687

Wales must secure the representation of their own opinions,feelings, and interests, by members of their own body, ordislodged must they become from that high professional andesteemed social rank which they now occupy. Their apothe-cary and other enemies must strike without ceasing.

THE FELLOWS OF THE NEW COLLEGE (GALLIPOTLODGE) AS MEDICAL WITNESSES IN 1846.

IF the MEDICAL BILL were to pass, and the PROJECTED

CHARTER were to issue, for incorporating the SURGEONS in an II" inferior" institution, bestowing on its FELLOws the not !,very euphonious or scientific cognomen of ° GENERAL- ’,FRACTITIONERS-IN-MEDICINE-SURGERY - AND - MiDWIFERY,"let us inquire how those gentlemen would be situated undercircumstances which must necessarily exist in connexion

with future events. A fellow of the new College called

to give evidence at a trial for murder, in 1846, would be

tolerably certain of discovering that the cross-examination,by the prisoner’s counsel, would take the following not veryagreeable course, and terminate with the uncomplimentaryremarks which we append:-

MEDICAL WITNESS CROSS-EXAMINED.

COUNSEL.—You say, Sir, that you are a legally-qualifiedmedical practitioner ?

.

GENERAL PRACTITIONER.—Yes.

COUNSEL.—You mean that you are a registered medicalpractitioner.GEN. PRAC.-Yes.

COUNSEL.—Under what title ?-Are you registered as aPHYSICIAN ? ?

GEN. PRAC.-No.

COUNSEL.—Are you registered as a DOCTOR of medicine ?GEN. PRAC.-No.

COUNSEL.—Are you registered as a SURGEON ?GEN. PRAC.-No.

COUNSEL.-Oh ! Ah!—You are an APOTHECARY ?

GEN. PRAC.—No I’m not. (Loud laughter, in which theJudge heartily joined.)

COUNSEL.—You must misunderstand me, Sir. Pray affordme a little of your attention. You have stated to the

Court that you are a legally-qualified medical practitioner,and that you are registered as such according to law; still

you admit that you are not a PHYSICIAN, a DOCTOR, a SUR-

GEON, or an APOTHECARY ? Then, Sir, what the dev-(Ireally beg pardon of the Court)-under what title are youregistered ?GEN. PRAC.—(speaking very solemnly.)-I am registered

as a GENERAL PRACTITIONER IN MEDICINE, SURGERY, ANDMiDWiFERY. (Roars of laughter, which the officers of theCourt found it impossible to repress for some minutes, thewitness looking exceedingly embarrassed.)

COUNSEL.—Oh! Very well, Sir. And so you are the

SURGEON who attended the deceased ?

GEN. PRAC.—No, Sir, I did not attend him as " A SUR-GEON."

COUNSEL.—Why, Sir, what do you mean ? Was it not a

surgical case, one of wounds and bruises, a death from ex-ternal violence, and do not you come here to give surgicalevidence?

GEN. PRAC.—Yes, but not as a SuRGEON.COUNSEL.—Sir, you are trifling with the Court. In one

word, are you a SURGEON?GEN. PRAC.—No.

COUNSEL.—Then do you mean to state that you have come

here to give surgical evidence on the trial of an unfortunateman whose life depends on the result ?GEN. PRAC.—My lord, I respectfully beg to inquire

whether I am bound to answer that question ? PTHE JUDGE.—Why do you ask ? PGEN. PRAC.—The Counsel desires to know whether I at-

tend here for the purpose of giving surgical evidence. Now,my lord, my evidence, certainly, would be strictly of thatcharacter, but if I were to answer the question directly in theaffirmative, I might subject myself to the penalties of an indict-ment, because, under the new Act of Sir JAMES GRAHAM, Iam liable to be prosecuted for a misdemeanor if I assume thestyle or title of " SURGEON."THE JUDGE.—It is a new point, and I feel some difficulty

in deciding. Probably the question of the learned counselhad better not be pressed.

