Report from the Select Committee on Pharmacy bill : together with the proceedings, minutes of evidence and index.

  • Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Select Committee on Pharmacy Bill.
Date:
1852
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Report from the Select Committee on Pharmacy bill : together with the proceedings, minutes of evidence and index. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by Royal College of Physicians, London. The original may be consulted at Royal College of Physicians, London.

    211/258 page 201
    — I think that any person putting a blue or green bottle in his window, would come within the definition, because that would be indicating that he sold drugs. without possessing the qualification required by this Act?—I think the last clause would almost prohibit the sale of drugs, except by persons possessing that quali- fication, and I think that that would have an injurious effect; for in country villages many small shopkeepers sell the common description of drugs, such as castor oil or rhubarb, and in cases of emergency I have found that to be extremely useful. 2758. Would this Bill prevent their doing it in future?—I should think it would. 2759. Would it prevent it, if they did not assume the name of chemist and druggist ?—If they held themselves out as sellers of medicine, I should think it would. 2760. Could they not sell medicines without being chemists and druggists?— They do now. 2761. And could they not, after this Bill has passed, go on doing that which they are doing now ?—I think not. I think that, if they put a coloured bottle in the window, that would indicate that they sell medicines. 2762. Mr. Jackson.] Yours is a country practice ?—Yes. 2763. Do you find that the class of trademen to which you have referred do usually put up “ Medicine sold here,” or some indication that they sell medicine ? —Yes, they have bottles in the window, or something of that kind. 2764. Chairman.] Is there anything in this Bill to prevent their putting up “Medicine sold here?”—I should think so. 2765. The 15th is the restrictive clause, and that clause merely says that no person not duly registered as a pharmaceutical chemist according to the provisions of the Act, except in certain cases which are mentioned, shall assume the title of pharmaceutical chemist, or any other name or emblem implying that he is registered under the Act, or qualified to carry on or exercise the business or calling of a pharmaceutical chemist?—Yes, the clause to which I was referring was the interpretation clause. 2766. Would the fact of a man stating that he sells medicine imply that he sells it in the capacity of a qualified chemist?—The clause to which I am referring says that the term “ Pharmaceutical Chemist” shall be construed to include chemist and druggist, dispensing chemist, and every other term denoting a dis- penser of medical prescriptions and vendor of medicine, not being a member of the medical profession, or practising under a diploma or licence of a medical or surgical corporate body. I should be inclined to think that a man would be included in that description if he put up a bottle in his window. 2767. Does your objection to the Bill apply to the probable injury the chemists and druggists would inflict on general practitioners ?—Certainly ; the illegal practising of chemists has already been felt to a very great extent by regular practitioners. I know of one instance, in which a very clever gentleman, who established himself in a neighbouring town, and obtained at the University of London very high honours, has left the profession entirely in consequence of not being able to make, as an apothecary, half as much as chemists and druggists make by acting as apothecaries. 2768. You admit that the evil exists to a great extent now?—Yes, to a very great extent. 2769. Can you point out to the Committee in what way a Bill, the object of which is to create a separate class who shall have no medical functions whatever assigned to them, could tend to increase that evil?—I am afraid you have no provision in the Bill restraining the illegal practice which is now7 carried on by chemists and druggists ; if they are to be allowed to practise as medical men, let them go through the same course of education as we do, and let them pass an examination at Apothecaries’ Hall. There are men now getting an income far superior to mine by practising as apothecaries, although they have never gone through an education entitling them so to practice. 2770. L)o you think that, by confining the practice of pharmacy to the hands of medical men, pharmacy would be sufficiently attended to, or that it would be as much attended to as if there were a class of men exclusively devoting their attention to that subject?—I cannot say; I do not quite understand the bearing of the question. 0.42. C c 2771. The C. Stiliceli, Esq.
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3