2
529 decided. It is easy to see one possible reason why advocates here and in America hesitate to call blood- group evidence in defending affiliation suits. The ’, legal profession have not yet realised that the tests are limited to proving non-paternity only, and are never positive. It is probable that many solicitors, when the question of calling in a pathologist arises, feel that if the evidence does not go in their favour it will go against them. It is unnecessary to point out the fallacy of this reasoning, but until lawyers are thoroughly reassured by a few practical demonstra- tions they will probably continue to play, as they think, for safety. Another possible obstacle is the question of whether a court can order a sample of blood to be taken from a defendant. A New York judgment, quoted by Dr. Swetlow, says quite definitely that it can, in civil and criminal proceedings alike, but in this country such an order is’ out of the question ; a test can only be made with the consent of the defendant, which is probably often withheld from a mistaken fear that the test may cut both ways. A barrister has suggested 3 that in time some form of " discovery " of blood groups may be introduced. A court may order either side to " discover " such documents as it considers are necessary for estab- lishing the truth ; it is not unreasonable that blood groups should be placed on the same footing. SKY-SHOUTING THE report of the Select Committee on Sky-writing 4 deals not only with smoke-writing by day and the II projection of words or patterns upon the clouds by night, but also with " sky-shouting the broadcasting of sound from aircraft either by direct transmission or by relaying. Sky-shouting has been used for advertising purposes in America, Italy, and Sweden, but is not at present regarded as a commercial success. The Committee regard it as objectionable that a raucous noise should be forced upon the hearing of men and women, whether they wish it or no. Whether added to the existing volume of noise in urban areas or obtruded upon the quiet of the countryside, this novel form of noise nuisance seems to the Committee an unnecessary and intolerable imposition ; they therefore recommend that, if it shows signs of being developed in this country, it should be prohibited by law for all private purposes. A brief Home Office memorandum, appended to the Committee’s report, discusses the legal position. Noise which is a nuisance may be restrained by an action in the High Court, but an application for an injunction must be supported by evidence that the noise causes a substantial interference with the ordinary comforts and pursuits of life in the conditions locally existing. Noises of a brief and transitory character would not easily be checked by this method ; such litigation is apt to be difficult and expensive ; moreover an action against a particular transmitter would be no shield against nuisance from other persons making similar noises. Statute law has - enabled local authorities to make by-laws restricting noise from the operation of wireless loud-speakers or gramophones. Such by-laws, which require con- firmation by the Secretary of State, are in practice limited to streets and public places, and proof of annoyance is required. The Home .Office observes that by-laws might perhaps cover noise from overhead but they could hardly go so far as to prohibit sky- 3 Trans. Med.-Leg. Soc., 1930-31, xxv., 35. 4 House of Commons paper 85. 7s. shouting altogether, without proof of annoyance. The maximum penalty for breach of such by-laws is E5. Certain progressive local authorities, such as the corporation of Edinburgh, have led the way in obtaining powers by private Act for dealing with the nuisance of noise. Precedents of this kind have been noted in our columns during the last few years in our annual summary of public health provisions in local legislation. But it is one thing to pass an enactment and another to enforce it. To turn from sky-shouting to sky-writing (which was the main concern of the Select Committee), the report advocates control rather than prohibition. The inventors of new methods of projection were modest in stating the limits of their apparatus. The illuminated words or pictures, it appears, cannot be clearly seen from an area larger than one square mile ; no projection is possible unless the sky is clouded ; summer-time restricts the duration of the requisite darkness, and as the method makes no appeal to a sleeping or deserted world, it was suggested that the average suitable period for sky projection in England is not longer than one hour per night. ’ Conditions of public safety, especially in air defence, air traffic, and coastal navigation, required considera- tion, as well as the protection of natural amenities. Questions of health or medical treatment are somewhat remote. It may be noted, however, that the Com- mittee point out the undesirability of a sky projector being operated near a hospital in such a way that the glare of the beam enters the windows of the building. The only other point of possible interest to the medical profession is the evidence (apparent in the questioning of witnesses by members of the Committee) that the ubiquitous advertisements of pills and of promises to cure constipation by various patent medicines has exhausted the patience of the public. PHRENICECTOMY IN BRONCHIECTASIS THOSE who have charge of patients suffering from one of the most distressing and fatal of pulmonary diseases will read with sympathetic interest any contributions of continental colleagues on the subject of bronchiectasis, the cure of which continues to baffle clinicians at home and abroad. A. Courcoux, A. Bidermann, and A. Alibert have lately recorded three cases of this disease in which a measure of success followed paresis of the diaphragm on the affected side. In each instance the bronchial dilata- tions were limited to the lung base. In one instance clinical relief was associated with a satisfactory collapse of the dilated bronchi, in two others, though symptoms were ameliorated, radiographic examination after the injection of lipiodol showed little change in the bronchial dilatations. A possible explanation of the relief obtained in the latter might be found in a temporary remission of symptoms due to rest and special care during a period of hospital treat- ment. Anatomical displacement following the rise in the diaphragm may however have facilitated bronchial drainage in the affected area. E. Rist, who is an ardent advocate of collapse therapy in the treat- ment of bronchiectasis, has noted similar improvement after phrenic avulsion. Another recent success in the treatment of basal bronchiectasis in a child is reported by M. Lereboullet.2 The experience of English physicians has been less fortunate. In those cases in which an adherent pleura does not 1 Rev. de la Tuberc.. 1932, xiii., 401. 2 See report of discussion, ibid., p. 55.
