642

perhaps, assists in the cure. Further, in the rabbit, tuberclehas not the same predilection for the apex which it shows inman. This may be explained by the difference in form of thelungs of the respective animals. In the rabbit the deposit oftubercular matter in serous membranes does not cause muchirritation.The results of inoculation from rabbit to rabbit were as

follows :-On the 30th of April two rabbits were inoculated with tubercle

taken from a rabbit which was killed immediately before theinoculation. The first was killed on the 16th of June. Tuberclein lungs, spleen, small intestine, and mesenteric glands. Thesecond was found dead on the 30th of June. Lungs infiltratedwith tubercle ; tubercle also on parietal pleura, and in liver,kidneys, and spleen.On the 12th of July a vigorous rabbit was inoculated. Killed

on the 30th of August. Lungs densely infiltrated with tubercle,which was also on the surface of the pleurae, in the mesentery,kidneys, and spleen. A small quantity was found on the smallintestine. A mass of enlarged and degenerated glands wasfound in front of the trachea, and the bronchial glands wereenlarged and tuberculous.

Inoculation from man to guinea-pig.On the 19th of December, two guinea-pigs were inoculated.

On the 21st February, one of them, a female, died. She hadbecome remarkably thin after the inoculation. Grey granula-tions were disseminated through the lungs. Tubercle wasalso found in the bronchial glands, liver, and spleen.On the 31st of March, the second animal, a male, died. The

lungs were densely infiltrated with tubercle. The bronchialglands were enlarged, and contained yellow matter. Most ofthe lymphatic glands of the body were enlarged. In eachaxilla was a gland the size of a bean, which had degeneratedinto a yellowish pulp. The liver and spleen also containedtubercle.

Inoculation from man to dog doubtful; and from man tocat, with little success. Man to sheep unsuccessful; man tobirds unsuccessful.The carnivora are much less liable to tubercle than the

rodents.Injection of tubercular matter into trachea doubtful.Inoculation of tubercular matter developed at seat of inocu-

lation. Performed successfully in two cases.

Appearance at seat of inoculation.Three or four days after the inoculation, a small nodule

appears, which resembles to the touch an indurated chancre ofthe prepuce. This enlarges for some time, and may at lastattain the size of a hazel-nut, or even of a small walnut. Thistakes place especially when the tubercular matter inoculatedis perfectly fresh, and taken from rabbits. These smalltumours are formed of a substance of a grey colour, fleshy, andrather resistant. On section, there are observed, at one periodof their evolution, small points of softening matter, of ayellowish-white colour. These points spread, become con-nuent, and lead to the softening of the whole tumour, and theevacuation of a cheesy matter, often mixed with pus.The development of tubercle internally seems to follow

inoculation in from ten to twenty days.It is possible that when phthisis is observed in several

members of the same family, it has spread by infection, not byhereditary transmission.

Inoculation has had the effect of producing abortion or thepremature death of the young. The young of animals inocu-lated, which survive a time, die with symptoms of inanition,but tubercles are not found in the body. The stomachs arefound very empty and milkless. Two such animals lived aboutfive months. Thev were thin. stunted. and scarcelvattainedmore than half the size of animals of their age. They presentedan excessive development of the abdomen, and their skin wasdull and ugly. They died of a sort of spinal meningitis, whichwas also fatal to several other rabbits previously in goodhealth which lived along with them. Neither of them pre-sented the slightest trace of tubercle.

CASES of contagious typhus having appeared amongsthorned cattle in several districts of Germany, especially atFrankfort, a ministerial ordinance, dated the 15th of May,has been issued, prohibiting the importation and transit ofruminating animals, fresh hides, or carcases along the wholelength of the French frontier, from Lauterbourg to the depart-ment of Savoy inclusive.

IMPORTANT PROSECUTION UNDER THEMEDICAL ACT.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET POLICE-COURT.

TUESDAY, MAY 21ST.

MR. ROBERT JACOB JORDAN appeared before Mr. Mansfieldin answer to a summons for having improperly assumed thetitle of "member of the Royal College of Surgeons of England."The Hon. F. Thesiger appeared for the prosecution; Mr.

Keane, Q.C., and Mr. Montague Williams appeared for thedefendant.The Hon. F. THESIGER in opening the case said,-I have

the honour to appear, Sir, on behalf of the Royal College ofSurgeons of England to support the information which waslaid by their secretary a week ago against Mr. Robert JacobJordan, who resides at 29, George-street, Hanover-square, foran offence against the provisions of the Medical Act, that ofhaving " wilfully and falsely pretended to be, and taken andused the name, title, or description, implying that he was re-cognised by law as a surgeon." I may state in the outset that

although those words which I have taken from the information,and which are contained in the 40th section of the Medical

Act, do express the offence with which the defendant is

charged, and with which you have to deal, they utterly fail toexpress the real nature and character of the offence of whichthe defendant has been guilty-an offence I may say that theRoyal College of Surgeons have every will to punish adequatelyas it deserves, but unfortunately as the law is at present con-stituted they have not the power. Sir, this is not an ordinarycase arising under this statute ; it is not the case of a manwho has merely infringed the provisions of the statute, whohas professed to possess the qualifications which the statuterequires him to possess as a guarantee of his knowledge and asa protection to the public ; it is not the case of such a mannever having possessed those qualifications, but it is the caseof a man who has been once a member of two honourable andlearned societies, the Royal College of Surgeons of Englandand the College of Physicians of Edinburgh ; a man who hashad opportunities of earning a name and a competency in anhonourable profession; but who has sacrificed that opportunityand disgraced his profession; a man who has been ignominiouslyexpelled from those societies; and what is more, a man who,after having been expelled from them, has openly braved them;who has carried on for years a trade which, I submit, outragesdecency in every possible way; a man who has kept for yearsa museum, a catalogue of which I hold in my hand, and the

particulars of which would I think shock the mind of any onepossessing a spark of refinement ; a man who at the entranceof that museum, so disgusting in its nature, has stuck up thediploma of the College of Surgeons.Mr. K:EANE. -I do not understand what this gentleman is

to be tried for. If he is to be tried for those things with regardto which my friend has been speaking with such extreme fer-vour, let him be charged accordingly. Have we anything todo with the Anatomical Museum ?The Hon. F. THESIGER.—I was quite prepared for this. You

will see, Sir, when I come to the section of the Act, that youhave a discretionary power as to the amount of penalty. Iwish to bring before you the conduct of this Mr. Robert JacobJordan, in order that you may, as I feel sure you will do ifthe facts are proved before you, inflict the very highest penaltywhich the law enables vou to inflict.Mr. KEANE.—You will not try him for one thing and punish

him for another.Mr. THESIGER.—I think I am not exceeding the duty I have

to perform as counsel, painful as that duty is. I say that foryears the defendant has been using the name of the College ofSurgeons and the name of the College of Physicians of Edin-burgh ; that he has professed to be a member of those societies;that he has used the diploma at all events of one of them inorder to publish and disseminate through this metropolis booksteeming with the foulest indecency, and in order to pander to

643

the very lowest tastes of the vicious, and to prey upon the practice as a surgeon, or put forth or publish in any way what-fears and follies of the young and the ignorant. I hope there- ever any indecent advertisement or notification relating to hisfore, when I have proved the facts of this case before you, that said practice as a surgeon ; and any fellow or member whoyou will inflict the very highest penalty, paltry though that may in any manner offend herein shall be liable to be removedpenalty must be to a man in the position of the defendant. by resolution of the Council from being a fellow and memberSir, Mr. Jordan in the year 18.59 was elected a member of the or a member of the College. No fellow or member of theRoyal College of Surgeons, and was registered under the College shall advertise or publish any matter or thing pre-Medical Act in respect of that qualification, as well as the judicial to the interests or derogatory to the honour of thequalification which he obtained from the College of Physicians College or disgraceful to the profession of surgery, and anyof Edinburgh. I should state that the College of Surgeons fellow or member who may in any manner offend herein shallwas originally established under a charter of the 40th year of be liable to be removed by the resolution of the Council fromGeorge III., and by that charter they have power " to make being a fellow and member or a member of the College."such bye-laws, ordinances, rules, and constitutions as to them Well, some correspondence passed between the secretary andshall seem requisite and convenient for the regulation, govern- Mr. Jordan, and finally by a resolution come to by the Councilment, and advantage of the said College, so as such bye-laws, of the College on the 10th of April, Mr. Jordan was formallyordinances, rules, and constitutions be not contrary to law, expelled from being a member of the College ; and on the 20thand in all such cases as shall be necessary be examined, ap- of April, at another meeting of the Council, the resolution ofproved of, and allowed, as by the laws and statutes of this expulsion was formally confirmed. In the same section of therealm is provided and required." By a subsequent charter in bye-laws it is stated " that any fellow or member who shallthe 7th year of the reign of her present Majesty the original have been so removed by resolution of the Council as aforesaidcharter was confirmed, and the name of the College was changed shall thereby forfeit all his rights and privileges as a fellowfrom "the Royal College of Surgeons in London" to "the and member or a member of the College, and his diplomas orRoyal College of Surgeons of England;" and by one paragraph diploma shall be thereupon void, and shall become the pro-in that charter it was said that " Except in the respects hereby pertv of the College, and be delivered up by such fellow oraltered, the said College and Council shall continue to have all member to the College on demand." I should state that insuch and the same jurisdictions, powers, authorities, and dis- accordance with the Medical Act notice was given to thecretions for and with respect to the government of the said General Council, and Mr. Jordan’s name was erased by themCollege and the election and choice of the officers of the same, from the list of the College of Surgeons and from the generalas well as the admission and expulsion of Members and Fellows, Register, I believe both in respect of his qualifications as aand for the making, retaining, confirming, annulling, or revok- surgeon and as a physician. A letter informing him of hising the bye-laws, ordinances, rules, and constitutions," &c. expulsion from the College was taken to him personally byThen it says that the bye-laws are to be certified by one of the Mr. Stone, and the diploma was demanded from him. Mr.

