The Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain was established in 1841 to represent the interests of its members, many of whom were small chemist and druggist retailers. Throughout the century this institution attempted to influence new policies designed to control the sale of poisonous substances routinely held by these shopkeepers. Using its in-house publication, the Pharmaceutical Journal, the Society argued for recognition of chemists and druggists as experts in the storage and distribution of poisons. This article examines the discursive strategy adopted by the Pharmaceutical Society in its attempts to retain control over the sale of chemicals. Its activities are analysed both in respect to the complex and socially embedded nature of chemical products, and to the technocratic nature of its claims.
Anon (l) (1857/8) The report of the Committee on the Sale of Poisons Bill. Pharmaceutical Journal17: 452.
14.
Anon (m) (1857/8) The ‘Sale of Poisons Bill’. Pharmaceutical Journal17: 441.
15.
Anon (n) (1898) A brief history of poisons legislation in the United Kingdom. Pharmaceutical Journal 4th series, 7: 192–194.
16.
Anon (o) (1858/9) Sale of poisons bill. Pharmaceutical Journal18: 483.
17.
Anon (p) (1868/9) The sale of poisons and extension of the Pharmacy Act. Pharmaceutical Journal 2nd series, 10: 49.
18.
Anon (q) (1868/9) Debates in the House of Commons on the Bill to Regulate the Sale of Poisons, and Alter and Amend the Pharmacy Act 1852. Pharmaceutical Journal 2nd series, 10: 58.
19.
Anon (r) (1869/70) The alleged insufficiency of the Pharmacy Act 1868 to restrict the sale of poisons. Pharmaceutical Journal 2nd series, 11: 315.
20.
Anon (s) (1892/3) Death by poison. Pharmaceutical Journal 3rd series, 23: 611.
ColesAM (2010) Technocratic discourse and technology management: The control of poisons in 19th century Britain. Paper given at ‘Managing Knowledge in the Techno-sciences, 1850–2000’ conference, University of Leeds, 5–8 July.
28.
CollingridgeD (1980) The Social Control of Technology. London: Pinter.
29.
DunminePL (2005) Preempting the future: Rhetoric and ideology of the future in political discourse. Discourse and Society16(4): 481–513.
30.
GenusA (1995) Walls and bridges: Towards a multi-disciplinary approach to the concept of flexibility. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management7(3): 287–306.
31.
GenusA (1997) Managing large-scale technology and inter-organisational relations: The case of the Channel tunnel. Research Policy26: 169–189.
32.
GenusAColesAM (2005) On constructive technology assessment and limitations on public participation in technology assessment. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management17: 433–443.
33.
GeyerR (2003) Beyond the third way: The science of complexity and the politics of choice. British Journal of Politics and International Relations5: 237–257.
34.
Hansard (1868a) House of Lords Debate, 18June, 192, paragraph 1748.
35.
Hansard (1868b) House of Commons Debate: Committee, 15July, 193, paragraph 1217.
36.
HearnGRoonyBMandevilleT (2003) Phenomenological turbulence in innovation and knowledge systems. Prometheus21: 231–244.
37.
HirschPMGillespieJJ (2001) Unpacking path dependence: Differential valuations accorded history across disciplines. In: GarudRKarnowP (eds) Path Dependency and Creation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
38.
HollowaySWF (1991) Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain 1841–1991: A Political and Social History. London: Pharmaceutical Press.
39.
HomanPG (2005) The development of community pharmacy. In: AndersonS (ed.) Making Medicines: A Brief History of Pharmacy and Pharmaceuticals. London: Pharmaceutical Press, 115–133.
40.
JensenCB (2005) An experiment in performative history: Electronic patient records as a future generating device. Social Studies of Science35: 241–267.
41.
JeritJ (2008) Issue framing and engagement: Rhetorical strategy in public policy debates. Political Behaviour50: 1–24.
42.
KimE-S (2008) Chemical sunset: Technological inflexibility and designing an intelligent precautionary ‘Polluter Pays’ principle. Science Technology Human Values33: 459–479.
43.
KleinbergE (2007) Haunting history: Deconstruction and the spirit of revision. History and Theory46: 113–143.
44.
LengwilerM (2008) Participatory approaches in science and technology: Historical origins and current practices in critical perspective. Science Technology Human Values33: 186–200.
45.
MackenzieA (2005) The problem of the attractor: A singular generality between sciences. Social Theory10: 45–65.
46.
McNallyR (2000) Strategic use of ‘risk’ in gene technology: The European rabies eradication programme. In: AdamBBeckUVan LoonJ (eds) The Risk Society and Beyond: Critical Issues For Social Theory. London: SAGE, 112–118.
47.
MarlandH (1987) The medical activities of mid-nineteenth century chemists and druggists, with special reference to Wakefield and Huddersfield. Medical History31: 415–439.
48.
MillstoneE (2009) Science, risk and governance: Radical rhetorics and the realities of reform in food safety governance. Research Policy38: 624–636.
49.
MulkayM (1993) Rhetorics of hope and fear in the great embryo debate. Social Studies of Science23: 721–742.
50.
NowotnyH (2005) The increase of complexity and its reduction. Theory, Culture & Society22: 15–31.
51.
UrryJ (2003) Global Complexity. Cambridge: Polity.
52.
UrryJ (2005) The complexities of the global. Theory, Culture & Society22: 235–254.
53.
WhooleyO (2013) Knowledge in the Time of Cholera: The Struggle over American Medicine in the Nineteenth Century. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
54.
WorlingPM (2005) Pharmacy in the early modern world (1617–1841). In: AndersonS (ed.) Making Medicines: A Brief History of Pharmacy and Pharmaceuticals. London: Pharmaceutical Press, 112–118.
