PHAllMACEUTICAL ETHICS. 
195 
which they should all feel themselves under to supply genuine proprietary medicines 
when ordered. He thanked Mr. Ince for the distinct expression of hij opinion as to the 
duty of pharmaceutists in such cases, viz. that the original preparation, by which the re¬ 
putation of the medicine had been established, should be always supplied unless it was 
otherwise stated. 
Mr. Sutton remarked that the past ten years had seen an extraordinary progress in 
pharmacy—a progress which he believed would go on faster and faster as time passed on. 
He would just say one word with regard to apprentices. He thought it rested very 
much with the present generation as to Avhat kind of men were introduced to the trade 
for the time to come. The aim should, of course, always be to obtain, if possible, 
youths thoroughly well educated ; but at the same time their success depended not so 
much upon what they had learned at school, as upon their capacity for acquiring know¬ 
ledge. With regard to what had been said about proprietary preparations, he would ob¬ 
serve—without intending to impute any unfairness—that there w'as too often an unwil¬ 
lingness shown by London houses to procure special articles made by their brethren in 
the country. 
Mr. Ince said he might mention here that a little while ago they received an order 
for a certain elixir, which was made by some one in a place they did not know. They 
spent three weeks in trying to discover the proprietor, and ultimately they found out 
that he was a little baker at Kouen. They got the elixir from him, and the customer was 
perfectly satisfied. 
Mr. J. H. Baldock, London, looked upon the unsatisfactory relations of masters and 
assistants as phases of the antagonism between labour and capital. 
Mr. Atheeton thanked the author of the paper for the opportunity of listening to it. 
He could assure any young men who might be present that they would find a prepara¬ 
tion for the present examinations of the Pharmaceutical Society invaluable; and even if 
they could not devote a whole term to the course of instruction in the laboratory, they 
would act most wisely in going there for a shorter period. As to counter prescribing, 
v/hich was often charged against chemists as an offence, it was but retaliation against 
surgeons who dispensed. He expressed his opinion that it would be impossible to estab¬ 
lish a regular code of prices, and deprecated the practice of chemists dispensing for sur¬ 
geons by arrangement. 
Mr. Kichardson said that as far as his humble opinion went, the only practical way 
to bring about the reforms they needed was by compulsory legislation. He believed 
that in the most important of the provincial towns a local tariff might be adopted to 
advantage. He frequently heard of persons being charged three different prices on 
three different occasions, and the inference to be drawn from that fact was that they 
had three different classes of customers. 
Mr. Eeynolds spoke to the question of medical opinion towards pharmaceutical 
progress. He quoted an article by Professor Christison on the Wooler poisoning case, 
published a few years since. In this it was pointed out that the difficulties of the case 
were due to the medical attendants relying upon themselves for the chemical detection 
of ])oison, which they had reason to suppose was being administered to their patient. 
Professor Christison gave it as his opinion that the claims of other studies in a medical 
curriculum, made it hopeless to expect from medical men, as a class, proficiency in 
chemistry or toxicology. The recent experience of the Leeds Chemists’ Association 
might be brought forward as showing a very satisfactory advance in the good feeling 
of the medical profession towards our body. About four years ago the association 
ventured to apply to the Council of the Leeds School of Medicine for the use of a 
room for some lectures, but received a refusal. AVithin the past three months a similar 
request had been renewed, in order to accommodate the class attending a course of read¬ 
ings in botany by Mr. Abbott. This time the application was most courteously received, 
and the lecture theatre, gas, etc., were lent for two evenings in each week without any 
charge. Mr. Eeynolds referred to the subject of ethics having been treated in the 
‘Pharmaceutical Journal’ on several occasions when it was edited by Mr. Jacob Bell. 
In a leading article in vol. 15 he found that a proprietary article, which had been 
frequently named in that meeting, was spoken of as undistinguishable in an ethical 
sense from Holloway’s pills. Now, he trusted that in their meetings they would not 
allow the money success of any such nostrums to make them blind to their true rela¬ 
tions [to pharmacy. Dr. Christisbu went on to say, “ There is no probable remedy, so 
o 2 > 
