INSTITUTE OF CHEMISTRY OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND. REPORT OF A CONFERENCE ON STANDARDS OF STRENGTH AND PURITY, AND EVIDENCES OF ADULTERATION OF DRUGS; ALSO THE REPORT OF THE COUNCIL AND BALANCE SHEET FOR 1880, TOGETHER WITH THE PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS. &tt.b.Dlt : PRINTED BY A. P.BLUNDELL & Co., 26, GABLICK HILL, E.C.-1881. FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION. INSTITUTE OF CHEMISTRY CONFERENCE ON OF AND PURITY,STANDARDSSTRENGTH AND EVIDENCES OF DRUGS,OF ADULTERATION HeZd Wednesday, December 8t4 I 680. PROFESSOR :REDWOODThe Sale of Food and Drugs Act has opened a wide field for occnpntion to chemists who are engaged not only in the duties of Public Analysts, but also in those of checking what may be thought to be the too eager assaults of official prosecutors acting iiiider the authority of this Act..The mairitenance of a high and uniform standard of quality in drugs, including under this term all medicines, is of the utmost importance, not only for ensuring their safe and successful use, but for promoting the much-needed advancement of knowledge in therapeutics. It has been well remarked that all the knowledge, skill, and judgment of the most learned physician, when applied in the treatment of disease, is centred in “that scrap of pap”, the prescription,” and it might be added that the efficacy of the prescription implies a knowledge of therapeutics, and involves the 4 use of drugs of uniform and known qualities. It is obvious, therefore, that all available means should be adopled not only for preventing the adulteration of drugs, but for promoting the use of such as are good in quality, and in which the greatest practicable uniformity of strength and composition is maintained.The attainment of these important objects, however, is not so easily effected as might be supposed. Most of our crude drugs come from abroad, many of them from places with which we have little or no direct communication, and where they are collected from plants in their wild state by uneducated natives; others &re produced by processes which do not yield uniform results; and the names of some are very indefinite in their signification. Using the term drug, as I have already done, in the sense in which it is employed in the Sale of Food and Druge Act, it may be said that the collection, preservation, production, and preparation of drugs are comprised in and constitute the art of pharmacy, the practice of which in connection with that of medicine has existed at all periods to which history extends.But a rational pharmacy has existed only in modern times. In this country the first evidence of the official application of scientific knomledge to the selection and identification of drugs is found in the London Pharmacopaeia of 1721, mhich was compiled under the supervision of Sir Hans Sloane, then President of the London College of Physicians. In the preface to that work, it is stated that ‘‘ The catalogue of simples has been drawn up entirely de nouo; the name of each plant,-and in some cases there are more than one,-has been annexed, both the officinal name and that which is retained by the more accurate botanists.Those who know how easily plants of the same genus and name may be con- founded, must clearly see that errors could scarcely have been avoided in any other way than by employing this distinction of terms.” But notwithstanding the improvements made at that time, and from time to time subsequently, it cannot yet be said that we have a complete knowledge of the botanical origin of all our drugs, or that we have the means of ensuring uniformity of quality in many of them. 5 At a later date, in 1746, a further and much greater improve- ment in British pharmacy was effected by the Londoii College of Physicians, who, referring to the medicines then and previously used, say, “It were certainly a disgrace and just reproach if pharmacy should any longer abound with those inartificial and irregular mixtures which the ignorance of the first ages introduced, and the perpetual fear and jealousies of poisons enforced; against which the ancients endlessly busied themselves in the search of antidotes which for the most part they superstitiously and doatingly derived from oracles, dreams, and astrological fancies, and vainly hoping to frame compositions that might singly prevail against every species of poison, they amassed together whatever they had imagined to he endowed with alexipharmic powers.By this procedure, the simplicity of physic was lost, and a wantonness in mixing, enlarging, and accumulating took place.” The result of the reformation at this time effected was that many old prolix formulae were rejected, and much more simple formuls adopted, which have formed the basis of most of the so-called galenical medicines employed in this country from that time to the present. This may be said to have been the commencement of the introduction of a rational pharmacy among us. Again, in 1788, a further change was made, and as that which had been effected in 1746 related to vhat are called galenical preparations, so this affected chiefly the chemical compounds used in medicine. Chemical and botanical names now came to be used in pharmacy consistently with the knowledge and views of scientific men, and as these underwent change the names of medicines did so also, a result which has sometimes been attended with inconvenience, if not danger.Thus, for instance, the name chloride of mercury has sometimes represented calomel and at others corrosive sublimate. Frequent changes in the names of drugs are, simply as such, objectionable, and although the scientific names they have received and are known by may, as they necessarily must, sometimes become antiquated, it is not always practicable, without obvious inconvenience and evil, to use names of moderii science, such, for instance, as ferrous and ferric sulyhate. 6 Up to the end of the first quarter of the present ceiitury, all or nearly all the improvements which took place in pharmacy-that is in the production and definition of drugs-were effected by medical men who were at the same time engaged in the practice of their profession, and could not therefore be supposed to have much time to devote to pharmaceutical investigntions.But during the last forty or fifty years pharmacy, which for about half a century previously had been struggling to obtain an independent exibtence of its own, has succeeded in vindicating its claim to recognition as a distinct occupation or pursuit, the qualifications for which have been made subjects for special study under the provisions of an Act of Parliament. There is not the same excuse now that might have been urged a century or even half a century ago, for the sale of bad, impure, or adnlterated drugs.Much has been done, especially since the establishment of, and by those connected with, the Pharmaceutical Society, towards the improvement of the supply of crude drugs, by tracing out their natural sources in foreign countries, drawing attention to imperfections in the methods of collecting and pre- serving them, and generally extending the knoLTledge of their distinctive characters, and the properties on which their medicinal efficacy depends. Much has also been done, with reference to manufactured drugs, towards increasing their purity and uniformity of composition, or the identity of their properties with those required in accordance with authorised formula Practices which existed, and were not uncommon a century or less ago, by which drugs were largely adulterated, are now un-known or resorted to ouly in rare instances and in a very mitigated form.Allusion is still sometimes made in books to such practices, but it is necessary to rcceire the statements so made with caution, fur they are often copied from one book to another without reference to time or place. Founded on this kind of book-knowledge, very erroneous opinions are occasionally expressed respecting supposed existing adulterations. With regard to the drugs consumed in this country, and supplied in the usual way by our registered chemists and druggists, 7 I am not aware, and do not believe that anything like systematic or serious adulteration exists. Instances, undoubtedly, do now and then come to light, of isolated cues of drug adulteration, but notwithstanding the periodical investigations of inspectors and analysts appointed under the Sale of Food and Drugs Act, and the vigilance of a numerous body of well-informed and scientific pharmacists in various parts of the country, who are fully com- petent for the detection of such cases, and always ready and anxious to discover and expose them, the number thus detected ia very small.If‘,however, me take a more comprehensive view, so as to in- clude all dealings in drugs by unqualified as well as qualified dealers, it will be found that the result of official invesfigation has been less satisfactory.The Local Government Board, in their recently issued Report for 1879-80, say--“We regret to find that drugs continue to be largely adulterated, no less than 171 samples being reported against out of 613 submitted to analysis.” This view of the case, however, requires to be qualified by Ihe statement, made elsewhere in the report, that the numbers giren represent all cases described as adulterated by analysts in their quarterly reports, although in some of the cases the defects mere so slight that no proceedings were taken, whilst in others, although proceedings were taken, they were not followed by convictions. The report, in commenting on the cases of adulteration, alludes to some of the prominent ones, and especially to the sale of ‘‘paregoric,” a popular remedy for coiighs, which ought to contain opium, but in which no opium could be detected, to sweet spirite of nitre, which was found to be mixed with 40 per cent.of water, and to tincture of rhubarb reduced to half its proper strength. These cafies represent practices that cannot be too strongly reyro- bated, but it is to be regretted that the report fails to explain, what I believe to be the fact, that such grossly adulterated articles were sold only by unqualified persons, usually grocers or small huxters, who, in country places, often sell some of the drugs used in domestic medicine. Paregoric, being an a1 tide of this claa, 8 has usually been sold by such persons, but as preparations of opium can now only be legally sold by registered chemists and druggists, a special preparation under the same name, but without the opium, has been providedfor the purpose of enabling unqualified dealers to evade the law.The Local Government Board might have contributed to the discouragement of this kind of adultera- tion if they had cautioned the public against purchasing drugs, and especially poyerful drugs, from dealers who hare no adequate knowledge of the properties and distinctive characters of such articles. A reference to the Pharmaceutical Journal would show that the delinquents in such cases as those under notice, have not been legally qualified druggists. And cases such as these con- stitute a large portion of those officially reported upon.But there is another class of cases, illustrative instances of which may be found among those alluded to by the Local Government Board. They speak of