57

have forwarded their petitions and memorials to their respectivedestinations. Such procrastination is highly injurious to thecause. I therefore trust that no further delay will take place,if it is really desired to reap the benefit of Sir John’s recom-mendation before next session of Parliament.The Poor-law Board will count the memorials, and if they

receive only one-fourth of the entire number, it will soon besaid in the House that three-fourths of the Unions have madeno complaint, and therefore are satisfied with their presentemoluments. It is in vain for members of Parliament to advo-cate our cause in the House, or for men from all parts of thekingdom to assemble, at a great expense, for a general meetingor for a committee, many of the members of which live at agreat distance from town, frequently to meet, unless theirsuggestions are carried out by individual Unions. One fort-night ought to have sufficed to sign and send a petition fromeach to the House of Commons, and a memorial to the Poor-law Board; but more than a month has now elapsed since theirtransmission for signature from me to them. The precise word-ing of these documents may not be in accordance with thewishes of all, as that is impossible; it therefore becomes theduty of the minority to yield to the majority, otherwise anamelioration of the present position can never be expected.The phraseology, however, I imagine, need not trouble any-one, as the Poor-law Board will make its own regulations. Thegreat object sought for is a fair remuneration, and that may beobtained by the present petitions, if the Union surgeons willact promptly and unanimously, without which it cannot be.expected the Poor-law Board will pay any attention to theircomplaints.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,Royal-terrace, Weymouth, July 8th, 1856. RICHARD GRuTiN.RICHARD GRIFFIN.

ACTING ASSISTANT-SURGEONS OF THE ARMY.To the Editor of THE LANCET.

SIR,-The Government are now about dismissing the actingassistant-surgeons of the army, and as a retiring allowancethey are to receive but two months’ pay. This is the cause ofmuch anxiety and annoyance. They have rendered great andimportant services, volunteered to undergo all the dangers ofthe war, passed through all the horrors of our hospitals, andwhat is their recompence? Their brethren in the TurkishContingent, as well as the civil surgeons, who received muchhigher pay, are to have a year’s salary as retiring allowance;and even the militia medical officers, who have never beennear the seat of war, are to be treated in like manner; whilethe acting assistant-surgeons of the army, who have seen mostservice, are to be compensated in the least degree.

Trusting you will advocate our cause, I beg leave to remain,Your obedient servant,

! Chatham, July, 1856. AN ACTING ASSISTANT-SURGEON.

THE RUBEOLA EPIDEMIC.To the Editor of THE LANCET. ’

SIR,-In the fifty-third (1840) volume of the EdinburghMedical and Surgical Journal there is a paper by Dr. Pater-son,,of Leith, containing, I believe, the first English accountof an epidemic of rubeola, distinctly pointing out the differen-tial diagnosis between it and scarlatina on the one hand, andmeasles on the other; showing also that the duration of therash varied, according to the severity of the disease, from fourto ten days; and that although most closely allied to scarlatina,he had in his own practice observed that disease ’’ run its re-gular course in a mild form in a child whom he had attendedfour months previously for rubeola;" while, although rubeolais perhaps most frequently observed during the simultaneousprevalence of scarlatina and morbilli, we have accounts of in-dependent epidemics of this disease alone, particularly bySella and Formey.

I myself have seen several cases of rubeola in children whomI had previously attended for measles: and I would call atten-tion to what Hildebrand gives as the distinctive mark betweentrue scarlatina and such cases of rubeola as, from the extent ofthe eruption, simulate it,-namely, that in the first, the palespot left on pressure with the finger redden.s from the circivm-ference to the centre; while in the second (rubeola), the rednessreturns from the centre to the circumference, " ocissime." Therubeola redness fades in two days, post viduum, leaving thespots still visible, which would confirm the diagnosis. From

