487

while the liquids descend by gravitation, the gases ascend by alaw of diffusion. The engineer of the City Commissioners ofSewers has presented an elaborate and very important Reporton the subject. Dr. W. Farr, and Dr. Lankester, the health officerof St. James’s, earnestly call attention to the subject in theirrespective Reports. Dr. Barker, of Bedford, has reprinted anaccount of his clever experiments on the influence of sewagegases on the health of animals. His striking experiments fixattention upon the dangerous effects of these effluvia. Theysre such as issue from half the gully-holes in the metropolis;and if Dr. Barker’s rats and mice and dogs grew sick, restless,and diarrhceal, it is no other than happens to the two millionsof human beings who in London live " in close chambers oversewers and cesspools." Dr. Farr and Dr. Lankester both thinkthat there is an easy remedy in running up pipes at least ashigh as the c7timneys, which should discharge these gases intothe air. The engineer of the Commissioners of Sewers recom-mends a more costly system of surface ventilation. Warned

by a painful experience, we forbear to enter upon this discus-sion. The sanitary necessity for ventilation is clearly enoughproved; it is for engineers to indicate the means. It appearsto be a problem of no very great difficulty, and one involvingno very considerable expense. The Registrar-General saysboldly that nothing can be easier, and that it is an inexpensivework. It may be so to men of plain good sense. But he evi-

dently has not yet seen the alarming Report to which wealluded, where the expense and difficulty are multiplied withall the ingenuity of a professional engineer, and we take this tobe a most emphatic form of superlative.

NEW FELLOWS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY.

MEDICINE is great and glorious, not only by its own powerand fame, but also by its noble alliances. The triumphs whichhave been achieved by those who bear its titles, range overall domains of science; and we are proud to see members of

’ the profession occupying the highest positions in nearly everydepartment of natural science, and wearing the honours whichfitly accrue from their disinterested labours. Nearly all thelearned societies number medical men amongst their officersand associates. The Royal Society has frequently recognised thehigh position of medical science, and enrolled amongst itsmembers many of the most distinguished members of the pro-fession.The following gentlemen are recommended by the Counci

for election into the Society on the 3rd of June :-T. G. Bal-four, M.D.; A. B. Garrod, M.D. ; Dr. Livingstone; W. S.Savory, M.B.; T. Williams, M.D.

THE DENTAL QUESTION.A NEW proposition appears to-day in another part of our

columns, by which it is sought to effect a reconciliation betweenthe opposite views of the two parties into which the dentalprofession is split. Nothing is more difficult than to effect asatisfactory compromise between opposing factions, who reso-lutely " show their teeth"-

"Pergis pugnantia secumFrontibus adversis componere ? non ego.

But union is so desirable in the ranks of the dental profession,and we take so great an interest in the efforts which the mem-bers of that profession are now making firmly to establish ahigh standard of education and capacity, and to attain anhonourable corporate existence, that we willingly open ourcolumns to "any reasonable proposition" on the subject whichemanates from a practitioner of intelligence and respectability.

MEDICO - PARLIAMENTARY.

Saturday, May 8th.-COMMONS-In answer to Mr. Berkeley, Mr.Hardy said that hitherto no regulations had been issued as to emeteries or burial-grounds in the metropolis under the

Burial Act of last session, but that they might shortly be ex-pected.Lord Vane Tempest and Lord Elcho distinguished them-

selves by an attempt to vindicate their taste at the expenseof their patriotism in carping at the site of Jenner’s monu-ment.Lord Naas replied to a question of Mr. Monsell, that he

hoped during the session to introduce a Bill for increasing thefrequency of vaccination in Ireland. It is time that some-

thing should be done. Last year 100,000 children of the Irishpoor remained unvaccinated.

Tuesday llth,.-Lord John Manners said, in answer to Mr.

Buller, that he should not give his sanction to any scheme ofMetropolitan Drainage until the Parliamentary Committeehad reported on it. As yet the Board of Works had not pre-sented any scheme.

General Peel announced that changes were about to becarried out in the Army Medical Department which wouldchange the present system under the Director-General. Awarrant in accordance with Mr. Herbert’s Committee awaited

Treasury approval.Later in the evening, Mr. Duncombe spoke with that

flippant absurdity which characterizes the disciples of imbecilequackery, of the discovery of the Great Jenner, in movingfor correspondence with reference to his statue.