cream of tartar, which has been found ‘‘largely mixed with sulphate of lime.” I presume what is meant here is that since the practice of “plastering ” wines has been more extensively indulged in than formerly, cream of tartar has sometimes contained an unusual proportion of calcium tartmte. This ingredient, however, has always been found in cream of tartar in variable proportions, and its presence, unless in excessive quantity, has been looked upon as a necessary impurity, and not as an adulteration. The more special impurity, which has only been noticed latterly, and the presence of which has never been satisfactorily accounted for, namely barium sulphate, is not alluded to in the report.We are told, however, that tartaric acid lias been met with ‘‘containing lead in quantity sufficient to injure health,” and that some samples of sweet spirits of nitre have been entirely destitute of nitrous ether. Only one other article is alluded to in the report, namely fluid magnesia, which it is said has been found to contain “only 3.3 grains of magnesia per fluid ounce, instead of the five grains which is the proper quantity .” Now, taking these cases as fairly representing,-and I believe they do fairly represent,-the sort of adulteration which may be 9 charged to the account of legitimate dealers in drugs, what are we to say with reference to them? We have certain standards of strength and purity by which to estimate the quality of drugs.Are we rigidly to apply such standards as we have, and to con- demn all articles which fail to accord therewith ? Our only officially authorised Standards are those of the Phar- rnacopceia. Before the publication of the British Pharmacopoeia only slight attempts had been made to define authoritatively the strength and purity of drugs by other than physical characters. In the Pharmacopceia of 1864 (the first British Pharmacopoeia) the use of chemical tests was pretty freely introduced, but it was urged by practical men that some of the standards then adopted were unduly severe, and that others were insufficient.In the subsequerit edition of the work, issued in 1867, which is still in authority, new tests were introduced, and the standards, although in a few instances lowered, were made generally more complete. It is obvious that chemical purity in commercial articles such as drugs, is either unattainable or could be only attained at a cost disproportionate to any practical ad-vantage that would result from it. Nevertheless it is desirable, in accordance with the views already expressed, that all reasonable means should be adopted for ensuring a supply, and the use of drugs, the com-position, strength, and purity of which are maintained as uniform as possible. With the view of promoting this object, the 15th section of the Pharmacy Act, 1868, imposes a penalty of fire pounds on any person who ‘‘shall compound any medicines of the British Pharmacopoeia except according to the formularies of the Pharmacopoeia.” Tlie authority of the Pharmacopeia is there- fore generally referred to when questions relating to the adultera- tion of drugs arise.It is important, however, to observe that the introduction of standards of strength and purity into the Pharmacopoeia took place before the passing of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act ; and that such standards when introduced were not intended to be applied in the enforcement of penal restrictions with reference to the 10 general sale of drugs. The Pharmacopoeia standards are in some caees not only higher than drugs of good ayerage quality reach, but even higher than those of the best quality attain to as met with in commerce.In some instances thej may be looked upon as standards of excellence to which it is desirable to reach, if possible, but which may be a little above what is at present practically attainable. It should also be observed that the lam, which imposes a penalty for deviations from the instructions of the Pharmacopoeia, relates to the compounding of the medicines of the British Pharmacopoeia, and this law can only be put into force by the Registrar of the Pharmaceutical Society. It is further worthy of note, that although this law was embodied in the Adulteration Act of 1872, it is not comprised in the Sale of Food and Drugs Act of 1875. It would appear, therefore, that we must seek in sections 4 to 8 of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act, and in the knowledge possessed by those acquainted with the practice of pharmacy in its various departments, as well as in the Pharmacopoeia, for the standards of strength and purity and the evidences of adulteration, from which to form a just conclnsiori when questions of drug adulteration arise.The information derived from these several sources may not always coincide, and it will sometimes be neces- sary to qualify the statement of one authority by that of another. Thus with reference to cream of tartar, are we to judge every commercial sample by the pharmacopoeia standard, which says : ‘‘Heated in a crucible it evolves inflammable gas and the odour of burned sugar, and leaves a black residue.This effervesces with diluted hydrochloric acid, and forms a solution which, when filtered, gires a yellow precipitate with perchloride of pltttinum, and when neutralised by atnmonia is rendered slightly turbid by oxalic acid.” If every sample of cream of tart4ar which failed to accord with this test were to be condemned as adulterated, we should haye very little left for use. It would, therefore, I think, be right to appeal in such case to the experience of those who are acquainted with the production and commerce of cream of tartar, and founded on the knowledge so obtained, to take 11 advantage of the provision of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act, which specifies that the offence which might otherwise be imputed shall not be deemed to be committed, ‘‘ where the drug is un-avoidably mixed with some extraneous matter in the process of collection or preparation.” There is no cream of tartar to be got that is free from calcium tartrate, and although samples may gometimes be met with that contain only two or three per cent, ot tartrate of calcium, in most cases the proportion is much greater than that, and it commonly reaches five or six, or even eight per cent.With reference to the presence of lead in tartaric acid, there cannot be two opinions as to the importance of preventing 80 objectionable a contamiuation, and generally, I believe, due care is taken by chemical manufacturers to accomplish that object. Traces of this or other metal may sometimes, no doubt, be detected in such articles as tartaric acid, but I should be very much surprised to find a quantity sufficient to injure health ; and with regard to the case alluded to in the report, it would have been desirable to know what quantity of lead was proved to exist in the acid.I recollect being engaged, many years ago, with Professors Graham, Miller, and Alfred Taylor in an investigation of the conditions under which water might become impregnated with lead, and we found that the water of the London vater supply, if left in contact with clean lead, would take up enough of the metal to admit of its detection by delicate chemical tests ; but it vas thought rery undesirable to create an alarm by publicly referring to the fact.Metallic vessels are necessarily used in many manufacturing operations, tin and copper being preferred where applicable, but lead is often usedfor lining crystalliEing tanks, and articles prepared in such vessels frequently contain traces of the metal of which the yessel is com- posed. Tt is quite right that public analysts should keep a watchful eye for the detection of such quantities of metallic im- pregnation as are aroidable or might prove injurious, but any attempt to create a popular prejudice where no real evil exists, is to be deprecated. The report of the Local Gorernment Board alludes to ‘‘sweet 12 spirits of nitre entirely destitute of nitrous ether,” but I am not aware that such an article has been met with except when largely diluted with water, and sold by persons, usually small huxters, unconnected with legitimate pharmacy.It must be admitted, however, that the subject of sweet spirits of nitre is a trouble-some and unsatisfactory one, The article is one for which there is a very large sale, and the consumption of it is principally as a popular domestic medicine. There have been several processes given for its preparation, some of which yield a product contain- ing scarcely any nitrous ether, and unfortunately this is the kind of article most approved of by the public. The name “sweet spirits of nitre ” is not recognised in the British Pharmacopoeia, and, therefore, the “spirit of nitrous ether ” described in that work does not necessarily represent it, although the latter pre- paration is generally sold for it in the better class of pharma-ceutical establishmente.But much of what is sold as sweet spirits of nitre is made by a process taken from one of the old pharmacopoeias, and this is largely supplied for unprofessional use, being preferred by the public who will go where they can get it. For many years I have taken a great deal of pains in endeavour- ing to supersede the old-fashioned sweet spirits of nitre of variable composition and with sometimes but a trace of nitrous ether in it, by the introduction of a process, now given in the British Pharmacopoeia, which yields a product uniform in composition when first prepared, and containing five or six per cent.of nitrous ether or other nitro-compound. If this had been a weaker preparation than it is, it would have been more palatable, and I have no doubt my attempt would have been more successful, for in its existing state the public object to it, and, therefore, the old- fashioned sweet spirits of nitre is still sold. Nor does the difficulty attending this preparation end here. The article made according to the pharmacopoeia, although it may strictly answer to the pharmacopeia standard when first prepared, will soon cease to do so, because the ethereal liquid, partly consisting of aldehyde, undergoes decomposition when exposed to the air. Even the (( spirit of nitrous ether ” of the pharmacopoeia, therefore, which 13 ought to be always used in dispensing, and I believe is so used, is not a preparation of constant composition, and Borne allowance has to be made for slight deviations in it from the Pharmacopoeia standard.I do not think that any serious case has been made out against the legitimate and qualified dealers in drugs with reference to the sale of sweet spirits of nitre. The most that can be said is, that among a class of the public who are accustomed to doctor them- selves and their families, by the use of familiar remedies which ‘‘ have hereditary reputations,” there is a demand for an article called sweet spirits of nitre, and that some druggists,whose businesses consist in selling drugs rather than in dispensing prescriptions, supply the sort of sweet spirits of nitre which the public requires and most approve of.I do not say that this indicates a satisfactory state of pharmacy, but neither do I say that the case is one in which the pharmacopoeia standard for ’‘spirit of nitrous ether ” should be applied to an article sold under a different