NON-CKHTIJ?! GATED PRACTITIONERS. 
563 
so as to relieve us of our present position, and also seeing it 
stated that we have no power of inflicting a penalty, I for¬ 
ward you the whole detail, as follows, under the head of— 
Practising as an apothecary without legal qualification an 
indictable offence* 
“ The Society of Apothecaries entertaining an opinion, which 
they have publicly expressed upon several occasions, that a 
penal check upon the practice of medicine by unqualified 
persons is indispensably necessary for the protection of the 
public, and that the pecuniary penalty imposed by the 
Apothecaries* Act is but ill-adapted for checking such prac¬ 
tice, have long desired that a more summary mode of 
proceeding against illegal practitioners should be adopted, 
and they have advocated an alteration of the law in this 
respect whenever a favorable opportunity for so doing has 
presented itself. A recent decision of the Court of Queen’s 
Bench, in a criminal prosecution instituted against an 
attorney for practising without a qualification, seemed to 
lead to the conclusion that, notwithstanding the specific 
pecuniary penalty imposed upon unqualified persons prac¬ 
tising as apothecaries, such persons might be indicted 
criminally as for a misdemeanour. This decision appeared 
to the society to suggest a mode of proceeding for checking 
the illegal practice of medicine, which might be attended 
with such important results that they determined to lose no 
time in obtaining the highest legal opinions upon the subject. 
They therefore laid a case before the law officers of the Crown, 
and it will be found, from the answers given to the questions 
submitted to the Attorney and Solicitor-General, in consulta¬ 
tion with Mr. F. Robinson, that it is the opinion of those 
learned gentlemen that an indictment will lie against a person 
who has practised as an apothecary without legal qualifica¬ 
tion. The society subjoin the questions proposed to counsel, 
and their answers thereto. 
“ 6 Questions. 
“ ‘ 1st. Whether an indictment will lie against a person who 
has practised as an apothecary without legal qualification, 
notwithstanding the particular penalty imposed upon per¬ 
sons so practising by the 20th section of the Act, and the 
disability imposed upon them by the 21st section ? And if 
you should be of opinion that an indictment will lie— 
“‘2nd. In what courts, metropolitan or provincial, could 