Wednesday l2th-Lord Ebrington moved a series of reso-lutions as to the Mortality in the Army, justly asserting it tobe long continued and excessive. This has been so thoroughlyproved out of doors that it was difficult to deny it. One or

two speakers attempted to show that the Guards’ mortality of20 per 1000 might, by an arithmetical juggle, be reduced onpaper to about 10 per 1000 ; but as the poor fellows are actuallydead, this logic failed to produce any effect, and the Housepassed the resolutions unanimously, to the confusion of " theauthorities" who attempted to show that they, above all men,were undeserving of censure; while, in fact, it is abundantlyclear that if they had received three times the amount of thegrants for which they asked, our soldiers would still have con-tinued to be poisoned with foul air and nauseated with boiledbeef through all future generations.

POOR-LAW MEDICAL REFORM.

A DEPUTATION waited on Mr. Sotheron Estcourt, at thePoor-law Board, on Friday the 7th instant, on the subject ofthe grievances of Poor-law medical officers. It consisted ofMr. R. Griffin, chairman of committee, Weymouth; Mr. F. J.Lord, honorary secretary; Mr. J. P. Brookes, Henley-on-Thames ; Dr. Rogers, Soho; Mr. J. G. Malone, Queenstown;Mr. W. B. Young, Reading; Mr. C. F. Sutton, Wragby; Mr.J. Luce, Swallowfield; Mr. J. Armstrong, Manchester; Dr.

West, Harpenden; Mr. S. Drew, Robertsbridge; Mr. J. R.

Hutchinson, St. Albans; Mr. G. E. Nicholas, Wandsworth;Mr. G. Lowndes, Walworth; Mr. J. Chapman, Hounslow;Mr. R. Eager, Guildford; Mr. B. Apaull, Hammersmith; Mr.A. W. Thurnall, Cambridge; Mr. F. Prince, Sawston, Cam-bridgeshire ; Mr. R. Ransome, Cambridge; Mr. L. 0. Fox,Broughton; Mr. W. K. Loveless, Stockbridge ; Dr. W. Fox;Mr. E. Nason, Nuneaton; Mr. R. Grimley, Banbury; Mr. G. P.Dunn, Ledbury; Dr. Williams, Aspley, Woburn; and Mr.

Brailey : accompanied by the following Members of Parlia-ment,-viz., Sir John R. Carnac, Mr. Bramley-Moore, Mr. AMackinnon, Mr. R. A. Slaney, Hon. Ralph Dutton, Mr. DonaldNicoll, Mr. G. S. Booth, Mr. W. Roupell, Mr. G. S. Beecroft,Mr. R. Ingham, Mr. T. S. Western, Mr. R. Campbell, Mr. P.W. Martin, Mr. W. W. Beach, Mr. F. North, Mr. F. Pigott,Mr. K. Macaulay, Mr. T. Luce, Mr. Newdegate, and Mr.Evans.

488

Mr. SLANEY, in introducing the deputation, passed a highcompliment upon the general body of Poor-law medical officers,and remarked that their object in waiting upon the Presidentof the Poor-law Board was to obtain his favourable considera-tion of a revision of their salaries, and the removal of othergrievances of which they complained.