name which originally represented, and still represents, the article sold. The circumstances affecting sweet spirits of nitre are similar to those which applied to paregoric in the early part of this century. Paregoric Elixir is a very old remedy for coughs, which was popularly used as such long before it was introduced, in 1746, into the Pharmacopoeia. Its pharmacopceial name was then ‘‘Elixir Paregoricum.” This name was changed in the Pharmacopoeia of 1788, to “Tinctura opii Camphorata.” It was made with camphor, opium, benzoic acid, oil of aniseed and spirit. Its familiar name was still (‘paregoric,” and the pharmacopczia formula under the name of ‘‘ Tinctura opii Camphorata ” represented it.In the Pharmacopoeia of 1809, the name was changed to “Tinctura Cainphora Composita,” and at the same time the oil of aniseed was omitted from the pharmacopoeia formula, a11 the other ingredients being retained. Now, what was the consequence of this change ? Why, that the public refused to receive the new tincture for paregoric, because it lacked the most pronounced character of their old familiar remedy which the oil of aniseed gave it, and druggists, eren those of the highest standing, were 14 obliged to keep the old preparation with oil of aniseed as well as the new-one for the general public and the other for medical prescriptions.This state of things continued until 1836, when a new Pharmacopoeia was brought out, and the oil of aniseed mras then restored to the official preparation. I believe this was done for the mere purpose of satisfying the public taste for paregoric with oil of aniseed, and to obviate the necessity for keeping tmo preparations. I perfectly recollect the influence which was brought to bear in getting the compound tincture of camphor of the pharmacopoeia reconciled in character with paregoric elixir, and I beIieve that something of a similar description will have to be done with reference to sweet spirits of nitre.The only remaining article alluded to by the Local Government Board is “fluid magnesia,” which they say has been found to contain “only 3.3 grains of magnesia per fluid ounce instead of 5 grains which is the proper proportion.” Now, fluid magnesia, like sweet spirits of nitre, is milch more largely used unprofession- ally than otherwise, and when so employed a solution containing about 3.3 grains of magnesia per fluid ounce is preferred to the stronger preparation of the pharmacopceia, and is commonly used and better suited for such use. I was responsible for the intro- duction of the 5 grain solution into the pharmacopceia, but ~ome time after the publication of the work, I became satisfied that the fluid magnesia ordered there mas too strong.In some notes on the Pharmacopoeia, which were published in the “ Pharinaceri tical Journal ” in 1870, I remarked, with reference to “ Liquor Magnesiae Carbonatis,” ‘‘this preparation would, I think, be im- proved by reducing its strength. The process as given in the Pharmacopoeia, yields a solution containing 13 grains of carbonate of magnesia to the fluid ounce, but it can only be kept of this etrength while it is fully charged with carbonic acid gas. On exposure to the air, some of the gas escapes, and carbonate of magnesia is then deposited. A solution containing 10 grains of carbonate of magnesia in the ounce would be more easily made and much more easily kept for use without alteration of strength.” The Paper from which this is an extract, was read at a meeting of 15 the Pharmaceutical Society, with a view of eliciting discussion among practical pharmacists respecting suggested improvements in some of the pharmacopoeia processes when a new edition should be calIed for.It was then expected that a new edition would be brought out in a few years ; but, although some 40,000 copies of the work have been sold, comprising several reprints, the Medical Council have been, and still are, slow in seeking a new edition, and in the absence of such, manufacturers are adopting some of the suggested improvements nnofficially. I see no other objection to the sale of fluid magnesia with 3-3 grains of magnesia per ounce than that its use as a domestic medicine might lead to its being sometimes employed in place of the stronger preparation in dispensing prescriptions.For the ordinary purposes for which fluid magnesia is required I consider it sufficiently strong, and better adapted than the stronger preparation. I have now disposed of the cases specified in the Report of the Local Government Board, and if the imputation conveyed in the statements made there rested only on such of the cases as apply to qualified or legitimate dealers in drugs, it would not, in my opinion, amount to much ; but I have no doubt there are included in the 171 cases of imputed adulteration, a certain number of such as are not specified, but of which we have occasionally heard under the names of ‘‘ violet powder ” and “ milk of sulphur.” At one time there was quite a raid on druggists and general dealers for articles sold under those names, which, if they were found to con- tain sulphate of calcium, were represented to be adulterated. In many of these cases no defence was attempted, and dealers were frightened into a tacit submission to imposed penalties, although no real offence had been committed, but since it has been shewn, on adequate authority, that the imputation in those cases arose from prejudice or imperfect knowledge, the number of prosecu- tions has dwindled down to next to none.I still, therefore, maintain the position with which I started, that as far as relates to the class of registered chemists and druggists, including, of conrm, the higher grade of pharmaceutical chemists, there is no evidence of any systematic or serious adulteration of the drugs 16 sold by tlleui ; and altliongh there niny be, as no doubt there are some slight deviations occasionally from the required observance of authorised instructions, which it is very desirable to remedy, I feel assured the Menibers of the Institute of Cheniistry will concur in the opinion, that the best and fittest mode of providing a remedy for such irregularities, and at the same time of raising the standards representing the qualities of drugs, is by increasing and extending the practical and scientific qualifications of those who are engaged in this department of commerce.DR. DUPRE:Before I begin niy remarks I should wish to ask Dr.Redwood one question, namely, does he still hold the opinion expressed by hini in a letter to the ‘‘ Pharmaceutical Journal,” in October, 1879, which was to the effect that the test for purity given in the British Pharmacopoeia, under the head OF Characters and Tests, refers to minimum and not to maximum quantities of impurity permitted to be present. Public analysts have certainly always supposed that the plain meaning of the terms used was that they related to maximum and not to minimum quantities. In the first paragraph of his Paper, Professor Redwood statee that the ‘‘ Sale of Food and Druge’ Act ” had, among other thinga, found employment for those chemists “checking what may be thought the too eager assaults of official prosecutors acting under the authority of the Act.” If by official prosecutora he means the sanitary inspector or the police, we here have nothing to do with those ; if he means public analysts, he labours under a mis- take.Public analysts are not public prosecutors, and this fact should be fully recognised : the sole function of the public analyst is to analyse articles of food and drugs brought to him, and to report the results to the persons who brought them. It must, however, be remembered that the Act says nothing about adulteration. All it stys is that the article bought should be “of the nature, sub- stance, and quality demanded,” and this distinction is of great importance. It is often possible to prove that an article is not of the nature demanded, although it may be impoasible to prove that it is adulterated.NOW,with regard to so-called qualified chemists, it must be remembered that they sell their 17 drugs at considerably higher prices than ordinary druggists, and fairly so if their drugs are pure. They claim to do so on account of the expensive education they had to pass through before they could call themselves pharmaceutical chemists, and that, therefore, they are not to be put on a level with ordinary druggists. They must, therefore, be judged as, in some degree, educated men, and the public have a right to expect that if they go to a qualified chemist every article they get is of the nature, substance, and quality demanded.Drugs may vary owing to many different circumstances. As for example-an important constituent of the drug or medicine may be left out or be put in in less than the proper proportion; or a neutral substance may be added for the purpose of dilution, or the proper active ingredient may be re-placed by a cheap and inferior substitute, &c. Then variation may be brought about by direct, wilful adulteration, by careless manufacture, by purposely selecting inferior and therefore cheaper qualities of drugs, by any of which the main object of the adulterator-an increased profit-may be attained. It becomes therefore of the highest importance to the public that there should be some standard by which to judge of the quality of a drug, and my contention is, and has always been, that if a drug is sold by a pharmaceutical chemist under a name recognised in the British Pharmacopoeia, and of course still more so if it is sold as representing a British Pharmacopoeia preparation, then it should be in accordance with the standard of the Pharmacopoeia.If it differs in any material degree from such standard, the chemist has committed a fraud, and no amount of sophistry will alter this fact. It is no defence to say that some drugs deteriorate with time. The chemist ought to know this. His education is given him for this purpose. What should we think of a public analyst, who having made a mistake, in consequence of which a chemist has been placed on his defence, should say, ''I am not to blame, my standard solution had deteriorated, or my balance had got out of order, and these things have an unfortunate habit of going wrong ?"