COUNSEL.-lVly lord, I am perfectly satisfied. It is quiteenough for me to have it admitted by the witness that theevidence in this case has not been given by A SURGEON.The learned counsel, subsequently, in his address to the

jury on behalf of the prisoner, remarked that the whole caseturned upon the testimony of a witness who had been called,for the prosecution, to give evidence as to the cause of the

death, but who admitted in his cross-examination that he wasneither a physician, nor a doctor, nor a surgeon, nor an

apothecary; and what weight the gentlemen of the jury wouldattach to the evidence of such a MEDICAL HERMAPHRODITE,it was not within the range of his sagacity to determine.The case for the prosecution had utterly failed. Would,’ in

fact, the gentlemen of the jury receive as scientific evidencethe testimony of a witness who, although he had been

interrogated in relation to a subject of a strictly surgicalcharacter, admitted that he was not a surgeon, and that hehad reason to fear that, in giving his evidence, he mightrender himself liable to be fined, or imprisoned, for admittingthat he had acted in a surgical case, though not as a surgeon QThe jury would also recollect that in one part of his cross-examination the witness had alleged that the law empoweredhim to officiate as a medical or surgical attendant in anypublic institution. The nurses, the bed-makers, and thecleaners of the wards might, according to law, act in a similarcapacity. The witness having himself been compelled toacknowledge that he was not a surgeon, the cause of the

death was, in his (the learned counsel’s) opinion, so ineffi-

ciently and unsatisfactorily proved, in consequence of therehaving been no skilful regular practitioner to visit the patient,and to give evidence in the court, that he considered it to bequite unnecessary to call any witnesses for the defence, as,in reality, no case had been established against the prisoner.

688

The evidence of a SURGEON, he confessed, might have madethe accusation assume a very different aspect.

Immediately that the learned Judge commenced summingup, the foreman interposed, saying that thejury unanimouslyreturned a verdict of Not guilty, and that they weredecidedly of opinion that a SURGEON ought to have givenevidence on the trial.

Allow the APOTHECARY -CONSPIRATORS to succeed in theirselfish enterprise against the respectability of the profession,and the "General Practitioners in Medicine, Surgery, andMidwifery," may perceive, in this anticipatory report, theestimation in which their attainments are likely to be held bythe public.

A FEW months ago, (see LANCET, Feb. 1st, 1845, p. 124,) wepointed out the absolute necessity of some legislative measurecalculated to restrain the indiscriminate sale of poisonoussubstances, a measure rendered indispensable by the daily in-crease of the crime of poisoning. With a view to ascertain

the precise state of the law on this subject in a neighbouringcountry, (France,) in which it has long attracted earnestattention, we have since applied to the learned and talented

professor of legal medicine at the University of Paris,M. ADELON, the Vice-Dean of the Medical Faculty, and aman whose -intellectual and moral worth is universallyappreciated. From him we have learnt many interestingdetails respecting the sale of poisons, both in the past and thepresent time. Some of these details we shall now lay beforeour readers, along with information derived from other

sources.

From an early period, there have been in France preventivemeasures with reference to the sale of poisonous substances.An edict of 1682 prohibited the sale of arsenic, realgar, cor-rosive sublimate, and other poisons, to any except to personshaving a regular dwelling, and requiring these substances forthe exercise of their profession. The seller was enjoined tokeep a register, in which the buyer was obliged to insert hisname, his dwelling, the quantity of the poison, and the usefor which he intended it. Every leaf of this register wasattested and signed by the Lieutenant-General of Police.The precautions prescribed by this edict were exaggerated

to such an extent, that druggists and medical men were for-bidden to make use, without a written permission, of venomousanimals, insects, reptiles, toads, vipers, &c., and those personsonly who had taken degrees in medicine and in pharmacywere allowed to have chemical laboratories. All others were

obliged to obtain a special authorization.An edict of 1777 separated pharmacy from the community

of traders, and instituted the College of Pharmacy. In thestatutes of the College, the dispositions of the edict of 1682,on the sale of poisons, are reproduced-viz., 1st. The obliga-tion to sell only to persons known, settled on the spot, andrequiring the poisons for the exercise of their profession.2ndly. A register, in which the buyer mentioned his name,his dwelling, and the use which he intended to make of thepoison, each page of which had to be signed by some publicpersonage. These statutes also imposed a third obligation,

that of keeping the poisonous substances in a safe place,under the key of the master, who alone was empowered tosell them.

