481

a space as may be consistent with a duecomprehension of the arguments which it

may be our object to enforce. In order to

avoid confusion, and that the Bill may be

considered as a whole, we must requestthe reader to go through the entire of the

paragraphs numbered and; placed within

infected commas, before he proceeds to ex-amiue any portion of the commentary.

A BILL

FOR REGULATING

SCHOOLS OF ANATOMY.

[" Note.—The words printed in italics areproposed to be inserted in the Committee."]

1. " Whereas a knowledge of the causesand nature of very many diseases whichaffect the body, and of the best methods oftreating and curing such diseases, and ofhealing and repairing divers wounds and

injuries to which the human frame is lia-ble, cannot be acquired but by anatomicalexamination; And whereas therefore it ishighly expedient to give protection, undercertain regulations, to the study and prac-tice of anatomy ; be it therefore enacted bythe King’s most excellent Majesty, by andwith the advice and consent of the Lords

Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, inthis present (Parliament assembled, and bythe authority of the same, that it shall belawful for his Majesty’s principal Secretaryof State for the time being for the HomeDepartment, on the first day of

’

in every year, or within fourteen days thennextfollowing, to appoint not fewer than threepersons to be, during one year, Inspectorsof places where anatomy is carried on; andas often as any of the Inspectors to be ap-pointed as aforesaid shall die, or shall re-fuse or become unable to act, to appointanother person to be Inspector in the roomof every Inspector who shall die, or shallrefuse or become unable to act."That it is " highly expedient" to pro.

mote the cultivation of the science of ana-

tomy we cheerfully admit, but if Mr. WAR-Bi. RTOX be required to substantiate the first

portion of his preamble, we know not wherehe can seek for his evidence with any hopeof success. A ’ knowledge of the causesoi disease " is not to be acquired in the

dissecting-room of the trading anatomist;neither will the dissection of the bodies

found there show in what manner diseases

may be treated scientifically. Not one bodyin a hundred is seen, before death, by theanatomist or his pupils; hence the morbid

appearances seldom, if ever, furnish anyuseful practical lessons. No, no. The dis-

secting-room of the school of anatomy"furnishes no knowledge of the causes of

disease, neither does it show, equally withthe opportunities of the hospital " dead-

house," how dangerous maladies may bebest combated. In other words, the de-monstrations in the regular dissecting-roommust be regarded only as the means of con-veying accurate information as to the normalcondition of the various structures of the

human body. On the contrary, in the" dead-house" of the hospital-the placeso perpetually forsaken by the never-ceas-ing praters about the utility of the scienceof anatomy-in the dead-house, we say, areto be found all those prominent traces ofdisease which give birth to the symptomsunder the immediate cognizance of the stu-dents before the decease of the patient.Here it is that the inquirer has the./means

of forming a correct estimate of the valueof therapeutic agents ; here it is that he

may learn why medicines failed, why painraged, why death triumphed ; for no soonerdoes lie behold the inflamed or water-

sodden brain-the blood-engorged or se.

rum-enveloped lungs-the poisoned sto-

mach, or hypertrophied heart-than he atonce connects the symptoms which he ob-served at the bed-side of the patient withthe morbid changes exhibited on an in-

spection of the body, and thus he collectsfrom thebest, the only, sources, that know-

ledge " which throughout life enables himto discharge his professional duties, far re-

mote from the dark regions of uncertaintyand empiricism.

" INSPECTORS.—The Bill provides, thatthe Secretary of State shall appoint " not

less than three Inspectors " of Anatomy.Now, really, we should be glaù to learn, ofwhat earthly use can be such officers? Yet

482

this is the great protecting power cantem-plated by the Bill. 11 Not less than three

Inspectors? " We should think not, truly,teeing that in another clause of the Bill itis provided, that any surgeon engaged indissecting a body must give notice of thatcircumstance to the Inspector of his dis-trict. Would an Inspector for each countybe sufficient ? Certainly not,-that is, tomake him a really efficient and useful officer.If an Inspector were resident in every

county-town, for example, how could suchan officer act as a protector to the publicin places remote from his residence ? The

office would be altogether useless, as everypower intended to be conferred by the Billupon the " Inspector," might, with muchmore propriety, be thrown into the handsof the ordinary magistrates. We do hopeand trust that the public will not be saddledwith the expenses of some fifty or a hun-dred offices, which cannot diminish in thesmallest degree the number of those crimeswhich it is the object of the Bill to prevent.Relying upon Mr. WARBURTON’S good in-tentions, we are anxious to impress uponthe mind of that gentleman, that there wouldbe great folly in his pressing for the enact-ment of this part of the Bill. Does not the