-why, he would be dismissed as unfit for his 18 calling.It is no defence to say that a drug has been collected bg ignorant natives, or to say that the impurity present is, although great, only a natural one. What should we think of a consulting chemist who, in a charge of fraud against a silversmith for having sold spoons of lead in place of silver, were to give evidence that silver was often associated with lead, that indeed much silver was extracted from lead, and that therefore the silversmith was not to blame for having sold spoons which simply contained a natural im- purity. Fortunately, in matters directly affecting the pocket, our judges, magistrates, and the public generally, are sufficiently educated, and such a defence would naturally be scouted.But in re- gard to drugs, general education is, unfortunately, very deficient, and a similar defence sometimes succeeds. Then, as to careless manu- facture. Consider that the object of adulteration is improper gain, by reducing the price to the seller, at the expense of quality, and this end may be gained by careless manufacture. When a chemist is charged with selling soda-water containing less than 1 grain instead of 30 grains of bicarbonate of soda per pint, is it any defence to state ‘‘that a little less than the ordinary amount might have been taken in this individual bottle, that some of the soda actually taken had been dropped, by the boy employed, out- side the bottle, and finally that some of the soda actually intro- duced into the bottle may have been projected out again on the introduction of the effervescent water I ” As well might a gold-smith charged with selling 1 carat gold for 18 carat gold, say that Some of the gold had dropped ontside the crucible.My experience of drugs is very different from that of Professor Redwood. If yon deal with ordinary pharmaceutical chemists, and ask for sulphate of quinine, iodide of potassium, bromide of potassium, or indeed any drug consisting of a single well-defined chemical compound, the article supplied is generally pretty good in whatever part of London it may be bought.But the we ie entirely different the instant you pass to drugs that are more or less an altered natural product, or that should contain a given percentage of the active ingredient. In such cases, it will be found that at least one out of every two articles bought differs 19 widely in nature, substance, and quality from that demanded. If we find much starch and chalk, we are told that the starch is added to prevent pieces of the drug from sticking to each other, and that the chalk has been blown into the drug from the soil during the process of collection. What is the pharmaceutical chemist educated for, if not for the purpose of recognising these impurities, 80 that he may either get rid of them or reject the drug, and not sell it as of the nature, substance, and quality of the drug demanded, in which these impurities should be present in very small proportions only, if at all? It mill be found that citrate of quinine and iron, B.P., is supplied containing only 4 instead of 16 per cent.of quinine, and with tartaric in place of citric acid, and whereas, 85 previously stated, the sulphate of quinine sold is generally pure, the alkaloid present in this pre-paration often contains much cinchonine. Acid hydroqanic, B.P., is sold with only + per cent. instead of 2 per cent. hydro- cyanic acid; liquor arsenicalis with only 2 instead of 4 grains arsenious acid per ounce, and so on. It may be that some of the standards given in the Pharmacopoeia are too high; if it be so, by all means let them be lowered, but as long as these standards are the only legally recognised standards, chemists should be made to adhere to them.As to cream of tartar containing calcium tartrate, and the attempted explanation of the fact, I entirely differ from Professor Redwood. In the first place there is no evidence that the plastering of wines has increased materially except perhaps in some parts of the South of France. Plastering is an immemorial custom. In the second place, the plhering is almost invariably done to the grapes, and the calcium remains with the husks in the form of calcium tartrate. A plastered wine contains little or no tartaric acid, and therefore can deporJit no tartar. Cream of tartar should be the purest form of tartar sold, and so far from its being, practically, impossible to free it from lime, the Prumian Pharmacopeiamakes such removal compulsory.It has been pointed out this evening by Professor Redwood, and is indeed well known, that the Registrar of the Pharmaceutical Society 20 can set the law in motion against any person compounding, and I presume selling, medicines of the British Pharmacopeis except “according to the formulas of the pharmacopoeia.” May I ask Professor Redwood how often during the last twenty years this law has been set in motion against a Pharmaceutical Uhemist ? have often read of unqualified persons being prosecuted at the instance of the Pharmaceutical Society, and fined &5, for aelling poisons, but I have never 8een one case in which a member of the Society has been prosecuted under the above Act, It cannot be urged that the fact of adulteration being practised was un-known to the Council of the Pharmaceutical Society, for there is abundant evidence to the contrary.We have many Members amongst us who are alao Members of the Pharmaceutical Society, and if these can induce the Pharma- ceutical Society in future to go hand in hand with public analysts, as far as possible, instead of more or less opposing them, this Conference will not have been held in vain. NR.UMNEY: I quite agree with our President, that the subject brought before us this evening is a most important one. As far a8 I know, no person is so competent to speak authoritatively on this subject as Professor Redwood, for he has made it his special study, and upon it can bring to bear the experience of at least half a century.Those who are acquainted with the collection, importation, and Bale of drugs, whether in a crude form or when manufactured into galenicals, know quite well that systematic adulteration is as rare now as it was common in the early part of this century, and that this happy change has in the main been brought about by the better education of those whose business it is to traffic in drugs, forced on, perhaps, latterly by the wholesome regulations of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act. I remember discussing ‘‘pure drugs ” nearly twenty years Bince with a pioneer in this path for purity of all medicines, whose age was,at the time of our conversation, over fourscore years, and he assured me that at the end of the last or in the early years of this century, it was a common practice to sophisticate powdered drugs, 21 one example of which may be given, viz: the sending of white bryony and jalap roots together to the public drug mill to produce powdered jalap.Such tricks as these in the present day are not even thought about, much less practised. Dr. Duprh, as far as I can judge, has just been pleading as would an able advocate for his client to make good the statebent of the Local Government Board, and making charges which cannot, in my judgment, be supported by facts. Dr. Dupr4 referred to a drug which he said sometimes contained starch and chalk.He did not mention it by name, but I presume he meant scammony. Now, how is scammony collected ? Is it not collected by the natives of Asia Minor by attaching a shell to a portion of a scammony root and there leaving it until it shall be filled with resinous exudation ? Un&r such circumstances, should we condemn a specimen that contained traces of earthy matter ? and considering the glutinous state in which this gummy, resinous mass has to be handled, should we always expect to find starch absent ? I can testify that I have seen scammony which although it would analyze upwards of 80 per cent. of resin, and thus conform to the Pharmacopeia requirements, yet would not stand its test for the absence of starch.Now, citrate of iron and quinine has also been alluded to, and statements made which are at variance with my own ex-perience, and more especially as to commercial specimens con- taining but 4 per cent. of quinine. I think I might here publicly defs and challenge any one to procure from any six pharmacies in the immediate vicinity of Burlington House, or even in London, a salt sold as the officinal one and containing so small a proportion of quinine as that just indicated. Soda water has also been mentioned, and the plea put forward by individuals who, when summoned under the Act, said the 6oy had failed in his duty to put in the requisite quantity of alkali into each bottle. No one practically acquainted with the details of an acrated water factory working with Bramah’s continuous process, would be induced to accept this as a solution of the 22 question. Is not carbonate of soda cheap enough? and is not the taste of the public to be listened to, when it demands aerated water, under the name of “soda water,” which is not soapy in taste ? That it is desirable to attain to the highest standards practicable I do not dispute ;on the contrary, I have always maintained that this is one of the objects of the pharmacist’s education, but still there are times when the British Pharmacopoeia standard cannot be reached.Some medicines, for instance, are liable to change from the hour they are made ; with others, again, a weaker form is found more convenient. Fluid magnesia, for instance, can without difficulty, as I heard some years since (“ Pharmaceutical Journal,” vol.xi., 455), be made to agree with the characters of the Pharmacopeia. But can it be kept so? Experience has taught many of us that it cannot, and therefore it is that it has been proposed that the strength shall be reduced to 10 grains of the carbonate rather than 13 grains to the ounce. Sulphurous acid solution, again, is described officially as con-taining upwards of 9 per cent. of sulphuroua anhydride. Now, an aqueous solution of this strength is known not only to be impracticable commercially, but also to be undesirable to handle as a remedial agent, and therefore it has been generally understood that it 5 per cent. solution would be substituted.Now, surely, because pharmacists act with some intelligence in these matters they ought not be subjected to the sweeping assertion that 28 per cent. of their drugs are adulterated. DR.ANGELL: I came up to this meeting fully expecting that an attack would be made upon those whose duty it is to detect and certify to adulterations in drugs, but it has not proved so powerful as I had expected. A great deal I had intended to say has been much better put by Dr. Duprh, but there are one or two things I cannot pass over. In the first place I should like to ask of Dr. Redwood to which of these two paragraphs he attachea more importance. This one : 23 The Sale of Food andDrugs Act has opened a wide field for occupation to ohemiets who are engaged not only in the duties of Public Analyst, but ah in those of checking what may be thought to be the too eager assmults of official proseautors acting under the authority of this Act.” Or : “The maintenance of a high and uniform standard of qudity in drugs in-oluding under this tern all medicines, is of the utmost importance, not only for insuring their safe and sumeasful use, but for promoting the much-needed advancement of knowledge in therapuetics.” This is a simple question, but 1 am inclined to think he will find Rome difficulty in answering it.A good deal has been said about the difficulty of obtaining the crude drugs in anything like a state of purity. I could not but smile when I came to the remark on page 4 about the wild state of the uneducated natives.Why the adulterations of tea were often blamed to the poor ‘‘Heathen Chinee,” until the operation of the Food and Drugs Act put a stop to them. We have heard how scammony is collected, and about the wind blowing pollen and starch grains on to the resinous juice, some-times, as I have found, to the extent of about half. Scammony also sticks to the hands of the natives, and they are obliged to use 50 per cent. of flour to prevent it. I should like also to remark upon a statement in page 7, which says that -“Notwithstanding the periodical investigations of inspectors and analysts appointed under the ‘ Sale of Food and Drugs Act,’ and the vigilance