Mr. R. GRIFFIN, of Weymouth, said he had been requestedby the deputation, who were the representatives of 3000medical practitioners in the country, to represent the greatgrievances under which they laboured. They were not apolitical body, and did not enter upon questions of that kind.They had duties to perform of great consequence to the poor,and their object was to obtain an amelioration of their condi-tion. There were 3000 of them, and 2000 were already Con-nected with that Association. Their great complaint was, thatthey had not sufficient remuneration afforded to them to enablethem satisfactorily to discharge their duties. He had gatheredfrom certain returns he had received from 500 medical officers,that, upon an average of each case they attended, they did notreceive more than 2s. 9d. When the right hon. gentlemanconsidered that the average duration of cases of sickness was28 days, and that a certain amount of medicine was required,sometimes expensive, he would readily see that the amountreceived was barely sufficient to pay for medicine, and thatthe medical man in reality received no remuneration for hisimportant services. It appeared that during the last threeyears one-third of the whole body of medical officers had re-signed, which showed that there was a deep-rooted evil some-where. He was persuaded that a larger number would haveresigned had it not been that in the country this sort of prac-tice was so intimately connected with private practice thatmen were obliged to continue it, reluctant as they might feel,from fear of the introduction of a stranger into the district.The average he had stated at 2s. 9 3/4d. a case, but in the returnshe had received he found that some men were paid as little as3d. a case, and it was obviously impossible that they couldsatisfactorily attend to a case for so long a time for so small asum. He found that his own average was Is. 4d. a case; buthe practised in a town district, whi_h was better than a countrydistrict, inasmuch as the facilities for reaching patients weregreater. On the part of the deputation, he had to urge, thatthe salaries of Poor-law medical officers should be regulatedtriennially, and that they should be paid for the duties theyperformed. Another question connected with salaries was theextras. It was suggested that they should have a fixed salary,founded upon the number of cases attended during the lastthree years, the sum to be calculated at not less than 5s. percase, with at least Is. extra for each mile, and 2.s. for each milebeyond the first five miles the patient resided from the medical officer’s house, one journey only to be charged. He (Mr. IGriffin) would have men paid for the work they did, and ifthey did no work they should not have any pay. He hadcommunications from medical officers who said that their work-houses had literally become hospitals, and that they had animmense deal of extra work to do, so that their remunerationin such cases was far from sufficient. There certainly was somedifficulty about the mode of remuneration, but perhaps theright hon. gentleman would direct his attention to that subjectin any scheme of legislation he might submit to Parliament.The scale of remuneration he had mentioned was certainly notsufficient to compensate men in widely-extended districts, in-asmuch as they had sometimes to travel a distance of 15 miles,and then to send medicine; for it was impossible for poor per-sons to send that distance for it. There was another subjectwhich he wished to press upon the right hon. gentleman’sattention-namely, that the class of persons entitled to medicalrelief should, as far as possible, be defined. As a general rule,the relieving officer gave his orders most liberally, but theseorders should not, they thought, continue in force for more thanthree months. The adoption of that system would be of verygreat advantage to medical men, and would be also economicalfor boards of guardians; for at present cases were put on thebooks and remained there for years. In the last two or threeyears he had had cases of persons of seventy and eighty yearsof age, and there was nothing the matter with them exceptold age, which a medical man could not very well alter. Thedeputation also wished to suggest that appointments made bythe Poor-law Board should be considered permanent. A selectcommittee of the House of Commons in 1854 recommendedthat all officers appointed by the Poor-law Board should bepermanent; but the Board, no doubt with the best possibleintentions, clogged it with a resolution that the medical officershould be resident in the district. The fairest ground to takewould be, that the poor should be within any reasonable dis-

tance the Board might fix, such distance to be equitablyfixed, with a view to the convenience of all parties. Thedeputation also thought that some power should be given tomedical officers to change the diet, and to order wine for patientswhen they thought it necessary. At present they could giveorders, but it was in the power of the relieving officer to refuse.He (Mr. Griffin) had applied for a truss for a patient, week afterweek, but the guardians, he believed, never saw the book inwhich his application was contained. At length he reportedthat if the patient died, he should return that the death tookplace from strangulated hernia, and then the truss was forth-coming. If the guardians had seen his application, no doubtthe truss would have been ordered; but relieving officers didnot like doctors very much, and did not pay much attention totheir requests. The deputation felt that there ought to be atthe Poor-law Board a medical man who was conversant withall matters connected with the relief of the poor. The deputa-tion also felt that consultations should be paid for. The presentsystem was manifestly unjust. He (Mr. Griffin) had frequentlygone long distances into the country for these consultations,and had never been paid anything.Mr. Griffin also presented petitions from various unions in

the country, embodying the views he had stated; and handedto the President a statement of requests on which the deputa-tion had agreed.

Mr. E5TCOURT said he wished to know the views of thedeputation in reference to a uniform scale of payment; butthe first point upon which he would like to be informed wasthat contained in the paper handed in-" That a fixed salary,founded on the average number of cases attended during thelast three years, should be adopted, the sum to be calculatedat not less than five shillings per case, with at least one shillingextra for each mile beyond the first mile, and two shillings foreach mile beyond the first five miles, the patient resides fromthe medical officer’s house." He (Mr. Estcourt) had receiveda number of representations from various parts of the country,recommending the Board not on any account to agree to analteration of salaries or to make allowances for mileage. Heshould like to know, from the body of gentlemen present, onwhich side their opinion turned. Was it their opinion thatmedical officers of unions should be paid by salary or by thecase ?Mr. GRIFFIN said a great deal hung upon that. They wanted

to protect the poor, and to provide that a certain class of per-sons should have orders for relief. This should be left to theboards of guardians, and not to the relieving officers, Theythought that there should be fixed salaries, calculated on anaverage of cases for a year retrospectively. He did not thinkthat a medical man should be paid less than seven shillings a case.