honourable gentleman himself perceive, thatthe man who would dare to purchase a dead

body under suspicious circumstances, wouldalso dare to refrain giving " notice" of his

guilt to the ’° Inspector " of his district 1But possibly Mr. WARBURTON apprehendsthat the power held by the Inspector, toexamine places in which anatomy may becarried on, might act as a sufficient checkin preventing the dissection of illegally-acquired subjects. Then, we repeat, givethat power to the magistrates, or to officersconnected with the New Police, who are

much more numerous than can be any bodv

of Inspectors created by the Home Secre-tary. And having also at their disposal a

great number of officers, who are paid bythe public, they might discharge this addi-

tional duty without imposing any additionaltax upon anatomists or medical students, or

without fixing any new burden upon the

county rate. Mr. WARBURTON’S proposalis, in fact, a scheme for throwing the right

of searching the houses of anatomists aodskilful surgeons into the hands of a newclass of officers ; but as magistrates alreadypossess the right to search all the houses

in the kingdom under the sanction of search.warrants, no earthly advantage can be gainedby placing this power at the disposal ofindividuals who will not have half such

opportunities of putting it in force as the

public officers by whom it is already ex.ercised. If it be argued contra, that magis.trates have only a right to issue search.warrants upon the oath of a complainant orinformer, whilst the 11 Inspector" is to bearmed with power to enter the suspectedpremises, by merely producing an "order"from the Secretary of State, our reply is

simply this :=Place in the hands of the

magistrate that " order" which it is now in-tended to give to the " Inspector," and thuseven greater protection for the public thanis contemplated by this part of the Bill

would be effectually secured, with this ad-

vantage-no additional expense to the

public." II. And be it enacted, that it shall be

lawful for the said Secretary of State to

direct what district of town or country, or

both together, with the places where ana.tomy is carried on, situate within such, district, every such Inspector shall be appointed to superintend ; and the times andplace or ;places when and where, and in

what manner, every such Inspector shalltransact the duties of his office; and thatthe name of every Inspector so appointed,and the district which he is appointed to

superintend, and the times and place or

places when and where he will transact theduties of his office, shall be published fromtime to time, as occasion may require, inthe London Gazette."

What has already been stated, in of

remarks on the first clause, will provewe hope, that the enactment of this clause

is unnecessary. The appointment of a:

483

" Inspector," with a view to prevent physi-cians, surgeons, and apothecaries, through-out the kingdom, from receiving for dissec-tion bodies which may be illegally acquir-ed, resembles a proposal for placing an

officer at the door of every tradesman, inorder that he may be prevented from reoceiving smuggled goods. Upon reconsi-

dering the subject, Mr. WARBURTON’S ownstrong sense of right will induce him toabandon such an absurd and utterly ineffi-eient expedient.

III. " And be it enacted, that not fewerthan one ofl such Inspectors shall reside inLondon, and there transact the duties of hisoffice; and that not fewer than one of suchInspectors shall reside in Edinburgh, andthere transact the duties of his office.

IV. " And be it enacted, that every In-spector to. be appointed by virtue of thisAct shall receive the returns and certificateshereinafter directed to be delivered to such

Inspector by all persons practising anatomywithin the district which such Inspector isappointed to superintend; and shall keepan account of all such returns and certifi.cates ; and shall inspect and inquire intothe condition of any place where anatomyis carried on, which the said Secretary ofState may order such Inspector to inspect.V. " And be it enacted, that it shall be

lawful for every such Inspector to visit andinspect, at any time, any place where ana-tomy is carried on, on the production bysuch Inspector of a written order signed bythe said Secretary of State, directing suchInspector to visit and inspect such place.

B I. " And be it enacted. that it shall be

lawful for the said Secretary of State to allowto every such Inspector such salary for histrouble, and such a sum of money for the ex-peiises of his office, as to the said Secretary ojStute shall appear 7-easonable ; and that anannual return of all such allowances shall beanade to Parliament."

