May 25, 1872.] 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
963 
society, but rather the contrary. Students in the country do 
not expect to receive instruction from duly qualified gentle¬ 
men for nothing ; but if the parent society will give them no 
.aid, they must either go without altogether or ask to have it 
.gratuitously. The expense of going to London and attending 
Bloomsbury Square, does form a great barrier to hundreds of 
•country students; but this “ Country Major Associate ” says 
that they had no right to enter the trade. Perhaps he has 
not yet learnt that the trade is free for any one to enter. 
'Those who can afford to pay for high-class training will not 
enter the trade, as it will not pay for the large outlay required, 
while if the Society did its duty to provincial associations, 
.there would be no necessity for country students to attend 
Bloomsbury Square. Provincial associations would be as 
much use to the country as the Square is to London, were they 
not crippled by want of funds. “ Country Major Associate” 
seems to think £100 not too much for a course of chemistry, 
and that the teacher must be a high class professor with no 
•end of degrees and diplomas. In most towns it would be 
•difficult to find such an one, while the work would just as well 
be done by any gentleman who has passed the Major, for 
£20, and the same with botany, etc. I admit that provincial 
associations are greatly dependent on voluntary teachers; but 
this state of things is a disgrace to the whole community of 
chemists and druggists. “ Country Major Associate’s ” reason 
for not spending £300 a year over provincial associations is 
rather a novel one,—as it is impossible to give £300 don’t 
give any. I think the Society ought to give £100 a year to 
each of the existing associations, and surely it can afford this 
out of £10,000 a year. The Society gets at least £5 from 
each student, and is it not common honesty to give a little in 
return ? I should think that in reviewing its past life, there 
is no act upon which the dying Council can look with so much 
satisfaction as its giving £48 out of an income of £10,000, 
to educate the pharmacists of the future. Is the revenue of 
the Society derived in the proportion of £9,950 from London, 
to £50 from all England ? Besides, for the Society not to 
give aid to provincial associations is a proceeding fraught with 
the gravest danger to the Society itself. The rising pharma¬ 
cists will grow up to look upon it with dislike as a Society 
which has done its best to thwart them in their efforts to 
•educate themselves, and to rob them by exorbitant fees. Let 
it remember that the assistants and apprentices of to day will 
be masters in their turn, and take warning ere it is too late. 
Provincial members expect something for their subscriptions; 
they cannot attend evening meetings, or have access to the 
library, and naturally they expect some indirect good to them¬ 
selves in the shape of help extended to their assistants and 
apprentices. We know what centralization has done for 
France ; the Society, on the small scale, is doing as France 
•did, and if an alteration is not made, and that at once, there 
will be the same result. 
Judging from his letter, I should say, that “ Country Major 
Associate” is one of those who look upon the business of a 
chemist and druggist as a profession, and pharmacy as a 
scientific pursuit for wealthy, learned gentlemen. I would 
venture to remind him that in nine out of ten oases, the pro¬ 
prietor has to get a living by his shop, not to pursue a 
scientific pastime, and that until surgeons leave off dispensing, 
the business of a chemist and druggist will be a trade, not a 
profession, and by no moans a very profitable or pleasant one 
cither. 
G. T. 
May 8th, 1872. 
Sir,—Some few weeks since you were kind enough to in¬ 
sert my remarks on “ Compulsory Education,” and, amongst 
other matters therein stated, the education of apprentices was 
incidentally touched upon. 
Since then, we have had in the Journal two, if not more, 
editorial articles, and several letters from leading chemists, 
almost entirely devoted to this subject. 
Perhaps Mr. Atkins and Mr. Giles may be right in the 
main; but the latter, as the exponent of high class pharmacy, 
is not likely to bring over the great bulk of the trade to his 
views. 
I believe we are most of us open to conviction; but, on the 
other hand, we object to being dragooned to meet other 
people’s tastes and fancies. 
Mr. Rimmington’s communication contains many points 
well worthy of consideration, as also does the letter by a 
Country Chemist, “ A Plea for Weak Brethren.” 
