546 CHOLERA.—THE CASE OF MR. R. B. ANDERSON.

inevitable that organised control of the consumption ofalcohol is only on the threshold and that the results liitliertoattained are, on the whole, satisfactory. The Europeancountries where most progress of a real kind has been madeare Norway and Sweden. As usual, the conflicting camps of"absolute abstention " on the one hand ant moderateuse" on the other engrossed the greater part of the dis-cussion-the result in point of argument, if not in point ofnumbers, being " drawn." Later in the day the Rev. GrantMills and Dr. H. Christ gave interesting accounts of the

appalling effects of alcohol among the savage tribes of Africa.This exposition suggested a modification of the Treaty ofBrussels of 1890-91 in the direction of a far more stringentprohibition of the importation of alcohol into the Dark Con-tinent. This modification, however, as a question of law,lay outside the power of the Congress, which had, there-fore, to remain satisfied with putting on record its opinion.Two important papers followed from MM. Koblinski ofDiisseldorf and Marthaler of Berne, penitentiary chaplains,who dwelt on the influence of alcohol in fostering crime.These, the second day’s proceedings, were wound up by abanquet the simplicity of which proved no bar to muchgeniality, which found expression in effective speeches, all I.impressed with international fraternity.The effect of alcoholic abuse in fostering crime was on the

third and last day made prominent by M. Denis, whoendeavoured by elaborate statistical returns to show the

length to which European countries had gone in combatingthis source of criminality. France and Belgium, where noserious attempt has been made to restrain the spread ofalcoholism, have, he said, the worst record in regard tocrime. Switzerland and Holland, he contended, where therestrictive movement had already begun, had rendered crime" stationary," preluding a reduction in its prevalence as the ’,movement became more energetic. Norway and Sweden, as Ifalready indicated, could boast of a distinct diminution intheir criminal population, thanks to their control ofalcoholism. From this the proceedings diverged into thesubject of special asylums for drunkards. MM. Bleuler,Arnold-Bovet, Smith, and others contributed valuableexpert evidence to its elucidation and strengthened theconclusion that these asylums should be multiplied,free from State control, and none of them on too largea scale-certainly not on the scale of that proposed in Franceto be established at the gates of Paris. Then the "full-dress debate" of the day was opened-on the State

"monopoly in alcohol "-a principle ably advocated byM. Milliet as the only possible solution of the difficulty, at

Ileast in Switzerland, under present circumstances. On theother hand, its application to all countries indiscriminately iwas strenuously opposed by MM. L. L. Rochat andMoeller of Brussels, while M. Alglave supported it as anideal to aim at. The afternoon sitting was employedin reorganising the permanent committee, so as to com-bine into one single committee the executive committeeproper and the old permanent committee. Brussels wasthereafter named as the seat of the next-the sixth-con-gress, to be held in 1897. After this, the subject of temper-ance cafes and restaurants was introduced, followed by thediscussion of alcoholism in its relation to the workingclasses. The proceedings were at this stage enlivened

by the intervention of a highly intelligent Socialistartisan, M. Bruno Gutsmann, who vigorously sustainedthe thesis that the cause of labour will never "findsalvation" so long as the representative working mandrinks, even moderately ; contending at the same time thatthe state of society, as at present constituted, actually"condemned him almost fatally to alcoholism," a state-ment which was received with considerable reserve.

M. Gutsmann was seconded by his fellow reporter, Mr.Martin Skinner, who replied to the objections raisedagainst abstinence by a certain class of Socialists, andwas in turn subjected to some vivacious but perfectlycourteous criticism on the part of the "moderates."The concluding papers were occupied with the educationof children in temperance principles-a well-consideredsubject on which the Congress was virtually unanimous.The consensus of opinion on the Congress is a favourable

one so ’far as its temper and ability are concerned-certainlyit has been exempt from such scenes as characterised itspredecessor of 1893 at the Hague. But-the besetting sinof all congresses-the agenda paper was far too crowded,the number and length of the papers sent in being out ofall proportion to the time at the disposal of the Congress.

Fewer subjects, more succinctly treated, and ampler noticegiven of their tenour, will in future be found a salutary inno-vation in the system hitherto adopted. As to the generalarrangements for the convenience and comfort of themembers, this latest one at Bale contrasts favourably withall its predecessors. A special word of praise is due to theentertainments by which its labours were relieved-the SOi1’é!::given by the abstaining students to the members in theCasino c1’t; being particularly commendable for the refinedhospitality by which it was characterised.

Bale, Aug. 24th.

CHOLERA.