experiments made within the last few days, I can vouch for

the correct description of the mode in which the scarlatinousredness returns. With regard to the name, " German measles"- its usual trite designation here-seems unexceptionable forcommon use; while, for more learned occasions, "rubeola"seems more decidedly to mark a distinct disease, than anyother yet proposed. It is not yet a hundred years sinceSauvages first applied the term " rubeola" to what had beenpreviously termed "morbilli;" while almost immediately afterhim, the German physicians, Selle, Orlow, and Ziegler, clearlylaid down the distinctive marks between rubeola and morbilli.Because we have been so negligent as not sooner to follow theirexample, is no good reason for depriving the disease of its goodname; while one decided objection to the term "scarlatinamorbillosa" is, the probability that such a term would leadmedical practitioners to put down as cases of this disorder,those mild cases of scarlatina in which what little eruptionthere is is papular, often with crescentic margins.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,Cramond, July 7th, 1856. SCOTUS.

Parliamentary Intelligence.HOUSE OF COMMONS.

MONDAY, JULY 7TH.MEDICAL PROFESSION BILL.

MR. SroorrER inquired whether the Government were pre-pared to fix a day for the discussion of the Medical ProfessionBill?Mr. CowpER thought, at that period of the Session, it was

vain to hope that the House would be able to consider theprovisions of the measure, and he would therefore move thatthe order be discharged. (Hear.)

, The order for Committee on the Bill was accordingly dis-

charged.VACCINATION BILL.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE hoped the Government would give some-definite assurance to the House as to the course they intendedto pursue with reference to the Vaccination Bill-a compulsorymeasure, to which strong objections were very generally enter-tained. Indeed, no less than 200 petitions had been presentedagainst the measure, while only one had been presented in its-favour, from persons connected with the Royal Vaccine Institu-tion. (A. laugh.) This Bill was to be administered by theBoard of Health, whose functions would cease next year. To-morrow the House would be called upon to consider the pro-priety of perpetuating the Board of Health, and he believedthat Board wished the Vaccination Bill to pass, in order thatthey might be able to say they had something to do. (A laugh. )

Mr. CowpER thought this Bill was of considerable import-ance. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Duncombe) who complainedthat the Bill would render vaccination compulsory overlookedthe fact, that under the existing law vaccination was alreadycompulsory. If the Bill did not come on before ten o’clockthat night, its further progress should be postponed to afuture day.Mr. BARROW observed, that very strong objections to the

measure were entertained bv many hon. members.

LUNATIC ASYLUMS (IRELAND) BILL.Mr. HORSMAN moved that the order for considering the

report on this bill be discharged.Colonel DUNNE, Captain MAGAN, and Lord NAAS caused

some amusement by rising together to oppose the motion.Colonel DUNNE said, the conduct of the Government was not

fair, was not straightforward, and, he would not say was nothonest, because that would be unparliamentary. (Hear, hear. )He could not find words to express his disapprobation, andwould move that the report be at once considered.

Mr. HORSMAN did not know on what ground the hon. andgallant member found fault with the Government, who onlyproposed to pursue with regard to this bill the course theyhad adopted with reference to others. It was intended toappoint a commission to institute an inquiry during the recesswith respect to lunatic asylums in Ireland, and upon theirreport a bill would be founded, which would be introduced inthe next session of Parliament.On the motion of Lord NAAS the debate was adjourned.

57

58

EDINBURGH CHAIR OF SURGERY.

Mr. PEEL, in answer to Mr. COWAN, said there was nointention to suppress the Chair of Military Surgery in theUniversity of Edinburgh, although some necessary delay hadoccurred in filling up the vacancy caused by the decease ofSir G. Ballingall.

TUESDAY, JULY 8TH.At the morning sitting, on the order for going into com-

mittee on the Public Health Bill,Mr. KNIGHT moved to defer the committee for three months,

objecting that the bill differed materially from the bills of 1848and 1854 ; and the remedial clauses in the latter were omitted;that it repealed the existing right of appeal; and that itdoubled the amount allowed to be raised on mortgage.The amendment was seconded by Mr. PALK.After a few words from Mr. G. LANGTON,Mr. CowpER defended the bill, which, he said, remedied

ambiguities in the present law, and made necessary alterationspreparatory to dealing, next year, with more important mat-ters-the organic changes in the constitution of the Board ofHealth. If any of the clauses of the bill should appear torequire much discussion, he was willing to postpone themuntil next year.

