Search for content in message boards

Help with James Fordham Chemist London

Help with James Fordham Chemist London

Posted: 1 Jan 2013 7:04AM GMT
Classification: Query
Surnames: Fordham
This post was deleted by the author on 3 Jan 2013 8:00AM GMT

Re: Help with James Fordham Chemist London

Posted: 2 Jan 2013 11:22PM GMT
Classification: Query
Working from his date of death he would have been about 50 when the Pharmaceutical Society was founded and introduced the qualification and registration of chemists in 1841, so it is possible he was never registered there. However there was a movement towards this from responsible chemists as opposed to the Apothecaries who were allowed to prescribe, for some years before 1841 with which he could have been associated. You could approach the Royal Pharmaceutical Society and ask if they have any record of him.

Re: Help with James Fordham Chemist London

Posted: 3 Jan 2013 2:44AM GMT
Classification: Query
Surnames: Fordham
This post was deleted by the author on 5 Dec 2013 12:03AM GMT

Re: Help with James Fordham Chemist London

Posted: 3 Jan 2013 12:28PM GMT
Classification: Query
One needs to be careful - Chemists and Druggists were not Apothecaries. The Worshipful Company of Apothecaries does not have an Archivist, enquiries have to be made in writing addressed to the Clerk, although an email to "Archives" can be used. In general they only cover the City of London, the Guildhall Library has records pertaining to the City only. Apothecaries had been organisedf since the Rose Act in 1703 - Chemists and Druggists only became organised and registered after the Pharmaceutical Act of 1841. Although it is now an independent charity the Apothecaries own the Chelsea Physic Garden and have the records. For the original query the RPS would probably be the quickest route to information.

Re: Help with James Fordham Chemist London

Posted: 3 Jan 2013 6:21PM GMT
Classification: Query
Surnames: Fordham
This post was deleted by the author on 5 Dec 2013 12:03AM GMT

Re: Help with James Fordham Chemist London

Posted: 3 Jan 2013 9:01PM GMT
Classification: Query
It probably is academic by now - perhaps the original enquirer thought that being told that anyone "detested" "nebulous" queries was a bit off-putting. After all, offering help is purely voluntary and if one is lucky enough to have some useful knowledge why not share it - even if a questioner is inarticulate? Statements in censuses about occupations, means and even family relationships are notorious for being fibs - I have met some real porkies. If the man was a "Chemist and Druggist" he would have had to be registered with the RPS after 1841 which could have been the quickest way to prove, or disprove, that particular point. He is unlikely to have been an Apothecary as they were very proud of their titles and it is something he would have been unlikely to hide. I do not think the Guildhall Library ever held the Apothecaries' records, they have always been at the Hall, although where jurisdictions crossed or overlapped they could have had duplicates. Web-sites are not always up-to-date - if you check the Apothecaries' web-site you will see they quite clearly say they no longer have an archivist -so perhaps Guildhall is not up-to-date. As accuracy is so important I would add that I am a Fellow of the Society of Apothecaries' Faculty of History and Philosophy of Medicine, holding their Diploma in the History of Medicine and also have an M.Sc. in the History of Science, Technology and Medicine from Inperial College - they were quite strict on accuracy in their exams! I am also an experienced translator and research worker - although retired and just do things from interest. I'll stop there - not requesting any comment.
per page

Find a board about a specific topic