and not entering upon the other question, 
whether printing upon the label of such a thing as paregoric 
the dose for an adult would not lead to many fatal errors in 
apportioning the dose to children of a few months old,—here 
a chemist, having fully complied with the law in the matter 
of labelling, is made responsible for the ignorance or the 
stupidity of his customer. This is really too bad. An iron¬ 
monger may sell a razor without warning his customer 
against cutting his throat, and a publican may supply to a 
drunkard that which he knows is to such a man a poison; 
and yet in both these instances the buyer of the article is 
supposed to possess common sense, though in the latter case 
there is little evidence of it. But a druggist must not only 
prepare his medicines correctly, and describe them properly 
and according to law on the label, but he must also provide 
his customers with knowledge of their effects, with discretion 
in their use, and with that caution in the employment of 
dangerous things which children are supposed to learn at an 
early age. 
A chemist of right principles will cheerfully comply with 
the requirements of the law, and, in addition, will give all 
needful directions for the use of strong remedies when he 
thinks that the safety of his customers requires them; but 
he will not burden himself with absurd responsibilities, or 
systematically insult his customers by treating them as if 
they were not possessed of common sense. 
Leeds, Jan. 27th, 1872. Edward Thompson. 
Hours of Closing. 
Sir,—I am glad to find that the subject of shorter hours of 
business is at length attracting attention, and that influential 
men are coming forward as the champions of early closing. 
When such men as Mr. Giles speak, the pharmaceutical world 
listens. I have read with pleasure his remarks on the subject. 
That there are difficulties to be encountered, no sensible man 
will deny; but I hold that they are not insurmountable. Our 
business is a peculiar one; we are not ordinary traders; our 
duties may be looked upon as semi-professional; as in the 
case of the physician or surgeon, we must expect to be called 
upon at any hour to render our services in cases of sudden 
and alarming illness, and I am sure that no man worthy of 
the name of pharmacist will object to meet such a demand, 
ay, and cheerfully too, but he does object, and very properly, 
to be disturbed after the legitimate hour for closing by Mrs. 
Grundy, who habitually sends an old prescription for mixture 
or pills, which she has been in the habit of taking for the last 
ten or twenty years,—she never being able to remember that 
the bottle or box requires replenishing until she is preparing 
for bed. 
I would suggest that, in order to protect ourselves from the 
inconsiderate and impertinent demands of the public, a higher 
rate of charges, say one-third, be asked, in order to compen¬ 
sate us for the extra demand upon our time. 
I am quite certain that if pharmacists generally, laying 
aside all petty jealousy, were to agree to adopt this policy, 
nine-tenths of our unnecessary after-hours’ business would be 
put a stop to. 