After a debate, in which Mr. HENRY, Mr. BAINES, Mr. T.GREENE, Mr. BARROW, and Mr. T. DUNCOMBE took part, theHouse divided, when the amendment was carried by 73 to 61.

Mr. COWPER said he should adopt the suggestion of Mr. T.GREENE, and introduce a continuance bill.

Medical News.ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS.-The following gentle.

men, having undergone the necessary examinations for theDiploma,, were admitted members of the College at the meet-ing of the Court of Examiners on the 4th inst. :-

CALLAGHAN, RICHARD, Cork.CASSELLS, JAMES PATERSON, Gateshead.COLLINS, WILLIAM HENRY, Hereford.DRUMMOND, JOHN, Greenheys, Manchester.ELLIOTT, ROBERT ARTHUR, Army.GRIMES, SILVESTER, St. Helen’s, Manchester.MILLIGAN, JOHN, Keighley, Yorkshire.MOYSEY, NICHOLAS, Royal Navy.O’CONNOR, DANIEL, Killarney, Ireland.RILEY, JAMES, Battersea.SUTTON, HENRY GAWEN, Middlesborough, Yorkshire.TATHAM, ROBERT GORDON, Newby-place, Poplar.

LICENTIATES IN MIDWIFERY.-The following members of theRoyal College of Surgeons, having undergone the necessary- examinations, were admitted Licentiates in Midwifery at themeeting of the Board on the 8th inst. :-BYRAMJEE, RUSTOMJEE, H.E.I.C.S.; diploma of member-

ship dated May 2, 1856.ELWIN, CHARLES JEKEN, Broad-street-buildings; June 27,

1856.GILLETT, THOS. CARTHEW, Truro, Cornwall; April 4, 1856.GREEN, SAMUEL HENRY, New Garrett, Manchester; May 12,

1856.GREENWOOD, JAMES, Queen’s-road, Dalston; May 12, 1856.GROOM, WILLIAM, Wisbeach, Cambridgeshire; April 21,

1856.KENDRICK, PHINEAS JOHN, Birmingham; June 27, 1856.LEMON, OLIVER, Pembroke-terrace, Caledonian-road, Isling-

ton ; June 29, 1855.MEADOWS, ALFRED, Ipswich; June 20, 1856.MURIEL, CHARLES EVANS, Norwich; June 20, 1856.POWNE, WILLIAM, Fowey, Cornwall; March 31, 1856.PUGH, JOHN LISTER PooL, Halifax, Yorkshire; April 18,

1856.SLAUGHTER, CHARLES HENRY, Farningham, Kent; June 20,

1856.TURNEY, THOMAS HENRY, Ovendon, near Halifax; May 9,

1856.WEBB, JOHN CRASKE, Shaftesbury - crescent, Pimlico ; ;

March 10, 1854.WILLIAMS, WILLIAM, Festiniog, N. Wales; May 23, 1856.WOOTTON, HERBERT GILLOW, Canterbury; June 6, 1856.

58

APOTHECARIES’ HALL. - Names of gentlemen whopassed their examination in the science and practice of Medi.cine, and received certificates to practise, on

Thursday, July 3rd, 1856.BURROWS, SAMUEL JAMES, Witheridge.CLOWES, FRANCIS, Stalham, Norfolk.EvANS, HENRY, Blaenant, Cardiganshire.LIPSCOMB, RICHARD NiCHOLSON, St. Alban’s.TUCKER, JOHN ARCHER, Lannarth, Cornwall.

