A Respectable Occupation: - University of Hertfordshire Research ...

We should not, he thought, be ―bound by any agreements to which we are
not parties.‖ 102
Mr J. Mason, writing for a second time, could not understand the
reason why assistants were to be admitted. There was no shortage of
candidates for the Society‘s examination. He wanted to know, ―What vested
interests were pulling the strings behind the scenes?‖ 103 There was also a
fear that the Society had no guarantee that in passing the byelaw they
would not set a precedent. It was feared that it would leave an open door to
all those who wished to register without qualifying by examination. Arthur
Mills from Eastbourne was not surprised that legal opinion thought that
Section 4(b) was permissive. Had the government wished it to be obligatory,
they would have worded it, ―The Society shall pass byelaws.‖ He had no
doubt that a Court would find in the Society‘s favour and that if the Society
acceded to the Privy Council‘s demands, more would follow. 104 Mr H.
Bagshaw writing from Oldham thought that the Society‘s Council did not
have enough determination. Would other professions such as doctors,
engineers and lawyers or even trades unionists, allow the government to
open up their ranks to those who had not completed an approved course of
training? 105
A Special General Meeting of the Society was held at the Central
Hall, Westminster on 6 August 1919. Despite all the protests, pharmacists
102 „The Proposed New Byelaw relating to Apothecaries‟ Assistants‟, Pharmaceutical Journal, 102, 2902,
(31 May 1919) 359.
103 „The Proposed New Byelaw relating to Apothecaries‟ Assistants‟, Pharmaceutical Journal, 102, 2902,
(31 May 1919) 358.
104 „The Proposed New Byelaw relating to Apothecaries‟ Assistants‟, Pharmaceutical Journal, 102, 2902,
(31 May 1919) 358-359.
105 „The Proposed New Byelaw relating to Apothecaries‟ Assistants‟, Pharmaceutical Journal, 102, 2901,
(24 May 1919) 340-341.
320