95THE LITERATURE OF SCIENTIFIC PAPERS,

reference to the Archbishop’s claim to act as visitor.

To this monastery, according to STOW, HENRY II.

granted the privilege of a " faire to be kepte yeerly at

Bartholomew-tide for three daies, to wit, the eve, the day,- and the next morrow" ; but, in course of time, the periodbecame extended to as much as 14 days. In 1614, on account

pf the filthy state into which the soft ground was trampledby the great concourse of people, the City authorities spent1600 in paving Smithfield ; in spite of this improve-ment, NED WARD, in 1669, describes the fair as "ancle deepin filth and nastiness." The moral filth seems at least to

have kept pace with the physical for, in 1703, at the closeof a good deal of description in which agricultural imple-ments are called by their shortest names, we read that

"this is not an ark, like NOAH’S, which received the

clean and unclean; only the unclean beasts enter this ark,and ’such as have the Devil’s livery on their backs." Bythat time the fair had become an intolerable nuisance

’and many endeavours were made by the Lord Mayor andAldermen first to shorten its duration and then to abolish it,but these were not entirely successful until 1855 when it

came to its end. It was at one time the chief cloth fair of

the kingdom but its period of usefulness covered only thefirst two or three centuries of its existence. Its historyis analogous to that of all similar institutions, and the

preamble of the Act 34 Vict. c. 12, by which fairs are nowcontrolled, declared that many of those then existing were"both unnecessary and productive of grievous immorality."We trust that the representations of the Wigan Association

may be favourably received alike by the borough authoritiesand by the Home Office.

The Literature of Scientific

Papers.WE received recently from the publishers an admirable

little book by Professor T. CLIFFORD ALLBUTT, Regius Pro-fessor of Physic in the University of Cambridge, dealing withthe literary composition of scientific papers, and havingread it carefully we wish that it could be made compulsoryupon every member of the medical profession to do the

same. In his preface Professor ALLBUTT points out that

his book consists only of comments on the more frequent ormore eminent defects of scientific essays, his experiencebeing obtained by perusal, as a matter of duty, of some

ninety or hundred theses, presented in the course of everyyear by candidates at the University of Cambridge for

the degrees of Bachelor or Doctor of Medicine. He

further states that his notes upon these defects are of

an unsystematic and occasional character. The notes must

be admitted, we suppose, to be of this casual sort, " for

he himself has said it," but we should not have so described

them ; at any rate, despite the limitations indicated by thetitle of the book and by the author’s verecundity, wehave from his pen an excellent and suggestive tract

upon the whole art of literary composition as appliedto our language. We, like Professor ALLBUTT, have to

1 Notes on the Composition of Scientific Papers. By T. CliffordAllbutt, M.A., M.D., LL.D., D.Sc., F.R.C.P., F.R.S., F.L.S., F.S.A.,Regius Professor of Physic in the University of Cambridge. Price 3s.net. Macmillan and Co., Limited, London.

peruse as a matter of duty a large number of scientific

essays and we find that he has summarised, and well-nighwith completeness, within the compass of his 150 pages,the various faults of style, arrangement, and presentationthat are most commonly to be found in the writings ofmedical authors. But he has done more than this. As

a matter of fact, these same faults are to be

discovered in the writings of all technical authors

of the present day, whether their special engagement bein medicine, in law, in physics, or even in history. It

is a notable fact that the scientific workers in all these

departments of life, whose labour is and must be conductedwith exactness, who deal with measurements of the smallestdiameters and dates of the utmost precision, and whose

whole working practice is a protest against inaccuracy,are as a class singularly inaccurate writers. Their

dates and their measurements will stand scrutiny, but notthe words in which they bring their facts to public know-

ledge. They know what they mean to say, but often theydo not say it. At other times they say it, but in such an

ambiguous and involved manner that the value of their

teaching is discounted heavily. What Professor ALLBUTT hasfound in his experience of theses at the University of Cam-

bridge, what we have found at the offices of THE LANCET,is illustrated in every technical paper in the United

Kingdom, and it does not seem to us that other nations

are ahead of us. Elaborate scientific papers reach us dailywhich have been printed in the reports of various societiesand the archives of various learned bodies ; the majority ofthem are marred by the failings that are prevalent in thetheses of the Cambridge candidates.

Professor ALLBUTT’s book contains two sections, an

introductory chapter which deals rather with the usual

procedures of the writers of academic essays and a second

chapter which is an essay on the art oi literary composition,the teaching being here mainly in the nature of counsel

as to the things to be avoided. In the first chapter heintroduces us to his own methods of composition, rightlypointing out that every writer must have his personal planof work. Professor ALLBUTT’S plan is not given by himas an example of one that it would suit all to follow

but we are sure that the glimpse afforded into

what we may call his " desk manners " will be

valuable to most of our readers. It will bringhome the fact, so well known to a few who have

learned it by experience and apparently so little known to

the scientific world, that something beyond a mass of in-formation and a desire to publish the same goes to the

making of a good book or a good essay. In the second

chapter Professor ALLBUTT alludes to most of the pitfallsthat lie in the path of those who fare forth into Englishcomposition without proper equipment, whose general culture

supplies them with no proper standards of comparison,whose vocabulary is scanty, whose ear is ill-trained,and whose taste is faulty. Here we find pointed out

the errors of those unhappy people who use fine

language when uninspired by fine thought, who employwords of obvious derivative meaning in contradiction to

that meaning, who lose themselves in the mazes of their

metaphors, who cannot appreciate that force and clearnessare lent to a sentence by the arrangement of the words in

