832

return for this extraordinary alleviation, or rather annihila-tion, of all sufferings under surgical treatment, man shoulddeem it his duty to render thanks to that Omnipotent Powerfrom which it has proceeded, is it possible for him practicallyto perform any more acceptable act of acknowledgmentthan to allow the dumb creatures in his service to partici-pate in a blessing which, by Divine authority, has been

imparted to the possessors, not exclusively of human reason,but without favour or exception of animal life 7 As regardshis horses, the performance of this duty is especiallyincumbent; for not only, like all other animals, are theyliable to the accidents and ills that flesh is heir to, but someof the cruelest operations to which they are subjected-such,for instance, as cutting off and cauterising their tails, burn-ing their sinews with red-hot irons, dividing and cuttingout a portion of a nerve (sensory), with other excruciatingoperations on young horses, under which they are oftenheard to squeal from pain-are inflicted on them to complywith either a useless as well as a barbarous fashion ; or toenable them ’ to go for another season’s hunting’ ; or

for the attainment of conveniences of which the horsederives not the smallest share ; or to make them sound

enough to sell’ ; and as the high-bred, broken-downhunter has no voice to ask for mercy, as he cannotboast of possessing reason, or as he has inherited no know-ledge, as he has no power to bequeath any, as his whole

energies have been devoted to the service and enjoyments ofman, by whose mechanical contrivances he is now ’ cast’ withhis four feet shackled together, lying prostrate on a heap ofstraw, just before the red hot iron sears his overstrainedsinews or the sharp knife is inserted into his living flesh-surely in a civilised country like England some high powershould be authorised to exclaim, not Woodman, spare thattree !’ but ’ Sportsman, save that horse!’ by chloroformfrom the agonibing torture to which you have sentenced him.You are a man of pleasure-save him from unnecessary pain.You are a man of business-incribe in that ledger in whichevery one of the acts of your life is recorded, on one side howmuch he will gain, and on the other, per contra, how verylittle you will lose, by the evaporation ot a fluid that will notcost you the price of the shoes of the poor animal whosemarketable value you have determined, by excruciating agonyto him, to increase."This urgent appeal concludes with another allusion to the

benefits chloroform has conferred on the human species,and adds : "If, therefore, man to this enormous

extent is benefited by chloroform, what right has he to

withhold it from his own animals, to whom, not onlyin equity, but by the laws of God it belongs as muchas it belongs to him ? 2 Their claims are so affectingand so obvious, the remedy that would save them from allpain is so cheap and simple, that we feel it is only necessaryto appeal to the public to obtain by acclamation a verdict intheir favour."

Notwithstanding this and similar appeals and remon-

strances, the employment of ansesthetics has made slowprogress in veterinary practice, expense, trouble, and timebeing usually the pleas offered for their non-adoption. Anumber of veterinary surgeons, however, resort to them onevery possible occasion, and, putting the avoidance of painon one side, testify to the advantages they derive fromthem ; indeed, there are some operations which could not beattempted with any hope of a successful result unlessthe animal is under the influence of an anaesthetic. Even incases of difficult parturition, partial anaesthesia, especially inthe mare, is found to be most advantageous in effecting delivery. Of all animals the horse is the one to which Ichloroform can be most safely administered ; in fact, it issometimes an arduous task to destroy this creature by inhala-tion of the drng. It has been given to hundreds-it might besaid thousands-of horses, almost undiluted with air, andwith absolute impunity. But some veterinary surgeons imaginethat there may be danger in this rapid ana;sthesia, and advisethe mixture of chloroform and air, which, if it requires alonger time to produce the necessary degree of narcosis, issafer. However this may be, it is gratifying to find thatattention is being increasingly directed to this matter; andamong those who have distinguished themselves in this

direction, and have laboared to dispel the prejudice whichstill opposes the use of chloroform, must be named Mr.Wallis Hoare, F.R.C.V.S., Cork, who, in advising the dilutionof chloroform vapour with air during inhalation, has improvedon the ordinary apparatus by a modified bag and foot bellows,which appears to be easily worked and effective. For adult

horses the quantity of chloroform required in this apparatusis from one and a half to two ounces, the time occupied inproducing complete anaesthesia varying from ton to fifteenminutes, and Mr. Iloare regards loss of muscular power in,the limbs and loss of sensation on striking the animalfirmly on the quarter as the best indications of the properstage at which operations may be commenced. Mr. Hoareisevidently an enthusiast in this humane practice of veterinarysurgery, and it is earnestly to be hoped that his example maybe largely followed ; for though all animals should receivemerciful consideration when they have to undergo operations,surely none of them is more entitled to this than the horse,whose muteness under the infliction of pain seems to leadpeople to think that he suffers but little-a grave error,but one which has caused him to be more abused and torturedthan all the others put together.

THE

COMPLIMENTARY DINNER TO SIR JOHN E.ERICHSEN, SIR J. RUSSELL REYNOLDS,

AND SIR JOHN WILLIAMS.

