349

THE LANCET.

LONDON, SATURDAY, MARCH 31, 1849.

THE .6500 NIEDICAL REFORM FUND.-ARMY SURGEONS.-THE " AIR-TRACTOR."

WE are delighted to see the readiness with which the pro-fession, without solicitation, beyond that contained in ourmere suggestion, has responded to the proposal for raising theFive Hundred Pounds Medical Reform Fund. We would

earnestly implore every man who has already sent in hisadhesion to this practical plan, to consider himself a Mis-sionary in the cause, bound to obtain the adhesion and con-tributions of his professional friends and neighbours. It is

only by such a wholesome propagandism that the requisitefund can be raised; and, without the Five-Hundred Pounder,the profession is in the greatest danger of being carried bystorm. With such a fund, managed by a trustworthy body,elected by and from the contributors, no violence could bedone to the profession. Whatever the measures proposed toParliament, with an ample Reform Fund, it would be possiblein a single week, to take, by means of petitions to Parlia-ment, the sense of the entire profession upon any questionaffecting its honour or interests. There can be no doubt

that, in the present state of the profession, to petition Par-liament, or memorialize Sir GEORGE GREY, is in reality toVOTE. Government will have, and can have, no other objectthan to make a great legal settlement of medical affairs, suchas shall be advantageous to the public, and satisfactory tothe great mass of the profession. To petition, then, is, werepeat, to vote ; and to subscribe to the fund requisite to

set the necessary machinery for petitioning in operation, is tosubscribe to the enfranchisement of the profession. And whowould not be enfranchised in a time like the present ?There are other points of great importance, depending on

the Five Hundred Pounds Fund, but this one of organizingpetitions is at once so tangible and so necessary, that its

utility must be obvious to all. Let this propagandism butspread from man to man, as it should do, and we have nofear for the profession; without it, our fears for all classes areof the gravest kind.

WE republish, in another place, that portion of the speechof Lieut.-general Sir HOWARD DOUGLAS, Bart., in April, 1847,which relates to the claims of the military surgeon to an im-

proved rate of retiring pension, and to military honours anddistinctions. Unfortunately, on the occasion of Sir HOWARDDouGLns’s address, there was but a thin house. Other mem-

bers, we know, were prepared to support the gallant General;but upon their entering the house, another question was underdiscussion, and so the subject dropped.Of objection there was nothing deserving the name. Mr.

Fox MAULE adduced good pay, and other commonplace argu-ments, against the motion, and the house was satisfied. Thus,the disinterested and noble exertions of Sir HOWARD DouoLASfell to the ground. The House of Commons has not, however,done with this subject, and we now call the attention of ourmilitary friends to it, in order that the comparative pecuniaryadvantages of the military and medical services may be placedat once on a fair statistical basis. We would suggest, as a fair

Sample, that the public be furnished with a comrarative state-

ment of the average expectancy of a captain and of a surgeonof infantry, up to the final retirement of each from activeservice. We shall then see how the pay and pension of theseveral medical grades tally with the staff and commandallowances of field officers, with their comparative prizemoney, &c., up to the crowning reward of divisional commands-and to the off-reckonings on regimental clothing.*With this information before him, every one can form his

own judgment; and we shall be much surprised if the pecu-niary rewards of the medical officer do not prove far, very far,behind those of his military brethren.

Sir HowARD DOUGLAs has shown us, that, in retiring pensions,the surgeon of thirty years’ standing is below the veterinary-surgeon and the quarter-master !Where is the degradation of the medical departments of

the army and navy to end ? î

WE have been requested to publish the correspondencebetween Dr. M ITCHELL, of Nottingham, and Professor SUIPSON,respecting the merit of priority in the invention of the " air-tractor." We do not consider it necessary to comply withthis request, since the correspondence has already appeared ina contemporary journal. The facts of the matter are brieflythese. Dr. MrTCHELL states, that when a pupil of the mid-wifery class in the University of Edinburgh, in 1847-48, heheard Dr. Srafpsorr refer to Dr. NEIL ARNOTT’S well-known

proposal to apply traction to the faetal head by means of. aleather sucker, such as boys use in their play; that Dr. Smp-soN declared he had endeavoured, in vain, to apply such aninstrument in the Edinburgh Maternity, and that he shouldbe glad to hear if any of his class had sufficient mechanical

genius to construct an available instrument of this kind.

Upon this, Dr. MITCHELL busied himself with the applicationof this principle, and showed to his fellow students drawings ofthe instruments he proposed. At the end of the session, inthe prize examinations in Dr. SmMPSON’s class, Dr. MITCHELLdescribed his instrument in his examination papers, and ac-

companied the description with a drawing of his proposedair-tractor. The description and drawings were sent in toProfessor SiMPSON, and, as Dr. MITCHELL avers, treated withsilent contempt.On complaining of this to Professor SiMpsoN after the air-

tractor had been published, without the slightest allusion toDr. MiTCHEu/s name, the Professor declared that, as far ashe knew, he had never seen Dr. irxcar;r,L’s exercises, andthat he had always confided the reading and determination ofthe prizes and exercises to others upon whom he could rely.With this explanation, Dr. MITCHELL was grievously dissatis-fied. Dr. SiMpsoN’s assistant, Dr. DUNCAN, subsequently wroteto Dr. MITCHELL, to inform him that he, Dr. DUNCAN, reacrand decided upon his exercises. Hence the dilemma, ac-cording to Dr. MITCHELL: either Dr. SIMPSON did see the ex-ercises in question, or he entrusted the prize distribution taimproper hands ? We quote the concluding observations of aletter by Dr. MITCHELL on these points. As matter of fair-ness and honour between student and professor, the case is

one of considerable importance.