Being very anxious to ascertain the views of country che¬ 
mists upon this important subject, I have taken advantage of 
every opportunity for discussing the question with them, 
and there seems to be very little difference of opinion upon the 
matter; we are all pretty well determined as to what we mean 
to do. 
Now, before another word is said upon pharmaceutical 
education, let us take a glance at what is going on at the 
present day, in the higher profession of medicine. What do 
we see ? M hy in this town of 50,000 inhabitants, and in the 
villages round, there are many medical pupils ; do the medical 
practitioners who take these pupils provide in their establish¬ 
ments dissecting rooms and museums for teaching them ? 
No such thing! Are lectures and classes provided for them ? 
Certainly not; the nearest medical school being between 
twenty and thirty miles from this. 
Well, what do they do? Just this. Supposing they are 
wise and studious, and wish to get on, they avail themselves 
of every opportunity for study and for the acquiring of prac¬ 
tical information. At the end of the term (we will take it 
for granted the Preliminary has been already passed) they go 
to London, or elsewhere, to attend hospital practice and lec¬ 
tures, and having passed their examination, they quietly 
settle down into a country practice. 
Others, whose means are more ample, and who are ambitious 
of a higher standing, take the office of house surgeon, demon¬ 
strator, etc., fix themselves either in the metropolis or one of 
our large centres of population, and become great in their 
profession; and between these two classes there will always 
exist many different ranks and orders. 
Now, apply this to the case of pharmaceutical pupils or 
apprentices. Speaking for myself, I intend to go on as we 
are now doing—to endeavour to select only such youths as 
have had a good education, and who appear to have an apti¬ 
tude and taste for study, and who have the means necessary 
for defraying all reasonable expenses incidental to the re¬ 
quirements expected from them. 
Of course proper arrangements will be made for allowing 
time for book study, and as far as circumstances will admit, 
and may be thought desirable, we shall make them acquainted 
with most of the ordinary pharmaceutical preparations ; but 
what we shall not do is to take apprentices (as Mr. Giles de¬ 
mands) without calculating upon their doing any work, nor 
shall we tumour places into chemical laboratories, nor suffer 
ourselves to become laboratory teachers. 
The facilities we offer will, we conceive, impart a good 
groundwork for further and higher instruction to follow. And 
to those who seek something higher and better, we must 
point out the Clifton sanctum, and other similar institu- 
tions, or as we conceive much better still, a short period of 
study in the Pharmaceutical School at Bloomsbury after they 
have concluded their apprenticeship. 
The establishment of classes and lectures and other means 
for imparting knowledge should, by all means, be encouraged, 
but it seems to me most unreasonable that this should in any 
way be done out of the funds of the Pharmaceutical Society, 
particularly when so small a proportion of the trade is con¬ 
tributor to its funds. 
If this sort of pampering goes on it will only cause a dis¬ 
satisfied spirit to spring up amongst our young men. Instead 
of feeling that self-dependence which alone can give strength 
and vigour, they will be looking for help, first to this quarter 
and then to the other, and blaming everything and everybody 
but themselves as the cause of failure. 
Let us do away with this paltry attempt at parading a 
pauperism which really does not or ought not to exist, and 
whatever plan for education may be determined upon, seek to 
make it self supporting. 
I am convinced that two of the greatest sources of evil, 
with regard to the subject before us consists, first in the cus¬ 
tom of taking youths as apprentices at too early an age, and 
secondly in their want of proper training during the time they 
are at school. The cure for the first is in our own hands. I 
would suggest that none should be taken younger than 10 
years of age. 
The second is not so easy to find a remedy for. For instance, 
I am seeking an apprentice. I apply to our principal schools, 
but cannot learn that those who have passed any of the ex¬ 
aminations think of being chemists. I advertise, and from 
among other candidates I select, one who has had three years’ 
education at one of our Grammar schools, and finished off 
with two years instruction at a classical and collegiate school 
near London. 
