POISONS AND PHARMACY BILL [H.I.] (Hansard, 20 March 1906)

§ THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (The Earl of CREWE)
My Lords, in asking your Lordships to give a Second Reading to this Bill, I am glad to be able to state that it is not, at any rate in its main points, of a controversial character as between the two sides of the House. In fact, I believe I am right in saying that had the late Government remained in office the noble Marquess 179 opposite (Lord Londonderry) would in all probability have introduced a similar if not a precisely identical Bill. Since, however, this proposed measure is the outcome of a considerable amount of discussion outside, and since also the subject is one which is of great interest to several classes of people in the country, and in no small degree to the public at large, it will be right, I think, that I should explain as briefly as I can the details of the Bill to your Lordships.
The first clause deals with the schedule of poisons. At present the sale of poisons is governed by the Pharmacy Act of 1868, which contains a schedule; but as science has advanced, and the lessons of experience have been learned, various additions have been made to that schedule by Order in Council. Those additions are now incorporated in the Bill, and one or two further additions, as your Lordships will see, are proposed.
Clause 2 deals with a very important matter. There has been for some time past a strong demand on the part of the agricultural and horticultural interests for some extension in facilities for the sale of poisonous substances used by them in their business. Last year, I think, the then Minister for Agriculture, Mr. Fellowes, received a deputation which urged upon him increased facilities for the sale of poisonous substances of that kind. In October last, at a meeting of the Chamber of Agriculture of Scotland— of course a very important body—a resolution was passed making a similar request; and I have no doubt that the noble Earl the Chairman of Committees will bear me out in saying that when he was at the Board of Agriculture similar demands were frequently made. It is proposed, therefore, that local authorities should have power to give licences to traders who are not chemists under certain circumstances to sell these articles. It is not, however, intended in any way to supersede the ordinary business of chemists in this matter, and it is only in districts where there are no chemists' shops that, as a rule, it is proposed that these powers should be given.
The article which, perhaps, will be more affected than any by this provision is sheep dip, which, as your Lordships 180 are aware, is as a rule of a very poisonous character. The most popular and generally-used sheep dip contains a very large amount of arsenic. A large sheep farmer will probably use several hundredweight of arsenic in the course of the year; and it has been found, particularly, for instance, in remote districts in Scotland, that sheep farmers have sustained no small inconvenience through having to send a great distance to secure the raw materials of sheep dip, and it is hoped that by giving licences to tradesmen who are not chemists to sell them, the convenience of sheep farmers will be greatly added to. Then I may also remind your Lordships of the great extension of spraying with various poisons for the destruction of insect and fungus enemies of different crops and plants which has taken place, and horticulturists will no doubt find a similar convenience in this provision.
I believe some objection has been raised, though I do not know whether it is now pressed, to the inclusion of arsenic in the substances thus to be sold. But arsenic has the dignity of having an Act of Parliament all to itself, by which its sale is regulated, and that Act contains the provision that arsenic sold for horticultural purposes has to be coloured in a different way, so that it can be distinguished from other substances, and that the danger of using it maybe minimised. It is a more or less essential part of this clause that arsenic should be retained among the substances thus to be sold. The draft regulations which it is proposed to make by Order in Council under this clause are already prepared, and it would probably be for the convenience of those interested in this subject—the Pharmaceutical Society and others—if those regulations are promptly laid on the Table, and therefore I propose to do that on an early date.
The third clause of the Bill deals with an entirely different subject. It deals with a matter which is of interest to the Pharmaceutical Society, and also one in which an alteration is, we think, required for the protection of the public. Its effect is that any person who carries on the business of a chemist in more than one shop shall, on premises which he does not look after himself, he being, of course, 181 a registered chemist, appoint in each case a registered chemist to look after the business. That is a provision which we consider is required for the protection of the public. I daresay your Lordships may remember that in the famous case of Bardell and Pickwick there was a juryman who, having unsuccessfully pleaded to be released from performing his duty, explained that he had left behind in charge of his shop an errand boy who, although a very nice boy, was thoroughly unacquainted with drugs, and the prevailing impression on his mind was that Epsom salts was oxalic acid, and syrup of senna was laudanum. That is, no doubt, an extreme instance, but I mention it to show how important it is that all dispensing of drugs, and the general management of the business of a chemist in every shop, should be conducted by a thoroughly qualified person.
Clause 4 deals with a question which has given rise to a certain amount of controversy. As I daresay your Lordships know, in the poorer districts of the great towns particularly, chemists' shops are very largely carried on by companies. A demand at one time was made—and I think it is hardly possible that that demand could be seriously pressed, because it is one which it would be quite impossible to meet—that everybody having an interest in a company of that kind should of necessity be a qualified chemist. That demand, as I say, is an entirely impossible one to meet. It is of no interest to the public to know how a chemist's shop is financed; but it is of the greatest importance to? know how it is managed; and this clause provides that in any case where chemists' shops are carried on by a company there must be bona fide management by a qualified person, whose name shall be conspicuously placed in the shop, and in order to prevent any infraction of this provieion, further words propose to enact that any breach of that regulation shall not merely be visited on the unqualified person who may be managing the shop, but on the company itself. That, it appears to me, is an exceedingly important provision. It is one to which, in fairness, no objection can be taken, and it is one which I hope will be carried without difficulty.
182 I may say, at the same time, that it is not at all the intention of His Majesty's Government to interfere in any way with the carrying on of these companies' shops. I have no doubt they do supply a want. Pears have been expressed that if these companies and their shops are interfered with the poor will not be able to obtain a proper supply of cheap drugs. How far cheap drugs are an unmixed benefit to the poor, or to any one else, may be a matter of opinion. I remember it used to he said a few years ago of the two principal consulting doctors then in London that they differed only in this that one had lost all faith in every drug, whereas the other retained some slight glimmering belief in two or three drugs. Consequently I do not know that access to very cheap drugs need be regarded as an unmixed blessing to the poor. But still, if they want them it is perfectly right that they should be able to have them without any interference. We do not intend to interfere with the provision of cheap drugs of this class.
The next clause—Clause 5, gives certain powers to the Pharmaceutical Society: in the first place, by making it more easy for them to carry out their examination; and secondly,—and I think this is a useful provision—by enabling them to recognise colonial diplomas without further examination in this country. The sixth clause makes a certain change with regard to the sale of the more important and best known mineral acids which, as your Lordships know, are very largely used in many branches of commerce and manufacture. It proposes to enact, not that their sale should be restricted so far as concerns persons by whom they are to be sold, but that precautions of the well-known kind with regard to the marking and nature of the bottle or vessel in which they are contained should be carried out, as though they were poisons included in the schedule.
The seventh, which is the last operative clause, deals with the application of the Bill to Ireland. I do not know that at this stage of the measure it is necessary to explain the rather complicated manner in which this Bill is to be applied to Ireland. I fancy one or two points are raised upon it, but probably it would 183 be more convenient if they were dealt with in Committee than at the present stage of the Bill. I will consequently, therefore, merely ask your Lordships at this stage to give the Bill a Second Reading.

THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE
My Lords, I entirely associate myself with what fell from the noble Earl the Lord President of the Council when he expressed his belief that there would be no objection in your Lordships' House to the principle of this Bill. I, on my part, certainly have no reason to object to it in principle. I really only rise to follow on the last words spoken by the noble Earl with reference to Clause 7 of the Bill; and, as he has expressed the opinion that it would be better to defer the discussion of the application of this Bill to Ireland until a later stage, I will postpone what I have to say. But I should like to remind the House that we in Ireland already have a system which we believe carries out the objects which prompted the Government to bring forward this Bill for England and Scotland. I am speaking after consultation with the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland, and I can inform your Lordships that we do not think it necessary that this Bill should apply to Ireland at all, and therefore I formally give notice that in Committee I shall move an Amendment omitting the application of the Bill to Ireland. I am authorised to say, on behalf of the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland, who were not called upon to give evidence before the Departmental Committee on whose Report this Bill is founded, that they would be very glad if they might be allowed to state their views to His Majesty's Government.

LORD MONKSWELL
My Lords: I have been asked by the President of the Pharmaceutical Society to say one or two words on this Bill. The Pharmaceutical Society is the authority to administer the Pharmacy Act of 1868, and what I have to say is this. The Pharmaceutical Society welcome many of the provisions of this Bill, and on the whole think it a 184 good Bill. As your Lordships, I daresay, know, there is another Bill before the other House of Parliament which was brought in by the Pharmaceutical Society, and that Bill is, to some extent, on all fours with this one. But the Pharmaceutical Society would desire that an Amendment should be introduced in clause 4 making it a little more stringent than it is. I venture, on behalf of the society, to express the hope that His Majesty's Government will consult their President, before the Bill goes into Committee, with regard to any Amendments that may be proposed or set down.

§ THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY
My Lords; I should not have trespassed on your Lordships' indulgence had I not been personally alluded to by my successor, the present Lord President of the Council. When I occupied that position this question was very carefully considered, and after consultation with the Board of Agriculture we placed on the stocks, if I may use that expression, a Bill somewhat similar to the one which the noble Earl has now introduced. I entirely agree with him that this is a non-controversial matter. We are all anxious that poisonous drugs should be sold with a maximum of convenience and the minimum of danger. Having studied this Bill while Lord President of the Council, together with the Board of Agriculture, I endorse what has fallen from my noble friend behind me (Lord Donoughmore), and I hope the noble Earl the Lord President will consult the various bodies interested before the Bill enters on its later stages. My noble friend Lord Donoughmore has stated with great truth that there is a feeling on the part of the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland that this Bill should not extend to that country. The noble Earl, when we go into Committee, will explain how Ireland is differently legislated for by the Act of 1890, which enables people in the poorer parts of Ireland, by passing a slight examination, to sell drugs. I would ask the noble Earl in charge of the Bill to consult the Pharmaceutical Society in Dublin, and I think he will find that, while they agree that such a measure is necessary 185 for the United Kingdom, they regard it as unnecessary and even dangerous to extend it to Ireland. So far as I am concerned, I shall certainly do all in my power to assist in the carrying of the measure as applied to the United Kingdom.

§ THE EARL OF HALSBURY
My Lords, I am certainly not disposed to say anything against the Bill as it stands. I take no part in the question raised by my noble friend behind me (Lord Donoughmore), for I do not know exactly what the state of things is. But I must point out that it is a mis-description to describe the Bill as reversing a decision of the courts.

§ THE EARL OF CREWE
It is only so described in the Memorandum attached to the Bill.

§ THE EARL OF HALSBURY
That is so. No court, I think, has entertained any doubt that the decision there referred to was right. I tried to put it right in the sense that this Bill does, by calling upon persons who sold drugs of that sort to be properly qualified, and I think the court justly held that a company could not be examined for a certificate, and therefore could not be within the Act. I thought that was a mistake that ought to be remedied, and I brought in a Bill for the purpose. A great cry was raised at the time—so much so that I had to withdraw the clause in order that the Bill might be sent to the other House. The cry was raised on the ground that the noble Lord himself has suggested—namely, the difficulty of poor people obtaining drugs as they desired.
I only wish to make one further observation. I think the whole question is much more difficult and complex than appears on the face of this Bill. It is perfectly certain that a very large number of poisons can be sold; you cannot get them at a chemist's without a proper prescription from a medical man, but if you go next door, it may be to a dry-salter, you can get any amount of deadly poisons, and the law at present has left it absolutely without any kind of protection, because the poisons are not sold in the character of medicines and 186 medical preparations, but under popular names. I cannot help thinking that one of these days the question must be dealt with at greater length and with more precision than is the case in this Bill. I do not say that by way of criticising this Bill, but merely as a caution that when we have passed this measure we shall not have completed all that is desired. At the same time I give my support to this Bill.

§ THE EARL OF CREWE
My Lords, I certainly have no complaint to make of the manner in which this Bill has been received on both sides of your Lordships' House. As regards the question raised by the noble Marquess opposite (Lord Londonderry), I can assure him that I shall be very happy indeed to consult the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland, and to give weight to any representations they may make. I can assure my noble friend Lord Monkswell equally that I shall have pleasure in talking over the provisions of the Bill with the representative of the Pharmaceutical Society of England, and with other gentlemen, who I believe, wish to see me on the subject. As regards what fell just now from the noble and learned Earl, the late Lord Chancellor, I confess that personally I am in very general agreement with him in the belief that all measures of this kind are only of a distinctly partial character as regards the possibility of danger to the public from the sale of deleterious articles. But, as he, I understand, agrees, that is a very large question indeed, and hardly comes under the head of a Poisons and Pharmacy Bill in the technical sense. And therefore, although I think it is well worthy of consideration whether some larger measure might not be brought in, I am afraid it is hardly possible to attempt to include provisions of that kind in the present measure.