SIR JOIIN E. ERICHSEN, Sir J. Russell Reynolds, andSir John Williams were entertained at dinner on Wednesdayevening by their colleagues, friends, and pupils at the CriterionRestaurant. The Vice-President of University College, LordReay, presided.Lord REAY, in rising to propose the health of the three dis-

tinguished guests, said it was impossible to leave out of sightthe extraordinary revolution which the science of which theywere the illustrious representatives had undergone. Afterbriefly tracing the development of their professional know-ledge and touching upon the recent discoveries of Roux withreference to diphtheria ; of Lord Rayleigh and ProfessorRamsay with regard to argon and helium ; of Kitasato withregard to the microbe of the plague ; of Sir Joseph Lister,Pasteur, and others, he said the conquests which had beenachieved were tangible ones, tending to make life more worthliving. Referrirg to the efforts which had been made to riàthe profession of quackery, he would like to see other

professions adopt something similar to the Medical Register.He saw little signs, however, of getting rid of qnacksin other professions, and in this respect the medical

profession in England had been singularly fortunate.To belong to such a profession was in itself a greathonour. To rise to a leading position in the profes.sion such as that which their three guests held madeit superfluous to enter into biographical details. Of SirJohn Erichsen it was sufficient to mention that he wasthe author of a standard work on the Science and Artof Surgery ; and those who had worked with him, for him,and under him, in University College knew the stimulatingpower of his work His example had left an indelible mark.Sir Russell Reynolds’ "System of Medicine" alone entitledhim to the position he held, and Sir John Williams hadmastered in all their medical and surgical ramifications thescience and art of gynaecology. In offering congratulatioD&to these gentlemen it could not be forgotten that this officialrecognition of their talents followed the natural selectionof the fittest by those best able to judge. It was a note-

worthy fact that in the medical profession the State was COD-spicuous by its absence, except when it created baronets.The medical schools were self-governing institutions, the

hospitals were not aided or controlled by County Conncils,and the Royal Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons werecorporations which were absolutely their own masters. Itwas a situation which was absolutely unique in the world,and if it could be followed by other professions would betotheir advantage. It was a great honour to University Collegethat its medical school claimed all three of their guests,and that in Sir John Erichsen they had a past President ofthe Royal College of Surgeons, and in Sir Russell Reynoldsthe actual President of the Royal College of Physicians.Their position had been attained not only by the splendourof their intellect, but by the self-sacrifice of which through-out their careers they had given such abundant proof. LordReay then piid a tribute to the memory of the late SirWilliam Savory, testifying to the good work be had done onthe Royal Commission on the University of London.The toast of the evening was spoken to by Sir Henry

833

Thompson, who gave some interesting reminiscences, andby Dr. Champneys, who spoke of his associations with SirJohn Williams.

Sir JOHN E. ERICHSEN, in responding, expressed the grati-fication he felt for the reception which had been accorded tohim that evening. The distinction which had been conferred

upon him by Her Majesty was most gratifying, but therewas the proverbial drop of bitter in the cup. "It comestoo late." In looking down that long vista of his life whichextended from the commencement of his work to the presentday, he could truly say that he had ever tried to

so shape his work that it might conduce to maintain thehonour and dignity of the profession to which he belonged,both in public and in private. If there was one matter more

gratifying to him than another it was that the distinctionconferred upon him was not a personal one but was conferredthrough an individual upon the profession. The public atlarge knew little of the inner life of the profession, ofthe great intellectual activity of its members, of its

splendid achievements in scientific work, of its devotion toduty, and of its self-sacrifice in the cause of charity. Thesecharacteristics were common to the humblest as well as themost exalted members of the profession, from the dresserwho imperils his life in attending to a patient to thework of Presidents of the Royal Colleges. The debtof gratitude which he owed to University College hecould never repay, the opportunities in early life forachieving whatever success he bad attained and the forma-tion of many friendships. To be president of UniversityCollege was one of the highest honours which could befall aprofessional man, especially when he was the successor ofsuch men as Lord Brougham, Mr. Grote, Lord Belper, andLord Kimberley.SirJ. RUSSELL REYNOLDS said that nothing could be more

gratifying to any member of the medical profession than thatevening had proved to him. He stood between his oldmaster, Sir John Erichsen. who was subsequently his col-

league and always his friend, and Sir John Williams,an old pupil, then his colleague and afterwards his ftiend.Something had lately been said about University Collegebeing a favoured one, but it had always enjoyed a largeshare of University honours, and had been productiveof men of distinction not only in the medical but also in thelegal professions. In the former he mentioned Sir JosephLister and Sir Richard Quain, and in the latter Sir G. Jesseland the present Lord Chancellor. Sir Russell Reynolds thenconcluded a brilliant little speech by relating a personalanecdote. He was called to see a gentleman, and the nextday a friend of his called upon the patient. On the friend

inquiring of the butler how the gentleman was. he replied,"Oh, he is much better and quite happy now. He has justseen Sir Joshua Reynolds, the president of the RoyalAcademy." "Sir JOHN WILLIAMS also responded.Sir WILLIAM BROADBENT proposed the health of the

Chairman, remarking that he did not think any honoursbestowed within his recollection had been received with suchunanimous goodwill and support on behalf of the professionas those which had been conferred upon their guests.During the evening Dr. F. Roberts admirably rendered the

charming ballad The Anchor ’s Weighed."

