REPORT ON MEDICAL EDUCATION, &C. 167 
thecaries' Company to prosecute. From the extract from Mr. 
Nussey's evidence which we have given above, we are forced 
to conclude, that the Society acts upon no fixed principles in 
instituting prosecutions; that it encourages medical men to be 
spies and informers against each other; that private spleen is 
the motive which prompts all prosecutions, affording a cu- 
rious illustration of the standing and acquirements of the gene- 
ral practitioners alluded to above by the master, and that sue- - 
cessful practice infallibly brings down the vengeance of the 
Society upon the head of the unexamined or unapprenticed 
offender. It would occupy too much time to point out all 
the inconsistencies and contradictions in that portion of Mr. 
Nussey's evidence given above. Every one w^ho will take 
the trouble to peruse it attentively will have no difficulty in 
detecting them. 
The following passage discloses at least one fixed principle 
in which the Society acts in regard to prosecutions, and that 
is, to intimidate all it can, and when the offender is too strong, 
to let him alone. Mr. John Bacot had previously stated that 
the Society were not bound to prosecute and that they exer- 
cised considerable discretion in instituting prosecutions. The 
examination then proceeds. 
"The committee have before them a letter dated Apotheca- 
ries' Hall, April 24, 1832, signed by your late brother, Ed- 
mund Bacot, clerk and solicitor to the Society, addressed to a 
person who was a graduate in physic in one of the Scotch 
universities, and was practising in the north of England. The 
letter contains the following passage: ^You are not infringing 
on the rights of the Society of Apothecaries, but are acting 
contrary to the provisions of an Act of Parliament passed for 
regulating the practice of apothecaries in England and Wales.? 
of which Act the Society, on any complaint, is bound and com- 
pellable to enforce the observance.' From this letter, and 
others to the same effect, it appears that your Society was in 
the habit of representing to the parties who were informed 
against for acting contrary to the provisions of the act of 1815, 
that the Society had no discretion, but was compelled to pro- 
secute ? I know that it was my brother's opinion that the 