principal Secretaries of State. Under those charters from Jordan positively refused to give up that diploma, and thetime to time bye-laws were made by the College, and the bye- Council, I suppose, considering that they had done sufficientlaws that were in force at the time when Mr. Jordan became in expelling him, took no measures then to get the diplomaa member of the College were the bye-laws of 1852, which back. From that time to this he has had that diploma andwere certified by the then Secretary of State, Mr. Walpole. has been parading it as I have stated. At the beginning of thisBy those bye-laws, every person who becomes a member of the year complaints were brought under the attention of the

College is to subscribe a declaration in which he says that Council to the effect that Mr. Jordan was publishing thesewhile he is a member of the Royal College of Surgeons of Eng- books and still holding himself out as a member of the Collegeland he will observe the bye-laws thereof, that he will obey of Surgeons. They then determined to take such steps as byevery summons issued by the order of the Council of the said law they were enabled to take. I may say on behalf of theCollege, having no reasonable excuse to the contrary, and that College that the only feeling of regret that they have is thathe will demean himself honourably in the practice of his pro- they are unable to take any steps except under the 40th sec-fession, and to the utmost of his power maintain the dignity tion of the Medical Act. They deeply regret that the lawand welfare of the College. In addition to that he has to sign gives them no power to strike at the root of Mr. Jordan’sa copy of the bye-laws, and I shall prove to you that Mr. offences, and so put a stop to the practices which are really a.Jordan did both sign the declaration and subscribe his name disgrace to this metropolis. The course which they have pur-to the bye-laws. In the beginning of 1863, in consequence of sued is this : they employed through their solicitors, Messrs.complaints which the Council of the College received, to the Wilde and Co., a detective officer of the name of Russell, who,effect that Mr. Jordan was carrying on the museum to which on the 3rd of April, visited the house of Mr. Jordan, inI have already directed your attention, and that he was the George-street. The door was opened to him, and he inquiredpublisher of an indecent book, the following letter was written for the museum. He was taken up to the museum, and at theto him by the then secretary of the Council :- same time there was given to him a book, which I hold in my

" 2nd March, 1863. hand, and which I shall have to refer to directly. When he" Sir,-I am directed by the President of the Royal College came to the museum he found at the entrance the diploma of

of Surgeons of England to inform you that the attention of the College of Surgeons hanging up. I believe he saw Mr.the Council of the College has been called to the course of Jordan for a minute or two on that occasion, and asked himconduct which you have been pursuing in connexion with your what time he received patients, and was told by him, I believe.practice as a member of the College. The Council are informed Nothing more passed on that occasion, but on the 5th of April,that you are the author of a book bearing your name, entitled the day mentioned in the information, Russell, by the instruc-’Guide to Masculine Vigour,’ which is presented to persons tion of Messrs. Wilde and Co., went again to the house, andvisiting the so-called London Anatomical Museum at 29, asked for Mr. Jordan. He was shown in to Mr. Jordan, andGeorge-street, Hanover-square, with which you are also con- entered into some conversation with him. He told him thatnected, and that by your authority handbills referring to he was come on behalf of some friend, and finally Mr. Jordanthis book and to yourself as the resident physician of the presented him with two books, which, in point of fact, willmuseum are handed to ladies and gentlemen passing by George- constitute the main evidence of the offence with which Mr.street. A specimen of the handbills is enclosed. The Council Jordan is charged. But before I call your attention to theseare also informed that the advertisement headed ’ Vitæ books I will refer to the provisions of the Medical Act of 1858.Vitalis," of which I enclose a copy, is constantly inserted in The Act is denominated "An Act to regulate the qualificationthe newspapers by your direction. The Council will at their of Practitioners in Medicine and Surgery," and the preamblenext meeting, which will take place on the llth of March, at states " Whereas it is expedient that persons requiring medicalfour o’clock, proceed to consider whether it is not their duty, aid should be enabled to distinguish qualified from unqualifiedin pursuance of the 16th section of the bye-laws, to remove practitioners, Be it enacted, and so forth." Then it says that

you from being a member of the College in consequence of the the Act may be cited as the Medical Act. Then it consti-misconduct of which you appear to have been guilty, and they tutes a general Register by which the qualifications mentionedwill be ready at the time mentioned to receive any explanation in the schedule may be registered ; and in the 15th section itwhich you may desire to offer personally or in writing. says : "Every person now possessed and (subject to the pro-

"I am, Sir, your most obedient servant, visions hereinafter contained) every person ht-reafter to become"E. BELFOUR." possessed of any one or more of the qualifications described

The section of the bye-laws to which the secretary there in the Schedule A to this Act shall, on payment of a fee notrefers is the following :- exceeding £2 in respect of qualifications obtained before the"No fellow or member of the College shall publicly profess Ist day of January, 1859, and not exceeding ;E5 in respect o‘or advertise a secret method or process of cure relating to his qualifications obtained on or after that day, be entitled to Ie.

644

registered on producing to the Registrar of the Branch Council I a medical work on married and single life, with cause and .

for England, Scotland, or Ireland, the document confirming or cure of general local prostration of the nervous and muscularevidencing the qualification or each of the qualifications in re- systems, published 1867." In the title-page he gives anspect whereof he seeks to be so registered." The schedule account of the book, which I need not read, and then he says,which is referred to contains the following qualifications, unto " By Robert J. Jordan, M.D., Licentiate of the Royal Collegewhich any person may be registered :-‘ 1st. Fellow, Licen- of Physicians, Edinburgh ; Member of the Royal College oftiate, or Extra Licentiate of the Royal College of Physicians Surgeons, England, &c." In that book also he publishes theof London. 2nd. Fellow or Licentiate of the Royal College of diplomas which I have mentioned. Now, those are the cir-Physicians of Edinburgh. 3rd. Fellow or Licentiate of the cumstances of this case, and I submit that if these facts are

