-June 8, 1872.] 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
999 
iion, and lie did not see that there was any occasion for 
Mr. Sandford’s amendment, because the motion was 
.that such reporters as the Coimcil should decide to invite 
should he admitted, and the Council might, and he 
thought very probably would, decide that they would 
only invite one reporter, the same as at present. He 
did not think it at all desirable that any reporters who 
might apply should he present, and thought it more 
than likely that as heretofore the Council would decide 
to invite only one. He did not think there was any 
risk of private matters being reported in an undesirable 
form, because he believed that when it was known that 
the proceedings of the Coimcil were more fully reported, 
and that the shorthand writer exercised simply his own 
discretion, subject to the supervision of the Editor of the 
•Journal, the proceedings would be very materially 
shortened, and another advantage would be secured that 
the committees would do their work much better than 
they did at present. During the last two years he had 
certainly seen a great deal of work done at the Council 
Board which ought to have been done in committee, the 
results only being submitted for confirmation. There 
was another means of getting rid of any difficulty with 
regard to personal matters which always would be 
coming up for discussion, and that was to refer them to 
•the General Purposes Committee, which could be sum¬ 
moned for any time, and which consisted of all the 
members of the Council. In this way any subject which 
it was not desirable to discuss in public could be ven¬ 
tilated and afterwards brought before the Council in 
such form that there could be no danger of any one’s 
feelings being hurt by the proceedings being published. 
He could see no practical inconvenience from the adop¬ 
tion of the motion, and in justice to the members of the 
-Council themselves, and certainly in justice to the whole 
•of their constituency who earnestly desired that this 
•change should take place, he should vote for it; but in 
doing so, he must say that he did it with the reserva¬ 
tions that from his own personal knowledge, he could 
.acquit the gentlemen who superintended the publication 
from any charge of improperly filtering the reports sub- 
anitted to them. He had been surprised at the amount 
of pains and trouble taken; and whatever had been sup¬ 
pressed had been done in charity to the readers and 
from the very best motives, and certainly with the 
purest intentions. 
Mr. Sandford said after what Mr. Brown had said 
die would withdraw his amendment, but it certainly put 
•a new complexion upon the motion. He understood Mr. 
Betty desired the Council to affirm the principle that 
other reporters should be admitted, whereas Mr. Brown 
■said he did not accept that interpretation. 
Mr. Hills said he had objected previously to the ad¬ 
mission of reporters altogether, but the time for that had 
passed by, and he would now support the motion if Mr. 
Betty would confine it to one reporter. He was quite 
content for their own reporter to make his reports as 
full as he chose and, if he liked, to supply them to 
■other journals. He was therefore quite prepared to 
support Mr. Betty after Mr. Brown’s explanation—at 
•any rate, that they should only have one reporter to 
begin with. 
Mr. Sandford said if they were not now affirming 
•the principle that other reporters should be admitted, he 
would vote with Mr. Betty. 
Mr. Betty said the principle he wanted to affirm was 
that they should not make speeches and then dress them 
aip themselves for publication afterwards, but that every 
^expression of their sentiments and their policy should 
be published through the legitimate channel. He be¬ 
lieved that in every other institution which published 
its proceedings, it was done through the medium of gen¬ 
tlemen of the press, who understood their business much 
better than any amateur triumvirate could do. It might 
perhaps at first sight be more agreeable to the feelings 
•of some members to know that nothing they said should 
appear unless it had the sanction of one or two of their 
fellow-members, but they were quite as likely to err as a 
reporter, whose business it was to attend to such matters. 
He should leave it to the committee to decide who 
should be admitted. He only desired to affirm the prin¬ 
ciple and leave them quite untrammelled. He did not 
wish to bind them to admit two reporters, nor on the 
other hand, would he admit that it would be always de¬ 
sirable to confine it to but one. It was a matter of 
detail which he would leave to the Committee. 
Mr. Sandford said he would withdraw his amend¬ 
ment if the understanding was that the motion did not 
pledge them to admit other reporters, but if it did he 
must press the amendment. 
Mr. Betty said he could not ask for Mr. Sandford’s 
vote under the slightest misapprehension as to his mean¬ 
ing. It was entirely a matter of principle whether their 
proceedings should be made public or not, and he was 
not to be bound down or hampered in the wording of the 
resolution as to how it should be done. He wanted to 
affirm the principle that there should be general report¬ 
ing and full reporting. 
Mr. Sandford said there might be the fullest re¬ 
porting with their own reporter. 
Mr. Betty said it would be open for the committee to 
appoint one reporter, but he would not bind them to do 
so, nor in any way prejudge the questions submitted to 
them. 
Mr. Brown said he must not be misunderstood. He 
most entirely agreed with the principle that it was de¬ 
sirable that the proceedings should be fully reported, 
but he thought it more than probable that when the 
committee came to deliberate on this subject, they would 
consider it desirable, at any rate for the first twelve 
months, to have only one reporter. This was a great 
and radical change, and they must have time to get ac¬ 
customed to it. 
Mr. Sandford said he would withdraw his amendment, 
because the discussion would stand on record, and would 
show in what way the motion was voted for and carried, 
and that they were not pledging themselves to the ad¬ 
mission of other reporters. 
The President said that there was still Mr. Sutton’s 
amendment; but, before putting it, he would say a word 
or two, having had a good deal to do with the publica¬ 
tion of the proceedings. If anything had been kept 
back, it was not from any desire on his part. No doubt 
many would remember that on more than one occasion, 
when a particular question had been brought forward, 
he had asked the Council whether the discussion should 
be reported or not, and the answer had been in the nega¬ 
tive. Sometimes, again, he had asked gentlemen, after 
the Council, whether they would like their remarks 
reported in full, and they had replied, “ Not exactly.” 
For himself, he had no objection to publishing every 
word that was spoken, and he thought they might be 
published from the notes of their own reporter quite as 
well as from any others. The only objection he saw to 
the motion was that the word “reporters” was used in 
the plural. He thought one reporter sufficient, and 
that he should be the one engaged by the Council; he 
could see no advantage in having two or three reporters. 
With regard to the circumstance referred to by Mr. 
Savage, he believed the regulation as to opening the 
library in the evening was published in the Journal as 
soon as possible; and it was not customary or desirable 
to publish notices of motion, which might, from various 
circumstances, be withdrawn and not discussed or acted 
upon. 
Mr. Sutton said he must press his amendment, be¬ 
cause he thought the principle to be decided upon really 
was,"whether one reporter or more should be present. 
He thought there should be one only, but that no re¬ 
striction should be put upon his discretion in reporting 
the proceedings. 
The President said the only difference seemed to be 