THE WOMEN’S FREE HOSPITAL,SOUTHAMPTON.

WE have received the following statement from the Hon.Secretaries of the Southampton Medical Society with a

request, as will be seen, for its publication :-"Certain facts relating to the constitution, management,

and work of the above hospital having come to the know-ledge of several members of the Southampton MedicalSociety in the course of their individual practices, and alsoto the members generally in the ordinary course of the workof the society, which are deemed by them to be of seriouspublic importance, we are instructed by the society to requestthe Editors of THE LANCET, in the public interest, to pub-lish the following statement of facts :-"In November, 1889, a few persons met and discussed the

subject of starting in Southampton a free hospital for thetreatment of the special diseases of women, and a committeeof five was appointed and the hospital started at 1, Bellevue-

terrace. In June, 1890, it was removed to 17, Ordnance-road, and in June, 1891, to 2, Middle Portland-terrace, andsince then the out-patients’ department has been removed to.a new building in Portland-terrace, where it is now carriedon. Professor Lawson Tait was stated to be the consultingsurgeon and Mr. Eliot the medical oflicer. Subsequently thecommittee announced that Dr. Playfair had consented to actas consulting physician, and had promised his support. The:committee, with the hospital thus formed and staffed, inabout December, 1891, issued an urgent appeal to the public.for support, and in each of the three reports subsequentlyissued by them a similar appeal is made. This appeal has insome small degree been responded to by public subscriptions.and donations.

"Notwithstanding that the hospital is called ’free,’ itappears from the reports issued by the committee that.patients require letters of recommendation, to be renewedtevery two months, subscribers of one guinea annually receiv-ing seven letters, those subscribing 10.’!. 6d. three letters, andthose subscribing 58. one letter. In-patients have to pay themedical officer a sum of two guineas a week and are treatedat his private surgical home. which in an extract from a.

newspaper notice incorporated in an advertisement of the.home contained in a local directory is described as a placewhere patience and kindness combined with vast experienceand skill can hardly fail to bring about a speedy recovery.’That the committee are responsible for the in-patients as.well as the out-patients is shown by the fact that in theirpublished statement of the patients treated they include in-patients. In their first report they state that a ward hasbeen efficiently fitted up ...... with all modern appliances forthe reception of in-patients’ ; and they add, ’As soon as.funds will permit all such cases will be offered the boon ofbeing admitted for treatment as in-patients at the hospital.’’In their second report they state that an arrangement had been.

made with their medical officer to receive hospital patients ata charge of two guineas a week, payable by the patient; at ahouse he had taken for his private patients ; and the medical’officer, in his report to the committee-which was adopted

i by them and published with their report-stated, ’I am glad: to state we can now treat in-patients and out-patients under! a different roof.’ In his report the medical cfficer thought: right to inform the committee that he had a good staff oft nurses thoroughly trained in the special branch of work they1were engaged in. This seems to imply a most incrediblet ignorance on the part of the committee as to matters they1 should have under their control. In their third report thetcommittei state that patients requiring operations have1 been admitted into beds set apart for hospital patients at. 8, Carlton-crescent, according to the arrangement that the-t committce made with their medical officer last year.’ The1 medical cflicer, in his report, adopted and published by the

committee, states, I have admitted cases for operations,into 8, Carlton-crescent,’ and adds that twenty-four

eabdominal sections have been performed, in addition to others operations.’ In a letter from the hon. secretary to theLi hospital in answer to an inquiry for information, under datea July 16.b, 1894, he &ta,tes: ’The in-patients have been

treated at Rockstone House ’ (or 8. Carlton- crescent) I ine the free ward,’ and adds the somewhat extraordinary state--

ment, 11 I am not in a position to answer your question, not-having access to the books.’"The reports of the committee contain no statement of the

number of patients treated, distinguishing in-patients fromout-patients, or any detailed particulars of the operationsperformed, or the deaths after operation, as is usually givenin reports of a like kind. The published accounts are also.very meagre, giving no particulars of the sums paid by

’

patients or the cost of in-patients. In their second reportathe committee state that their medical officer asked for per-

mission to furnish rooms at 2. Middle Portland-terrace (the-, house used as the hospital) for his private patients, and suchr- permission was given ; but. although the charity bore the rent

and other expenses of the house, no reference is made in theo accounts of any sum received from the medical officer for-k the accommodation thus afforded him.is

’’ Seeing that (1) the committee were taking on themselvest the responsibility of very serious operations involving risk of3- life, and which, if not absolutely necessary, were merely

useless mutilations ; (2) there was only one medical officerte residing in Southampton, the consulting surgeon residing inte Birmingham and the consulting physician in London ; (3) the? hospital is styled ’free,’ while letters of recommendatione- are required and in-patients are expected to pay two guineas