At present this department of medical police is governedin France by the law which regulates the practice of phar-’macy, that of the twentieth germinal year, xi.—1st. Pharmacyis not a free profession; in order to exercise it there are

certain studies and examinations to be gone through, and adegree to be obtained. 2nd. Pharmaciens (retail chemists anddruggists) are only allowed to prepare remedies, accordingto the officinal formulae of the codex, or the magistral formulæof graduates in medicine. 3rd. They are obliged to keepready all the preparations of the codex. 4th. They are notallowed to sell any remedies except on the prescription ofa graduate in medicine. 5th. They are obliged to keep theprescriptions, in order to cover their responsibility as vendors,and as a public guarantee of the effects which they may pro-duce. 6th. They are not allowed to sell any secret re-

medies. 7th. They are not allowed to sell any other articlesthan drugs, simples, and medicinal preparations. 8th. Lastly,as regards poisons, the articles 34 and 35 of the law repro-duce the three dispositions above expressed; the obligationto sell poisons only to persons domiciliated and known, andrequiring them for their profession ; the register on whichthe buyer inscribes his name and his dwelling; and the obli-gation to place the poison in a separate and secure place, ofwhich the master alone keeps the key. A fine of 3000 francs(1201.) is imposed on all who infringe any of these dispo-sitions. Two trades only are under the operation of this law,druggists and grocers; they alone are named in the law, but,by analogy, in Paris only, the administration also comprisesunder its operation the herborists. The latter are a class

of retail traders, without analogy in England. They sell

medicinal herbs, seeds, and leeches.’ We must add, that every year, once at least, and oftenerif considered advisable, visits are made by a committee ofprofessors of the Faculty of Medicine, and professors of theSchool of Pharmacy, to all the druggists’ laboratories, andto the grocers’ shops, in order to ascertain whether the obli-gations of the law are duly observed.The fine of 3000 francs being very heavy, the judges often

hesitate to apply it. On the proposal of M. ADELON, the

Academy of Medicine has recently advised Government tomodify the fine, in a projected alteration of the law, so as togive the judges the power to reduce it to 500 francs, (201.,)should they think advisable.

It has been found advisable to leave the sale, by manufac-turers, of those poisons which are employed wholesale in thearts and various trades, nearly free; as, for instance, the arseniteof copper, or Scheele’s blue, which is used in the fabricationof paper hangings. Recently, the keeper of the seals confidedto a committee, composed of physicians, chemists, and manu-fac:urers, the investigation of this question. Their reportwas, that they did not think themselves justified in re-commending Government to interfere with this branch ofcommerce.

The grocers, who, as we have stated, are allowed to deal in

689

drugs as well as the " pharmaciens," keep them, not for medi-cinal purposes, but for the arts. They are not permitted toprepare any medical formula, or to sell any drug in medicinaldoses. As we have seen, they are subject to the same re-strictions, with regard to the sale of poisonous substances, asthe pharmaciens or druggists. Should a grocer be convicted

of selling any pharmaceutical preparation, he is fined 500

francs, (20l.)In Germany and most other parts of the Continent,

the measures adopted to prevent the indiscriminate sale

of poisonous drugs are, we believe, still more stringent.A circumstance which must facilitate the execution of the

above law, in France, is, that all druggists, who alone areallowed to use drugs for medicinal purposes, are graduatesof an efficient pharmaceutical college. In the present stateof things in England, it would certainly be extremely difficultto legislate on the subject, the sale of drugs being perfectlyfree and open to every one.

