91S 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
were compelled to place a label upon the vessel or 
packet denoting that what they sold was poisonous, and 
they were obliged to give a caution to the persons 
receiving it as to their dangerous nature, and he thought 
the same should apply to the local authorities. 
A verdict was returned by the jury that the deceased 
died from the effects of drinking carbolic acid, and 
appended to the verdict an opinion that the delivering 
out to persons of carbolic acid without a label, caution, 
or information of its character is dangerous, and should 
be discontinued. 
The deputy-coroner said he would forward this 
expression of opinion by the jury to the proper local 
authorities. 
American Diplomas. 
On Tuesday, May 7th, an appeal was argued in the 
Court of Exchequer on behalf of Thomas Andrews, of 
Shrewsbury, against a conviction by the magistrates of 
that town for improperly using the letters M.D. after 
his name in accounts rendered. The appellant produced 
a diploma of the University of Philadelphia, United 
States, of the year 1870, but did not appear even to have 
visited the place or been examined before a qualified 
tribunal. 
Their Lordships were all of opinion that the conviction 
should be affirmed, and dismissed the appeal with costs. 
Baron Martin expressed his satisfaction that measures 
were being taken by the Legislature in America to sup¬ 
press this issue of spurious degrees by the University of 
Philadelphia. 
GEORGE ROBERT GRAY, F.R.S. 
We regret to have to record the death, on Monday, 
May 6th, of George Robert Gray, F.R.S., Assistant 
Keeper of the Department of Natural History at the 
British Museum. Mr. Gray was the youngest son of 
Samuel Frederick Gray, author of the well-known 
* Supplement to the Pharmacopoeia.’ The deceased 
gentleman was himself the author of some highly 
esteemed works on various branches of natural history. 
GEORGE JOHN GILES. 
George John Giles, late of the Seven Sisters Road, 
Holloway, died at Whiteparish, Wilts, on the 25th day 
of April, from pulmonary consumption, in the 25th year 
of his age. 
MEETINGS FOR THE ENSUING WEEK. 
Monday . Society of Arts, at 8 p.m. — “Silicates, 
May 13. Silicides, Glass and Glass Painting.” By 
Professor Barff (Cantor Lecture). 
1loyal JSIedical and Cliirurqical Society, at 
8.30 p.m. 
London Institution, at 4 p.m. —“Elementary 
Botany.” By Professor Bentley. 
Tuesday . Royal Institution, at 3 p.m. —“Develop- 
May 14. naent of Belief and Custom.” By Mr. 
E. B. Tylor. 
"Wednesday ... Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, 
May 15. at 12.—Annual Meeting. Evening, at 8.— 
Conversazione. 
Society of Arts, at 8 p.m. 
Thursday . Royal Society, at 9 p.m. 
May 16. Royal Institution, at 3 p.m. —“ Heat and 
Light.” By Dr. Tyndall. 
Chemical Society, at 8 p.m. 
Friday . Royal Institution, at 9 p.m. 
Saturday . Royal Institution, at 3 p.m. — “ Chemical 
May 18. Action of Light.” By Professor Roscoe. 
[May 11, 1872. 
*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. 
Election op Council. 
Sir,—The letter of ‘ Fair Play’alludes to the omission of 
the names of some of the candidates, mine amongst others, 
in the list which has been circulated by the Defence Associa¬ 
tion. Apart from its unfairness, I think it bad taste to send 
such circulars to those also who are thus blackballed by anti¬ 
cipation, soliciting them to vote against themselves. 
I have been invited for several years to allow my Dame to 
be placed on the list, and have acceded on the present occa¬ 
sion, feeling that when new names are required, it is but 
reasonable to expect that those who have for years been con¬ 
nected with the Society, and shared whatever benefits have 
arisen therefrom, should be ready, if requested, to take their 
turn in carrying on its business and promoting its general 
welfare. I really know nothing of the Defence Association 
or its officers, and greatly doubt if they know much of me or 
my views. It would be therefore obviously unfair for either to 
denounce the other. There must be great and important 
interests to serve; and were I on the Council I could only give 
any question my best consideration and judgment, free from, 
influence outside or in. Beyond that I can promise nothing,, 
except that I shall not feel disappointed at a non-election, 
seeing there are so many excellent men ready to fill the vacan¬ 
cies that now occur. 
It is to be regretted the Association should have issued the* 
circular as emanating from the Pharmaceutical Society itself. 
The discovery of the misrepresentation would lead respectable 
readers to disregard the contents. “ Qui mendax in uno, qua 
mendaxin omnibus.” Edward M. Burden. 
Sir,—What a fuss Messrs. Smith and Co. are making about 
the Defence Association’s circular! Mr. Smith surely 
forgets that bis name was not only on a similar list last year,, 
but that it was put there at the particular request of hie 
friend Mr. Carr, and that his election was secured thereby; 
and further, that no protest or threat of legal proceedings 
wasmadeby him at that time. Yerily, the inconsistency of some- 
people is passing strange. But the whole matter seems to lie in 
a nutshell; had the promoters of the circular placed Mr. Smith’s 
name on the list, there would certainly have been nothing said 
about the circular “ purporting to emanate from the Society,” 
or of its “ having a tendency to vitiate the whole election,”' 
from the Torquay quarter at least. As it is, however, L 
think he has, with the assistance of the Council, helped on the- 
object of the Defence Associations very considerably; and had 
they known their circular was to be brought so prominently 
before the members through the Journal and otherwise, they 
might have saved themselves the expense of advertising. 
I have not the least doubt but what the members will ratify 
the selection made by the Defence Committees, and show by 
their decision that they were right, at least, in excluding the* 
names of Messrs. Smith and Carr from the list of gentlemen 
who have yet to make a public apology to their constituents- 
for their actions in regard to the poison question last year. 
As regards your editorial note, Mr. Editor, I cannot see 
how it could be possible for any man with a grain of common 
sense to mistake the Defence circular for the Society’s, 
official voting-paper. The parties who sent them in return 
to the Secretary as such, must have been opponents,* who did. 
so for a purpose best known to themselves. 
A word to your correspondent ‘ Fair Flay.’ Did it not occur 
to him, when he wrote his communication, that anonymous- 
writing is anything but fan* play ? When he was so ex¬ 
tremely anxious for the independence of individual members, 
lie might have shown his own independence by giving his- 
name. But I deny that there is anything in the circular that 
need be protested against. The heading might certainly 
have been worded differently, or some of the wording might 
have been transposed, which would have suited the require¬ 
ments of the Defence Committee and left them free from the 
accusation that has been made against them of usurping the 
name of the Pharmaceutical Society; but as it is, it shows- 
no indications of such, and I can confidently assert that such 
* We are informed that Mr. Fairlie’s assumption is in¬ 
correct.— Ed. Ph. J. 
CarmptlrMf. 