of a numerous body of well-informed and scientific pharmaoists in various parts of the country, who me fully competent for the detection of such cases, and alwtays ready and anxious to discover and expose them, the number thus detected is very amall.” I may observe on this, that however much vigilance these officers may use, it is exceedingly difficult to obtain samples of drugs.If an inspector goes into the shop of a grocer, he can demand articles under certain provisions of the Act; but if he goesinto the shop of a chemist it is a fair question for the latter to ank: *‘What do you want it for ? ” and as the inspector is bound to tell them, then the remark is : u We have not any.” That is the practical difficulty in carrying out the Act in regard to druggists. In respect to the observations on cream of tartar, it really seems bo me that the British Pharmacopceia is taken up or put down exactly m the case demands.24 If we refer to the article cream of tartar in the British Pharma- copoeia, we shall find that the calcium present should produce only a slight turbidity with ammonium oxalate. I remember some time ago, when in court, putting to a well-known professor of pharmacy-the indefatigable defendant in cases of prosecution for the adulteration of drugs-the question as to “How much lime salt was indicated by the bare allowance of a slight turbidity with the reagent ;was it as much as 8 or 9 per cent. of the whole Bubstance ?” It is according to the strength of the solution,” was the only answer which could be got out of him.It appears to me that what Professor Redwood would like us to understand from his words is, Chat the pharmacopceia is to be adhered to when it is wanted by the pharmacist, and not when it is not wanted. Then he tells us if we were to demand cream of tartar in accord- ance with the test, that there would be very little cream of tartar left. We were once told in the same way that if we were to ask only for green tea which had not been painted, we should put an end to all green tea. Depend upon it, that if we were to demand cream of tartar in a fairly pure conditiou, it would be very quickly supplied to us. Then, with respect to the argument Professor Redwood has put forward with some force-the taste of the public. The taste of the public has always been used as an argument in support of all kinds of adulteration, and it is now somewhat out of date.It is really no defence at all. It has also been stated that it is impossible to fix upon standards, but it has now been found by the public analysts that there are few cases where the standard could not be determined. PROFESSOR : 1 may say that I came to this meeting ATTFIELD with the intention, if necessary, of supporting Dr. Redwood, for I felt that I could concur in all that he had said in the proof of his paper. At the same time I was anxious to ascertain from his additional remarks and from the discussion, what evidence might be afforded respecting the adulteration of drugs. When I say I support Dr.Redwood, I mean more especially as to his statement that “with regard to the drugs con-raumed in this country, and supplied in the usual way by our 25 registered chemists and druggists, I am not aware, and do not believe, that anything like systematic or serious adulteration exists.” I support him in this opinion, because for a great many years I have been looking for evidence of the alleged sophistica- tion of drugs by druggists, but, hitherto, have found no degree of adulteration at all worthy of imperial recognition. Now, respect-ing this particular kind of adulteration, I do not know any language which would be too strong to express my abhorrence of it, in any form. An article of food may be adulterated and per-haps do no particular harm, because we are not bound to purchase or to sw~tllow; and m buyers are to some extent judges, the principle of caveat emptor applies.But a drug is something to bring us back to health ; we take it almost nolens vohs, and we suffer if it is adulterated ;-hence any person who designedly adulterates drugs should be punished with the utmost rigour of the law. But where are these drug adulterators? I have been con- nected with the Pharmaceutical Society for some twenty-five years, and I know pretty well what w~tsdone by that Society for the previous fifteen years. In the forty years’ proceedings published by that Society, I have looked in vain for evidence of anything like widespread or serious adulteration. I have found competent men coming forward with the results of their investigations, looking anxiously to find adulteration, but Kith little success.am also connected with a similar society, the British Pharmaceuli- cal Conference, which has taken up the question ;one of the only two articles of its constitution stating that it is founded “to main- tain uncompromisingly the principle of purity in medicine.” In the earlier years of the existence of this body, steps were taken to obtain from most of the chief towns of the country specimens of drugs for examination. Some times specimens were obtained from all the shops in one town, and sometimes from one shop in each of several different towns. Papers were written on the investigations, but what was the result ? Scarcely a single case of adulteration could be detected ;and the gentlemen who conducted the investi- gations were, so far as one could tell, men of skill, reputation, and probity.Since the Food and Drugs Act has been in operation, I have looked in the reports of the public analysts and of the Local Government Board for evidence, but, again, have found Fery little. It is true that the report of the Local Government Board, quoted by Dr. Redwood, states that nearly 28 per cent. of the uamples examined were adulterated, but thie statement must be taken cum grano salis. If it be true that such Iarge proportions of the drugn examined were adulterated, how is it that a large number of prosecutions were not instituted ? Prosecutions have in some instances been undertaken, but of these a large proportiox has broken down.I myself, although as I have said, I hate adulteration, have alwaye willingly taken part in the defence of cases which, to my judgment, were only cases of alleged adultera-tion, and the results have justified my opinion. It is all very well to say that chemists who have defended such cases, have taken too much the position of advocates. There is a tu quoque statement which might well be applied to those who supported the prosecutions, The fact however stands, that after hearing fairly typical cases, including a aolicitor and an analyst on one side, and a solicitor and an analyst on the other, impartial tribunals have found most of the asserted charges of drug adulteration to be without proper founda- tion.To the credit of chemistry be it said that the analyst, as an analyst, has seldom been in fault, the failure to sustain the charge resting generally on the deductions from the analyses rather than on the analyses themselves. After looking for evidence of the adultera- tion of drugs, I cannot but come to the conclusion, not onlyfrom my own experience elsewhere, but from what I have heard, or rather, have not heard, in course of the discussion this evening, that there is in this country nothing like serious or systematic adulteration of drugs by druggists. I asnt to see evidence, notmere assertion, but evidence, either from the prosecutions or from papers brought before one of the many societies-the Pharmaceutical Society, the British Pharmaceutical Conference, the Chemical Society, the Society of Public Analysts, or our own Society, so that the ques- tion of adulteration or non-adulteration by the British Pharmacist, may be incontestably and truthfully settled.DR.MUTER: I have listened with interest to hear what the 27 speaker who has just sat down would say upm the subject under discussion, because he has certainly been amongst those referred to by Dr. Redwood for whom work had been found to check the assaults of too zealous prosecutors. He is, as it were, a representa- tive defence analyst, and therefore, in following him, I mean to confine my remarks to the manner in which the decisions of the impartial judges referred to by him have generally been obtained, and to the effect on the public welfare of such specious excuses for the existence of inferior and impure drugs, as we have heard to-night from some speakers.I am quite willing, at the outset, to admit, that, ag a rule, the most inferior drugs are not to be found in the shops of pharmaceutical chemists, but in those of oilmen and other unlicensed dealers, who do a trade in the commoner drugs, at prices far below the regular retailer. On the other hand, I am also bound to say that the educated men do not always exercise the care they are aupposed to do, in checking the quality of the drugs they buy, before retailing them. The truth is, how-ever, that the whole thing begins with wholesale houses, who positively encourage the sale of inferior articles, by supplying cheap drugs to the unlicensed persons, and so acting to the pre- judice of the regular pharmacist.I would ask any man in hia senses what it means when one sees in a wholesale price list the same drug marked “opt,” “medium,” and ‘‘SO~~S.’~Is it not that the first is the proper and only admissible article up to a proper strength, while the second is not so, and what the third is I must leave to imagination. Drugs are not like groceries, they must either be of full strength and purity, or worthless, and so they cannot be honestly judged by ordinary trade qualities. Addressing myself now to the prosecutions which have failed, let me present you with a picture. Never was there a case in which the defendant was wealthy, but that a grand array of our friends, the professional defence analysts, were brought down, while the un-fortunate country public analyst was left alone, often without even the semblance of legal assistance.The inspector gives evidence, and the analyst gives his, and then up gets the talented barrister, retained, regardless of expense, by the Defence Associa- 28 tion. He severely cross-examines the public analyst, whom he addresses simply as Mr., no matter what his title may be, and he then dilates upon the meagre nature of the evidence for the prosecution, and introduces his witnesses with a grand flourish, and examines them by the title of profemor this, or Dr. that. The consequence naturally is, that the ‘‘impartial judge,” knowing nothing of the real nature of the point in dispute, goes simply by the weight of evidence, which is represented on the one side by a mercilessly cross-examined ‘‘Mr.,” and on the other by a Professor or two not cross-examined at all by any one competent to do so, and naturally he decides in favour of the views promulgated by the latter.It seems to me that the entire tendency of professional defence eridence has been to reduce the standards of purity in everything, and conseqently the public suffers. Take, for instance, the simple question of milk, and we find that, under this treatment, the standard has been steadily going down, so that we really now get a more constantly diluted article than before the passing of the Act, With the standard to which we have now been reduced, most dealers can and do regularly add iO per cent.of water without