530

the question, "And have sanitary matters been attended tomuch more of late years " he put aside any such limitationof time and answered, "I think we have always been wellabreast of sanitary improvements." He evidently consideredthat the condition of Gloucester water and drainage had nobearing on small-pox.What he had to complain of, however, was the hospital.

" Q. 18,234. Have you got any system in Gloucester like theLeicester system, and so forth ? 7 A. No, I do not think so.Our hospital is nothing like so good as the Leicester one.-Q. How many beds have you got in your hospital? 7 A. Ireally do not know.-Q. Is it in the town or outside ? 7 A. Itis outside the town ; it is a one-storey building and I shouldthink they have perhaps got a dozen beds.-Q. What isthe population of Gloucester ? 7 A. 40,000.-Q. That isnot a very large provision for infectious diseases ? 7 A. No,they are thinking of building another, because theysaid if there had been any other disease running it wouldhave been rather too crowded." By and by we shall seethat this question of the hospital bulks very largely in anti-vaccination apologetics for the Gloucester small-pox disaster.In the issue of the Inc7uirer for October, 1897, the aboveevidence is quoted, and is prefixed by the statement, " Mr.Newman, of Gloucester, shows how at the date of his evidence,in 1891, before Gloucester passed through her time of trial,the hospital accommodation was known to be entirelyinadequate for coping with any serious outbreak of disease."Bat the Inquirrerr very well knows that between 1891 and theonset of the epidemic the hospital accommodation wasincreased threefold or fourfold. Instead of "perhaps adozen beds" it had forty-eight beds, and instead ofthese being devoted to " any other disease " theywere confined to small-pox alone. Yet the Inquirer,with a perverted ingenuity which changes white into blackand truth into falsehood, tells its readers that "beforeGloucester passed through her time of trial the hospitalaccommodation was known to be entirely inadequate," whileas a matter of fact the amount of accommodation when the’epidemic began was very considerably beyond the standardusually aimed at for all infectious diseases by any com-munity. Excepting that the Inq1d1’er bad no convenientpeg on which to hang the sophistry it might as well havegone back to a time when Gloucester had no hospital andhave declared that "before Gloucester passed through hertime of trial hospital accommodation was known to be

entirely wanting." The Royal Commission on Vaccinationan its report gives great consideration to the case of "honestanti-vaccinators." Is the Inqui1’er their mouthpiece ? 7

Mr. Newman was also abked whether he thought thesuppression of small-pox or the suppression of vaccinationthe more important, and this elicited his views on pathology.6‘I believe that you cannot have small-pox, if you ask mypersonal belief (and I should not think of giving it unasked),unless persons have the small-pox in them, and then thatbeing so it is far better for it to come out, and being out itis practically got rid of." Being asked, "How long do youthink it would be in before it comes out he explained : "I Ishould not say it was small-pox. If he has impure matterin him, dirt of any sort, it may come out in small-pox if small-pox is about. Perhaps he may have typhoidfever if that was about. It is far better to have small-poxto be thrown on the external skin than to have it thrown onthe more delicate internal skin ......."The other Gloucester witness was Mr. Rice, who had in

887 told the guardians of his faith in sanitation, and whoin 1891 told the Royal Commission that Gloucester would notreceive a suggestion of compulsory re-vaccination, and thatthe believed a great many working men "would suffer

imprisonment, fine, or anything else, rather than that theywould consent to it." Yet without fine or imprisonmpntGloucester by the end of 1896 had become the best re-

vaccinated town in Her Majesty’s dominions.(To be continued.)

ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONSOF ENGLAND.

AN ordinary meeting of the Council was held on Feb. 10th,the President, Sir WILLIAM MACCORMAC, Bart., being inthe chair.The SECRETARY reported the death of Mr, Edward Lund,

past Member of the Council and of the Court of Examiners.

A resolution was passed that" the Council do hereby expresstheir deep regret at the death of their former colleagueMr. Edward Lund and their sincere sympathy with themembers of his family in the loss which they have sus-

tained. The Council do also record their appreciationof the services rendered by Mr. Lund to the College as amember of the Council and of the Court of Examiners andtheir remembrance of the kindly nature which won for himthe goodwill and esteem of all who knew him."The Council did not confirm the resolution adopted

by them on Dec. 9th, 1897, in reply to the thirdresolution carried at the annual meeting of Fellows andMembers, but adopted the following in lieu thereof:"That the mover and seconder of the third resolu-tion carried at the annual meeting of Fellows andMembers be informed that on June 10th, 1897, the Councilpassed a resolution to the effect that they are willingto consider any evidence which may be submitted to themrespecting canvassing for patients, either directly or

indirectly, by any individual Fellow or Member of theCollege, with a view to determining whether or not suchFellow or Member has been guilty of a breach of the by-law.To this resolution the Council adhere, but in the opinion ofthe Council so long as so many different and dissimilarinstitutions are included under the denomination of medicalaid associations, many of them, such as the friendly societies,being legalised institutions, the Council cannot, make anygeneral pronouncement respecting the connexion of medicalmen with these associations."

