THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL. 
SECOND SERIES. 
VOL. VI.—No. XI.—MAY 1st, 1865. 
THE PEOPOSED LEGISLATION AFFECTING PHAEMACY. 
Before our next issue it is probable that the subject which has been engrossing 
the attention of chemists and druggists for the last twelve months will be 
finally settled, or at least so far advanced that its settlement may be pretty 
well foreshadowed. In the meantime, it is interesting to watch the discussion 
which has arisen on the introduction of two Pharmacy Bills at the same mo¬ 
ment to Parliament,—a discussion which clearly shows that the question is 
regarded as one of public , and not merely class interest. 
There may be different opinions as to the method of carrying out the neces¬ 
sary arrangements, but there seems little variance as to the need for some le¬ 
gislative enactments to regulate the qualifications of chemists and druggists, 
and the universality of the demand for protection on the part of the public 
proves that we were not wrong in declaring last year that the time bad arrived 
when the work which the Pharmaceutical Society commenced in 1841 might be 
consummated. In 1852 the promoters of the Pharmacy Bill asked too much ; 
in 1865 they have erred, some say, in proposing too little. The love of “free- 
trade ” is no way diminished, indeed it has become more general, but perhaps, 
as a necessary consequence, is held more temperately; so that men who stand 
up for the greatest liberty of the subject in buying and seUing, as well as in 
higher matters, admit that when the public safety requires it the u skid ” must 
be applied. Before a railway can be opened for general traffic, a Government 
inspector must pass over it and give his certificate of approval. If a ship sail 
from our docks, she must be commanded by an examined captain ; if she be in¬ 
tended for the conveyance of passengers, her mate must also be duly qualified. 
By the arrangements of a free-trade Government every man who would serve 
the State, whether as a Foreign Office clerk or a tide-waiter, must prove his 
capability for the duty by submitting to an examination. 
The debate on the second reading of Sir Fitzroy Kelly’s BiU (a report of 
which appears in another part of this Journal) displays a wonderful unanimity 
of opinion on two most important points—the necessity of rendering examina¬ 
tion compulsory, and the Board to which that examination should be entrusted. 
The honourable and learned member for Suffolk stated his case to the House 
with his usual perspicuity; it was evident that he had not consented to take on 
trust the merits of a Bill for which he was to stand godfather, but had, on the 
contrary, carefully considered and made himself master of the whole question— 
the public necessity, the point to which legislation might be carried, the danger 
or inconvenience of going beyond that point, the antecedents and present posi¬ 
tion of the Society which had prepared the Bill, the relation which that Society 
VOL. VI. 2 R 
