41

The fermented liquor, being filtered off from the excess ofyeast and evaporated to dryness, afforded 15½ grains of solidmatter, which of course consisted only of urea and salts; this,multiplied by 2,

leaves 25 as the saline matter present.The analysis may therefore now be considered complete,

viz.:—

COMPARISONS OF ANALYSES.

I am, Sir, yours respectfully,The Laboratory, Cheltenham, JOHN HoRSLEY.

June, 1854.JOHN HORSLEY.

THE MEDICAL PROFESSION AND LIFEASSURANCE COMPANIES.

C. H. TURNER.

To the Editor of THE LANCET.SIR,—I have forwarded the following note to the Secretary

of the Edinburgh Life Office, and, as I told him that I shouldforward it to THE LANCET for insertion, I shall be obliged byyour allowing it to appear in your pages.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,Minchinhampton, March, 1854.

_____

C. H. TURNER.

" Edinburgh Life Aesurance Office, London."All communications of this nature being intended equally

for the benefit and security of the party to be insured, and ofthe Company, permit me to request the favour of yourobserving much precision and care in stating the answers, andshould the necessary return not be made within seven daysfrom this date, the directors will conclude that you do not con-sider the life insurable."

Minchinhampton, March, 1854.

SIR,—One of your agents has forwarded to me a circularwith the above extract, and a request that I would answer astring of medical interrogatories on the life of a person pro-posing to insure in your office. The same post brought aproposal on another life from the Legal and Commercial Office;that paper I immediately filled up, because mention was madethat the proper fees would be paid; your paper I decline tofill up, because you refuse to pay for a communication whichyou admit is intended "for the benpfit and security of theCompany." There is no doubt not only that the " security" ofyour Company, but that of every other, mainly depends on the64 precision" of the medical report; you have no right, therefore,to ask such important information gratuitously, it is clearlyunjust and in direct variance with the well-admitted maxim,"that the labourer is worthy of his hire." " You would notventure to ask a lawyer one point, much less request a stringof questions to be replied to, without remuneration; neitherwould you ask a clergyman to give you a certificate withoutpaying him, and suffer me to assure you that such a state ofthings will shortly cease with my own profession.

I leave you to draw your own conclusions upon the lifewhich you have forwarded for my consideration now, or at theexpiration of "seven" days; in the meantime, however, I shalladvise the party to make application to some office whose cir-cumstances will admit of their paying for that upon which thestability of their Company must depend.

I have the honour to be, Sir, your humble servant,C. W. TURNER.

To the Secretary of the Edinburgh Life Office, King WiUiam-street.

ABUSES AT THE MANCHESTER ROYALINFIRMARY.

To the Editor of THE LANCET.SIR,—Devoted as you have ever been to the interests of the

medical students, I presume to address you in hopes that (ifyou will oblige by giving this letter a place in your valuablejournal) it may be the means of putting an end to some of theabuses of this hospital. I am one of those fortunate indi-viduals whom the governors of this institution have honoured

by accepting the trifling sum of fifty guineas for the inestimableprivilege of walking the wards, in company of about ninetyequally lucky youths. I have now been a pupil of this hospitaltwo years, and have seen occasionally the gleam of the knife,but I have rarely seen more; for I assure you, Sir, I havenever had a fair and distinct view of an operation, on regularoperating days, since I have had the happiness to be attachedto this establishment. That part of the theatre where thepatient is placed is always filled with visitors, surgeons,dressers, and house-surgeons, &c.; and, although there isample space for all, they literally club their sagacious headstogether, and-but need I say more?-the pupils in the firstrow endeavour to overtop them, and those in the second andthird rows follow their example, and are under the necessityof standing on the rails, posts, &c., to obtain a casual glanceof what is going forward.

Then, the first step towards remedying this evil would be,the enforcing a restriction to prevent the surgeons crammingthe operating theatre with individuals who are of no earthlyassistance. I appeal to the oldest pupil, to the surgeons them-selves, whether I have overstated the plain facts. Let notany one suppose that we (the pupils) object to visitors-farfrom it; but we must not suffer inconvenience by them, and ifthey honour us with their presence, they should share ouraccommodation, and not obstruct our view.Another cause of complaint is, that the surgeons do not give

any clinical instruction at the bed-side. Surely a surgeon, ifhe wishes to improve his pupils, would make such remarks, ashe walked from one bed to another, as are worthy of beingcommunicated; and then, when the pupils leave the hospital,they would have the satisfaction of knowing they have receivedsomething for their money.