King and Queen’s College of Physicians in Ireland. 4th. made out they will bring Mr. Jordan within the provisions ofFellow, or Member, or Licentiate in Midwifery of the Royal the Medical Act; and if so, I think you will really feel a satis-College of Surgeons of England," and so on. The next section faction in inflicting the highest penalty you can, paltry as itto which I will call your attention is the 28th, which provides is, upon a man who has been guilty of offences which I onlyfor giving notice to the General Council in case of any person regret on behalf of the Council of the College of Surgeons theybeins expelled from one of the colleges or bodies mentioned are not able to prosecute so as to put a stop to them.in the schedule. Then the 31st section says, "Every person Mr. Trimmer was then called, and produced the charter ofregistered under this Act shall be entitled, according to his the 40th George III., from which the extract was read citedqualification or qualifications, to practise medicine or surgery by Mr. Thesiger in his opening address. The witness alsoor medicine and surgery, as the case may be, in any part of produced the charter of 1843 and the bye-laws of 1852, fromher Majesty’s dominions, and to demand and recover in any which he read the extracts quoted by Mr. Thesiger.court of law, with full costs of suit, reasonable charges for Mr. KEANE.—Can you point me to any part of the firstprofessional aid," &c. Then in the 34th section we find that charter which contains anything as to the expulsion of mem-"after the first day of January, 1859, the words ’legal bers and fellows, or as to making bye-laws, ordinances, rules,qualified medical practitioner’ or ’duly qualified medical and constitutions ?-That is not included in the charter; it ispractitioner,’ or any word importing a person recognised within the scope of the bye-laws.by law as a medical practitioner or member of the medical Mr. KEANE. —I am not asking you to interpret the law, butprofession when used in any Act of Parliament shall be to tell me whether you can find in the first charter anythingconstrued to mean a person registered under this Act." The relating to the admission and expulsion of members and fellows,next section to which I will refer is the 40th, which imposes and as to making, retaining, confirming, annulling, or revokingthe penalty: "Any person who shall wilfully and falsely pre- bye-laws, ordinances, rules, and constitutions ?-No.tend to be or take or use the name or title of a Physician, Mr. KEANE.-Have you the original bye-laws here ?-TheseDoctor of Medicine, Licentiate in Medicine and Surgery, are the bye-laws that were in force at the time when Mr.Bachelor of Medicine, Surgeon, General Practitioner, or Jordan was admitted a member of the College of Surgeons.Apothecary, or any name, title, addition, or description im- Mr. KEANE.—Is there anything in the bye-laws of Geo. III.plying that he is registered under this Act, or that he is re- about expelling members ?-I do not know.cognised by law as a physician or surgeon, or licentiate of Mr. THESIGER.-You will bear in mind that this was aftermedicine or surgery, or a practitioner in medicine, or an the charter of the 7th of Victoria. I believe, Mr. Trimmer,apothecary, shall upon a summary conviction for any such you are secretary of the College ?-Yes.offence pay a sum not exceeding £20." I am bound to say Mr. KEANE.—Will you produce the declaration subscribedthat the wording of that section is not so clear as it might be, by Mr. Jordan ?but it seems to me, after considering it as well as I have been Mr. TRIMMER (producing the declaration).-This is the de-able, that it means this: that the first part of the section refers claration subscribed by Mr. Jordan.to a person who, without reference to the qualifications men- Mr. KEANE.-Can you prove his handwriting?-No, Mr.tioned specifically in Schedule A, pretends to be a surgeon Stone will prove that.generally, or physician, or doctor of medicine, or licen- Mr. T. Stone was then called.tiate in medicine and surgery, or uses those names or titles. Mr. THESIGER.—Will you look at the writing at the end ofThe second part seems to me to refer to any person who pre- that declaration, and tell us if it is Mr. Jordan’s ?-It is veri-tends to be a surgeon-that is, qualified as a surgeon under fied by myself.Schedule A of the Act,-or any person who pretends that he is Mr. THESIGER.—I will now ask Mr. Trimmer to produceregistered generally under the Act in respect of any qualifica- the bye-laws subscribed by the defendant.

tion, or that he is recognised by law in respect of the quali- Mr. Trimmer produced a copy of the bye-laws.fications mentioned in the schedule as a physician, or surgeon, Mr. THESIGER. -Mr. Stone will tell us if this is Mr. Jordan’sor licentiate in medicine, and so forth. If that be the case I signature ?-It is.think I shall be able to prove to you that Mr. Jordan has Mr. KEANE said that Mr. Walpole’s signature of the bye-brought himself within the provisions of that section. I will laws had not been proved.now call attention to the first of the books which Mr. Jordan The Hon. Arthur Dillon was then called and examined bypresented to Inspector Russell. The book is called, "A Cata- Mr. Thesiger.logue of the London Anatomical Museum." It then gives a Mr. THESIGER.—You are in the Home Office, I believe ?-description which I certainly do not mean to trouble you with. Yes.Then there come "Extracts from ’Nervous Exhaustion, its Mr. THESIGER.—Will you look at the signature of Mr.Cause and Cure, with an essay on Seminology,’ by Robert J. Walpole to these bye-laws ?-That is the signature of Mr.Jordan, M.D., Licentiate of the Royal College of Physicians, Walpole.Edinburgh ; Member of the Royal College of Surgeons, Eng- Mr. THESIGER.—He was Secretary of State in 1852 ?-Yes.land; Graduate of Medicine, Surgery, &c., in the Royal Uni- Mr. THESIGER.-I will now ask Mr. Trimmer to produceversity of Erlangen ; Author of ’Skin Diseases and their the Medical Register of 1862 [the Register was produced], andRemedies,’ " and so forth. The only other part of the book I call attention to the 27th section of the Medical Act, whichto which I shall call your attention is that at page 109, where says-" The Registrar of the General Council shall in everyhe sets out in full the diploma of the College of Surgeons, and year cause to be printed, published, and sold, under the direc-page 110, where he sets out the diploma of the Royal College tion of such Council, a correct Register of the names, in alpha-of Physicians, and page 111, where he gives a translation of the betical order according to the surnames, with the respectivediploma of Doctor of Medicine in the Royal University of Er- residences, in the form set forth in Schedule D to this Act, orlangen. At the end of the book you have "opinions of the press;" to the like effect," &c.then at page 224 there is this: "Important caution-In order to Mr. MANSFIELD. -This is the clause to make the Registerprevent the dangerous consequences ensuing from the treat- evidence ?ment pursued by unqualified pretenders to medical skill, the Mr. THESIGER.—Yes. "A copy of the Medical Registerpatient should, preparatory to placing his health and con- for the time being, purporting to be so printed and publishedsequent future welfare in jeopardy, insist upon an examination as aforesaid, shall be evidence in all courts." Does that docu-of their claims. Dr. Jordan in publishing his diplomas con- ment purport to be printed and published and sold under thesiders such a course imperative, as several unqualified persons direction of the Council ?have assumed his name. He is, therefore, compelled to avail Mr. TRIMMER.—It does.himself of those means left at his disposal to prove his legiti- Mr. KEANE.-I object to its admission.mate position." Then in the other book, which seems to con- Mr. TRIMMER.—It is the Medical Register printed and pub-sist of an extract or extracts from the book already quoted, lished under the direction of the Council of Medical Educationthere is this passage : " Extracts from Nervous Exhaustion,’ and Registration of the United Kingdom, pursuant to the Act

645

passed in the 21st and 22nd Victoria, chapter 90, entitled Mr. THESIGER.—Were you assistant-secretary at the time?.. An Act to regulate the Qualifications of Practitioners of -I was.Medicine and Surgery." Mr. THESIGER.-Was it your duty to make minutes or to go

Mr. KEANE.—In order to be admissible in evidence, it must through the minutes after the meeting?-It was my duty tobe a copy of the Medical Register. This gentleman does not go through the minutes after Mr. Belfour, the secretary, hadappear to have compared it with the Medical Register. There written them.is no proof that it is a copy. Mr. THESIGER.—Did you go through those minutes ?-Yes.Mr. THESIGER.—This objection has already been taken in Mr. THESIGER.—Then you may refresh your memory, and

another case. In that case it was not an authorised copy, but tell us what was done.even there Chief Justice Erle admitted it. Mr. KEANE.—What occurred in the absence of the defendantMr. KEANE : I assure you the objection was not taken in the can be no evidence against him.

form I am taking it. My objection is this-you will under- Mr. THESIGER.—This is a resolution to expel.stand it in a moment. A copy of the Medical Register, pur- Mr. KEANE.—YOU cannot read what was done in his absence.porting to be printed and published by this authority, is to be Mr. THESIGER.—I am asking what resolution was come toevidence. Two things therefore are necessary : first of all, it on the 10th of April.must be proved to be a copy of the Medical Register, and then, Mr. KEANE.—The resolution, I suppose, was in writing ?having shown it to be a copy, you must show that it is pub- Mr. TRIMMER.—The resolutions are not written at the time.lished and purports to be published and printed by this Mr. KEANE.—Of course not; but are they afterwards in-authority. This document purports to be published and serted in a book and signed by the chairman ?printed, but it is not proved to be a copy. Mr. TRIMMER.—Not until they have been submitted to the

Mr. THESIGER : My friend does not seem to be aware of the Council for confirmation.words of the Act. The Act does not say that it is to be proved Mr. KEANE.—Then they have no authority until confirma-to be a copy, but " purporting to be so printed and published tion ?

