TO THE PHARMACEUTICAL SOCIETY. 
619 
in such, well-assured position in the trade that “ tliey had nothing to gain.” 
There was such a wide distinction between them and the ordinary race of 
chemists in that day that the very difference tended to their profit, and self- 
interest would have pointed to its perpetuation. 13ut our founders rose to the 
occasion and superior to self-interest, determined to do all in their power for 
the general good, by assisting every chemist to attain the high level on which 
they stood. Ten years later, when the Pharmacy Act established the position 
of all who had joined the Society, the same liberality wms extended to out¬ 
siders; and to these occasions we look for example as to the course which should 
be taken if we would obtain the crowning stone of the pharmaceutical edifice. 
Much has been said about the assurance always given that the door was perma¬ 
nently closed against all but examined men, but it should be remembered that 
that assurance was given when the question only of altering the bye-laws was 
under discussion in 1861, and a mere change in the internal arrangements of 
the Society would indeed have been a breach of faith, bringing with it no re¬ 
compense to justify such a step. The case is widely different now ; the ex¬ 
tension of the Pharmacy Act would bring an ample equivalent for the conces¬ 
sion, and lead to the end aimed at from the beginning. If, however, it were 
proposed to introduce these men in business as “ Associates ” with votes, in 
all the affairs of the Society, would it not be bringing them in wfith a griev¬ 
ance, and therefore rendering them less likely to co-operate heartily for the 
future good of the Society ? The same, we think, applies to the chemists 
and druggists of the future, who must necessarily have passed an examina¬ 
tion, which if it proved them worthy to become chemists and druggists 
would prove them also worthy to be elected members of a Society formed ex¬ 
pressly to embrace all the chemists and druggists of Great Britain. 
One argument brought against this measure is the doubt thrown on the 
accession of members after the passing of the Bill, and it seems to be assumed 
that chemists and druggists would be satisfied with mere registration. To 
this it is only necessary to reply that if such were the case it would nullity 
all the other objections, as a man who declined to become a member could not * 
possibly announce himself to the world as one, and if so few would do it, the 
chance of swamping the Society would be small indeed. 
Some objectors use the very popular plea of £. s. d., and truly it is mar¬ 
vellous to find men charging all their high premiums, lecture fees, laboratory 
instruction, and travelling expenses to the debit of their account with the 
Society. Can it be that their success in business depends altogether on their 
possession of a title, and not at all on their professional ability to practise 
the art in which they have been declared competent ? Do they not carry into 
their own shops and laboratories some useful knowledge applicable to their 
every-day requirements,—knowledge which gives them a positive advantage 
over unskilled neighbours ? Would they depend entirely on a diploma for 
success ? 
We believe many members of the Society have not made themselves 
fully acquainted with the provisions of the Bill, although they have been 
described very often in this J ournal, it is printed in extenso in our present 
number, and we would commend a perusal and a careful consideration of it 
between this and the day of general meeting, that the advantages to be ob¬ 
tained may not be lightly thrown away. 
2 T 2 