UNFORTUNATELY for the profession, medical men have butlittle to do with the making of the laws which regulate thesocial community, and still less with their execution. The

inevitable consequence is, that whenever their interests, socialor individual, are at stake, they are sure to go to the wall.Far different is it with the members of the other learned

professions; they, on the contrary, are too well represented,both in the legislature and in the executive, to allow theirinterests to be neglected or sacrificed. One of the most

glaring illustrations of the above fact is to be found in a latedecision of the SECRETARY OF STATE, with reference to an

important feature in the medical clauses of the FactoryAct.That Act orders, that whenever any accident happens by

which a person employed in a factory is prevented from i

being at his work at nine o’clock on the following morning,the mill-owner shall send a notice of the accident to the ’,medical certifier of the factory. The medical practitioner,on receiving that notice, is required immediately to visit the ’,,mill, and to inquire how the accident occurred ; then to visit ’ithe person injured or ill, in order to ascertain his state, andto draw up a full report. This report is to be sent, within ’,,

forty-eight hours, to Somerset House, and a copy to the i,Deputy Factory Inspector. For the performance of thesevarious duties, it was decreed by the Act that the medical ’i

practitioner should be paid a fee, the amount of which was to Ibe regulated by the SECRETARY OF STATE.

After much deliberation, no doubt, Sir JAMES GRAHAMhas at last decided on the remuneration that is to be offeredto the profession, and on the 3rd of March, 1845, the follow- iing letter was issued from the Factory Inspector’s Office.We give it in full, and verbatim, for we firmly believe thatour readers would doubt our statement had they not thedocument under their eyes : i

SIR,—The inspectors have been in communication with theSecretary of State respecting the fees to be allowed to certifyingsurgeons, for investigating and reporting cases of accidents infactories, and I have to acquaint you that, in conformity with the

opinion of the -Secretary of State, communicated to the inspec-tors in his letters of the 12th and 25th of February last, the fol-lowing scale of fees is to be adopted by each inspector. Thedistances mentioned are to be those from the residence of the sur-

geon to the factory and to the place where the injured person isexamined, but in neither case is to include the distance travelledin returning.

SCALE OF FEES :

1. In all cases where the surgeon* has to go less thanfive miles- three shillings.

2. If above five and under ten miles--five shillings.3. Above ten miles-seven shillings and sixpence.4. Under peculiar circumstances, to be stated by the inspector

of the district, he may recommend the payment of a fee of tenshillings.

I am, Sir, your very obedient servant,ROBERT J. SAUNDERS, Inspector.

So that, for walking or riding three miles, for examininghalf a dozen persons, possibly more, at the mill, in order toascertain the facts of the case ; for calling on and examiningthe patient himself; and for drawing up, copying, and for-warding two medical reports, the practitioner is to receive

THREE SHILLINGS. Stupendous liberality! THREESHILLINGS!We should like to learn what the members of the bar

would say were they called upon to perform similar dutiesfor a like sum. We are rather inclined to think that

they would consider themselves ill paid were they offeredthree guineas instead of ,three shillings. We must, indeed,be in a low estimation with the Government, for such termsas these to be forced upon our acceptance.

A PUBLIC meeting of the BRITISH GRADUATES in medicinepractising in London and the suburbs, was held at 15, LowerBelgrave-street, Eaton-square, on Thursday last. The prac-titioners who assembled on the occasion considered that theprovisions of the amended Medical Bill were insulting tothe holders of the degrees of the British universities." It wasresolved to petition the House of Commons on the subject.

THE postponement of the motion for the re-commitment ofthe MEDICAL BILL from MONDAY last, June the 9th, to nextTHURSDAY, June the 19th, has induced the Committee of

requisitionists to Mr. GUTHRIE to name TUESDAY and

WEDNESDAY, the 1st and 2nd of July, as the days on whichthe PUBLIC BREAKFAST and AGGREGATE MEETING will be

held. Another week is thus gained for the completion ofthe arrangements in the country. The Committee is adver-

tised to assemble at seven o’clock, for eight, a the FREE-MASONS* TAVERN, on Monday evening next, June 16th, and

they have invited the attendance, on that occasion, of everymember of the College who is friendly to the formation of aconvocation of surgeons in which their opinions shall be faith-fully represented and firmly maintained., ,

* If the new Bill were to pass, what would the GENERAL PRACTITIONER

get? Sir JAMES is certainly a promising medical legislator !