.

as aforesaid." Mr. TRIMMER.—Certainly not.Mr. KEANE : My contention is that you must prove it to be Mr. KEANE.—Then I object to your giving an account of

a copy. them. ,

Mr. THESIGER: If my friend makes any objection of that Mr. TiiESIGER.-NVhe., is the course of business at- these

sort, I will not for the present put in any of the registers at all. meetings ? Is the resolution come to at one meeting confirmedMr. KEANE.—I am content that it should be excluded. at another ?Mr. MANSFIELD.—It can hardly be necessary to prove that Mr. TRIMMER.—It is.

the document referred to is a correct copy, because there is a Mr. THESIGER.—Then, in spite of my friend’s objection, Ispecial provision in case of its not being correct-there is a will ask you what was the resolution come to at that meet-

remedy provided, ing ?Mr. THESIGER.—It is enough to put in the book, and to say Mr. KEANE.-I object to the reception of it. Nothing done

that it purports to be a copy of the Register, in the defendant’s absence can be evidence against him.Mr. KEANE.—It does not say so. Mr. THESIGER.—This is an act done. The Council of theMr. THESIGER.—I call upon the defendant to produce a letter College have power to expel members for misconduct; the way

of the 2nd of March, 1863, from the College of Surgeons, in which they are to exercise that is by resolution of theMr. KEANE.—Prove your notice to produce. Council. The first stage of proof must be the resolution whichMr. Charles Futcher was then called. was come to to expel Mr. Jordan. I cannot understand myMr. THESIGER.—Are you managing clerk to Messrs. friend’s objection.

Humphreys, Wilde, and Berger, solicitors to the College of Mr. KEANE.—I apprehend what is done in the absence ofSurgeons ?-I am. the defendant is not evidence against him unless there is some-Mr. THESIGER.—Did you serve a notice to produce a dupli- thing done to make it evidence. I am told something about

cate of which you hold in your hand, upon the defendant ?- the Council ; this is the first we have heard about it. Let usYes ; personally on Mr. Jordan. see what are their functions and duties and rights as againstMr. THESIGER.—When?—On the 16th of this month. us. There is a clear and obvious way of brmging the matter[The notice to produce was read. It required the defendant home to me. What was done in secret conclave can be no

to produce letters from the Secretary of the College of Sur- evidence against me, especially in a criminal matter, unlessgeons, dated March 2nd, 1863 ; March 18th, 1863 ; and April there be something in the charter or Act of Parliament which27th, 1863.] ] makes it so. You must show that it was communicated.

Mr. Stone was then recalled. Mr. THESIGER.—My friend Mr. Keane is mistaking twoMr. THESIGER.—Did you on the 2nd of March, 1863, hand things. If there is a conversation between persons, you cannot

a letter to Mr. Jordan from Mr. Belfour ?-I did. give evidence of that conversation in the absence of the personMr. KEANE.—How do you recollect that you did that?—I implicated unless it was communicated. My friend knows

have a perfect recollection of it, from having written a full ac- well enough that an act done is evidence, whether it is com-count of it immediately afterwards. municated or not.Mr. KEANE.—Have you got that full account with you?- Mr. MANSFIELD.-I am with you, Mr. Thesiger. It is part

No; it is in print. of the res gestce.Mr. THESIGER.—I now call for the letter of the 2nd of March. Mr. KEANE.—You will make a note of my objection.Mr. KEANE.—We have not got it. (A laugh.) Mr. MANSFIELD. -Very well.Mr. THESIGER.—Then we can prove the copy. Mr. THESIGER.—Now state the resolution that was come toMr. Trimmer was recalled. at the meeting of the 10th of April.Mr. THESIGER..-Did you see that letter before it went out? Mr. TRIMMER.—It was a resolution to remove Mr. Jordan

- Decidedly. It bears at the end, in my own handwriting, from being a member of the College."Signed, Edmund Belfour." Mr. KEANE.-You must show that proper legal ground wasMr. KEANE.-Mr. Stone must verify that as the one he put forward for expelling him before there is any jurisdiction

handed to the defendant. at all, and that he had notice of it.Mr. THESIGER.—We cannot do everything at once. Air. THESIGER.-There is the letter of the 2nd of MarchMr. TRIMMER.—Mr. Stone copied it. giving him notice.Mr. THESIGER.—Is that a copy of the letter which you Mr. KEANE.-The letter of the 2nd of March is no notice at

handed to Mr. Jordan? all. I object that this resolution cannot be read unless it isMr. STONE.—Yes; it is a copy made by myself. shown that the specific charge was communicated to the de-Mr. THESIGER.—Then we will put that in. fendant, that he had a proper summons to attend the meeting,Mr. TRIMMER.—The remark with reference to the first and that, having a proper summons, he attended, or made

letter applies to the other. It is in my handwriting in the default, and so made default as to give jurisdiction.same way-" Signed, Edmund Belfour," [Copies of the letters Mr. THESIGER (handing a letter to the witness) -Will you.were put in.] look at that letter, and tell me if it is in Mr. Jordan’s hand-Mr. THESIGER.—Do you produce the minutes of the Council writing.—Yes, it is; it is dated llth March, 1863, and is

of the College ?-Y es. addressed to my predecessor.Mr. THESIGER.— Is Mr. Belfour dead ?-He is. I Mr. KEANE.—Have you seen Mr. Jordan write ?-No.Mr. THESIGER.—YOU succeeded him ?-I did. Mr. KEANE.—You said this letter was in his handwriting.-Mr. THESIGER.—Were you present at a meeting on the 10th I compared it with the signature.

of April, 1863 ?-I was. - Mr. KEANE.—That wont do.

646

Mr. Stone was recalled. Mr. THESIGER.—There is nothing in the bye-laws to showMr. THESIGER -Have you seen Mr. Jordan write ? that it is necessary that they should give notice ; but it hasMr. STONE.—Yes; that is his signature. been proved that notice was given of the meeting at which theMr. THESIGER. —Were you present, Air. Trimmer, at the expulsion took place. The resolution was come to on the 10th

meeting on the llth of March ?-I was. of April; the ratification was at a subsequent meeting.Mr. THESIGER.—Who attended that meeting?—The presi- Mr. MANSFIELD.—There is a sort of locns penitentiœ pro-

dent, the vice-president, and several members of Council. vided, in case anything should be discovered which might in-Mr. THESIGER.—What passed at that meeting ? duce them to reconsider their decision.Mr. KEANE.—I must object again. You must show that Mr. THESIGER.—The act is the act of the 10th of April,

he had proper notice, and from that day his expulsion dates.Mr. THESIGER.—The objection has been raised and answered. Mr. Stone, recalled.Mr. KEANE.—It has been raised, but not answered. If my Mr. THESIGER.—Did you deliver a letter from Mr. Belfour,

friend will prove that we received notice of any meeting affect- of which this is a copy, April 27th, 1863, to the defendant ?-ing us, and that we were present or made default, we must I did.take the consequences. Until that is done my friend is not The letter was read Royal College of Surgeons of Eng-regular. land, April 27th, 1863.-Sir,-Referring to my former commu-Mr. THESIGER.—My friend seems to forget the letter of the nication to you, I now beg to inform you, by direction of the

2nd of March, informing Mr. Jordan of the meeting about to President, that you have, by resolution of the Council of thistake place. College, been removed from being a member thereof, and toThe Witness.-The resolution was: "Resolved, that Mr. request that you will, in obedience to the bye-laws, deliver to

Jordan be informed that his conduct altogether is disgraceful the bearer, who is authorised to receive the same, your diplomato professional surgery; that although he cannot be heard by as a member of the College."counsel, any further explanation he may offer will be consi- Mr. KEANE.—That is a letter, sir, after the alleged confir.dered at the next meeting." mation as to which we have not had your decision whether itMr. KEANE.—Was he present ?-No. is admissible.Mr. THESiGER. --Now I call for the letter of the 18th March Mr. MANSFIELD.-I think it is admissible as evidence.

from Mr. Belfour to the defendant. Mr. Trimmer produced the list of members of the College,Mr. KEANE.-We have not got it. 1862-63.Mr. THESIGER.—Then we will put in a copy. Mr. Stone stated that he erased the defendant’s name inMr. KEANE, -Did Mr. Stone prove that ? Did he give it to 1863, immediately after the meeting of the Council.

Mr. Jordan ? .