96 THE MEDICAL DIPLOMATES’ SOCIETY OF LONDON.

that sentence-who, in fact, shovel on to paper in the first

phraseology that occurs to them all that they have to say,and, knowing their own intentions, are bewildered to findthemselves misunderstood. Professor ALLBUTT does not

draw his examples, either those he would have us imitate orthose he would have us avoid, from medical literature, buthas made his teaching far pleasanter and more entertainingby going to general literature for them. But as medical

journalists we thank him for inculcating two lessons :-(1) that the rules of English prose, the methods of Englishstyle, and the graces of literary art can be as well employedupon a scientific theme as upon a romantic one ; and

(2) that without attention to the methods of writing andthe arrangement of material a scientific work, howeversolid the attainments of its author, must lose much of its

value. Professor ALLBUTT makes it apparent that to

write well is not with many people an instinctive perform.ance but rather the result of considerable industry, training,and application. ROBERT Louis STEVENSON, whose literarystyle, as displayed in popular romance and whimsical talesof adventure, brought home to the English public more ’,

than any modern writer has done the possibilities of our ’,own tongue, described himself in an autobiographicalnote as "a sedulous ape," meaning that with the

greatest industry he had imitated the style of all

those of his predecessors whom he admired before

he evolved a style of his own. It is a similar spiritof industry that Professor ALLBUTT would suggest as

worthy of their consideration to the writers of scientific

papers. We all know that style is nothing without matter,that arrangement is idle without facts-that, in short. it isessential for a man to have something to say before I

he considers how to say it-but when a scientific author has I

a message to deliver he should consider more carefully thanhe does at present the form in which he will deliver it.

Pains expended in this way will gain for him a hearing from

many ears that hitherto have been deaf.

It is disconcerting for those of us who say, and think,that the general level of culture in the medical profes-sion is rising, to find Professor ALLBUTT’S criticism of theliterary capacity of medical men founded entirely upon theperusal of theses submitted by graduates in medicine, whoare generally graduates in arts, of one of the older

universities. The difference between the education

of the university graduate and that of the diplomateof a corporation is supposed to be that the former

has obtained, and profited by, his larger opportunitiesfor general culture. It is allowed that in many instances

in the British scheme of medical education the graduate isin no sense the scientific superior of the diplomate. Is he

superior in general culture ? ‘! Our experience is a large oneand we know that we are right when we say that as a rulethe graduates of the older universities display the advantagesof a broader range of knowledge and a better preliminarygrounding. If at the University of Cambridge these

advantages have not led to any first-hand acquaintancewith literary methods it is certain that no other youngmedical men or young scientific men, taken as a whole

class, have higher literary capacities. Most of the candi-

dates for the degrees of Bachelor of Medicine and Doctor ofMedicine at the University of Cambridge will read Professor

ALLBUTT’s book and profit by it, and thus will remove

from their University what seems to us to constitute a

reproach. But we heartily recommend the book to all ourreaders. Professor ALLBUTT is an acknowledged master of

elegant, precise, and good English. Apart from their

scientific value his writings have claims to be considered

models of prose, so that he has that best of all positionsfrom which to be heard when he speaks of literary methodsand literary style-he has employed them both with

distinguished success.

Annotations.

THE MEDICAL DIPLOMATES’ SOCIETY OFLONDON.

" Ne quid nimis."

THE Medical Diplomates’ Society of London has beenestablished for the purpose of meeting the natural desire ofits members to obtain admission to a " final examination inmedicine " which shall entitle them to a medical degree andshall thus remove the " serious disabilities " under which

they labour by not possessing the title of "Dr." althoughtheir work is of a standard which would elsewhere than inLondon obtain for them a medical degree. We have receivedfrom the new society a copy of its rules and also a circularaddressed 1/rbi. et orbi, asking for the " advice and

support" of those into whose hands it falls and signed by thepresident of the society, Dr. F. J. Smith, of the London

Hospital. By the rules of the society the qualification formembership is the possession of any diploma conferredeither by the Royal College of Physicians of Londonor the Royal College of Surgeons of England ; and there maybe honorary members, not necessarily qualified as above,but of " recognised position and distinction in the medicalprofession." The declared object of the society is to promotethe " professional advancement " of its ordinary members" by holding meetings, by providing opportunities for socialintercourse, by such other means as the executive committeemay approve from time to time, and by endeavours to obtainadmission to an examination for a degree in medicine con-ferred by a British University." The language of the rule, itwill be observed. differs from that of the circular, which setsforth that the contemplated examination is to be a "final" one in " medicine. " only. The society, in short, representsthe desire, the natural desire, of a certain number of" diplomates to become entitled to call themselves " Dr."or " M.D." and to be affiliated to a " British University."We do not believe there is the least prospect that anyBritish university will consent to give its degrees in medicineon any different basis of general attainment than is requiredfor degrees in any other faculty. The position of themedical student in London is a peculiar one and itsanomalies are now attracting much attention. He hasthe finest opportunities in the world for obtainingclinical instruction. He has so many chances of receivingadequate scientific education that embarrassment is pro-duced by the duplication and reduplication of lecturers andlaboratories. And yet it is exceedingly difficult for himto obtain the title of " Dr." which among the public is

regarded as the hall-mark of a medical man. The Medical

Diplomates’ Society of London may assist in the cause ofreform and so benefit succeeding generations of Londonstudents. But with regret we have to record our impressionthat the action of the members must be regarded as altruistic.We do not think it possible that they will obtain for them-selves the title of " I)r." from any British university though