690 
TWENTY-SIXTH ANNIVERSARY 
himself against neighbouring chemists. Gentlemen, I look back to Mr. Hawes’s 
propositions of 1841, which at the time were regarded as compassing our de¬ 
struction, as the best possible thing which could have happened for us. They 
elevated that which was but an instinct into something much higher—they car¬ 
ried us out of ourselves and united us to our fellows, as it were enlarging our¬ 
selves, and making selfishness justifiable. They led us to comprehend the true 
importance of Pharmacy, and the legitimate means by which to advance it and 
its professors; they taught us that public safety required a certain educational 
qualification in dispensers, and happily there were among us men sufficiently 
enlightened to see that we could only hope for success by ministering to the 
public necessity. But, gentlemen, there was this other great virtue attaching 
to our founders which can never be too much valued, whether as an honour to. 
them or an example to us,—they were men who already possessed the necessary 
qualification, they were appreciated by the public and had something like a 
“ patent-right ” to public confidence ; but possessing this, and profiting thereby 
as individuals, they sank the instinct of “ self-preservation” and gave freely of 
their honour to those who had none, in order to found a Society, confident that 
such self-sacrifice would ultimately secure power to work out the object they 
had at heart, i.e. “ the elevation of the character and status of our body by 
means of education this could only be secured in the succeeding generation, 
by taking existing chemists and druggists as they were, to establish the Society 
on a broad basis. Gentlemen, we know how earnestly our founders, headed by 
Jacob Bell, endeavoured to obtain from Parliament power to compel all future 
chemists and druggists to submit to examination before commencing business; 
we know how much power was obtained, and we know that Mr. Bell, accepting 
it as*an instalment, worked on to the end of his life with ever-increasing zeal 
to attain his object. Could he have been spared a few years longer, I believe we 
should ere now have achieved the success he so desired and for which we are 
now working. I say I believe we should have obtained that consummation of 
his wishes, because public opinion has recognized the necessity, and it only 
needed union among the present generation of chemists to secure it. Jacob Bell 
was the man to bring about that union. I trust we may yet be successful. 
As it is, we may congratulate ourselves on the present position of the Phar¬ 
maceutical Society. Recognized by the Government, approved and assisted by 
the higher branches of the medical profession, sought after now by chemists 
and druggists to whom our success has been a convincing argument,—the game 
is to some extent in our own hands ; it is for us to make or mar it by an adher¬ 
ence to, or a divergence from, the liberal policy of our founders As on this 
• very morning we shall be called on to decide weighty matters connected with 
our future conduct, I will say no more about it just now. 
Gentlemen, during my presidency, there has arisen an association which I 
think I mentioned hopefully at its comiLencement, but of which now, according 
to the way of the world, for it has achieved success, I may speak exultingly as 
an offshoot from this Society,—I mean the British Pharmaceutical Conference. 
It was established principally, I think, by men who have to thank Bloomsbury 
Square for opportunities of education and development; others I know belong 
to it who do not belong to us^ but I can only regard the Institution as likely, in 
all respects, to promote our interests. Here we are occupied more with creating 
pharmaceutists; in the Conference meetings it is the business of those 
pharmaceutists to advance the science of pharmacy, to spread abroad a love of 
it which will elevate the trade of a druggist into the profession of pharmacy, 
but still, I hope, without destroying the business habits of its votaries. That the 
active members of the Conference have a due regard to the mixed nature of our 
business, and the mischief which would result by overlooking that fact, I think 
was fully proved by the admirable paper on Pharmaceutical Ethics, read by Mr. 