All these clauses still refer to the office

of Inspector." Not one fact, however,is stated to show how such an institutioncan act beneficially. Surely the " returns"might be forwarded to the magistrates, orto the commissioners of police, thi wasgreat a hope of advantage as to the Inspec-tor of a district; neither would it be a

severe additional labour imposed upon theclerk of the magistrate to file such 11 re-

turns," or to register them in a book keptfor such purpose. Of the " order" from the

Secretary of State, and of another tax uponthe public, in the shape of an I allou:anc."to the Inspector, we have already spoken.The whole of the preceding clauses mightbe expunged without detracting from theutility and efficacy of this or any other Billwhich may be introduced into Parliament

with a view to promote the cultivation of

anatomy, and protect the public from thBurk and Bishop murders.

VII. " And be it enacted, that it shallbe lawful for the executor or administratorof any person deceased, or for any partyhaving lawfully the custody of the body ofany such person, with the consent of thenearest known relative of such person, topermit the body of such person to undergoanatomical examination ; unless to the

knowledge of such executor or administra-tor, or of such party, such person shall haveexpressed his desire, either in writing atany time, or orally in the presence of oneor more witnesses, that his body after deathmay not undergo such examination."

The concluding part of this clause is

calculated to attract much attention ; it has

evidently been framed with a view to dis.pel the hostile feelings of the poor by mak-ing it a matter of choice, whilst living,whether their bodies shall, or shall not, bethe subjects of anatomical investigationafter death. Should they express a wishthat the process of dissection may not be

instituted upon their bodies, then it is to

be unlawful for the person having legalcustody of the body, to hand it over to theanatomist; but the clause inflicts no penaltyfor disobedience, so that in its presentshape it would be inoperative. Should this

section of the Bill be strengthened by con-necting with it a severe penalty for a vio-lation of its commands, this one clause mayprove a greater obstacle to an adequate

supply of subjects for dissection than all

the combined obstacles now existing. En

passaizt we may remark, that the Bill is

Yarteculuoly sparing in the imposition of

penalties. Now of the first part of this

484

clause, that-’° It shall be lawful for theexecutor or administrator of any person

deceased, or for any party having lawfullythe custody of the body of any such person,with the consent of the nearest known re-

lative of such person, to permit the bodyof such person to undergo anatomical ex-amination." Here we have some traces of

that rock which has wrecked nine-tenths of

the tiny reasoners on this question. It is

unblushingly alleged, by the trading ana-tomists and their coadjutors, that the prac-tising of dissections is an offence subjectingthe parties to a criminal prosecution,whereas nothing can be more false. The

Times of Thursday, in a brief laudatory ar-ticle upon the memorial of the College of

Surgeons, echoes the absurdity in its pecu-liar tones of borrowed 11 thunder," yet thissame Times, within the last week or ten

days-not knowing how many hundreds havedone the same thing, has innocently enoughinformed the public that " several philan-thropic gentlemen" have selected the co-

lumns of that journal for making it known tothe world that they had bequeathed their

own bodies for dissection, thus showing, intheir extreme love for science, that theyhad the utmost disregard for the feelings ofsurviving relatives.

But in what consisted the " philan-thropy" or patriotism of the persons whohad bequeathed their bodies for dissection,if the will of the testator cannot be car-

ried into effect owing to the penalty of acriminal prosecution ? Yet, quoth the

Times of Thursday, "it is truly (falsely)observed by the council (Precious jllnto!Would that the Times and public were as well

acquainted with them and their proceed-ings as are the profession and ourselves ! )that, by the present state of the law, theanatomical student cannot, without a crime,have a dead body in his possession to

dissect." What crime’! ? We call upon the

Times, we call- upon Mr. Warburton, wecall upon the Council, we call -upon the

trading anatomists, to point out the laTwhich renders it criminal for any man to

have in his possession, for the purpose of

dissection, a dead body, of which he maybecome lawfully possessed. Let them provethat there exists such a law ; then we willadmit that the clause last quoted may be-

come an essentially valuable section of an

Anatomy Bill, and we will acknowledge alsothat they have written, on this question,something more than the merest, the veriest,twaddle. Of what use, we say, is it to givebodies for dissection, if they cannot be dis.sected ? But the whole statement is sheer,

unqualified, nonsense; or rather it is so

mixed up with arguments founded uponfalsehood, that it has proved exceedinglypernicious to that question which the greatbody of the profession are so disinterestedlyandjudiciously advocating. We repeat, thatit is already lawful for persons having theunquestioned legal custody of dead humanbodies, to give them up for dissection, andit is already lawful for anatomists and otherpersons to dissect such persons, when placedat their disposal by the lawful possessors.The first portion of this clause, therefore,

had better be erased altogether, and the con-

eluding part may as well be expunged ifthere be not the restraint of a penalty im.posed on persons who may have a strongmotive for violating its conditions.