Mr. THESIGER.—I now propose to put in a copy of theMr. STONE.-I gave it to Mr. Jordan. Medical Register of 1862.Mr. THESIGER.—The letter of the 18th March was to this Mr. KEANE.-I have objected to that.

effect :-" Your letter of the 11th instant was submitted to Mr. MANSFIELD.—I do not say that Mr. Keane’s objection isthe Council of this College at their meeting of that day; and I a wrong one, but certainly it would neutralise the purpose ofam directed to inform you that the Council cannot comply the Act, which was to avoid the necessity of giving formalwith your request to be heard by counsel, but they have ad- proof of the Register itself.journed the further consideration of this matter until their Mr. KEANE.-Do I understand that it is admitted ?next meeting, which will be held on the 10th day of April, at Mr. MANSFIELD.—Yes.four o’clock, in order to afford the further opportunity of offer- The Register of 1863, containing the defendant’s name, wasing, verbally or in writing, any explanation that you may produced, also the Register of 1867, not containing the de-desire to make. With respect to the request to be informed fendant’s name.more specifically in what respect you have violated the bye- Mr. Stone’s examination continued by Mr. Thesiger :-laws, I am directed to state that it is considered that the When you went with the letter of the 27th of April, I be-course of conduct pursued by you in connexion with your lieve you saw Mr. Jordan himself ?-I did.practice, which is particularly mentioned in my former letter, Did you ask him to give up his diploma ?-I did.amounts to an indecent advertisement or notification relating What did he say to that ?-He apologised for keeping me soto your practice as a surgeon; and that the books referred to long, and asked if I would wait a few minutes longer. I saidare disgraceful to the profession of surgery within the meaning doubtless it was his wish to consult his legal adviser, and inof the 16th section of the bye-laws of the College." Were order to give him an opportunity of doing that I would callyou (Mr. Trimmer) present at a meeting of the Council on the another day. I did so, and he refused to give up the diploma.20th April, 1863 ? Has it ever been given up ?-No.Witness.-I was. Mr. KEANE.—I believe Mr. Jordan gave you E22 for theMr. THESIGER. - What passed at that meeting ? - The diploma ?-Yes.

minutes of the previous meeting were confirmed. Mr. A. G. RUSSELL was then examined by Mr. Thesiger:-Mr. KEANE. -Was any notice of the meeting of the 20th Are you a detective sergeant of the City of London !-Yes.

given to Mr. Jordan ?-No. Did you receive instructions from Messrs. Wilde and Co., onMr. THESIGER.—You will find by the bye-laws that there is the 3rd of April, to go to the defendant’s house ?-I did.

no necessity for that. It is merely a confirmation of the pre- Did you see anything upon the door ?-Yes, "Dr. Robertvious resolution. J. Jordan."Mr. KEANE. -I object to the confirmation as much as to the Did you go in ?-I rang the bell, and the door was opened

resolution itself. There was no notice of it. by the porter. I asked the porter if there was a museum toMr. THESIGER.—The objection is the same as before, be seen, and he said there was. I asked how much the admis-Mr. MANSFIELD.-No; the objection is on another ground, sion was, and he said a shilling. I paid a shilling, and he

namely, that there was no notice. The first objection was that then gave me a blue book [produced]. He told me the museumanything done in the defendant’s absence could not be evidence, was upon the first and second floors.

Mr. THESIGER. -The notice to attend appears to me to be Did you go up ?-I did.totally unnecessary. Did you see anything hanging up at the entrance to theMr. KEANE.—The resolution consists of two parts. There door ?-Yes, on the second floor I saw a diploma.

is first the assent of the members present to the removal; that Mr. KEANE.-I object to that. You should have given usremains in suspense for a certain time. Then there is a day notice to produce.upon which the suspense is to be terminated, equally by the Mr. THESIGER.—We have given notice to produce "a cer-assent of those present. The two together make up the ex- tain diploma of the 4th February, 1859."pulsion. Of the first the defendant may have had notice ; of Mr. KEANE.-I object to that. You ought to have said,the second, none. He might have interposed, and protested " the piece of paper hanging on the top of your stairs." (Aagainst the confirmation, laugh.) If that is the paper you want, you should have toldMr. MA-NSFIELD.--I do not think there can be any question us so.

as to the admission of it as evidence ; there may be a question Mr. THESIGER.—I do not know whether my friend is serious.as to the validity of the acts of the Council. Mr. KEANE.—Quite.Mr. THESIGER.—That is what I suggest. Mr. THESIGER.—I am not going to argue the point. I haveMr. KEANE.—The acts of the Council, unless there is a law proved the notice to produce.

making them against everybody, cannot be admissible against Mr. Futcher was recalled.the defendant without proper notice to him enabling him to Mr. THESIGER.—When you served the notice to produceparticipate in what is being done. upon Mr. Jordan did he say anything to you?

647

Mr. FUTCHER.—Yes; he read the notice, and said "I do THURSDAY MAY 23RD.not know where the letters are, but there is the diploma," ’

pointing to it in the room. The case was resumed to-day.Mr. KEANE. -Where was this conversation ?-In a room on Mr. STONE was recalled, and stated, in answer to Mr. Thesiger,

the ground-floor. that it was the custom for the College of Surgeons every year toMr. KEANE. -Did he point to something in the room ?-He send to the registrar of the Medical Council a list of the persons

pointed to the diploma ; I looked at it. elected as members of the College.Mr. MANSFIELD.—What did he say about it ? - He said, Mr. KEANE, in addressing the magistrate for the defendant,

There is the diploma; I cannot find the letters." said he submitted that the charge had not been made out. He

Mr. MANSFIELD. - It is clear, then, that Russell did not regretted that the College of Surgeons should have placed itselfsee the diploma. in the position it had assumed. Nearly four years ago the de-Mr. THESIGER. -This was on a different day, and the fendant was removed from the books of the College, and until the

diploma might have been removed. present moment no complaint had been made, no effort put forthMr. Russell’s examination by Mr. Thesiger continued:- to bring .Mr. Jordan to justice. What was it that had made

Did you copy any part of the diploma that you saw ?-Yes, them so lively at the present moment ? It appeared that on atwo or three names. It was dated Feb. 4th, 1859; and signed, sudden everybody became alert-the solieitors were energetic,"Green (president), Arnott, and South," to all appearance in Mr. Trimmer became agitated, Mr. Stone active, and the manag-different handwritings. ing clerk in a state of inquietude, in order to make Mr. JordanWhen you were coming down from the museum did you see pay 20d. If Mr. Jordan had committed a crime he ought to

anyone?—I believe I saw Dr. Jordan; that gentleman (pointing have been put down before. Why had not the College of Sur-to the defendant), but he was differently dressed. geons prosecuted him ’? Why had not the police prosecuted

’ Did you go again on the 5th of April ?-I did. him ? The fact was, he had done nothing for which he ought toDid you then see Mr. Jordan again ?-I did. When 1 went be prosecuted ; and the College, sniffing at the penalty of 20l., said,

to the door he was standing talking to another gentleman. " Inasmuch as we cannot prosecute him as we wish, let us see

Did he give you any books ?-He did. I asked him if he whether we cannot get the penalty." He regretted that Mr.had not written a work on Debility, and he said he had. I Thesiger, in opening the case, should have assumed that the judgeasked him what was the price; and he said, a shilling. I gave

would feel a satisfaction in the sentencewhich he might pronounce,him a shilling for it. [The book was produced.] He said, if since the feeling with which any sentence was passed was alwaysI would wait a short time he would give me an extract from understood to be that of regret, accompanied with a desire forall his larger works, and would not charge me anything for it. the amelioration of the person sentenced. Mr. Thesiger statedHe then went out of the room, and in a minute or two he gave

that the book received from the defendant was of a disgustingme this book. f Produced ]

,

character. He was reminded of what Swift said of a "nice

Mr. THESIGER.—Those are the books to which I have called man"—that he was " a man of nasty ideas ;" and he thoughtattention. that any person who read the book, and considered that it

Mr. MANSFIELD.—I hope I have not got to read them. justified the fervour and objurgation of Mr. Thesiger, was "aMr. THESIGER.—I have called attention to the material nice man" according to that definition. No doub, as a matter

parts. of composition and of argument, the book might have been veryMr. MANSFIELD. —Is this with reference to the secret much improved. Exception might be taken in a, linguistic point

remedy ? of view to such a word as " seminology :" but the book containedMr. THESIGER.—He sets out his diploma, and calls himself nothing that might not be found in other books treating upon the

a member of the College of Surgeons. same subject with much greater detail. The great scientific

Mr. KEANE.-One of the books was given by the porter. I book on the subject in question was that written about ninetydo not know that the agency of the porter has been proved. years ago by a Frenchman of great experience and learning ;Cross-examined by Mr. KEANE :- and he ventured to say that that book was a hundred times asI suppose you did not go on account of debility ?-No, but dangerous to young people, if they did not know how to control

the doctor rather thought I did. (Laughter.) ,

themselves, as the book he held in his hand. No person,Who was it sent you ?-The solicitors, Messrs. Wilde. however, thought of prosecuting the Frenchman for publishingTell me all that Dr. Jordan said respecting the document a bad book. The Faculty of Medicine of Paris was proud

that you say was a diploma ?-He made no remark to me about of the author as a member ; he was recognised by everythat. faculty abroad; and he had no doubt the College of Surgeons

