Edgar Judge

Edgar Harvey Judge

1862-1951

The name Judge is remembered in Bourne today mainly in connection with an historic cottage property at No 19 North Street, Bourne, which dated from the 17th century and had an original Victorian shop front but was demolished in 1988 amid many protests to make way for the Burghley Centre development.

From the early years of the 19th century, the property was used as a chemist's shop and the business was originally run by John Bellairs Roberts but was taken over by Edgar Judge in 1890. It subsequently became known locally as Judge's with an equally ancient interior, the walls lined with an assortment of pharmaceutical bottles and phials which remained unchanged until the building was pulled down, despite being Grade II listed during the survey of 1977.

In 1907, Edgar Judge was reprimanded by the coroner during the inquest on a man who had been found dead in bed when it was disclosed that he had provided him with medicine without a doctor being consulted and although he subsequently defended his actions through his professional organisation, the Pharmaceutical Society, the resulting publicity did the business untold harm.

Judge’s main outside interest was the St John Ambulance Brigade, being appointed ambulance officer of the Bourne division in 1932 and assuming command the following year, subsequently becoming Divisional Superintendent in 1934, a post he filled until he retired in 1947 but remained active as vice-president. Judge died in June 1951, aged 90, and is buried in the town cemetery.

The chemist's shop run by Edgar Judge is pictured above on the right before 1890 when the proprietor was John Roberts. The premises were demolished in 1988 amid much public protest. The photograph below shows the interior of Edgar Judge's shop taken during the days of gas lighting and many of the products on sale can still be identified such as Yardley's Old English lavender, spectacles, Bruce Green's sight savers, various pills and potions, utensils for home nursing and feeding cups for bed patients.

Photographed circa 1920

MR JUDGE'S PICK ME UP

Edgar Judge was remembered by many for his golden tonic which really was a wonderful pick me up but now gone forever like so many good things. Most old family chemists sold these tonics made to their own recipes and my wife, an old Brunnian, remembers that most people had a bottle in their pantry or medicine cabinet. Her family always had it available and it was used among other things to treat depression before there was much in the way of understanding of the problem. Came the day when I in my turn needed something of this kind, I extremely reluctantly tried a bottle. The taste was bitter but not harsh and low and behold, much to my amazement, it worked so we hurried to Bourne (we live in Stamford) and stockpiled three bottles for future use. We recommended it to friends and they too tried it with the same success. They lived in Norway and on one occasion phoned us asking whether it was still available by which time Judge's had stopped trading. I do wonder if the bitterness came from quinine. In the early days chemists had a lot more freedom of choice for these things than they do now.
- contributed by John Freear, of Stamford, Lincolnshire, in July 2010.

AN ILL-ADVISED PRESCRIPTION

1907: The sale of medicines is strictly regulated by law and it is illegal to buy controlled drugs without a doctor’s prescription. Legislation, largely drawn up during the 20th century, was introduced to safeguard the public when buying and being prescribed medicines although 100 years ago, the rules were more relaxed and so mistakes often happened.
William Palmer, aged 62, was found dead in bed at his home in Stanley Street, Bourne, on Thursday 7th February. He was later identified by Mrs Mary Ann Daff, of West Road, as her brother. She told an inquest which was held at the Town Hall the following Saturday: “When I left him on Wednesday night, he seemed alright but when I went down next day, the door was locked and I could not get in. My nephew was with me and he got in through the window but we found him quite dead.”
Susannah Gribble, a neighbour, told the hearing that Palmer had been suffering from a bad cold and when she left him on Wednesday night, he said that he intended to see the doctor the following morning. Dr James Watson-Burdwood said in evidence that he had frequently attended Palmer and he would think that he had died from acute bronchitis and heart disease.
Edgar Harvey Judge, MPS [Member of the Pharmaceutical Society], a chemist, of North Street, said that Palmer had come to him and asked for medicine and he gave him an 8 oz. bottle of mixture. The coroner, Dr Augustus Greenwood, asked Judge if he was allowed by law to prescribe to customers and he replied that he was not and the coroner warned him: “I advise you then not to prescribe for anyone else in future.”
Summing up, the coroner said: “With regard to the medicine, I have seen the prescription and I find that it did Palmer no harm and no good. But I think the public ought to know that when they go to a chemist and ask him to prescribe a medicine, the chemist is running a serious risk if he does so.”
The jury returned a verdict in accordance with the medical testimony but Judge was incensed by the coroner’s remarks and consulted his professional organisation, the Pharmaceutical Society [membership was purely voluntary until the passing of the Pharmacy and Poisons Act, 1933], with the result that a statement appeared in the Chemist and Druggist magazine the following week:
"It is much to be regretted that the coroner’s remarks have been published [by the Stamford Mercury] without qualification, thereby reflecting unnecessarily upon a chemist who, in prescribing, did not exceed the rights accorded to every citizen of this realm. There is no liability under the Apothecaries Act for prescribing; the offence under the statute is diagnosing disease and prescribing a remedy. Such professional service on the part of chemists we do not attempt to justify or defend but we do most strongly protest against unnecessary remarks in regard to lawful prescribing, especially when evidence shows (as in the present case) that it has not contributed in the slightest to the death under inquiry."