VIII. " Provided always, and be it enact-ed, that in no case shall the body of Jnyperson be removed for anatomical examina.tion from any place where such person mayhave died, unless a certificate, stating inwhat manner such person came by his death,shall, previouslvto the removal of the bodv.have been signed by a medical man whoattended such person during the illnesswhereof he died ; or if no medical man at-tended such person during such illness,then bv some other medical man : and thatin case of such removal, such certificateshall be delivered, together with the body,to the party receiving the same for anato-mical examination."

It is quite right that bodies should not

be removed, or received, unless under thesanction of certificates granted by medical

485

practitioners; but Mr. WARBURTON shouldrecollect that*’ the cause of death" cannot

in numberless instances, be ascertainedwithout a minute examination of all the

great important organs of the body, which,as one of the clauses expresses it, would be" carrying on anatomy," and require the su-

perintendence of the " Inspector." The

bare proposal of the certificate is a goodone, and may be adopted with effect.

IX. " And be it enacted, that it shall belawful for any graduate or licentiate in me-dicine, or any member or fellow of anyCollege of Surgeons, or any professor,teacher, or student of medicine or surgery,to receive or possess for anatomical exami-nation, or to examine anatomically, the

body of any person deceased, provided theparty havmg lawfully the custody of thebody, with the consent of the nearest knownrelative of such person, have permitted thebody to undergo anatomical examination ;and provided such person shall not, to the

knowledge of such executor or administra-tor, or of such party, have expressed hisdesire, either in writing at any time, ororally in the presence of one or more wit-nesses, that his body after death may notundergo such examination; and providedsuch certificate as aforesaid shall have beendelivered, together with the body, to theperson receiving the same for anatomicalexamination."

The substance of this clause has been

considered,, in the remarks offered uponclause VI.

X. " And be it enacted, that every partyreceiving the body of any person deceasedfor anatomical examination, if the body beremoved for such examination from the placewhere such person died, shall demand andreceive, together with the body, a certifi-cate as aforesaid ; and if an Inspector shallhave been appointed to superintend that

district, in which is situated the placewhere such partv received the body, shall,within twenty-four hours next following thehour at which the body was received, trans- imit to such Inspector the certificate re-ceived together with the body, and also a Ireturn, stating at what day and hour, andfrom whom, the body was received, the dateand place of death, the sex, and (as far asis known at the time) the Christian and sur-name, age, and last place of abode, of suchperson ; and that every party receiving abody for anatomical examination, shall enter,or cause to be entered, the aforesaid parti-culars relating to such body, and a copy of

the certificate be received together withthe body, iu a book to be kept by him forthat purpose, and shall produce such bookwhenever required so to do by any Inspec-tor so appointed as aforesaid, authorised toinspect the same by a written order signedby the said Secretary of State ; and shall

permit any such Inspector to inspect andvisit every place where anatomy is carriedon by such party, on the production by suchInspector of a written order signed by thesaid Secretary of State, directing such In-spector to visit and inspect such place."

In conformity with the provisions of thisclause, a surgeon, residing thirty miles

from the county town, must send to the

Inspector of the district within twenty-fourhours after he has become possessed of adead body for dissection. We ask again,would not a notice to the nearest Magistrateoffer more security to the public, whilst itwould be attended with much less incon-

venience and expense! ?

XI. " And be it enacted, that no gra-duate or licentiate in medicine, nor anymember or fellow of any College of Sur-

geons, nor any professor, teacher, or stu-dent of medicine or surgery, shall be liableto any prosecution, penalty, or punishmentfor receiving or having in his possessionany dead human body for anatomical exa-mination, or for examining anatomically anydead human body, or for any offence againstthis Act, unless the prosecution shall beinstituted by the Attorney-General, or byleave of the Court of King’s Bench, if thealleged offence whereof the party is accusedshall have been committed in England, norunless the prosecution shall be instituted bythe public prosecutor, if the alleged offencewhereof the party is accused shall have beencommitted in Scotland."

This is an exceedingly curiotts clause.