Trusting, in fairness to the students, that you will insertthis communication,

I remain, your obedient and humble servant,The Library, July, 1854. REFORMER.

Parliamentary Intelligence.HOUSE OF LORDS—TUESDAY, JULY 11TH, 1854.

CHARGES AGAINST THE BOARD OF HEALTH.

THE Earl of SHAFTESBURY said, that he wished to claim theindulgence of their lordships while he called their attention tocertain charges which had been made in another place againsta public board with which he was connected, and which chargestherefore, to some extent, reflected personally on himself. Hehad the less inclination to apologize to their lordships forcalling their attention to the subject, because the charges towhich he referred were of a very serious nature, made in theabsence of the parties against whom they were directed, and towhom no notice whatever had been given that such chargeswould be made. He therefore took the present opportunity ofreplying to the accusations to which he referred, which hemight characterize as unjust and calumnious, and such as hecould clearly prove were in every way unfounded. The chargeswere made by a noble lord in the other house, who had for twoor three years been at the head of the department of Woodsand Forests, and were directed against the chairman andofficers of the Board of Health, the noble lord’s former col-leagues, against whom he had thought proper to bring forwardtwo or three charges of misconduct so gross and-

Earl FITZWILLIAM rose to order, and said that the chargeswhich the noble earl was about to deny did not in any wayaffect the noble earl as a member of their lordships’ house, nordid they arise from anything he had done in that house. Theywere merely charge* made in another house against a publicboard of which the noble earl was a member, and therefore hewould submit that this was by no means a case of that natureor personal importance to induce their lordships to depart fromtheir usual mode of proceeding with business, and justify itstaking precedence of the order of the day. (Hear, hear.)The Earl of SHAFTESBURY had hoped that, after having

42

stated that the charges affected him peisonallv, and also to acertain extent implied a charge of corruption, he might havebeen allowed to proceed. As it was, he could only yield to therules of the House, and defer his remarks.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—FRIDAY, JULY 7.MEDICAL PROFESSION.

Mr. CRAUFURD moved for leave to bring in a Bill to amendthe l2ws relating to the medical profession.Lord PALMERSTON hoped the hon. gentleman would not per-

severe with his Bill this year, but give the profession itself anopportunity of placing its views on the subject in a practicableform before Parliament. If the medical profession itself didnothing, the hon. gentleman could next session introduce thesubject.Lord D. STUART thought the introduction of the Bill would

serve as a guide for the deliberations of the profession in any-thing it might contemplate doing.

Mr. CRAUFORD persevering,The House divided, when the numbers were,-

The Bill was accordingly rejected.SEWERS’ COMMISSION.

Lord PALMERSTON obtained leave to bring in a Bill to con-tinue for twelve months the existing Metropolitan Sewers’Commission, with limited powers, a larger measure, embracingmore comprehensive sewerage powers, being postponed untilnext year, until after the report of the Corporation of LondonInquiry Commissioners had been thoroughly considered.

GENERAL BOARD OF HEALTH.

Lord PALMERSTON moved for leave to bring in a Bill for thecontinuance of the General Board of Health. The arrange-ment he proposed by this Bill was, that the Board of Healthshould be continued for two years from the end of next month,that it should consist of members to be appointed and to beremovable by the Secretary of State for the Home Department,and that it should be subject to follow all the directions andorders which it might have from the Secretary of State. It

appeared to him that the care of the health of the country wasnaturally one of the functions belonging to the department ofthe Home Secretary. At the present moment applications onthe subject came to him incessantly from all parts of the coun-try ; but now the Secretary of State had no power over theBoard of Health. When the proposed power and control overthe board was vested in the Home Secretary, he hoped thatthose differences which had prevailed between local bodies andthe general board would cease. At present the board was inthe anomalous position of being an independent body, not sub-jected to any control, and not represented in that House; sothat no person was answerable there for its acts. The Bill whichhe sought to introduce, in the first place, placed it under thecontrol of an efficient and responsible department; and, in thenext place, would give to Parliament a public officer answerablefor the proceedings of the board.

Mr. HENLEY said, it did not appear to him, from what hehad heard fall from the noble lord, that the noble lord was likelyto constitute the board in a manner which would give satis-faction to the country.

Sir B. HALL hoped his noble friend would allow sufficienttime to elapse between the first and second reading of the Bill,in order that the inhabitants, both of the metropolis and of theprovinces, might see and have time to consider the powers givento the new board. He was afraid the board, as it was proposedto be established, would be unsatisftctory.

Sir G. PECHELL hoped the country would not be saddled withthe board for more than one year.Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.

COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH.TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1854.

(Before LORD CAMPBELL and a Special Jury.)

YEARSLEY v. WAKLEY.

THIS cause came on for trial on Tuesday, Vice-ChancellorWood having directed that the case should be submitted to ajury. Sir F. Thesiger, Mr. Lush, and Mr. Wordsworth, werefor the plaintiff the Attorney-General, Mr. Bramwell, and Mr.

T. Chambers, M.P., for the defendant. The action was for an

alleged breach of copyright on the part of the defendant. Itwas asserted that, in the compilation of THE BRITISH MEDICALDIRECTORY, he had made such use of the plaintiff’s works,"The London and Provincial" and " Scottish Medical Di-

rectories," as amounted to an act of piracy. Sir F. Thesigerhaving opened the case, evidence was given of the proprietor-ship of "The London and Provincial Medical Directory," andthe editor of that work was subsequently called. It soon be.came evident, however, that it would be impossible for a juryto determine the real merits of the case, from the time it wouldoccupy, and the minute details to be investigated. It was

mutually arranged that a verdict should be returned, pro formâ,for the plaintiff, in order that the entire matter might be re-ferred to a barrister, who should decide on all matters betweenthe parties, including the proceedings in Chancery and atCommon Law.With reference to the proceedings in Chancery, Lord Camp-

bell remarked, that it would have been better that the Vice-Chancellor should have adjudicated upon the matter in hisown court.The Attorney-General said that the defendant’s counsel had

pressed for a decision when the proceedings were before Vice-Chancellor Wood, and that he was quite willing to meet thecase in any manner by which it could be fully investigated.** It will be seen that the verdict is a mere matter of form,

and will not prejudice the ultimate settlement of the question.The action refers only to the BRITISH MEDICAL DIRECTORY ofthe last and the present year, and will not in any respect in-terfere with the publication of the edition of

THE BRITISH MEDICAL DIRECTORY FOR 1855.

Medical News.

RovAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS.—The following gentle-men, having undergone the necessary examinations for the

diploma, were admitted Members of the College at a meetingof the Court of Examiners on the 7th inst. :-

BENNETT, FREDERICK, York-place, City-road.HUGHES, AZARIAH, Bodedern, Anglesea.REED, JAMES TAVERNER, Downham, Norfolk.SMITH, THOMAS, Tunbridge.STILES, BRADFORD, Marlborough, Wilts.STILWELL, GEORGE JAMES, Hillingden, Middlesex.THORNHILL, DAVID CLARKE, Stratford-green.WHITLING, HENRY TOWNSEND, Nuremberg, Bavaria.The following gentlemen were admitted Members on the

10th inst. :-

COATES, GEORGE VINICOMBE, Hart-street, Bloomsbury.COVERNTON, CHARLES JAMES, Simcoe, Canada West.GREEN, WILLIAM, Matfen, Northumberland.HADON, GILBERT BETHUNE, Haseley, Warwick.LAURENCE, JOHN ZACHARIAH, Devonshire-street, Portland-

place.MARSHALL, WILLIAM, Laurie-terrace, Westminster-road.MILES, HERBERT CHALMERS, the Charterhouse.COLLEGIATE ELECTIONS.-At a meeting of the Council of the

Royal College of Surgeons on Thursday, GEORGE JAMESGUTHRIE, Esq., F.R.S., was elected President of the College,being the third occasion on which this honour has been conferredon this Nestor of British surgery; and WILLIAM LAWRENCE,Esq., F.R.S., and BENJAMIN TRAVERS, Esq., F.R.S., wereelected Vice-Presidents for the ensuing year. At the annualmeeting of the Fellows of the College, on Thursday, the6th instant, Messrs. JOSEPH HODGSON, of Westbourne-terrace, and FRANCIS KIERNAN, of Manchester-street, Man-chester-square, were re-elected Members of the Council; andMessrs. JOHN HILTON, of New Broad-street, and RICHARDQUAIN, of Cavendish-square, were elected Members of theCouncil on the vacancies occasioned by the decease of Mr.Bransby B. Cooper, and the resignation of Mr. Thomas Cope-land.

LICENTIATES IN MIDWIFERY.—The following members ofthe Royal College of Surgeons of England, having undergonethe necessary examinations, were admitted Licentiates in Mid.wifery, at the meeting of the Board on the 12th inst.:—Messrs.John Dixon, Hemsworth, Yorkshire, diploma of membershipdated March 31, 1854; Charles Young, Worth, Sussex, July

,12, 1850; Edward Towndrow France, Sheffield, April 24,