500 
TIIE TWO SOCIETIES. 
We most strongly deny the truth of these statements, and will endeavour 
to show, by an appeal to undoubted facts, that there is no more reliance to 
be placed in them than in the assertions which emanated from the same 
quarter a few years ago with reference to the total number of Chemists and 
Druggists in England and Wales. It will be recollected how contemptuously 
the representatives of the United Society used to speak of the Pharmaceuti¬ 
cal Society as a very small section of the Chemists and Druggists, whom they 
represented as numbering about 40,000 ; and, assigning 2000 to the Pharma¬ 
ceutical Society, they assumed that they represented the remaining 38,000. 
The hollowness of this vain boasting was only equalled by its folly, for, having 
used it as an argument in support of their claim for exemption from serving 
on juries, it was turned against them as affording sufficient ground for reject¬ 
ing the claim. Having been positively asserted, however, it was for a time 
received as a truthful statement, even by the Government, until we were en¬ 
abled, by a reference to the undoubted evidence afforded by the census 
returns, to dissipate so absurd a delusion or misrepresentation. We have 
shown that the number of Chemists and Druggists of all sorts in business on 
their own account in England and Wales is less than 6000, of whom more- 
than 2000 are members of the Pharmaceutical Society. But we are told—and 
this statement was made by the deputation who waited on Sir George Grey 
—that the United Society are a larger body than the Pharmaceutical Society. 
Now, let us see what evidence there is in support of this assertion. 
In estimating the relative importance and influence of the two Societies, it 
is necessary to look in either case to something more than a mere array of 
names purporting to represent the numerical strength of the body. Who are 
the individuals whose names are used to swell a list, and give the appearance 
of strength to a Society ? What are the circumstances under which these 
names have been obtained ? What grounds are there for calling them mem¬ 
bers of the Society ? What are the conditions of membership, and how far 
have these conditions been fulfilled P If these questions be asked and truth¬ 
fully answered with reference to the respective lists of the Pharmaceutical 
Society and of the United Society of Chemists and Druggists, something like 
a just estimate may be formed of the relative importance and influence of 
these two bodies. 
The Pharmaceutical Society was founded in 1841 ; it has been in existence, 
therefore, for nearly a quarter of a century, during which period its ostensible 
objects and aim have been to advance and elevate the study and practice of 
Chemistry and Pharmacy, to promote a uniform and efficient system of edu¬ 
cation among those who practise Pharmacy, to protect the interests of 
Chemists and Druggists, and to provide a fund for the relief of the distressed 
Members and Associates of the Society, and their widows and orphans. These 
objects have been steadily and successfully carried into effect in every par¬ 
ticular. No pains or expense have been spared in providing for and pro¬ 
moting an improved system of professional education for the rising genera¬ 
tion of Chemists and Druggists, nor has- anything been done in the same 
direction by any other body. Means have also been provided for those of 
all ages, whose occupations would not admit of their otherwise extending 
their acquaintance with Chemistry and Pharmacy, whereby they might keep 
pace with the progress of improvement. Valuable assistance has been 
rendered on numerous occasions, not only to the body of Chemists and Drug¬ 
gists, but to individuals, and even to those unconnected with the Society, 
when the interests of the trade have been unjustly assailed from any quarter. 
And lastly, the members, by their individual and united efforts, have created 
a fund for the relief of distressed members, of which fund there is now an. 
available surplus of more than £7000. 