In reply to a communication received from a Member ofthe College respecting a provident association in a provincialtown the Council decided to state, in reference to the twoquestions submitted to them, that they are of opinion : (1)that if well-to-do members of a provident association availthemselves of the services of the medical officers of thatassociation without adequately remunerating them such con-duct is reprehensible ; and (2) that the Council have nocontrol over the management of such associations and theyconsider that the proper way to deal with such an abuse is tosubmit the facts to the managing officials.The PRESIDENT reported that he had attended on

Dec. 13 eh the opening ceremony of the Mason UniversityCollege, Birmingham.The PRESIDENT also reported that he and Mr. Howse, in

pursuance of the resolution of the Council of Dec. 9th last,had attended as the representatives of the College the con-ference held at the University of London on Dec. 14th, inreference to what steps should be taken in relation to theproposed legislation for the University, and that they hadalso on Jan. 24th taken part in a deputation to the LordPresident of the Council for the purpose of urging his

lordship to reintroduce in the coming session of Parliamentthe London University Commission Bill of last session.A letter was read from the committee of delegates of the

metropolitan medical schools asking the College to join adeputation to the metropolitan Members of Parliament to asktheir support in carrying the promised London UniversityCommission Bill. It was resolved that:

" The College, in conjunction with the Royal College of Physicians, iswilling to join the deputation provided that it is not proposed by thedeputation to urge amendments."

A letter was read offering to the College a framed copy inoils of the portrait of Sir Erasmus Wilson which was paintedby Mr. Stephen Pearce and exhibited at the Royal Academyinl872. The offer was accepted with thanks.The PRESIDENT called the attention of the Council to the

proposed legislation in Italy enacting that qualified medicalmen of other countries shall not in future be allowed to

practise in Italy without holding the degree of an Italianuniversity. The consideration of this subject was post-poned.The Senior ViCE-PRESIDENT reported that the PRESIDENT

had consented to fieliver the next Hunterian Oration andaccordingly declared Sir William MacCormac, Bart., t) beappointed Hunterian Orator for 1899.

Mr. T. PICKERING PICK was appointed Bradshaw Lecturerfor 1898The SECRETARY suggested that he should be authorised to

remove from the list of Members published in the CollegeCalendar the names of all Members admitted before the year1835 whom he might be unable to trace as still living. Noresolution on the matter was passed.

Mr. TWEEDY moved that Clause 4 of Section XXIII. ofthe regulations of the Council relating to meetings of Fellowsbe altered to the following: "4. A meeting shall be held in

531

each year on the first Thursday in July after the annualelection to the Council on that day." The resolution wafcanied.

THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON THE

METROPOLITAN WATER-SUPPLY.

THE tenth meeting of the Royal Commissioners was heldin the Moses Room of the House of Lords on Monday,Feb. 14th. All the Commissioners were present, but Mr.Cripps, Q. C., left about half.an-hour after the commencementof the sitting. Mr. G. L. Gomme, statistical officer to theLondon County Council, was examined by the CHAIRMAN.His evidence occupied the whole of the sitting. Counsel

representing the water companies very frequently assistedthe witness by reading sections from Acts of Parliamentrelating to matters under consideration, which dealt chieflywith the purchase of the undertakings of various provincialwater companies by municipal authorities. Before theexamination was commenced Mr. RICKARDS, counsel for theChelsea Company, rose to explain that he accepted as correctthe figures which had beau sent in by the company in theirParliamentary return and on the accuracy of which he hadthrown doubt at the last meeting of the Commissioners.

Mr. GOMME was first examined with regard to the purchaseof the two companies which formerly supplied Glasgow withwater. These undertakings were bought in 1855. At thattime it was admitted that the supply of water was inade-quate both in quantity and quality and the corporation ofGlasgow had already determined that they would get a newsupply from Loch Katrine.Mr. POPE, Q.C., pointed out that at the time of purchase

the water-supply of the companies was obtained from theRiver Clyde, which was notoriously impure. Under thesuperintendence of Mr. Bateman, the engineer, the waterwas conducted from Loch Katrine and the work was carriedout in about ten years; the new supply was commenced inthe year 1865.The CHAIRMAN suggested that as the corporation had

decided to get the new supply from pure sources the moneyspent in purchasing the undertakings of the companiesreally amounted to a dead loss of the amount paid.With regard to the expenses of the water supplied to

the consumers it was said that the water rent paid wasgradually reduced during the four years preceding 1890. Inthe case of Glasgow, however, there is a "rate in aid" ofthe water-supply and the financial aspect of the case cannottherefore be judged entirely from a study of the figures ofthe amounts paid in water rents. The "rate in aid" is

given partly for the water used for street watering and forthe supply of the municipal buildings. The water-supplyfrom Loch Katrine is not all used by the city of Glasgow.

