2
1580 Parliamentary Intelligence. H O U S E OF COMMONS. THURSDAY, MAY 23RD. Disease among the Troops in South Africa. SIR WALTER FOSTER asked the Secretary of State for War if he could state the number of cases of typhoid fever and the number of deaths among the forces in South Africa during the month of April, and also the number of cases of plague and the number of deaths from that disease, up to the latest advices, among the soldiers and others engaged in the campaign.-Mr. BRODRICK replied: The returns for April received only take up to the 19th; there had been then 1052 admissions for enteric fever and 140 deaths. The numbers of cases of plague have, according to latest advices, been as follows-viz., 14 soldiers, 20 native drivers, and eight other employes ; of seven deaths reported none are stated to have occurred among soldiers -Dr. FARQUHARSON asked the Secretary of State for War whether he could state the number of sick in the 2nd Wercesters at Bloemfontein between April 4th and 27th, 1900, what were the total of enteric fever cases, and what the ratio of mortality was up to May 31st.-Lord STANLEY replied to the question, saying : The number of sick admitted to hospital between April 4th and 27th, 1900, was 94. It is not possible to differentiate the cases of enteric fever from the information at the disposal of the War Office, but up to May 31st there were 15 deaths from enteric fever. Treatment of Tuberculous Carcassea. Mr. FIELD asked the President of the Local Government Board whether he was aware that the late medical officer of health of the City of London stated in his annual report to the Corporation, 1900, that he would condemn all carcasses affected by localised tuberculosis; and, in view of the statement of the Royal Commission on Tuber- culosis that such meat might be eaten with impunity, and seeing that the late medical officer of health of the City of London was paid part of his salary by the Local Government Board, would he state what steps the Board would take.-Mr. WALTER LONG said: I am aware of the statements made on this subject by the late medical officer of health of the City of London in his report for 1899, but I am not responsible for the views which he entertained. I may add that no part of his salary was paid by the Local Government Board. Educational Appointmentjor Dr. Henry Ward Irvine. On the motion for the adjournment of the House for the Whitsuntide vacation. Mr. MCKENNA called attention to the appointment of Dr. Henry Ward Irvine as one of His Majesty’s inspectors of schools. He gave to the House an account of the proceedings before the General Medical Council when Dr. Irvine was charged with unprofessional conduct in connexion with an institution in Birmingham and the Council found the charge proved and suspended further proceedings in the case for six months, and explained that since then Dr. Irvine had withdrawn from the institution and accepted this appointment. The hon. Member submitted that Dr. Irvine should not have received the appointment whilst a charge of this kind was hanging over him. He had no wish to mention the names of the persons who were interested in this gentleman. Mr. CHAMBERLAIN said that as the whole speech was an insinuation he thought the hon. Member had better mention names. Mr. McKENNA said he was surprised to find the right hon. gentleman so sensitive-he who had not hesitated to call those opposed to him traitors, pro-Boers, and Little Englanders. However, if he wanted the names he would say that the first witness called in defence of Dr. Irvine was Mr. W. Cook, J.P., Alderman of the City of Birmingham and chair- man of the Hospital Saturday Fund in Birmingham. Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: And chirman of the Liberal Association. Mr. MoEENNA said that this information was not given in the report of what took place. The next witness was the honorary secretary of the institution, and the next Mr. Arthur Chamberlain, J.P. Perhaps the Vice-President of the Council would be able to explain to the House ’ who it was that recommended this gentleman to be an inspector of schools. Mr. CHAMBERLAIN complained that the hon. Member had given him no notice of this attack, but he happened to know something of the subject matter and he would state the facts to the House. He had never seen Dr. Irvine and knew nothing about him except that he had been appointed an inspector of schools. He had never recom- mended or suggested him for the appointment, and, indeed, had never even heard of his name until the hon. Member introduced it. It was unfortunate that Members below the gangway could not attack him without attacking other people. He did not mind these attacks, but he thought it was a distinct abuse of the privileges of the House to bring in the names of people who were in no way connected with the Colonial Secretary. The hon. Member had represented that Dr. Irvine was under a ban, that his character was under the consideration of the General Medical Council. As a matter of fact, the only charge against this gentleman was that of having infringed what he might call a trade-union rule of the medical profes- sion. There was absolutely nothing against his private character. Certain gentlemen in Birmingham, among them his brother, Mr. Arthur Chamberlain, devised a new charity in Birmingham to secure 1 for the working classes of the city the advantages of consultation with eminent practitioners which they could not have under existing circum- stances without payment beyond their means. The object was to secure a gentleman of high professional reputation. Dr. Irvine was chosen as the first of these practitioners, and the moment he was chosen ( the greatest possible objection was taken on behalf of the medical profession in Birmingham. He did not wish to go ( into the matter in detail, but it must be evident to the House that the appointment of a gentleman to a position of this kind might have the effect of injuring the business of other private practitioners, and it I was not unnatural that