After some conversation on this point,Mr. ESTCOURT said the next point on the paper was-" That

a revision of salaries shall take place triennially in each union,if desired either by the Poor-law Board, boards of guardians,or medical officers." Taking it for granted that they wereagreed upon that point, were they prepared to accept the con-verse of the proposition, that their appointments should be forthree years ?

Mr. GRIFFIN said that a committee of the House of Commonshad recommended that the appointments should be permanent.

Mr. Ross thought it very desirable there should be perma-nency of appointment. That, however, would have nothingto do with remuneration. So long as a man rendered faithfulservice he was clearly entitled to remuneration.

Mr. GRIFFIN urged that though boards of guardians mightappoint medical officers, they should not have the power ofdismissing them. He thought i would be a very bad principlethat medical officers should retire at the end of three years,being qualified for re-election.

Mr. ESTCOURT said he ought to tell them that the Boardwas constantly receiving complaints of inattention and neglectconsequent upon the permanency of appointments. No doubtmany of them were unfounded, but they served to show himthat such cases had multiplied since the recommendations of1854 making appointments permanent. He believed that ifany new provision were suggested in the House of Commons,that argument would be brought up against it.Mr. BRADY, M.P., suggested that in calculating remunera-

tion, a medical officer should always be taken to live in thecentre of his district, wherever his residence might happen tobe. In regard to the complaints alluded to by the right hon.gentleman, he only wondered there were not more, consideringthe scanty and insufficient remuneration. He thought it ver,objectionable that medical officers should be the mere nonuneof boards of guardians.

489

Mr. GRIFFIN said that no doubt the complaints arose fromthe immense districts men had to attend to. The Poor-lawBoard had laid it down as a rule that no man should have morethan 15,000 acres; but if the President would look over therecords of his own office, he would find that many men hadthree times that amount.Mr. ESTCOURT said that was certainly very grievous, and he

would look into the matter.The next points urged were, that too great discretion was

allowed to the relieving officers, that it should be transferredto the board of guardians, and that it should be at the discre-tion of the medical officer to attend to any cases he thoughtnecessary, subject to confirmation by the board of guardians.The case, Mr. Griffin thought, might probably be met by givingpower to overseers as well as relieving officers. It was also

urged that persons having less than 10s. a week should be con-sidered fit objects for relief, but that in cases of persons havinglarge families, or under other special circumstances, that rulemight be relaxed. The subject of competition was also spokenof

Mr. ESTCOURT said that it had been for many years past theobject of the Board to improve the condition of the Poor-lawmedical officers. He could not introduce any measure to Par-liament this session with any chance of success, and he shouldlike to be furnished during the recess with some argumentswhich would justify him in bringing in a bill. Taking the lasttwenty years, from 1838 to 1858, the amount paid by thepublic to medical officers now is exactly double what it wasin the former period. In 1838, the salaries were £136,775; in1858, they amounted to .6272,000. If he went before Parlia-ment with a proposition of this kind, he should be asked whathe wanted more than had already been obtained. Memberswould say, "You have doubled in twenty years the amountpaid to these gentlemen; and there can be no reason for anychange, because whenever an opening takes place there areplenty of well-qualified candidates to fill it." He must requestthe gentlemen present to think over the matter, and supplyhim with answers to these objections.Mr. GRIFFIN reminded the right hon. gentleman that he had

lumped together items which should not be combined with eachother. In his estimate of 185S he had included the cost ofvaccination.Mr. ESTCOURT said that increase would amount to about

£10,000.A Gentleman said that he found he could not satisfactorily

discharge his duty for the small amount of pay he received,and it was impossible for him to keep a properly-qualifiedassistant. One result of this state of things was, that mencould not go as assistants, and were obliged to go into practicefor themselves within six or twelve months of passing theirexamination. They could find no scope for their talent exceptby going into competition with other men.Mr. ESTCOURT said he thought he saw clearly the nature of

the grievances complained of, and what the members of thedeputation desired. It was no new subject to him, and hehad not taken it up merely during the two months he hadbeen in office. He thought the present mode of paying salarieswas a very bad one, and he was of opinion that that portionwhich was paid by the Government should be paid entirelyout of the Consolidated Fund. It was very objectionable thatone portion should be paid out of local rates and another outof the Consolidated Fund. With regard to the proposed in-crease, he thought the amounts should from time to time bemade to correspond with the work done; and that their sug-gestions were entitled to receive the attentive considerationof the Government. He freely admitted that the systemof Poor-law medical relief required alteration, and if he couldsee his way to the adoption of a good measure he would atonce introduce it. He was sure of this, that Parliamentwould have the greatest objection to interfere with the discre-tion of boards of guardians.Mr. GRIFFIN, in the name of the deputation, thanked the

right hon. gentleman for the courtesy with which they hadbeen received.The deputation then retired.