I presume you did not consult or affect to consult him about itself had done him honour. What was tue case broughtany ailment of yours ?-No ; not of my own. against the defendant ? The Act of Parliament began byOr of any one else ?-I told him I had a friend suffering, I stating that it was expedient that persons requiring medical

thought, from debility. aid should be able to distinguish qualified from unqualified prac-Did you ask him to tell you something that your friend could titioners, and every section of the Act should be construed and

do ?-I asked him when he was likely to be seen, and what he applied with reference to that object. The Act placed a checkcharged. He said about twelve was the best time to see him, upon the various learned bodies, because, although each of themand his charge was £1. might for itself strike a member off its books, and though all of

I suppose there was no such friend in existence ?-Only the them combined might do the same, the law did not require thegentleman who employed me. General Council to follow them in that respect. The CouncilYou considered that was a bit of diplomacy?-It was. could remove any expelled member from the register if it saw fit;He did not call your attention to any part of these books ?- but it was not compelled to do so, and if the name was erased, it

No. was only in respect of the particular qualitication which theNor you his ?-No. learned body in question might have the power to impart. TheYou did not say, "Are you a legally qualified practi- great thing to which the Legislature looked, was not the books

tioner?"-No. of a particular college or university, but the register. Then theAnd he did not say to you,

" I am a legally qualified prac- question to be considered was, what is the power of the Generaltioner" ?-No, he did not. Council ? The Council had power to remove any medical prac-Have these books been in your possession ever since ?-No ; titioner who was convicted of " infamous conduct." No evidence,

I signed them, and left them in the possession of the solicitors. however, had been given that the General Council hadI see one is signed " G. R., 3rd April." That is your removed him. The only evidence wis that he had

writing ?—Yes. been removed by the College of Surgeons. There was

The others are also signed?—Yes; I signed them on the no evidence that any communication had been made6th of April, though I had them on the 5th. I signed them by Mr. Trimmer or Mr. Stone, notifying to the Generalwhen I gave them up. Council what had taken place. Nobody bid ventured to state

So as to identify them ?—Yes. that he was charged with conduct infamous in respect to theMr. THESIGER said that was the case for the prosecution. profession before the General Council, that there was any noticeThe case was then adjourned to Thursday. given to him to attend, that any evidence was heard, and thatMr. LEWIS said he had a similar summons taken out by the any decision on the subject was arrived at by the General

College of Physicians of Edinburgh, and the witnesses were in Council. He maintained that no offence could be committedattendance, under the Act, except that of falsely preteudhj. to be registered.

It was arranged that the Edinburgh case should stand over, Under the 15th section, persons having certain qualificationsit being understood that the printed copy of the charter should might ask to be registered ; and when once registered, they -werebe received as evidence instead of the original, perfectly independent of the bodies that gave them their qualifi-

648

cations. What were the qualifications possessed by the de- when he was registered he was qualified to practise-to be recog-fendant ? He claimed the qualification of a member of the Royal nised as a practitioner. Up to that time he was not "recognised,"College of Surgeons, to which he had properly entitled himself. and without registration he was unable to recover his fees. TheAnd what had the College of Surgeons done against the defendant ? Act of Parliament said, " Unless you are registered, the law willFirst they tried to expel him. Their authority for th,,t was found not enable you to recover your fees, and then it added, "inin their first charter, which permitted them to frame Lye-1a ws order to be a registered medical man you must have certainfor their government, to be approved by the Secr etary of State. qualifications." Mr. Jordan said, "I have the qualifications toThe approval, however, of a Secretary of State would not make be registered,’’ and there he stopped. Unless he was registeredbye-laws lawful that were otherwise unlawful. Tua approval he was not exempt from serving on juries and inquests, or fromwas a necessary condition of legality, but did not confer legality, serving in the militia, nor could he hold any appomtment asIt was necessary that the prosecutors should show that the physician, surgeon, or medical officer in the miiitary or navalrequisite authority was conferred upon them bv the bye-laws, service, or in any public medical establishment ; nor could hebut they had failed to do so. The 5rst thing they did was to even give a certificate without registration. Mr. Jordan saidsend a gentleman, under false pretences, to Mr. Jordan’s house, nothing whatever to the detective to induce him to suppose thatto tell lies and entrap the defendant ; in truth, to do a very he was registered. He had simply to forward his qualifica-mean and base act. He did not quarrel with the detective officer tions, which would enable him to be registered on aoplrcation.for the part he had taken, any more than he should quarrel with He had not obtained money by false pretences, either by pre-Calcraft for hanging a, criminal. It was his business ; and cer- tending that he was registered, or that he was a member of thetainly a person more admirably got up to disarm suspicion never College of Surgeons. All the industry which the prosecutorsexisted. He was just of the age that might induce a person to had been able to bring to bear upon the subject, had not madesay, "Here is a healthy man rather wrong-about his seminology" out any such case against the defendant. If such a case could- (a laugh)—and he was delighted to find that the detective force poshibly be made out, no effort would have been wanting to esta-of London was so admirably organized as to he able to produce blish it. By section 28, if any of the Colleges or bodies struckan old gentleman so admirably adapted to such a purpose. It from their list the name of any of their member, they werewas, h ’wever, an ineffably mean and base proceeding on the part directed to signify the same to the General Council, who might, ifof the College. If Mr. Jordan had been guilty of putting forth they saw fit, direct the Registrar to erase the name from theimmodest and obscene books, let him be prosecuted. If he had register. It was possible that the Council might not see fit toa museum in which he exhibited for money immoral figures, let erase the name, so that a man with none of the qualificationshim be prosecuted. The College of Surgeons, however, was per- might nevertheless be a successful practitioner in London, havingfectly supine in that respect. He did not mean to say that they the authority of the supreme medical body. It was weli knownhad neglected their duty, but they evidently knew that they had that Harvey was at one time in great danger from the medicalnone to perform-that what Mr. Jordan published, and what he body of this country when he propounded his theory of the cir-exhibite i, was innocuous, and that the law could not reach him. culation of the blood. The College of Surgeons might perhapsTo send a detective officer to entrap him in the way that had lapse into some of its old ways, and the Medical Council mightbeen described was certainly not the conduct of members of an be a little more enlightened, so that it might authorize ahonourable profession. Did the officer see anything wrong in man to practise whom the College of Surgeons had removedthe .museum? Evidently not, since no evidence had been given from its books. The Act of Parliament prohibited the em-of it ; nor did Mr. Jordan say anything to him to which objec- ployment of any term "implying that he is recognised by lawtion could be taken : he did not offer to cure him, he did not say as a physician, or surgeon, or licentiate in medicine and surgery,that he was a member, of the College of Surgeons; the detective or practitioner in medicine, or apothecary." What was theofficer simply made a copy of the diploma, which it was meaning of being "recognised by law" ? The statute gave powerstated the defendant ought to have returned. But why to certain persons to practise, to recover fees, and to fill certainought he to return it ? If it was his dutv to return it, offices. That was the way in which they were "recognised byit must have been because some one else had a legal right to it. law." Surgeons were at one time identified with barbers; andThe defendant, however, had been defying the College for four there was an old Act of Henry VIII. stating that the two occu-years to exercise any such right, and their inaction showed pations should not be combine :, because persons who went to bethat they were conscious that they had none. Mr. Jordan shaved might run the risk of taking malignant diseases. He

practically stated, " I will give you back the diploma or I mentioned this in illustration of the position which he wished towill take the consequences. If you have a right to it, bring lay down, that surgeons were not recognised by law except underan action of detenue, and see what you will get by it." the Medical Act. Looking at the section containing the wordsThe so! icitori, Messrs. Humphreys and Wilde, were far too wary "recognised by law as a physician or surgeon," he asked himselfto bring such an action. The detective officer went on a second if it was one of the redundancies of which the friiriers of statutesoccasion, telling some story about a friend who had no existence, were so fond. In compliment to the framers of the statute, he hadand there the matter ended. A book was given to the defendant endeavoured to find out something which would satisfy those

by a porter, and another by the defendant, and the charge was that words, and he thought he had been able to do so. In thesomewhere in one of the books the defendant styled himself a mem- 34th section it was enacted, "that after the first of January,ber of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, and set forth 1859, the words legally qualified medical practitioner,’ or dulyhis diploma. Was it not true that he had received such a diplo- qualified medical practitioner,’ or any words importing a personma ? that he had been examined and fully passed the examiners, recognised by law as a medical practitioner, or member of thedeclaring that they found him to be fit and capable to medical profession, when used in any Act of Parliament, shall beexercise the art ard science of surgery, in witness whereof they construed to mean a person registered under this Act." It didsubscribed their names, and caused the seal of the College to be not say any other Act of Parliament," "any future Act," oraffixed to the diploma ? The defendant also stated that some "any past Act," but "this Act of Parliament." The last date

