661 
PHARMACY IN AUSTRALIA. 
Mr. Whitfield, of Scarborough, sends the following letter taken from the 1 Melbourne 
Medical and Surgical Review/ as showing the condition of pharmacy in that colony:— 
Sir,—The curious rodomontade by “ Chemist ” in your last issue, requires an answer, 
and perhaps he will take it with a better grace from a “ brother chip ” than from one of 
the faculty, for which he professes such deep “ disgust.” 
The burden of his complaint is as follows:—“ The profession make a point of sending 
their prescriptions to a particular chemist.” It certainly is the case to a limited extent; 
but if we consider the present state of pharmacy in the colony, the wonder is that the 
custom is not more general. I will here give two or three cases in point. 
Within the last fortnight, a gentleman who had a mixture repeatedly prepared by us, 
had occasion to have it made elsewhere; he brought it to the writer next morning, and 
asked what was wrong with it, as it differed in taste and colour from what he had be¬ 
fore taken ; on examination, the principal ingredient (Tr. Cubebse) was found absent: 
the name on the bottle was that of a “ respectable chemist.” The next case occurred 
four or five weeks ago, and is as follows :—A chemist (“ a respectable one ”) inquired 
the price of Liq. Bismuthi, and observed in a cool, off-hand manner that it had been 
ordered in several prescriptions which he had dispensed, but he had omitted it, not 
having the preparation in stock. I had been conversing with a medical gentleman a 
short time before this occurrence, when he told me he had prescribed Liq. Bismuthi, 
but without effect. This is precisely what might have been expected, if the prescription 
had been prepared by the last-mentioned individual. Another case occurred, which is 
perhaps more to the point than either of the preceding. This time, a “respectable che¬ 
mist ” substituted Pulv. Antim. Tart, for Pulv. Antimonialis. I am satisfied that it arose 
from ignorance, and not carelessness, as he was not brought up to the trade. 
After the above remarks, it will be obvious that the profession is fully justified if it 
inquires of its patients where they obtain their medicine, and advising accordingly. 
Your strictures on “ Chemist’s ” next paragraph render it unnecessary for me to notice 
it. The rest of the letter is, however, very funny ; he threatens medical men, if they 
continue to “disgust” him (which means if they do not send their prescriptions to his 
shop) with the united vengeance of the trade. It is to be regretted that he did not 
inform his intended victims how it would take effect. Next come some allusions to 
American M.D.’s, with whom he ranks Drake, Brandreth, and others: I presume he will 
do the same for Mr. L. L. S., who is the proprietor of certain pills of vegetable origin 
and of wondrous efficacy. Lastly, I am at a loss to perceive the connection between 
“ hyperbolic(«/) language and dog-Latin” with the “skilful operating surgeon or clever 
ohstetric(ian).” 
Having proved that pharmacy in this colony is not in a satisfactory condition, it is 
my duty to propose a remedy, and I commend it to the earnest consideration of the 
profession and trade. The remedy consists of an Act of Parliament to the following- 
effect :— 
1st. That all chemists in business do'register themselves before some fixed date. 
2nd. After that date, all chemists not registered, and all chemists’ assistants that wish 
to register, do pass an examination, which shall be (to commence with) plain and prac¬ 
tical. 
3rd.'The Board of Examiners to be appointed, say, by the Governor in Council, and 
to consist of equal numbers of medical men and registered chemists. 
4th. All registered chemists to pay an annual subscription, say, of 20s. The funds 
thus raised to be devoted to the prosecution of any infringing the rights of registered 
chemists, and to the general advancement of the interests of the trade. 
The word chemist as used above only refers to dispensing chemists. 
These suggestions I am aware are very crude and incomplete, yet I believe that if 
some similar regulations were in force, medical men would not “disgust” “Chemist by 
sending their “prescriptions to a particular shop,” for they would then have a guarantee 
that all in the trade were at least tolerably proficient. I would also strongly advise 
him to lend a hand thus to reform our own body, instead of so coarsely abusing the 
profession, whose only fault is that of protecting the public from the effect of cheap 
and therefore adulterated drugs, and from garrulous and therefore untrustworthy che¬ 
mists. 
