378 MEETING OF CHEMISTS AND DRUGGISTS, GLASGOW. 
cause of the unpopularity of the Pharmaceutical Society here, and a political blunder 
on the part of the framers of the original Bill. A student of medicine can receive his 
diploma as a medical practitioner in Edinburgh, Glasgow, or Aberdeen, without the fees 
being sent to London, and whv should not a student of pharmacy receive his diploma as 
a Pharmaceutical Chemist in the same towns on the same terms? In Scotland generally, 
and Glasgow in particular, the services of professional lecturers can be had for a small 
expenditure, and if the fees were retained in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen, and other 
towns,—if thought desirable, classes could be established and regularly kept up, local 
boards for examination and general management could be instituted, and measures such 
as exist in London and Edinburgh set on foot; and the mere fact of money being re¬ 
tained in central and representative cities would give strength to the Society. This, he 
trusted, would be carefully considered. He had no doubt objections could be urged against 
this arrangement, but after a careful consideration of them all, he thought they could be 
easily overcome. A common objection presents itself, what would you do in the case of the 
large English towns? His answer to that question w'ould be nothing , let us deal with 
Sco land alone. An apparently strong objection is, Edinburgh receives annually £50 from 
London ; what arrangement would you make there ? Edinburgh, in my opinion, would be 
better without it, were the fees retained, and would certainly be placed in a more indepen¬ 
dent position. During the present year, Edinburgh has transmitted to London Pit 7 4s. 6i ., 
more than half of which was for examination fees, the remainder, annual subscriptions,— 
moreover, the last grant of £50 to Edinburgh was given with a grudge; there is no pro¬ 
vision for its continuance in the proposed Bill, and should this Bill become law, there is 
nothing to prevent its being stopped, whenever the London executive may think lit. 
The strongest objection of all is that the Pharmaceutical Society is not on the same 
footing as the Scotch Universities, and that there must be some bond of union between 
the London and Scotch chemists; this he was willing to admit, and would not object to 
the registration fees and annual subscriptions, to be used as the Board might deem ex¬ 
pedient, the surplus each year to be forwarded to London to be added to the Benevolent 
Fund. This he thought would do no more perhaps than place us, so far as pecuniary 
matters go, is as good a position as Edinburgh is at present, but with this important dif¬ 
ference, that it would be legally secured by us. Mr. Moffat, after these considerations, 
begged to move the following, “ That as the Bills of the Pharmaceutical and United 
Societies ignore and make no provision for the retaining of any part of the funds in 
Scotland, it is the opinion of this meeting that it would be an act of injustice to pass a 
resolution in favour of either, that both should be opposed, and the influence of this meet¬ 
ing be used with the Scotch Members of Parliament accordingly.” 
Mr. John Campbell then rose, but before proceeding to express any opinion on the Bills 
of both Societies, he begged to convey the very kind thanks of the Profession in the city 
to the deputation from Edinburgh, for the handsome manner they had responded to the 
invitation to take part in the proceedings of the evening ; he then said they had now be¬ 
fore them tw y o Bills, very important measures indeed if allowed to pass into law; he could 
not see bis way clear to support either Bills in their present shape, and in saying so, he 
was sure he expressed the general opinion of the Profession in this city. That no allow¬ 
ance should be made in these Bills for retaining part of the moneys for educational pur¬ 
poses he considered was unfair, but Mr. Moffat had so thoroughly expressed his views, 
that he considered it unnecessary to say more than that he cordially concurred in all that 
he had said, and begged to second his motion, trusting that this meeting would give it 
their entire support. 
Mr. James Taite then moved the following amendment:—that legislative restriction 
is necessary to the public safety, and that one of the Bills should therefore be supported ; 
that the proposed Bill of the Pharmaceutical Society, not being based on any ground of 
monopoly, is more likely to meet the sanction of our free-trade legislature, and as emana¬ 
ting from a Society already in existence, render a second society unnecessary. 
Mr. Alexander Kinninmont then begged to second Mr. Taite’s amendment, and in 
doing so paid a high compliment to the framers of the Pharmaceutical Bill; he consi¬ 
dered the whole Bill as the production of men of thorough business habits, and in every 
way superior to that of the United Society. At this juncture an unpleasant contre¬ 
temps occurred; the meeting being about to vote on the motion and amendment which 
was before it, when Mr. Buott, in fairness demanded that the Bill of the United Society 
should be put to the vote along with the Pharmaceutical Biil; several gentlemen rose to 