persons pretending to possess medical skill had assumed his of the at of Parliament was October, 1861, so that there wouldname in consequence of his popularity. Well, had that be a period of two and a half years in which there would be astatement been disproved ? The defendant had stated nothing numbb; of persons not necessarily registered under the Act, whoin those respects that was not strictly true. He had earned his nevertheless would be physicians, or licentiates in medicine, ordiploma, and he had been removed by the College, not from any apothecaries "recognised by law." In section 36 there was a

incompetence on his part, but, so far as at present appeared, for list of offices which could not be held by an unregistered personhaving published a work having for its object the cure and pre- after January, 1859, Physicians and surgeons in the armyvention of disease. The College was unable to prosecute him and navy, lunatic asylums, hospitals, dispensanes, work-on that ground, and the charge brought against him was houses, poor-houses, friendly societies, and so on, all thesethat he had wilfully and falsely pretended to take the name had a further time allowed by law for completing theiror title of physician, doctor of medicine, licentiate in registration, so that under this very Act of Parliamentmedicine and surgery, bachelor of medicine, surgeon, or some there would be two sets of persons, persons not officially ap-title of that kind. There was no evidence, however, that he pointed, whose only right to practise would be the right theyhad done anything more than use the name of a member of the derived from registration ; and another set of official persons,Royal College of Surgeons of England ; he had not used any whose right to practise in a particular way would ce nse at aterm which signified that he was registered under the Act; he given time, unless altered by the Legislature ; and that last set ofonly used the title which the statute employed for the purpose persons would be "recognised by law" as physicians or

of describing a qualification to become registered, which might surgeons. There was also a third class. The Act referred firstbe perfected by subsequent registration, but not a single word to medical persons who have qualifications only, to persons whoimplied such perfect subsequent registration. The possession of have qualifications plus registration ; and thirdly, to persons whothe diploma entitled him to present himself for registration, and have qualifications together with some empluyment in connexion

649

with the army or navy or some public establishment, which en- compel him to give it up. He went oa for four years defyingtitled them to the appellation of medical practitioners "recog- the College, and they acquiescing in his defiance. What couldnised by law" up to some time in 1861, even though they have kept so powerful a body inactive, but the belief that theywere not registered. Qualification was a different thing from were wrong, and that the defendant was right! There wasthe right to practise; and in Schedule A a number of titles strong evidence, not only of the bona fides of the defendant,were given which related simply to qualification. Mr. Jordan but of the mala fides of the College, whose duty, if anyhad committed no offence except in reference to qualification, existed, ouht not to have been deferred for so long a period.If the contention ot the prosecutors was right, the 40th section Mr. THESIGER said he believed he had a right to address thewould read-" Any perscn who shall state that he has any quali- Court in reply to Mr. Keane on matters of law.fication which he has not, or that he is registered when he is not, Mr. KEANE. —You have no right whatever.or that he holds an office which makes the law recognise him as a Mr. MANSFIELD said he thought that the points of law shouldmedical practitioner when he does not, shall be liable to a fine." be argued as in the higher courts.This was an attempt on the part of the College of Surgeons to Mr. THESIGER said that the contention of Mr. Keane appearedget that which they never had-power to punish a man to be, first, that there was no power in the College to expel aby summary conviction, because he falsely stated that he was a member ; secondly, that the way in which that power was ex-member of their body. If he had obtained money by any such ercised was irregular; thirdly, that the words of the section didfalse pretence, let them indict’: him. If they should make any not comprise the case before the court ; and fourthly, that if itattempt to indict Mr. Jordan, he congratulated them on the did, the fact of the diploma having been left in Mr. Jordan’s

happy condition in which they would be when an action for possession, and the Council not having taken proceedings till themalicious prosecution was commenced against them, as it un- present time, constituted such an acquiescence in his claim as todoubtediy would be. Mr. Jordan said-" I was improperly make it come within the ruling of " Ellis v. Keily"-namely,removed. You have improperly exercised your jurisdiction ; that Mr. Jordan was holding himself out to the world as ayour order is a nullity. I can live and get on without you. I member of the College of Surgeons under the boncE fide impres-will enter into no contest with you ; but I affirm that I am a sion that he was making a claim as a right. With regard to themember of your body, and that I have done nothing wrong in case cited by Mr. Keane, if it was authority at all, it was au-the way you allege." With regard to indecent advertisements, no thori:y on behalf of the prosecution. The only evidence againstevidence had been given. If the defendant had put forth such ad- Mr. Keily in that case was that he had a plate with the wordvertisements and handbills,let them be produced and let him be "doctor" on his door. Mr. Keane had in a most inge-prosecuted for them. His bills and pamphlets were publicly issued, nious manner endeavoured to put a prophetical construction onand he acknowledged himself to be the author of them ; but they the 40th section, and attempted to show that there was a differencedared not attempt to prosecute him for them. What had the between being "registered under the Act," and "recognised bydefendant published that was "prejudicial to the interests or law ;" that the words" recognised by law " were intended toderogatory to the honour of the College, or disgraceful to the meet the case of persons who held appointments between theprofession of surgery ?" Was it not rather dishonouring to the years 1859 and 1861. The Act of Parliament did not come into

College to be attempting to be doing one thing while they were effect until the first of January, 1859, and no one coald there-

pretending to do another? It was evident that the statute, like fore be recognised by law under that Act, or any other,that of Henry VIII., had a very strong suspicion of the medical until that date. Mr. Keane appeared to think that the Act

body, because it said, " Provided always that the name of no person was afterwards extended by the subsequent Act of 1861, and thatshall be erased from the register on the ground of his having between the two dates unregistered persons might be " recognisedadopted any theory of medicine or surgery." He ventured to by law." He was quite sure that Mr. Keane would not repeatsubmit that the College of Surgeons were bound to show that so extraordinary a proposition. The 40th section first referred

they were not prosecuting the defendant merely for the adoption to persons who "pretended to be, or to take or use the nameof a particular theory. No doubt some of the notions put forth or title of a physician, doctor of medicine, licentiate inwere of an extravagant nature ; the defendant believed too im- medicine and surgery, bachelor of medicine, surgeon, generalplicitly, perhaps, in the efficacy of phosphates, quinine, and other practitioner, or apothecary," &e. That referred to any personagents ; but that was all "theory ;" and if there was nothing in- pretending to possess any of the qualifications mentioned indecent in the publication, there was no case made out against Schedule A to the Act, " or in name, title, addition, or

Mr. Jordan. But he was a marked man, with whom the Col- description implying that he is registered under this

lege, for some reason or other, was displeased; and hence the Act, or that he is recognised by law as a physician, or surgeon,prosecution. No human being, from first to last, had ventured or licentiate in medicine and surgery, or a practitioner in medi-to come forward and declare that in his honour and conscience cine, or an apothecary." A reference to the schedule would athe believed the advertisements were indecent, or that the notifi- once show that the words " registered under this Act, or recog-cations were indecent, or that there was anything done nised by law," &c., meant registered or recognised by law in re-by the defendant prejudicial to the interests or derogatory spect of the qualifications mentioned in that schedule. Byto the honour of the College, or disgraceful to the pro- section 15, persons possessing the qualifications mentioned infession of surgery. The court did not know on what schedule A were entitled, upon the payment of a fee, to be regis-evidence the College of Surgeons proceeded, and he maintained tered ; and there was a provision, " that it shall be lawful forthat the foundation of their jurisdiction to remove was the several Colleges and other bodies mentioned in the said

gone. It was nowhere said that removal by the Council of schedule A to transmit from time to time to the sari regiatrarthe College of Surgeons was evidence of a person being properly lists, certified under their respective seals, of the several personsremoved-it was not even prima facie evidence of his removal. who, in respect of qualifications granted by such Colleges or bodiesIt was obvious that the defendant thought that he had been respectively, are for the time being entitled to be registeredwrongly removed. He asked to be heard by counsel, but the under this Act, stating their respective qualifications and placesrequest was not complied with. He (Mr. Keane) was not alto- of residence of such persons ;" and it was in evidencegether surprised at that result, for nothing was more disagree- that the custom of the College of Surgeons was to send to theable to a body wishing to have its own way than to hear Medical Council every year a list of the persons who werecounsel in opposition. The courts of law were never afraid to elected as members ; so that, in point of fact, the possession ofhear counsel, but the College of Surgeons declined any such the qualification of a member of the College of Surgeons impliedassistance. None of the papers that were before the College of that the person was also registered and recognised by law. It

