855

that of the London University, the examiners of which inthe subjects of anatomy and surgery-viz., Professor Redfernand Sir William Mac Cormac, both Queen’s men-they havein common with the Queen’s University ; but still, an exami-nation that a student with fair abilities could expect to getthrough with the help of the admirable teaching to be obtainedat any of the Queen’s Colleges in Ireland. This morecareful preparation for the culminating part of its educationalscheme, the students would be compelled to go through,even if it took them six or seven years, were it not for theseminor licensing bodies. Who shall say that the professionand the public are not the losers thereby ? It is not expectedin the present day in this country that all medical men shouldpossess a university degree, but it would be well that allthose who undergo a university education should proceed tothe examinations of their alma mater, necessitating fortheir successful issue a wide range of subjects, includingthe collateral sciences with their bearing on medical ques-tions, in acquiring a knowledge of which they have theconcomitant advantage of the formation of habits ofaccuracy in details. One of the reasons why the Queen’sUniversity was enabled to maintain its high standard wasthat it was not dependent on examination fees for its support,nor could its examiners be influenced by golden visions oflarge dividends to be obtained from increased number ofcandidates ; and more, the fee was within the reach of themost impecunious of ambitious students. Now, it is to beregretted that a university so happily placed, and so con-sistently adhering to its high standard of what a universitydegree in medicine or surgery should mean, and its worknecessarily influencing for good rival institutions, should besummarily disposed of and dissolved in order to remove, orrather to fail to remove, jealousy on the part of a portion ofthe Catholic community. For this, the University, a victim tounrest and one-sided agitation, fell, and an examination boardis substituted. They asked for a Roman roll in the place ofwhole meal, and they have been given a stone. And thecountry has lost an improving and potent educationalsystem, ever widening its influence, in the Queen’s Univer-sity in Ireland. Long may her 7800 children do honour toher name. Yours trulv.Plymouth, November, 1881. AUGUSTUS H. BAMPTON.

PROFESSOR VIRCHOW’S TESTIMONIAL.To the Editor of THE LANCET.

SIR,—Allow me to acknowledge in your columns th,

following subscriptions, in addition to those previouslyannounced, towards the above testimonial; and to urge intending subscribers to communicate with me on the subjecwith as little delay as possible.

Ernest Hart, Esq................ &1 1 1 0Felix Semon, Esq............. 1 1 0F. J. Mouat, M.D., F.R.S....... 5 5 0W. Aitken, M.D., F.R.S.......... 2 2 0Sir W. Gull, Bart., F.R.S.......... 2 10 0E. Bronner, Esq........... 1 1 0Bisset Hawkins, M.D., F.R.S....... 2 0 0Samuel Wilks, M.D., F.R.S....... 1 1 0Sidney Coupland, M.D.......... 1 1 0N. Montefiore, Esq............. 2 2 0G. H. Philipson, M.D.......... 1 1 0D. Drummond, M.D ............. 1 1 0J. Marion Sims, M.D............. 2 10 0

Tam. Sir. vour obedient servant.Old Burlington-street, Nov. 10th, 1881. J. S. BRISTOWE.

"SPECIALISM IN MEDICINE."To the Editor of THE LANCET.

SIR,-Some specialties seem to have got a firm footingamongst us, and it would not be fair to deny that, honestlypractised, they are of service to the profession and thepublic. But I venture to suggest that in most, if not all,cases the specialist should be a consultant pure and simpleand his advice sought only in conjunction with the ordinarymedical attendant, or on the recommendation of an "all-round" physician or surgeon.

Your obedient servant,November, 1881. F.R.C.P.

THE ST. JOHN AMBULANCE ASSOCIATION.To the Editor of THE LANCET.

SIR,—Having this year held Ambulance lectures in con-nexion with the St. John’s Society for Men and Women, inaddition to a course for volunteers, may I be allowed as oneof its humble supporters to give "Country Practitioner " afew ideas on the subject?The prospectus I have before me must be a very different

one from that which he has seen, for instead of there being, ashe says, "an almost entire absence of medical men in itslist of patrons and supporters," I find that out of twenty-three names mentioned as being deputy chairmen, no fewerthan ten, or nearly half the number, are medical men, andsuch well-known names as Dr. Lionel Beale, Surgeon-General Longmore, and Dr. Sieveking figure in the list ; inthe various local branches, too, medical men’s names doappear on the various committees, and it must be borne inmind that the lecturer is generally an ex officio memberof committee.What points in the Society’s programme does " General

Practitioner" consider "highly objectionable"? The

Society itself says that first aid is the only thingto be taught, and both the examiners and lecturersalways impress this forcibly on the mind of their classes- viz., that in a case of accident or sudden illnessthe first thing to do is to send at once for a medical man.Surely there can be nothing objectionable in showing aperson how to use artificial respiration in a case of drowning,following in this instance the example of the Royal HumaneSociety, who most advisedly send their charts illustratingthe Marshall Hall and Silvester method to the variousstations of the army and navy, and elsewhere. Is it, too,"highly objectionable" to show a person how to stop thevarious kinds of haemorrhage ? Or would it be less objection-able to allow a person to bleed to death from a burst varicosevein (as happened in this town a few months since), whileawaiting the doctor’s arrival? Is it, again, "highly ob-jectionable" to show men how to carry a case of fracture

gently, or women how to change sheets, and in other waysnurse the sick? If these are not "highly objectionable,"may the Society go on and prosper as it is doing; if theyare considered ’’highly objectionable" by our profession atlarge, I for one am very sorry I ever had anything to dowith the St. John Ambulance Association.

T am Sir yours faithfully

Ringwood, Oct. 31st, 1881.H. GEARY DYER,

Surgeon 2nd Hants R.V.

AN UNSATISFACTORY INQUEST.To the Editor of THE LANCET.

SIR,—Referring to a paragraph on this subject in THELANCET of Oct. 29th, 1881, p. 769, let me state my experi-ence.

On Sept. 30th, by the coroner’s order, I made an autopsyon the body of A. H , brought to the London Hos-

pital dead. After a very careful examination of the vitalorgans, and finding them healthy, with the least possibledelay I analysed the stomach and contents, the procedureproving the presence of carbolic acid in considerable quan-tity. The following morning the evidence of the friends ofthe deceased and other witnesses went to show that whilstin apparently good health and walking in the street theyoung man suddenly uttered an exclamation and fell, shortlyexpiring. Save for the chemical analysis of the stomachmade by me, no hypothesis whatever could even have beensuggested as to the cause of death. I am remunerated tothe extent of two guineas.On addressing the Home Secretary to claim an additional

fee for my labour, I am told that " the Secretary of State isinformed by the coroner (Mr. George Collier) that in hisopinion the case did not present any special features, andthat he did not, therefore, apply for authority to incur extraexpense for analytical examination."

I fail to see how in my case an analytical examinationcould possibly have been dispensed with, and I fully sym-pathise with Mr. Giles Ford in the difficulties he has en-countered in his.Taking into consideration the grave responsibility involved

in undertaking a chemical analysis for medico-legal purposes,