60 fc 
PUBLIC OPINION ON THE TWO BILLS. 
urged against restricting the sale of such materials. When, however, the matter is 
approached in a practical spirit, we recognize the absolute necessity for some control 
other than that which has hitherto been ex'ercised. It matters little that arsenic must 
be coloured with soot or indigo, so long as materials equally deadly and far more subtle 
can be procured from the same seller. In these days of alkaloids and essences, arsenic 
is but a vulgar instrument. It is true that by the 23 Viet. c. 8, to administer any poison 
or noxious thing with intent to injure is a misdemeanour ; but to sell it is a matter of 
mere mercantile adventure, requiring on the part of the vendor a knowledge neither of 
its dangerous character and probable effects, nor of anything about it other than its 
trade price and retail value. This condition of affairs excited the attention of earnest 
and good men, who called to their aid the co-operation of the worthy members of their 
craft, who in 1841 established the Pharmaceutical Society, for the purpose of advancing 
chemistry and pharmacy, and promoting a uniform system of education for those who 
should practise the same; and also for the protection of those who carry on the business 
of chemists and druggists. This association, from the excellence of its design, attracted to 
its membership a large number of the better classes of the chemists and druggists of that 
day. In 1843 it became an incorporated society, and in 1852 received special par¬ 
liamentary recognition. Were the Pharmacy Act of 1852 obligatory, further legislation 
would not be needed. As, however, outside its provisions there is a very large number 
of men who traffic in drugs as a mere matter of commerce, the necessity has arisen for 
some regulating measure whereby at least the safety of the public may be ensured. The 
Pharmaceutical Society, which has afforded such valid proofs of its high public spirit and 
due appreciation of what is required, is known to have given much attention to the 
preparation of such a Bill as might meet the more prominent necessities of the case. 
Any suggestions put forward by that society are entitled, therefore, to be received with 
consideration and respect. 
“ The Bill introduced by Sir Fitzroy Kelly is the result of long and mature deliberation 
of the Council and members of the Pharmaceutical Society. It is a temperate and well- 
considered measure. It involves registration of those who at present have a vested 
interest in the business of a chemist and druggist, and requires from those who may in 
future become members of the body, or use its titles, the passing of an examination, and 
proof of qualification. So far as this Act goes it is complete, and, we venture to affirm, 
deseving of confidence and support. It limits its restrictions to those ‘ keeping open 
shop for the compounding of prescriptions of duly qualified medical practitioners.’ In 
this respect its provisions and proposed restrictions will be identical with those of the 
Irish Apothecaries’ Company, that rigidly inhibit compounding of prescriptions to those 
possessing their licence. We would desire a further extension of its provisions, and see 
them include some regulations whereby the sale of poisons or dangerous drugs would be 
confined to those whom the enactment is intended to include. The promoters of the 
Bill have hesitated to do this, through the apprehension that such a complication might 
endanger the success of their most useful and excellent measure, and also in the belief 
that a register of duly-qualified chemists and druggists would be necessary as a condition 
precedent to the operation of any restrictive measure respecting the sale of poisons. 
Though there is much force in such arguments, we still believe that public attention is 
now so alive to a necessity for some measure of this character, that Parliament would 
sanction its provisions. Many Acts on the same subject are undesirable. True, the 
present Bill is chiefly directed to the purposes of education, qualification, and registra¬ 
tion ; but we believe it would not be prejudiced by the insertion of such a clause, as it 
virtually leaves intact the existing condition and privileges of those who do not com¬ 
pound prescriptions. The Bill introduced by Sir John Shelley is allowed to have 
emanated from the United Society of Chemists and Druggists, which must be regarded 
rather in the light of a trade association than of a scientific body. The provisions of 
this Bill are crude and ill-considered. While that introduced by Sir Fitzroy Kelly 
proposes an amendment and extension of an existing measure, whose operations have 
been attended with the happiest results, the other contemplates the organization of a 
new mechanism, the scheme of which bears undeniable evidence of a very imperfect 
appreciation of the duties or objects for which it is designed. While Sir Fitzroy Kelly’s 
Bill provides for a certificate, from a duly authorized board, of competent skill and 
knowledge for compounding of prescriptions, which implies a knowledge of drugs and 
chemicals in their combinations, that of Sir John Shelley limits the qualification ‘ to a 