fear of conviction. One word more and I have done. Dr. Attfield said, I think, that no evidence as to the qualities of drugs had been brought before any society. I can say something very different to that, because I have sat in this room, as Presi-dent of the Society of Public Analysts, and heard papers on the subject read and discussed ; and surely it must be admitted that such meetings were composed of men who understood something, at least, of the subject which is their daily occupation, whatever our defence friends may say to the contrary. DR.DUPRE: I should like to say a few words as regards the question of citrate of iron and quinine. I have analysed many specimens taken from all parts of London, at respectable shops, and not one out of three came up to the standard of 16 per cent.In some cases it fell to six or even four. Not many years ago there were wholesale houses in London at which three qualities were kept, and the excuse was that these were manufactured because the country practitioners required them. As long a8 29 wholesale firms send out drugs of different qualities, there is no possibility of ensuring quality. MR.UXNEYthought that public analysts had done much good in recommending prosecutions for the sale of cream of tartar which contained barium sulphate, but that they failed in discretion when prosecutions were instituted on account of so-called abnormal amounts of calcium tartrate occasionally present, Then, again, neither the wholesale nor retail druggist was directly responsible for the cream of tartar with barium, for, as Dr.Paul pointed out, the process of saZting or sprinkling in of the sulphate as the crystals were packed in casks was carried on in the ports of Southern Europe. However, even this was a thing of the past, for it was now thoroughly stamped out. With regard to citrate of iron and quinine, he should like to add that it was the custom of manufac- turers to make preparations containing 8 per cent. and 16 per cent. of quinine respectively, and it was sold so labelled, and therefore those who bought it did so with their eyes open.He main- tained that wholesale druggists and manufacturing chemists were ~lsmuch interested in, and evinced an equal desire to maintain, the purity of all substances used in medicines, adid pharmacists themselves. THE SECRETARYthen read the following letter from Dr. Stevenson:-‘‘Dr. Redwood argues to this effect : that the introduction of standards of strength and purity into the pharmacopoeia took place before the passing of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act; that the pharmacopceial etandards were not intended to be applied with reference to the general sale of drugs; and that those standards are to be regarded, in some instances, as standards of excellenceto be reached rather than those practically attainable at present.He thus reiterates what has been urged by the pharmaceutical journals on behalf of pharmacists who object in their sale to be bound by the British Pharmacopoeia, except when dispensing the prescrip- tions of medical men. “I think it is to be regretted that such arguments are put forth on behalf of pharmacists, and I doubt the wisdom of their 30 endorsing such a line of argument, even if their own interesh only are regarded. The public will, I hope, jealously watch any attempt to reduce the quality of drugs and substances used in pharmacy. ‘‘In his certificate of analysis, the public analyst ia obliged to state either that a drug is genuine or that it contains foreign ingredients, and to specify the percentages of these. He is not, as Dr.Redwood seems to imply, required to speak of a drug as ‘adulterated.’ It is clear, then, that he must refer, either expreasly or by implication, to some standard of purity, natural or laid down by some competent authority. Now, what recognised standards have we for drugs and medicaments ? I know of none but the British Pharmacopoeia. And what is its authority, and how far does it apply? It is declared by statute to be intended to supersede all the different pharmacopoeias before used in Great Britain ; it is intended, so it is declared, to afford, not only the members of the medical profession, but those engaged in the pre- paration of medicines also, one uniform standard and guide. Thie being so, and all other pharmacopoeias being superseded by the British, when pharmacist, or any one selling a medicine or drug, is asked for a drug or medicine under a pharmacopoeial name, the buyer is entitled to receive the article of the pharmacopceial quality, and of no other except when specially demanded.“It might be supposed that as Dr. Redwood is one of the gentlemen who prepared the British Pharmacopoeia, his opinion that the pharmacopoeia1 standards are rather standards of ex-cellence to be reached than those at present practically attainable, is conclusive a8 to this. But his opinion is, I believe, erroneous ; or if not so, he must, when he assisted in drawing up the book, have been ill-informed (which I can hardly think), or else he greatly misunderstood the purport of the work he was engaged on.Let the Pharmacopoeia speak for itself. It says:-‘Pains have been taken to make the descriptions of all the substances referred to in the work, sufficiently comprehensive and minute to afford a clear indication of what the medicines of the Pharma- copoeia are intended to be.’ And since the book is by statute to 81 be a list of medicines and compounds, the term medicines must include drugs. And it adds that its object is ‘to enable those who are engaged in their adminietration to determine the identity and test the purity of such a8 are met with in umamerce.’ It appem to me that the book is intended to treat of commercial articles, and in this I am further confirmed by the further state- ment of the book itself, which says, ‘it is left optional with the manufacturer to use the processes given, or others by which pro- ducts may be obtained that will accord with the dmr@tatians and tests given for their identicficatwn.’ It appears to me that Dr.Redwood’s statement that the Pharmacooepia lays down ideal and usually impracticable standards of purity is strangely at variance with the declarations of the Pharmacopoeia itself. “Will pharmacists venture to lay down authoritatively a book of standards of purity below those of the British Pharmacopoeia? Unit1 they have the courage to do this, and drive people into demanding the pharmacopoeia1 articles, I think public analysts and magistrates will do well to abide by the standards laid down by Dr.Redwood himself in the British Pharmacopoeia.” PROFESSOR in reply, said : The discussion which has REDWOOD, taken place on this subject has been in no respect more severe in criticism than I was prepared for, but I have looked in vain to what has been aaid for evidence of adulteration of drugs other than that which I have myself admitted. I do not say that no such thing aa adulteration exists, but I do say that we have no evidence of any serious systematic adulteration, such as we know haa existed and still exists with reference to articles of consump-tion in connection with food. I may appeal to what Dr.Dupr6 has said as the result of his experience, which is to the effect that when he obtains fiom pharmacists articles such as quinine, iodide and bromide of potassium, or other well-defined chemical products they are pure; but he contends that when he departs from that course and examines druga in their crude state he finds evidence of what he terms adulteration, but which I should rather regard as impurities, admitted impurities, necessary impurities, which are abundantly covered by the qualifications 32 introduced into the Sale of Food and Drugs Act.Dr. Dupr6 has alluded to scammony and cream of tartar, and I contend he has not in the slightest degree altered the position which I laid down, that cream of tartar, although formerly not difficult to meet with containing not more than 2 or 3 per cent. of tartrate of calcium, was at the present time rarely found in that state.Dr. Dupr6 has also allnded to citrate of iron and quinine, to which a reply was made by Mr. Umney. I have not referred specially to citrate of iron and quinine, but I am well aware that it is met with in commerce not of the full strength ordered in the Pharmacopoeia. Such an article was a common article of commerce previous to the issue of the Pharmacopceia. Medical men were constantly using it with 7 or 8 per cent. of quinine in it ; and seeing that medical men are large consumers of that article, and have a perfect right to use it of any strength they think proper, manufacturers will, of course, supply it. Therefore, the supply, under existing circum- stances, of two perfectly different strengths. Dr. Dupr6 asked me to state whether I still adhered to the opinions which hesays I ex-pressed in a letter in the “Pharmaceutical Journal” some time ago, to the effect that the standards of strength given in the pharmaco- pceia are to be taken as minimums and not as maximums of impurity.I have already sufficiently answered that in print, but I would not wiBh the suggestion thrown out by Dr. DuprB to pass without my repeating what I have already said in my paper, namely, that in many instances, as with cream of tartar, the standard is that of the minimum of impurity which is to be met with in the article. I have explained my meaning more fully in this paper by indicating standards in the Pharmacopoeia in other cases which are of a similar description. Thus, the carbonate of potash of commerce is, of course, never pure, but contains sulphate and chloride, which are necessary impurities in the article as obtained from wood ashes; and if we were driven to the employment of none other than pure carbonate of potash, the result would not be any advantage in its use in medicine, while the price would be enormously increased.One speaker stated that many wholesale houses had a practice of keeping drugs of various qualities, and he seems to consider that it is wrong to supply drugs excepting when they are of the best possible quality. From this I entirely differ. Anyone who has had a large experience in drugs knows that what applies to articles of diet must also apply to drugs. What would be said in justification of a statement that ‘‘ Here are tea and coffee and sugar sold of different qualities ? Surely, this is altogether wrong; why should we have two or three qualities, why not confine ourselves to the best ? ” There is not the same difference in the qualities of drugs as in articles of food, but still some differences inevitably exist.Take, for instance, an article in the borderland ginger. Is it possible that all ginger is or could be kept to one standard? The same may be said of rhubarb or any other drug of that description. Of course, these drugs are im- ported in quantities ; they are classed according to their several qualities, and they are sold according to such qualities. And we must also bear in mind that these drugs are not all used by the same class of individuals.It would be unjust if the lower classes were compelled to pay ten or twenty times the price for medicine they now pay. If all the inferior qualities of drugs were turned out of the market and none but the very best sold, they would undoubtedly suffer. These are all questions of which