Surgeons had been submitted to the Court, though copies of had been contended by Mr. Keane that no conviction could bethem must have been in their possession. He (Mr. Keane) obtained under the 40th section, except in reference to registra-contended that if a person had a bonâ fide belief that he was a tion. But the case of Ellis v. Kelly disproved that position.member of the College, the offence charged in the present case Mr. Kelly was registered as a member of the College of Surgeons,was not committed. This view was borne out by the case of and it was not contended that the information would not lieEllis v. Ketly (13th Law Journal), in which it was held that under the Act. It was there decided that the defendant wilfullythe statute did not impose a penalty for mere incorrectness, and and false;y calling himself doctor of medicine, he not having anythat where there was a bonâ fide claim of right no offence was qualification by which he was entitled so to designate himself,committed. Mr. Jordan had a right to say, " You have constituted the offence under the Act. With regard to the powerwrongly removed me; I have done nothing which was unbe- of the College to expel, even if there were no express wordscoming a member of the College, and I am a member giving that power, it would necessarily be incident to a

still ;" and if he said that bonâ fide, as he had been saying during body of that description. If, however, a member was

the last four ears, it was a good answer to the charge made expelled without due cause, there was a remedy by way of man-against him. He had been consistent throughout. When asked damus before the Court of Queen’s Bench, to compel reiBstate-for his diploma, he positively refused, and no effort was made to ment. The charter of the 40th George III. expressly gave power

650

to the College to make, ordain, confirm, annul, or revoke suchbye-laws, ordinances, rules, and constitutions as to them shallseem requisite ; and by the charter of the 7th of Victoria itwas expressly enacted by the 22nd section, " that if it shallat any time hereafter appear that any present or future member,or any fellow of the said College to be appointed or admittedat any time after the expiration of the said first three calendarmonths from the date hereof, shall have obtained his letters,testimonial, or his diploma respectively by any fraud, falsestatement, or imposition, or that either before or after obtainingsuch his letters, testimonial, or diploma, he shall have violated

any bye-law, rule, or regulation of the said College, then and inevery such case, and after such previous notice to, and such

hearing of, such member or fellow as, under the circumstances,the Council of the said College shall think proper, it shall belawful for such Council to recal and to declare the letters, testi-monial, or diploma respectively, of such member or fellow tobe void, and thereupon every such member or fellow shallcease to be a member, or a member and fellow of the saidCollege, as the case may be, accordingly."Mr. MANSFIELD said it could hardly be contended that the

magistrates sitting in petty sessions should have the power ofreviewing the bye-laws of a chartered body like the College ofSurgeons.Mr. THESIGER said he did not think it necessary to argue the

point farther. Even if there were no such powers as those whichwere given by the charters, when a man entered into a society inwhich there were certain regulations, he would be held to bebound by them, and would properly cease to be a member whenhe disobeyed those regulations. By the bye-laws of 1852, it wasexpressly enacted that any fellow or member publicly professingor advertising a secret method or process of cure, or puttingforward any indecent advertisement or notification, shouldbe liable to removal ; and the same liability attached to anymember advertising or publishing any matter or thingprejudicial to the interests or derogatory to the honour of the

College, or disgraceful to the profession of surgery. He sub-mitted that the Court would presume that the College of

Surgeons had acted properly, and if their acts were canvassed,there was ample evidence to show that they were justified inwhat they were doing. It had been contended that there wasno evidence that the powers given under the bye-laws had notbeen properly exercised.Mr. MANSHELD said the case was similar to that of a gentle-

man being disbarred, and appearing in a court of justice. TheCourt in that case would not go into the question of whether hewas properly disbarred, but would decline to hear him.

Mr. KEANE, in replying, said it was absurd to say that thedefendant if wrongfully removed from the books of the College ofSurgeons, could apply for a mandamus to have his name restored.Why should he incur that expense and delay, especially when hecared nothing for the authority of the College? 1 They had donetheir best to beggar and ruin him ; they were the attackingparties, and the defendant was right in resisting the attack.

Mr. MANSFIELD, in giving judgment, said Considering theimportance of this case to the scientific and learned body of mento whom we are all of us more or less beholden from the begin-ning to the end of our lives, perhaps it is well that the case hasbeen argued at such length. The sum and substance of the caseis this, that the defendant Jordan, of whom I never heard a syl-lable in the course of my life until the day before yesterday,has " wilfully and falsely pretended to be, or taken or used thename or title of a physician, doctor of medicine, licentiate inmedicine and surgery, bachelor of medicine, surgeon, generalpractitioner, or apothecary, or any name, title, addition, or de-scription implying that he is registered under the Act, or that heis recognised by law as a physician, or surgeon, contrary to thestatute." In the course of the argument different Acts of Par-liament and bye-laws have been referred to, to show that theRoyal College of Surgeons of England have certain powers,amongst which are some analogous to those which are exercisedby the Inns of Court over their members, and those exercised overthe clergy and over the military by the respective tribunals towhich persons belonging to those professions are subjected. In

point of fact, this case seems rather to resemble those which

occasionally come before courts-martial and the Inns of Courtin which members of those professions have done something ofan unbecoming character. It has been alleged that some chargewas made against Mr. Jordan (of which I really know verylittle, and which I do not care to inquire into) before the RoyalCollege of Surgeons, and that they, in the exercise of theirpowers, came to a resolution which, in point of fact, dismissedhim from that body. It further appears that upon the Councilexercising their powers in this way, the person does ilao fceto

cease to be one of their body, and to have any power to exercisehis profession under the diploma by which he was admitted amember of the College. However that is, the matter is verysimple. It cannot be supposed that justices sitting in pettysessions (whom I represent) should go into the proceedings whichtook place at the College of Surgeons, as to which there is veryslender evidence before me. I must presume that, as they werethe authorized body to make inquiries of this kind, everythingwas rightly done. I am not to inquire whether it was

rightly aud properly done. They have done something,and what is the result of that something ? 2 The result is,to prevent the defendant from holding himself out to be a prac-tising surgeon. Practise he might as an individual, but not asa surgeon "recognised by law," for I apprehend that the mean-ing of a person "recognised by law as physician, or surgeon, orlicentiate, or apothecary," is that he is a member of the Collegeof Physicians, or the College of Surgeons, or licentiate of Apo-thec,tries’ Hall. Now, I apprehend that status is completely putan end to by the resolution which was come to in April by theRoyal College of Surgeons. Whether they did it rightly or

wrongly it is not for me to say ; but there is the fact. Then,assuming that he had ceased to be a surgeon, I cannot shut myeyes to the fact that by putting those books into the hands ofRussell, in which he is described as a member of the RoyalCollege of Surgeons, his diploma being set out at full length, hedoes represent himself to be that which in point of fact he isnot. Whether he has been rightly dismissed or not I really donot know, and have no means of ascertaining; but I considerthat the defendant has ceased to be a surgeon, and that it is notin his power to contend that his removal is a nullity. All hecan contend is, that if he took certain steps, the Royal Collegeof Surgeons might be compelled by a superior court to reinstatehim. At present he has ceased to be a surgeon recognised bylaw, and I cannot avoid coming to the conclusion that he hasbeen representing himself to be recognised by law. If so, he hasbeen guilty of the offence charged against him by the informa-tion, and that the judgment must be against him. The

penalty will be twenty pounds.Some applause, which was instantly checked, followed the

announcement of the magistrate’s decision.Mr. KEANE applied for a case to be stated for the opinion

of a higher tribunal.Mr. MANSFIELD granted the application.

Parliamentary Intelligence.HOUSE OF LORDS.

MAY 21ST.

THE CATTLE PLAGUE.

THE Duke of BUCKINGHAM, in moving the second readingof the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Bill, after giving anelaborate history of the recent and former outbreaks, statedthat the legislation of last Session, enabling the Privy Councilto issue orders to meet special cases, had been productive ofgreat advantage. The Bill now proposed would continueexisting powers, and in some respects would extend them asexperience had shown to be necessary.

After a brief discussion, in the course of which a generalassent was given, upon an understanding that it would be re-ferred to a Select Committee, the Bill was read a second time.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.MAY 16TH.

CARL ANDERSEN.

Mr. BLAKE asked the right hon. gentleman the member forCambridge University whether it was true that the sentencepassed on the Swedish seaman, Carl Andersen, had been com-muted to penal servitude for life.Mr. WALPOLE said it was true the sentence had been com-

muted, but not on the ground that Andersen was insane.There was this peculiarity in the case-that the man was in-fluenced throughout by a delusion. The judge put this cir-cumstance to the jury, fully explained the nature of the law,and told them to find a verdict of acquittal on the ground ofinsanity if they thought the prisoner acted under such a delu-sion. The jury deliberated for an hour, and found him guiltyof murder, and, therefore, held him responsible for the act