complaint should be made. The complaint was carried to the General Medical Council who, he understood, gave as their decision that if Dr. Irvine did not retire from the position they I would strike his name off the Medical Register. Dr. Irvine, for good reasons no doubt, thought it his duty to bow to the decision of the Council and he gave notice to the charitable institu- tion that he would be unable to continue his services to it. He believed that the institution had already appointed, or intended to appoint, another gentleman of professional eminence and he hoped it would find some one who would carry out the eminently beneficial objects which its promoters had in view. That was the whole story. It was in connexion with a story like this, a story of a charity in which men of all classes and all politics in Birmingham were concerned, that the hon. Member got up and with an air of mystery tried to make the House believe that he had discovered a plot in which the Colonial Secretary was concerned. Sir WALTER FosTKR explained to the House the duties and powers of the General Medical Council and in particular the circumstances in which the Council might declare a registered medical practitioner to have been guilty of " infamous conduct in a professional respect." Mr. CHAMBERLAIN, interrupting the hon. Member, asked whether he considered taking lower fees than were usual constituted "infamous conduct." Sir WALTER FOSTER replied that he was merely quoting the words of the Medical Act and that it did not lie with him but with the General Medical Council to define what they meant. In this case the Council had found the charge proved and they might proceed to erase the name from the Register. Dr. Irvine had, as it were, been remanded for six months in order that he might have an oppor. tunitv of considering his position. They had here the decision of a judicial body so high that no judge of the land had ever ventured to question its decisions. On the contrary, the courts had always held that the Council were the only body competent to decide what was " infamous conduct in a professional respect." He submitted on purely public grounds that no person in such a position as this doctor, await- ing the judgment of the General Medical Council on a charge on which he had been found guilty, ought to have been appointed to a high public office, especially as the body which made the appointment, the Privy Council, was the body under which the General Medical Council worked. Sir JOHN GORST said that Dr. Irvine had been selected from a large number of candidates for an inspectorship of schools by the Lord President of the Council as the man from his very exceptional qualifi- cations best fitted for the office. He held a very distinguished degree of Trinity College, Dublin, and not being a man of great means he had supported himself before and after he had taken his medical degree by acting as a teacher and master in several secondary schools in Ireland. At the time the appointment was made the Lord President and he had not heard of this charge against Dr. Irvine. Sir WALTER FOSTER pointed out that the Privy Council received the minutes of the General Medical Council. Sir JOHN GORST said that neither the Lord President nor he had sufficient leisure to peruse the proceedings of the General Medical Council, but even if the matters alleged in the course of this debate had been brought to the notice of the Board of Education they would have seen in them no reason whatever for reconsidering their decision. FRIDAY, MAY 24TH. The Standard jor Milk. Mr. HANBURY, on being questioned with regard to this subject by Mr. LAMBERT, said that he was very anxious that there should be the fullest criticism of the report of the Committee before the standard was fixed, but he certainly hoped to have it fixed within a week after the close of the Whitsuntide Recess. Scottish Health Bill. On the motion of the LORD ADVOCATE a Bill was introduced and read a first time to amend the law in regard to the sewerage and drainage and water-supply of burghs in Scotland. Appointments. Sueeessful applicants for Vacancies, Secretaries of Public Institutions, and others possessing information suitable for this column, are invited to forward it to THE LANCET Office, directed to the Sub- Editor, not later than 9 o’clock on the Thursday morning of each week, for publication in the next number. BABNES, A. S., M.B., B.Sc. Lond., has been appointed Junior House Physician to the National Hospital for the Paralysed and Epileptic, Queen-square, W.C. BIRKBECK, L. H. C., B.A., M.B., B.Ch. Oxon., has been appointed Assistant House Physician at St. Thomas’s Hospital. BuRFiELD, T., M.A., M.B., B.C. Camb., L.R.C.P. Lond., M.R.C.S. Eng., has had an extension of his appointment as House Surgeon at St. Thomas’s Hospital. DRYLAND, J. W., M.R.C.S. Eng., L.S.A., has been re-appointed Medioa Officer to the Kettering Joint Hospital Board. DUB&NON, L. S., L.R.C.P. Lond., M.R.C.S. Eng., has had an extension of his appointment as Clinical Assistant in the Electrical Depart- ment at St. Thomas’s Hospital. EDWARDS, T. H., L.R.C.P. Lond., M.R.C.S. Eng., has had an exten8ion of his appointment as House Surgeon at St. Thomas’s Hospital. EVELYN, W. A., M.A., M.D.Cantab., L.R.C.P.Lond., M.R.C.S. Bng., has been appointed Third Honorary Medical Officer of the York County Hospital. Fox, R. A., M.B., C.M. Edin., has been appointed Senior Medical Officer at the Coast Hospital, Little Bay, New South Wales. GosTLING, G. W., M.B. Lond., L.S.A., has been appointed Fourth Surgical Officer of the York County Hospital. GRIMWADE, A. S., L.B.C.P. Lond., M.R.C.S. Eng., has had an extension of his appointment as Assistant House Surgeon at St. Thomas’s Hospital. HARRIS, A. W., M.R.C.S. Eng., L.S.A., D.P.H. Eng. Conj., has been appointed Medical Officer and Analyst to the Metropolitan Borough of Lewisham. HARWOOD, H. M., M.A., M.B., B.C. Cantab., has been appointed Clinical Assistant in the Departments of Diseases of the Throat and Diseases of the Ear at St. Thomas’s Hospital.
