THE PROPOSED PHARMACY BILL. 
661 
Some may charj^e me with holding uncharitable and illiberal views ; but I 
maintain that charity begins at home, and liberality consists not in giving 
away everytliing to starve oneself. 
In the first article in the last number of this Journal, the writer reminds 
the members of the meeting held, when they instructed the Council to be 
liberal with the outsiders. This observation reminds me of a remark in 
‘ Punch ’ some time ago, to the effect that when the Allies during the Crimean 
war conceded to the Russians an inch, the latter took the Dardanelles ; and it is . 
evident when the members gave the Council the permission alluded to, the 
former never intcmded the latter to go to the length they have. 
After all, Mr. Editor, tlie executive of the Pharmaceutical Society will 
not find us hard dealers if, in the abundance of their lib^’rality to strangers, 
they will only show a little justice to their old friends, by ceasing to split 
hairs, and appoint a tangible distinction between the title of Pharmaceutical 
Chemists and those to be brought in,—one that the public will readily per¬ 
ceive, and cannot fail to recognize and admit. T would propose, as an out¬ 
sider has suggested, that there be three degrees:—Fellows, Members, and 
Licentiates. Fellows : the present examined members, and those who shall 
hereafter pass the Major Examination. Members: the present unexatnined 
members. Licentiates : the future members they hope to have without 
examination, and to the latter I would grant all the privileges as now agreed 
upon. Or, if thought preferable, there might be only two degrees ; in one 
of which the two first-named classes might be united as Fellows or Members, 
and the last as Licentiates. If the Council will do this, I, and many who 
think with me, may shake hands wuth that body, and say go on ; but if the 
Council persist in pursuing their present policy intact, our interests will no 
longer be safe in their hands, and I w ould recommend ttie adoption of a pro¬ 
posal made to me, namely, that all the present Members and Associates wdio 
feel themselves aggrieved by the conduct of the Council, combine, and pro¬ 
test against it. I have no doubt many gentlemen will be willing to receive 
the names of such, or an arrangement might soon be made. 
In conclusion, Mr. Editor, I hope and believe the Council will reconsider 
the matter, and deem it both just and wise to regard the interests, and merit 
the continued support and confidence of their attested friends, than trust alto¬ 
gether to the liberality of the new-comers, the prospects of which, at the 
most, are very uncertain and unsatisfactory. Apologizing for the length of 
this letter, the insertion of which in your next number I shall be obliged, 
and beg to subscribe myself 
Yours very truly, 
A “ P. C.” BY Examination. 
April 1867. 
TO THE EDITOR OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL. 
Sir,—Mr. Mills, in his letter of last month, comments with some severity 
on the late proceedings of the Pharmaceutical Council, and of those who in 
relation to the Pharmaceutical Society are termed outsiders. As a member 
of the trade I have taken part in these negotiations, and finding myself within 
reach of his scourge, and that he has struck I can appeal to him, in the wmrds 
of Themistocles, “to listen.” 
I believe I cull all the argument of his letter under the following heads :— 
Injustice to the examined men, to the founders, and to the public. 
The effect on the public mind of the unfairness of the Council admitting 