those in commerce have to take notice, and only those inexperienced in drugs would maintain that only one quality should be used. THE PRESIDENT:1 have not much to add, from my own experience, bearing upon the subjects of the interesting discussion to which we have listened, yet I feel it would not be right to refrain from telling you the impression made upon my mind by the perusal of Dr. Redwood’s paper, and the discussion which it has elicited, especially aa I approach the subject from the point of view of one who has never been concerned professionally with questions relating to the quality of drugs retailed.and their relations to existing standards, and who should, therefore, be in a position to express an unbiassed judgment. It seems to me to have been forcibly demonstrated this evening that much remains to be done by the Pharmaceutical Society, by the Society of Public Analysts, and by the Fellows of this Institiitch, to raise the 1) 34 quality of drags and medicinal chemicals, and to establish and maintain such stsndards of purity and strength as we should desire to see governing their supply to the public. I quite believe Dr. Redwood's statement, which was supported by Professor Attfield, that wholesale direct adulteration of drugs does not exist, but I consider that Dr. Dupr6 put the subject in its true light, when he saidit was not so much a question of adulteration, as of whether the articles supplieJ to the public are of such quality as they have a right to demand, If the same unavoidable competition existed in consequence of a public demand for cheap drugs, as there is in the case of articles of food, we might admit that such excuse as existed for the sale of inferior articles in the one case might also apply to the other.But surely a public demand for cheap drugs does not exist. I believe the public pay without grumbling the most liberal prices demanded for medicines, and, therefore, they have a right to demand the supply of articles concerning the quality and proper strength of which there is no doubt.It has been argued tha.t two qualities of citrate of iron and quinine must of necessity exist, because one medical man has been accustomed to prescribe the article of inferior strength, and another the superior article, but is it not very possible that a dis-pensing chemist may not be able to refrain from yielding to the temptation of keeping only the inferior quality, so that the patient may not actually get what the medical man thinks he is prescribing ? I repeat that the public have a right to expect the article sold to be of the highest quality, and that he runs great risk of not obtaining this if the dispensing chemist has the option of purchasing several qualities of a drug or chemical, the standard of quality or strength which is laid down in the pharmacopaia.It has been said that the wholesale druggist is obliged to meet the demand for lower qualities of drugs ; if so, it obviously rests with the dispensing chemist and druggist whether these inferior articles are manufac- tured or not. Surely if, ax Professor Redwood says, it is the practice to manufacture paregoric which contains no opium to meet the demands of a particular class of salesmen, a gross deception is practised upon the purchaser, who expects to obtain the 35 article known as paregoric, avd, perhaps, prescribed to him as such. The existence of this practice of the supply of inferior qualities of drugs, alone shows that very important reforms have to be ma.de in connection with this subject.Dr. Redwood has pointed out the importance of raising the standard of the scientific qualification of those engaged in this department of commerce. What we also require on their part is firm rectitude of purpose and a discontinuance of the manufacture of articles, the existence of Rhich may serve as temptations to yield to dishonest practices under the cloak of a supposed weakness on the part of the public for cheap supplies of medicine. I do think that the Fellows of this Institute, among which are many belonging to the Pharmaceutical Society and the Society of Public Analysts, have useful work to do in removing all spirit of antagonism between those Societies, and in bringing them to co-operate heartily and earnestly in the interests of the public,' by doing their utmost to secure the adoption and maintenance of proper standards of strength and purity, and to encourage increased knowledge and commercial rectitude in those engaged in the manufacture and sale of drugs and medical preparations. The proceedings terminated with a rote of thanks to Dr.Redwood. LIST OF OFFICERS &. COUNCIL FOR 1881. PRESIDENT. F. A. ABEL, C.B., F.R.S., &c. VICE-PRESIDENTS. JAMES BELL, F.C.S. E. FRANKLAND, Ph.D., D.C.L., F.R.S., &c. W.N. HARTLEY, F.R.S.E., F.C.S. E. J. MILLS, D.Sc., F.R.S. T. REDWOOD, Ph.D., F.C.S.H. E. ROSCOE, Ph.D., F.R.S. TREASURER. C. R. ALDER WRIGHT, D.Sc., F.C.S. ORDINARY MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. JOHN ATTFIELD, Ph.D., F.R.S., &o. W. ODLING, M.A., M.B., F.R.S., &c. DUGALD CAMPBELL, F.C.S. F. J. M. PAGE, F.C.S. A. 3UPR6, Ph.D., F.R.S., &c. JOHN PATTINSON, F.C.S. R. J. FRISWELL, F.C.S. B. H. PAUL, Ph.D., F.C.S. P. GRIESS, Ph.D., F.R.S., &c. J. SPILLER, F.C.S. C. W. HEATON, F.C.S. T. STEVENSON, M.D., F.C.S. DOUGLAS HERMAN, F.C.S. A. NORMAN TATE. J. F. HODGES, M.D., F.C.S. C. MEYMOTT TIDY, M.B., F.C.S. DAVID HOWARD, F.C. S. W. A. TILDEN, D.Sc., F.R.S., &c. E. W. T. JONES, F.C.S. R. V. TUSON, F.C.S. T. W. KEATES. A. VOELCKER, Ph.D., F.R.S., &c. C. T. KINGZETT, F.C.S. W. WALLACE, Ph.D., F.R.S.E. J. W.KYNASTON, F.C.S.T. WAY, F.C.S. F. A. MANNING, F.C.S. SECRETARY. C. E. GROVES, F.C.S. INSTITUTE OF CHEMISTRY OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND, REPORT OF COUNCIL. As at all former Annual General Meetings, it is again the pleasing duty of the Council to congratulate the Members on the progress which the Institute has made during the past year in regard to the increase in their numbers. At the time of the last Annual Meeting, there were on the Register, 370 Fellows and 54 Asso-ciates, whilst at the present time there are 422 Fellows and 51 Associates, besides 5 Fellows who have been recently elected, but not yet formally admitted, making in all 478 Members. During the past year we have lost 4 Fellows by death, Mr. A. C. Bruce, M.A., of Birmingham, Mr.Thoinas Eltoft, Dr. J. Stenhouse, F.R.S., one of the Founders of the Chemical Society, who died on the last day of the old year, and Mr. W. W. Stoddart, of Bristol. One Fellow and one Associate have resigned. The power intrusted to the Council on the foundation of our Association of admitting candidates directly to the Fellowship without first passing through the grade of Associate, ceased on the 2nd of Octo-ber last ;so that many Chemists have recently availed themselves of the opportunity of joining the Institute as Fellows under those conditions. Several Chemists who were invited to become Members at the time of the foundation have also taken up their Fellowship. 40 With reference to the satisfactory total increase in our numbers during the past year, it must not be overlooked that this is due to the direct admission of Chemists to the Fellowship under the special regulations which have now lapsed.By our Articles of Association, every candidate applying to be admitted as a Fellow after October 2nd, 1880, must gire evidence- 1. “ That he is not less than 24 years of age. 2. ‘(That he has been admitted to the Institute as Associate. 3. “That he has, since his admission as an Associate, and “for a period of three years therefrom, been con-“tinuously engaged in the study and practical “work of Applied Chemistry in a manner xhich “shall be satisfactory to the Council.” From this time forward, therefore, our numerical increase nil1 depend on the number of candidates for the Associateship who give satisfactory evidence that they have the necessary qualifi- cations. The conditions under which candidates for the Associateship of the Institute are in future to be considered eligible for admission to the examinations, have recently been the subject of careful con- sideration by the Council, also the question to what extent the examinations as hitherto carried out need to be modified or amplified.As the attendance in London for the required practical examination may entail considerable inconvenience and expense upon candidates for the Asaociateship residing in Scotland or Ireland, it is under consideration 88 to whether-where special circumstances arise-it may not be expedient to arrange for examinations in Practical Chemietry in connection with the Institute, to be held at the great ceutres in those countries, and perhaps also in the provinces.The prize of 250 offered by our late President, Dr. Frankland, for the best original investigation involving gas analysis, has been awarded to Mr. Frank Hatton for his researches- I. ‘( On the Action of Bacteria on Various Gases.” 11. ‘‘ On the Oxidation of Organic Matter in Water by 1~’iltr:~tionthrorigh Various ltedin.” 41 111. “On the Reduction of Nitrates by Sewage, Spongy Iron, and other Agents.” These have been accepted by the Council as sufficient and satis- factory evidence of training in Practical Chemistry to entitle him to the Associateship. Since the last Annual General Meeting, ConferenrPs have been held at which questions of considerable importance were discussed, namely :-“What should be the Relation of Professional Chemists to each other, to their Clients, and to the Public in legal cases ? ” ‘‘ On Standards of Strength and Purity, and Evidence of Adulteration in Drugs.” The decision of the Council to print the papers in which the subjects of the Conferences were to be introduced and to circulate them amongst the Members some time previously has been found to be very useful ; not only has it enabled the Members attending the Conferences to carefully consider the subject for discussion before the meeting took place, but Members who reside out of London, or who from other causes were unable to attend, have sent letters to be read at the Conferences, expressing their views on the matter under consideration.The Parliamentary Committee, with the assistance of the Parliamentary Agents of the Institute, have carefully watched the various Bills brought forward in Parliament during the last session, but there were none which seemed likely to affect the intereats of Members of the Institute. The advisability of getting an Act of Parliament passed for the incorporation of the Institute has been under discussion by your Council, as it is considered that in this way the objects and aims of our Association would be brought under the notice of various official bodies in a more forcible manner, whilst additional status and influence would thus be acquired by the Institute.The Institute is indebted to the President and Council of the Chemical Society for the use of their rooms during the past year. INSTITUTE OF CHEMISTRY OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND. STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT AND BALAA'CZ LYBEET, FROM1ST JANUARY DECEMBER,TO 31~~ 1880. 32 8. a. s s. a. s 8. d. Cash in hand, Jan. 1,1880 .... 118 Printing, Stationery, and Postage ......103 15 6 Balance in London and Westminster Advertisements ..........104 2 3 Bank, Jan. 1,1880 ....292 17 10 Rent, Office, and Miscellaneous Expenses .. 