Mr. POPE pointed out that the city is surrounded bya number of police boroughs and that these are sup-plied with water by an arrangement made with the

municipal authorities of Glasgow. With regard to thesupply of these outlying authorities the Act of Parlia-ment under which the Glasgow water-supply was carriedout provided that the municipal authorities of the city shouldnot be compelled to supply the parts around, but that ifthey did so the maximum amount which they were allowedto charge should be limited. The water from the Clyde isstill used for trade purposes.

In the case of Birmingham the water undertakings werepurchased in the year 1875. A full account of the trans-action ia given in the appendix to Sir William Harcourt’sreport on the London water-supply. With regard to theamount charged at Birmingham Mr. GOMME admitted thatthe amount paid by the inhabitants of Birmingham for waterrents in the case of houses under L30 a year was greaterthan in London. The water is supplied by the Birminghammunicipal authorities to four outlying urban and five ruraldistricts and the charges are the same as those made in thecity.The purchase of the water undertakings at Sheffield was

quoted by Mr. POPE as the leading example of compulsorysale on the part of a water company which was not a default-

ing one. The purchase was made in the year 1887. In thecase of Sheffield a large amount of money was expended onthe repair of the reservoir which had burst and to pay for

l this misfortune it was found necessary to raise the chargesi to the extent of 25 per cent. for some years.

The next case brought under the consideration of theCommissioners was that of the Stockton and MiddlesboroughCompany, and with regard to the conditions of purchaseMr. BAGGALLAY, Q.C., Mr. PoPE, Q.C. and other counselcame to the aid of the witness to supply details with whichhe appeared to be unacquainted. After the purchase of thewater company’s undertakings a Water Trust was formed to

1 make arrangements with regard to the supply of the districtsaround. The water was taken from the River Tees and, as

, Mr. Balfour Browne pointed out, it has since been necessary. to obtain an entirely new supply from the Lune and Balder.b This was done at a cost of nearly .61,000,000. The water of

the Tees is now used for trade purposes.,

In answer to questions by Major-General SCOTT it was. stated that the trade supply of Middlesborough amounted to1 something like 77 per cent. of the total amount, whereas ini London it was only about 25 per cent. of the amountt supplied.r Mr. GOMME, in answer to the CHAIRMAN, said that as amatter of fact he did not think that the water-supply in the3 cases which had been considered could well be comparedwith the case of London. With regard to the cost oft administration he pointed out that at Birmingham the pipesr belonging to the corporation go under the pavement as farI as the house of the consumer and this is not the case in

London. The witness complained also that in the case of3 London the water companies paid too much in dividends.i A table was put in showing the dividends paid from 1851-t 1871, from which it appeared that most companies had paid- increasing dividends. Several tables were put in and somef were rejected, the CHAIRMAN remarking that the Com-v missioners did not wish to have tables for the mere pleasure

of looking at them if they did not teach anything.e Mr. GOMME thought that the figures proved either thate the expenses of the West Middlesex Company had beene unduly starved until they paid their full dividends or thatr when they had arrived at such a state of prosperity as to payd their full dividends they had spent money too freely.fi The meeting was adjourned until the following day.

i The eleventh meeting of the Royal Commissioners wasy held on Tuesday, Feb. 15th. With the exception of Mr.s Cripps, Q.C., all the Commissioners were present. Sir George

Bruce left soon after the commencement of the sitting.o The examination of Mr. GoMME was continued and thes witness put in a large number cf tables dealing chiefly withn the financial aspect of the metropolitan water companies.f The first table, however, had reference to various provincialt water-supplies and gave in tabular form statistics of thef water undertakings of the county boroughs in England ands Wales in which the works are in the hands of the corpora-r tion. In Southampton, Hastings, and Worcester the wholey of the expenses of the water-supply are paid for directly from

the rates.

y The witness was asked whether it would be possible toI- frame regulations by which a water authority could regulatee the companies’ undertakings with regard to engineeringe problems. This question arose out of the suggestion that in" the case of some companies these arrangements were notd kept in a proper state of efficiency. The witness suggestedd that an engineer might frame rules which could be carriedf out by a control authority. Some details were given withd reference to the water paid for by the County Council fors trade purposes, including that supplied to the places called

by the witness the " Council’s parks." Mr. Gomme suggestede that if a system of control were adopted the capital of the1- various undertakings should be reduced to the actual moneys value of the works which are at present in use. Thise suggestion the CHAIRMAN characterised as "very drastic,t control."r Mr. DB BoCK PORTER inquired whether the witness didj not mean rather that the capital should be written downn after a valuation of the plant and that this writing downl was a thing usually done in commercial undertakings in alle cases in which the plant was liable to depreciation.

In answer to Major-General ScoTT witness said that expert,s evidence as to the value of the plant would be required ; andy in answer to further questions he said that the things whicht- he considered obsolete were disused works and engines.e Before the year 1852 disused pipes and even coal were putn down to capital account, but since the appointment of tl eII official auditor the accounts had been under control and in