WE learn from Singapore that cholera was prevalentamong the natives of this station during the summer, and !that one European, an officer of the Northumberland Fusiliers,had succumbed to the disease.But Japan is the country that has had a terrible experience-

of cholera of late, following the recent war and close com-munication with China and Corea. The epidemic in Japanattained large proportions and proved very fatal. Out of25,000 cases 16,000 deaths were returned. We shall, no doubt,be furnished with a medical history of the epidemic by theJapanese medical authorities in the course of the year, andit will be interesting to ascertain the views entertained byan intelligent and very enterprising people as to the causesof the disease and the methods by which it is believedto have been introduced and spread in that country. So faras Europe is concerned, it is not likely that it will beaffected by an extension of the epidemic from Japan.The Vienna correspondent of the Times says that on the

23rd inst. a death took place at Tarnopol in Galicia and theprovisional diagnosis of Asiatic cholera has now been confirmedby bacteriological examination.

THE CASE OF MR. R. B. ANDERSON.

TnAT all British subjects are entitled to the benefits of animpartial administration of justice everywhere throughoutthis realm is a cardinal maxim of our legal system. The

agents and exponents of the law are fallible, like otherhuman beings, but hardships arising from this naturaldefect in most cases admit of reparation. The broal

principles of justice are practically unalterable, and thesecurity of individual members of the community is under-stood to be guaranteed by publicity and by the right of £

appeal. The conspicuous integrity of the administration,ofthe law in England tends to foster this belief. Not withinthepresent century have judges in this country been chargedwith systematic partiality, bias, and misuse of judicialpowers. The same, however, cannot be said of all parts .ofthe Queen’s dominions. For some time past the columns ofTHE LANCET have contained frequent references to theremarkable hardships which have been illegally, but inthe name of the law, inflicted on a member of our

profession, Mr. R. B. Anderson, of the Island ofTobago, in the West Indies. This gentleman, who in1873 became a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons ofEngland, settled in Tobago, where he attained considerablesuccess in practice and received the appointment of colonialsurgeon, an office which after he had held it for five yearswas discontinued, Mr. Anderson receiving a pension by wayof compensation. By the year 1889 he had been aboutsixteen years in practice in the island; he was, moreover, ajustice of the peace, an elected member of the Legislativebody, and a landowner. In that year, and after he ha8ceased to be the colonial surgeon, he was consulted by acoloured woman named Marshall, who suffered from limitednecrosis of the lower jaw. After some months’ preliminaryattendance, necessitated by the unsatisfactory state of thepatient’s health, Mr. Anderson, with the assistance of a

medical friend, cut down upon the sequestrum. It did notseparate immediately, the patient’s husband made himselfobjectionable, and after some weeks’ further attendanceMr. Anderson suggested that they should seek other advicer

547FIFTH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF OTOLOGY.

and retired from the case. About a fortnight after hisattendance ceased, the sequestrum became loosened,and was easily removed by Dr. Tulloch, of Tobago, merelywith his fingers. Mr. Anderson’s professional chargesnot being paid, he took proceedings in the Petty DebtCourt, and after some inexplicable delay found that theChief Justice, Sir John Gorrie, who was then in the Island ofTrinidad, had given special directions that this case was not tobe tried until his (Sir John Gorrie’s) arrival in Tobago. In themeantime Mrs. Marshall and her husband sued Mr. Andersonin forvid pauperis for .f:15 damages ; there was no shadow ofproof that the female plaintiff had sustained any injury, andthe principal charge alleged against the defendant was

neglect, inasmuch as he had improperly ceased to attend theplaintiff and retired from the case before recovery was

complete. In the result the Chief Justice, in the begin-ning of 1890, gave judgment for the plaintiff for practi-cally f,17 10s., with costs for breach of contract-forwhich the plaintiffs had not sued, neither had their

plaint been amended to include it. Sir John Gorrie furtherstated, without any reservation, that a medical man, as such,and merely by becoming qualified, was bound to attend allcases of illness to which he was summoned, and that nomedical man had a right, without the consent of the patient,to abandon any case which he had begun to treat, even

where other medical aid was available and where the patientwas running no risk from such abandonment, and that by sodoing he laid himself open to an action at law, civil or

criminal. He also stigmatised the making of contracts priorto attendance as an unprofessional and improper act on thepart of the practitioner. It is almost needless to addthat Mr. Anderson’s claim for fees was disallowed by SirJohn Gorrie. About a year afterwards-viz., on Jan. 20th,1891-summonses in a non-medical case were taken out

against Mr. Anderson. The plaintiff sued in fo2-iiii pauperis,no affidavit was made to show that the debts were unpaid,and the total amount of the judgment debts, including costs,was E42 2s. The case was tried in Tobago before Mr. JusticeCook, and Mr. Anderson was on Jan. 23rd ordered by thisjudge, upon adjournment of his examination, to give his