71 6 $4 A 293 19 6 Examiner'sFees ....... .... 15 15 0 50 Entrance Fees at Five Guineas ..262 10 0 Salaries and Wages ...... .... 152 0 0 10 ,, at Twb Guineas ..21 0 0 Parliamentary Agents .... .... 3 19 0 3 Life Compositions ...... 78 15 0 Purchase of S6503 "I, Consolci .. ....644 17 7 362 5 0 Cash in hand 31 Dec., 1880 .... 28 15 5 420 Fellows' Subscriptions ....882 0 6 Balance in London and Westminster 39 Associates ........ 40 19 0 Bank, 31 Dec., 1880 .... 922 19 6 Interest onConsols ...... 39 13 2 ExambationFees ...... 21 0 0 ;El639 17 2 21639 17 2 3ssetsI Zinbilitts. 31 December, 1880, Cash in hand.. 2544 1 1 31 December, 1880 NOW. 9, ,, S2000 3 "I, Consols. EL J. GROSJEAN,Audited and found correct, Jan. 6th, 1881 RAPHAEL MELDOL.4, JOHN M. THOMSON. 43 PRESIDENT’S ADDRESS. THEPRESIDENTsaid : The Report of the Council, which you haye just heard read, records a condition of prosperity and a promise for the future such as, I believe, few societies or associa- tions of the character and age of our Institute, have been able to boast of.In October last we completed the third year of our existence as an incorporated association, and with that completion ceased the admission to our Fellowship of any but those who shall have attained to and passed through the preliminary grade of Associate. While the total number of our Members is within about twenty- five of the maximum fixed for the purposes of our registration, an inspection of our Register by those extensively acquainted with the profession will afford satisfactory proof that, in regard to the admission of Fellows, which, until lately, has been to a great extent at the discretion of the Council, a good standard of compe- tence and of professional poaition has been maintained.In the admission of Associates, the Council, guided by its Nomination Committee, has also carefully maintained the standard of qualifica-tion laid down in the Articles of the Institute. There is good cause to congratulate the originators of the Institute on the fact that but few men of eminence as scientific or professional chemists have not borne testimony, by taking up the Fellowship which was open to them until October last, to their correct conception, and consequent approval, of the objects with which this professional Association has been founded. Most sad it is that, amongst the prominent names upon our Register, we should so soon have to miss that of one of the most eminent and most highly respected men who joined the Institute on its founda- tion.As a professional chemist, no less than aa an enthusiastic investigator, whose lore for the science raised and sustained him above difficulties to which very many would have speedily have succumbed, and as a man especially distinguished for his high moral principles and his fearless candour, the late Dr. Stenhouse occupied for many years a very exalted position among his fellow- Eorkers. His approval of the aims with which this Association was founded, went far to counterbalance the adverse crikicisms of a few whose opinions are entitled to great respect, but who do not appear to have rightly or fully understood the views which have led many leading chemists to co-operate zealously with younger members of the profession in endeavouring to establish this pro- fessional Association upon a sound and firm footing.I venture to think it must be admitted to have been demon- strated that those endeavours have already been crowned with success, not merely by the anxiety exhibited by a considerable number of well-qualified professional men to join our body, after the first general selection of Fellows had been made, but also by the readi6ess with which young members of the profession have already presented themselves for examination, with a view to qualify for the position of Assooiate of the Institute. That the examination for admission to our Association is already taking its place among recognised public examinations must, I consider, be regarded as one important result achieved by those whom you select to watch over the interests of the Institute ; and if, while affording all reasonable facilities to candidates to present them- selves for examination, we can succeed, by judicious revision from time to time of our regulations governing the admission of Asso- ciates, in improving, not only the preliminary chemical education, but also, and I might say especially, the general scientific training of young men who enter the profession, we shall, I consider, hare accomplished one of the most important and useful objects which many of the more earnest workers in the interests of the Institute had in view when they originally joined the movement for its establishment.It is doubtless considered by the majority of professional chemists who hare become Fellows of the Institute, that the annual subscriptions paid by them serve their chief intended purpoee by contributing to the accumulation of funds, wherewith important work for the advancement of the best interests of the 45 profession may, in the future, be accomplished. It has, however, come to the knowledge of your Council that there are among our numbers a few who already look for some immediate substantial return for the subscriptions paid year by year, or who consider that some palpable personal advantage or benefit (concerning the nature of which no well-defined idea appears to exist,) should at once accrue to subscribers to the Institute.As the few observations which I am now offering are submitted solely on my individual responsibility, I will venture to remind such members that the Institute can only be said to have been just launched into existence, and that very much remains to be done towards the full development of its character and its sphere of action. I would add that it counts among its members men eminent as scientific and professional chemists, who have joined it simply with the object of giving both material support and the support and influence afforded by their names, to an Institution, the suc- cessful development of which they hope, in course of time, to see operate beneficially upon the welfare and social position of the profession at large ; who not only cannot be expected to reap any personal benefit from their connexion with the Institute, but who have moreover demonstrated their readiness to expend much valuable time in endeavouring so to bring its foundation to a BUC-cessful issue as to establish, on a firm basis, an Association truly representative of the chemical profession and of the interests of its members.If these men are cheerfully content to labour for the Institute, besides contributing to its funds, those whose sole object in becoming members was to reap personal benefit from their association with it may surely be content to exercise some patience. They should, moreover, not lose sight of the fact that the power and influence enjoyed by old-established representative Associations of other professions, which do at once convey privileges to those elected into their body, have been of gradual growth and development.I may, at the same time, remind the members that their Council has contiIiually given its earnest attention to the subject of 46 securing increasing advantages to those who have joined the Institute. Thus, it has been indicated in the Council’s Report that the practicability of securing some additional status to members by obtaining an Act of Parliament for the incorporation of the Institute, has been considered, and this subject will have to be dealt with by the new Council. Our Register is advertised from time to time, as also are new elections made.The Register is sent to Government authorities and public bodies who have to deal with chemical appointments, and means will be adopted to direct attention to it in all instances when vacancies in chemical appoint- ments arise. It need scarcely be pointed out that it rests greatly with individual members of the Institute to disseminate a know- ledge of its existence and objects, and thus to contribute towards securing for themselves the advantages resulting from its gradual recognition by the public as the representative Institution of the profession, which operates in the interests of the public by examin-ing into and vouching for the qualifications of the practical chemists enrolled upon its Register.Your Council has further endeavoured to promote the objects of the Institute by occasionally convening meetings of its members, or Conferences, for the purpose of discussing topics of special interest to the profession, and we are much indebted to some Fellows who hare taken the trouble to prepare papers to serve as starting points for these discussions. The attendances at these Conferences have not been large, and it is to be hoped that in the future those members who are able to attend meetings in London may more generally endeavour to benefit their colleagues and themselves by taking part in the interchange of views at such meetings, on matters involving diversities of information, ex-perience and opinion.To those who are unable to be listeners or speakers at these meetings, the circulation of the papers read and of the proceedings thereon has probably been of some use and interest. Among the subjects which will certainly occupy the attention of future Councils will be the questions, whether more frequent meetings of the members may be organized with prospect of general approval and succesfi; and whether some form of 47 periodical publication may be issued, distinct in character from that of a purely scientific journal, (the demand for which is SO completely met by the journal of the Chemical Society,) but dealing with matters of special interest to practising chemists. The establishment of such a periodical would of course create a more or less considerable demand upon our resources, and the question will therefore need careful consideration,-when and to what extent it may be prudent to incur such pecuniary responsi- bilities, so as to avoid the crippling of resources which should be always a-iailable towards furthering objects of more direct im- portance to members of the Institute.In concluding these few remarks I would again lay stress upon the fact that, as an earnest of the beneficial work which this In-stitute aims at accomplishing, it is doing its best, by stipulating for special, well-defined, qualifications, the standard of which should be gradually and judiciously raised, to fulfil the first object of the Association as laid down in our Memorandum, namely:- To promote and encourage a thorough study of Chemistry and all branches of Science allied thereto, in their application to the Arts, to Agriculture, to Public Health and to Technical Industry.” The zeal and success which have, up to the present time, marked the labours of those who have acted as your Council may, I venture to think, be accepted by members as proof that no pains will be spared, nor time lost, in endeavouring to secure the second of the declared objects of the Association, by (‘adopting,” or seeking to promote the adoption, of all legitimate measures for the advancement of the profession .. . and particularly for the maintenance of the profession of the Consulting and Analytical Chemist on a sound and satisfactory basis.”