The unconstitutional and illegal proceedings of the Council of the Pharmaceutical Society / by William Dickinson.

  • Dickinson, William
Date:
[1853]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The unconstitutional and illegal proceedings of the Council of the Pharmaceutical Society / by William Dickinson. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    16/50 (page 15)
    enumerated in the above extract; but I should observe that severe strictures were made by one of the gentlemen present on the anoma- lous position of Mr. Jacob Bell, in reference to the Journal of the Society, and also as to the use that had been made of its pages, which was wholly foreign to the purposes to which a Journal of a scientific society should be exclusively dedicated ; namely, to scientific and educational purposes, and a faithful and impartial record of the Society’s transactions. While fully agreeing in all that the speaker then thought proper to allege, I am not, nor can I be made, responsible for the words and acts of others. These, Gentlemen, are the points brought before the Secretary of State for his consideration, either to adopt partially or wholly, which you, Gentlemen, have thought proper in your journal to de- signate as “frivolous — contradictory—sophistical—transparent—dis- honest — fallacious — unintelligible — antagonistic to the progress of education—and—calculated to drag down pharmacy to its original level.” [Pharmaceutical Journal, passim.] I will dare venture to assert that there is not one independent Member of the Society who would not declare that the proposed modifications were both reasonable and necessary, and not “mere minor differences on matters of detail” [Pharmaceutical Journal, vol. xiii. p. 145], and that the epithets “ hostile,” “treacherous,” &c., are unseemly and uncalled-for. That I have endeavoured to obstruct the business of the Society, or interfere with the successful operation of the Pharmacy Act, by joining such Deputation, are assertions wholly devoid of truth and reason. That the business of the Society was delayed for want of the confirmation of the Bye-laws by the Secretary of State is true, but I had no control over his Lordship’s appointments. The proposed Bye-laws received the cofirmation of the meeting of members on the 11th May. On the same day Lord Palmerston was applied to, to name an early day to receive a Deputation of Members of the Society on such proposed Bye-laws. His Lordship fixed the afternoon of Friday, the 27th May, to receive the Deputa- tion. At this meeting his Lordship requested the proposed modifi- cations to be sent to him in writing. This statement was delivered at the Home Office on the Monday morning following (the 30th May). His Lordship’s provisional confirmation bears date the 17th June following. If his other pressing and more important engagements precluded him from paying earlier attention to the Deputation or the application of the Council, I cannot see the justice of the accusation brought against me, that / have obstructed the business of the Society. III. As to the charge with reference to certain articles contained in the “ Annals oe Pharmacy,” I deny your right to demand any explanations from me on this head. The Press of this country is a free Press. It maintains and daily puts in practice, its right to criticise the acts of all private or public persons, governments, bodies corporate, or associations. No person