COLLEGIATE ELECTIONS.-At a meeting of the Councilon Thursday afternoon, Benjamin Travers, Esq., F.R.S., waselected, for the second time, President of the Royal College ofSurgeons; and Edward Stanley, Esq., F.R.S., and JosephHenry Green, Esq., F. R.S., were elected Vice-Presidents forthe ensuing year; and Messrs. Solly and Cock, the recently.elected Councillors, took their seats.UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, LONDON. -At a Session of

Council, on Saturday last, the vacant office of assistant-surgeon to the hospital was filled up, by the appointment ofMr. Henry Thompson, F. R. C. S. E., M.B. At the same timethe appointment of Mr. William Price Jones, F.R.C.S.E., asresident medical officer of the hospital, was confirmed. Sixformer students of the College, who had taken degrees withhonour at the University of London, were chosen Fellows ofthe College-viz., William Henry Ransom, M.D. ; RobertRussell Reynolds, M.D. ; Mr. Fowler, LL.B. ; Alfred Wills,LL.B. ; William Bower Todhunter, A.M. ; John C. AddyScott, A. M. A vote of thanks was passed to Colonel Sykes,for presiding at the distribution of prizes for the Facultyof Arts, and for his eloquent address; and a prize of £10,offered by a late student, Mr. Lawrence Counsel, to thestudent who should take the first prize in Professor De Mor-gan’s Lower Senior Class for Mathematics was conferred onMr. Marcus N. Adler. Another prize of £10, offered by Mr.Counsel for Professor Russell’s Class of English Law, wasordered to be announced for competition next session.IMPORTANT MEDICAL CASE.-MARYLEBONE COUNTY

COURT, (Before J. L. ADOLPHUS, Esq.): WOOD v. COSSER.-The plaintiff is a "general practitioner," of Richmond-villa,Bayswater; and the defendant is a captain of the British army,of Albert-terrace, Bayswater. The sum claimed was .66, anddefendant had paid £2 12s. 6d. into court in full satisfaction.Mr. Vaughan appeared for Dr. Wood, and Mr. Grainger forCaptain Cosser. The plaintiff stated that he was a physician,a licentiate of the Apothecaries’ Company, and a M.R.C.S.He practised chiefly as a general practitioner, and treated thepoor gratuitously. His charges varied from 5s. to .61 Is. avisit; but they depended much upon the position of the parties,and the nature of the cases. In the present instance he chargedfor fifteen visits, ranging from 7s. 6d. to 12s. 6d. per visit, andwhich charges were very moderate. The defendant’s wifeengaged him upon the occasion of his attending one of herservants. He only prescribed, and did not make up his ownprescriptions.By Mr. GRAINGER.-Has his diploma as a physician from

Aberdeen. A brass plate on his door describes him as a phy-sician. Has been in Bayswater nine months. Got acquaintedwith the defendant’s family through Mr. Horne, their druggist.Asked Mr. Horne to introduce him to patients. He attendeddefendant’s family as a general practitioner. As a licentiate ofthe Apothecaries’ Company he could and has charged .61 Is. avisit. Is aware that if he attended the defendant’s family asa physician, he has no locus standi at law to recover his fees.Attends patients just as it suits him, either in the capacity ofphysician, surgeon, or apothecary-the three branches togetherform a general practitioner. Has no remembrance of agreeingto attend defendant’s family for 3s. 6d. per visit. Mrs. Cossertold him that Mr. M’Cann, of Parliament-street, was theirfamily doctor, but lived too far away to attend her childrenconstantly.Mr. GRAINGER contended that the plaintiff was to all intents

and purposes a physician, and in that capacity could notrecover.

The JUDGE was of opinion that, by paying the £2 12s. 6d.into court, the defendant had lost his right to make the ob-jection ; otherwise it might have been fatal to the claim.

Mr. GRAINGER said his next objection was that the bill sentin was a blank one, and it had been held in Hewston v. Batty,reported in 3 Espinasse, p. 192, that where a medical mansends in an account in blank, he is bound to accept the moneypaid into court.The Learned JUDGE took some time to consider this novel