HEALTH OF LONDON DURING THE WEEK ENDINGSATURDAY, MAY 8TH.-The deaths returned were 1056. Dis-eases of the zymotic character produced last week 242 deaths.Hooping-cough was fatal in 63 cases; measles in 45; scarlatina’n 38; typhus (with common fever) in 30; diarrhaea in 9; small-ox in 3; ague in 1. Two deaths resulted from cholera; and 5- 4;al cases of diphtheria are returned.

THE MAIN-DRAINAGE SCHEMES EXAMINEDFROM A MEDICAL POINT OF VIEW.

(From the Correspondent whose first communication on thesubject we published on the 24th ult.)

WE are conscious that some of the views to be developed inthe medical examination to which we propose to subject theprinciples of the Metropolitan Main-Drainage Schemes, are

not in accordance with those generally entertained. We arealso conscious that the opinions we have formed are the resultof candid inquiry, and direct observation exercised under pecu-liar facilities. We, therefore, feel justified-considering theenormous interests, sanitary, commercial, and financial, in-volved-in inviting a deliberate re-examination into the fun-damental propositions upon which all Main-Drainage schemesrepose.But first let us diverge for a moment to notice the substance

of the remarkable Report upon the Sewage of Towns recentlypresented by the Royal Commission.The reporters may be presumed to comprise amongst them

all the qualities fitted for the investigation. Medical know-

ledge is represented by Dr. Southwood Smith and Mr. Simon;chemistry, by Professor Way and Mr. Lawes; engineeringscience, by Mr. Rawlinson and Mr. Austin; and the judicialfaculty, to weigh the evidence and pronounce a decision, bythe Earl of Essex and Mr. Ker Seymer. They state that theyare convinced, by the representations of Mr. GoldsworthyGurney-who had been, as we have previously shown, com-pletely anticipated by Mr. Freebody and Dr. Barnes-that themere diversion of the sewage will not purify the Thames fromits present foul condition. They recommend the immediateexecution of the Embankment-Scheme. Advanced terraces

being constructed, continuous on the surface, but affording con-venient entrances to inner basins for the wharves above London-bridge, reservoirs are to be formed in the embankments adja-cent to the mouths of the existing sewers, into which all thesewage is to be received and deodorized, and-from which thepurified water being first allowed to flow into the river-theprecipitated matter will be pumped into the country or to thesea. The reservoirs and apparatus are to be beneath the sur-face, and consequently invisible, so that no nuisance whatevercan be apprehended. The cost of these works-of substantialand permanent utility and beauty is estimated at £3,250,000,in lieu of the £9,000,000 or .611,000,000 which the Governmentengineers propose to sink in works of stupendous folly andhideous uselessness.

This Report is the final blow to the Main-Drainage delusion.That such a delusion should ever have acquired so strong a holdupon the scientific and popular mind as to dictate an Act ofParliament, dispensing with even the form of preliminary in-quiry, is a circumstance-with the utmost reverence be itspoken-which we owe to the influence of the press. The riveris observed by casual passengers to be in a foul and disgracefulcondition: acres of hideous mud-banks, exposed at low water;huge sewers disemboguing their black and fœtid streams byopen mouths, constitute a visible and elective nuisance, callingloudly for a remedy. The foremost chemist of the age makesa steam-b ’at voyage from London-bridge to Hungerford. AsHorace immortalised his Iter ad Brundusium, so did Faradaycommit the rapid impressions of his brief passage on the Thamesto the imagination and memories of his fellow-citizens. Everynewspaper in the metropolis gave it a prominent place. Itwas reprinted by the Board of Health, and specially noticed bythe Houses of Parliament, who have a peculiar interest in thepurity of the Thames. From the decision of a man so saga-cious, a philosopher so profound, there seemed no appeal. Noone so much as ventured to examine critically what it was thatMr. Faraday’s condemnation of the Thames really meant; orto inquire what was the true remedy indicated by his condem-nation.

Professor Faraday’s voyage was made, and its history re-corded in July, 1855. From that day to the present not onetittle of evidence-that is, evidence springing from observation- has been advanced in support of the conclusions which the

press and the public drew from that graphic description. Evereince, as Mr. Busk observes. "Very great and lamentable mis-conception has prevailed.’’ The attention of Professor Faradaywas arrested by the " opacity" of the stream. He tested this