Parties having in their possession, for the

purposes of dissection, any dead humanbodies,—whether those of murdered personsor not,-cannot, in strict accordance with

the terms of this section, be subjcctetl to

punishment, unless the prosecution be in-

stituted by the Attorney-General or the

Court of Kinaj’s Bench.XII. "And be it enacted, that nothing inthis Act contained shall be construed to ex-tend to or to prohibit any post-mortem exa- mination of any human body, required or) directed to be made by any competent legalauthority."

486

It is to be hoped that not any of the" post-mortem examinations," as now in-

stituted and conducted by medical practi-tioners, will be prohibited, or in the smallestdegree obstructed.

XIII. " And whereas an Act was passedin the fourth year of the reign of his lateMajesty, for altering and amending thelaws and usages relating to the intermentof the remains of persons against whomthere should be had a finding offelo de se ;and whereas another Act was passed, in the.ninth year of the reign of his late Majesty,for consolidating and amending the statutesin England relative to offences against the.]person; by which latter Act it is enactedthat the body of every person convicted ofmurder shall, after execution, either be dis-sected or hung in chains, as to the Courtwhich tried the offender shall seem meet;and that the sentence to be pronounced bythe Court shall express, inter alia, that thebody of the offender shall be dissected orhung in chains, whichsoever of the two theCourt shall order ; be it eoacted, that somuch of the said last-recited Act as autho-rizes the Court, if it shall see fit, to directthat the body of a person convicted of mur-der shall after execution be dissected, be,and the same is hereby repealed, except sofar as so much of the said Act may repealthe whole or part of any other Act or Acts.. XIV. " And be it enacted, that the bodyof every person convicted of murder shall,after execution, either be hung in chains, orbe buried on the highway, after the manner’in which, before the passing of the said first-recited Act, the bodies of self-murdererswere wont to be buried, as to the Court mayseem meet ; and that the sentence to be pro-nounced by the Court shall express, interalia, that the body of the offender shall behung in chains, or buried on the highway,after the manner aforesaid, whichsoever ofthe two the Court shall order."

These two last clauses are admirable,and, if carried into effect, will tend incalcu-

lably to remove those prejudices which areentertained by a large portion of the publicagainst a process, which, although harmlessin itself, has hitherto been inflicted on theworst of criminals, as the last mark of hu-man degradation.XV. " And be it enacted, that if any

action or suit shall be commenced or broughtagainst any person for any-thing done inpursuance of this Act, the same shall becommenced within siT calendar months nextafter the fact committed ; and the defendantin every such action or suit shall and may,at his election, plead specially or to the

general issue, Not Guilty, and give thisAct and the special matter in evidence atany trial to be had thereupon, and that thesame was done in pursuance and by the au-thority of this Act.XVI. "And in order to remove doubts as

to the meaning of certain words in this Act,be it enacted, that the words "person andparty" shall be respectively deemed to in-clude any number of persons ; and that themeaning of the aforesaid words shall not berestricted, although the same may be sub.sequently referred to in the singular numberand masculine gender only.XVII. " And be it enacted, that nothing

in this Act contained shall extend to Ire-land.XVIII. " And be it enacted, that this

Act shall commence and take effect fromand after the ."

Such are the provisions of the bill uponwhich the members of the " collective wis.dom " of the nation will have to delivertheir sage opinions. The attentive readercannot fail to perceive two very strikingomissions in the document. First,-notone clause is framed with a view to preventthe buying and selling of dead human

bodies,-indeed there is not one word onthat subject; and, secondly,—the bill im-poses no penalty on those individuals whomay violate its stipulations. Hence, we ofcourse infer that it cannot be enacted into alaw in its present form. What we considerthe bill ought to be, mav be collected fromthe remarks which we have offered on thedocument now before us, -but as we mayhave failed in explaining our views fully onthis subject, we shall again take up thesubject in our ensuing number.

CHOLERA.

TRANSFUSION OF BLOOD.

AMONGST the multitude of remedies sug-gested in the treatment of this destructivepestilence, there is one which bore some

probability of being useful in the terriblestate of collapse. We allude to the truns-

fusion of healthy blood into the vessels of thesmicuig patient. ’1’his subject attracts ourpresent notice, in consequence of a pro-position which has just been sent to us he byMr. LEARY, the eminent surgeon of Parlia-ment-street.We have only to state, that transfusion

of blood has already been adopted in somecases, reports of which were delivered at alate sitting of the Academie de Médecine inParis. This remedial agent was fouud,

however, to have completely failed.