474 
THE PHARMACY BILL. 
My plan differs only from Mr. Holloway’s in that I employ the sulphate in¬ 
stead of the iron itself. I take a calculated quantity of the sulphate of iron, 
• Id half an equivalent of sulphuric acid, oxidize by means of nitric acid at a 
sufficiently high temperature, precipitate the peroxide with ammonia, wash 
thoroughly, and dissolve without drying in the hydrochloric acid ; evaporate 
carefully to the required bulk, which must be somewhat over the quantity of 
acid first added, to avoid loss, and lastly, make up the quantity with spirits of 
wine. There still remains, of course, the action of the acid on the spirit; but 
even allowing this to be an objection, it is not a question for the pharmaceutist 
so long as the Pharmacopoeia orders a tincture and not a liquor. 
In making the tincture directly from the anhydrous perchloride, as suggested 
by Dr. Attfield, would not the difficulty of weighing be overcome by having a 
standard solution of specific gravity, which, on dilution with a prescribed quan¬ 
tity of spirit, would yield a tincture of the required strength? 
Your obedient servant, 
Charles Ekin, F.C.S. 
BatJ;, February 23, 18f>5. 
THE PHABMACY BILL. 
TO THE EDITOR OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL. 
Sir,—As circumstances over which I have no control prevent my going to 
London to represent in the Pharmaceutical Council the views which I know 
are held by a considerable number of thinking men in our body, I take the 
liberty of asking for space to sav a few words about our proposed Pharmacy 
Bill. 
Towards the conclusion of your leader in the current number of the Journal 
you hold up, as unworthy of credence, certain anonymous opinions. I now beg 
to claim those opinions as my own, and shall endeavour to show briefly the 
grounds of their tenure. 
If I am not mistaken, dispensing and the sale of drugs were formerly carried 
on almost exclusively by the apothecary; a restriction was then placed upon the 
name u apothecary,” and another class of men sprang up, who now, under the 
title of Chemist and Druggist, do this work. At the present time it is proposed 
to restrict the titles of Chemist and Druggist, and I have no doubt if this is 
done some other title will, in the course of fifty years, become a common desig¬ 
nation under which our trade will be carried on, excepting in so far as the trade 
itself, as well as the title, is placed under restriction. 
The only step practically .valuable to the public,'and permanently elevating to 
the trade, will be to place the trade , and not the name, under suitable regula¬ 
tions. 
You appear to think that the business of Chemist and Druggist is not likely 
to be carried on under any other title than that just quoted. I expect in some 
parts of the country experience already shows the mistake under which you 
labour. Taking up a sample book of labels issued by a local printer to his cus¬ 
tomers, I find a considerable number of labels actually in use in which the 
words Chemist and Druggist have been avoided, as if they had already been de¬ 
barred, and abundant evidence of the many ways in which dealers in drugs 
might designate themselves. Take, for example, these from labels on which 
neither of the words Chemist or Druggist is used. \There were several on which 
the heading was simply u Medical Hall,” the name of the proprietor being at 
the foot of the label; others had u Medical Hall, J. S. proprietor “ National 
Medical Hall“F -Street Medical Hall“L -(name of a town) Medical 
Hall u B--’s (name of a person) Medical Hall“ Western Medical Hall 