security in R500 and also to find bail in E500 for his

appearance at the adjourned hearing of the summons,and in default of giving such security he was committedto prison, where he remained until the adjourned hearingwas resumed on Jan. 30th. On that day Mr. JusticeCook again adjourned the hearing after some examina-tion and required Mr. Anderson to find security for his

appearance, as before, in two sums of E500 each. Fivewell-known residents, three of whom were members of theLegislative Council, perceiving that a grave injustice wasbeing perpetrated, went in a body to the judge to offer thesecurity. Mr. Anderson was sent to England in 1891 bypublic subscriptions raised in Trinidad, to lay his wrongsbefore the home authorities and the public. On Sept. 14thof that year he instituted his remarkable action in theCourt of Queen’s Bench against the Trinidad judges(Anderson r. Gorrie and others). The facts disclosedwere too flagrant to be overlooked. In 1892 a RoyalCommission, consisting of Sir William Markby and SirFrederick Pollock, was appointed to inquire into the admini-stration of justice in Trinidad and Tobago, and their reportresulted in the removal of Mr. Justice Cook from office.Sir John Gorrie was also interdicted pending the formalbringing of charges against him, but the interdiction wassoon followed by his death. Mr. Anderson’s action againstthe judges only came on in April, 1894, and occupiedseven days, before the late Lord Chief Justice Cole-

ridge and a special jury of Middlesex. In the course

of the trial Lord Coleridge stigmatised the impositionof the bail already mentioned as "a piece of un-

mitigated, unlawful tyranny," and in the course ofhis summing-up said:—"The proceedings for contempt ofcourt taken against the plaintiff for having petitioned theQueen were quite unjustifiable. Then judgments having Ibeen obtained against Mr. Anderson for R42, Mr. Justice ICook held him to bail for f’.500. He confessed he could not iunderstand how an English judge could have so acted."The verdict was as follows :-" The jury find that thedefendant Cook oppressively and with malice overstrainedhis judicial powers to the prejudice of the plaintiff and thewilful perversion of justice, and found a verdict for theplaintiff for R500." Lord Coleridge, however, entered judg-ment for the defendant on the ground that no action will lieagainst a judge for an act done in his judicial capacity, and

this judgment has been confirmed by the Master of the Rolls,Lord Esher, and the Court of Appeal. ’".-""". .

Mr. Anderson is, therefore, in an exceptional and almostunique manner the helpless victim of judicial persecution.He has been forced into heavy expenditure in the defence ofhis natural rights-an object so dear to every Englishman-now lie has the additional mortification of findingthat the survivor of his persecutors is by a legal techni-cality placed above the ordinary operation of Iaw,"andthereby enabled to evade making reparation for his unlawfulacts. Mr. Andersen’s courage is admirable, but it is im-possible to avoid pitying him. His thriving practice has beenbroken up, judgments unjustly given against him in Tobagoare still in force and prevent him from returning to the

island, whilst his means are consumed in the unequalstruggle against an impassive officialism which admits thejustice of his cause and the reality of his hardships but failsto provide redress.

FIFTH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OFOTOLOGY.

Ix reference to this congress, which will be held at Florencefrom Sept. 23rd to 26th, Messrs. Thomas Cook and Son ofLudgate-circus, London, E.C., have made the followingarrangements for issuing tickets to Florence by all routes.As delegates will be entitled to tickets at greatly reducedfares on the Italian railways by production of their certifi-cate of membership at the railway station at the frontier,Messrs. Cook and Son also issue tickets to Modane, Vinti-mille, or Cliiasso by all routes. The following are a fewexamples of the chief routes :-

i i i i

Messrs. Cook and Son can also supply circular tickets fromLondon to Dover, Calais, Laon, Lucerne, St. Gothard,Chiasso, Milan, returning viâ Turin, Modane, Paris, Calais,Dover, London, at £11 5s. 1 d. first class and £8 4s. secondclass ; and through tickets from Southampton to Genoa,by North German Lloyd steamers, leaving Southampton onSept. lst and 15th, and arriving at Genoa on Sept. 9th and23rd, at-single journey, first class E8 13s., second class;E5 8s. 6d.; return journey, first class E14 8s. 6d., secondclass £9 1s. Through tickets from London by Orientsteamer, leaving Tilbury on Sept. 6th and 20th, and arriving at,Naples on Sept. 15th and 29th. Fare to Naples, .E14 first,

class, S10 second class. Or by Peninsular and Orientalsteamer, leaving Sept. 13th.

THROUGH SERVICES TO FLORENCE.

London to Paris viti Calais.