* We do not wish to speak here of the salaries of military governors ofcolonies, because these are but accidents, though, unhappily for the interests s_of England, frequent accidents in the lives of our geL eraIs. But let that

pass.

350 THE MANCHESTER MEDICO-ETHICAL ASSOCIATION.-CLAIMS OF MR. A. WALKER.

"It can scarcely be credited, that one (Dr. Duncan) whohad the means of knowing to whom the papers belonged,should have been allowed to indulge his likes and dislikestowards certain of the competitors by his decision upon theirpapers; supposing, however, such to have been the case, it isa violent improbability to suppose that Dr. Duncan, whoassists Dr. Simpson in everything, and is constantly with him,should have kept the article on the air-tractor from hisknowledge, especially when he knew that the Professor had’ thought and talked of it’ so long ago !"After all, the instrument itself may not possess any

obstetric value whatever, but this does not affect the ques-tions of principle involved in the correspondence betweenProfessor Simpsox and Dr. MITCHELL.

WE need not say that we cordially approve of the Memorial,which we publish elsewhere, from the Manchester Medico-Ethical Association. The various points in favour of theappointment of medical men to coronerships are urged withthe most clear and cogent reasoning in that document. These

reasonings, taken up, and repeated from time to time, mustproduce their intended effect, notwithstanding the powerfulinterest inherent to the legal profession. Already, the argu-ments on one side have been successful in many instances, and

taking the whole of England, there really is a fair array ofmedical men holding the coroner’s office. The number cannotfail to increase, if the discussion of the subject be resolutelypersevered in. No reasonable man can doubt that the medicalman is, in the majority of the emergencies incident to thecoronership, far more capable than the mere lawyer. Perfec-

tion would lie in a due admixture of medicine and law in

candidates for this important office. It would be well if a

class of men could be specially trained, both in law and medi-cine, and we have often thought it a most valuable suggestion,that facilities should be given for combining the degrees ofM.D. and LL.B. of the University of London. To such a

Combination of qualification not a word of objection could beoffered, even by the most zealous lawyer.We cannot refer to this subject, without, at the same time,

according our warmest praise to the career of the ManchesterAssociation. Since its organization, a great number of im-portant questions have been touched upon in a manner whichhas been most serviceable to the highest interests of the pro-fession. We need only refer to the subjects of medical

etiquette, life-insurance fees, as well as the present Memorial.We feel the more interest in this society, as it is the embodi-ment of principles which we most zealously advocated be-fore its establishment. We have often considered this Asso-ciation as the most promising reply made to our reiterateddemand for a purer professional ethos than had long obtainedwithin our ranks. It is the embodiment of a new state of

feeling in the profession. We would fain believe, that notonly in Manchester, but wherever British medicine extends,a public professional feeling is taking the place of the oldsentiment of selfishness and caste. Would that every town

in the kingdom had, like Manchester, its Ethical Association,with such a president as Dr. BARDSLEY, and such secretaries Ias Messrs. R. ALLEN and J. AIKENHEAD; we should then havea weighty counterpoise to the mischievous jobbery of themetropolitan corporate bodies. Since the foundation of this

association, public professional feeling has greatly im-

proved in Manchester. To the true lover of the profession,nothing more encouraging has occurred, of recent date, than

the late memorial of the medical men of Manchester, to thenumber of 150, against the abominable scheme founded on thePrinciples, and advocated by the treacherous Institute. Once

more commending Manchester for her aid in the good causeof professional advancement, ethically, scientifically, andpolitically, we venture to hope that the other great provincialtowns-Liverpool, Birmingham, Bristol, Bath, Hull, Leeds,Sheffield, Norwich, Newcastle, &c., will also be up and stirringin like manner. They can do no better than follow so noblean example. Heaven knows, there is need enough of exertion,if medical men do not wish the profession to sink still lowerand"lower in the hands of the selfish corporations.

OUR readers will no doubt recollect, that towards theclose of last year we presented to their notice, in the pages ofTHE LANCET, a series of papers from the pen of Mr. ALEXANDERWALKER, pointing out the extent of his claims as a pioneer inthe march of discovery as relates to the physiology of thenervous system-that field of research which has been sofertile in salutary results to medical science and the humanrace. In publishing those papers we by no means pledgedourselves (nor do we now) to an unconditional assent to thewhole, or even the majority, of the views of Mr. WALKER; butwe must assert that enough has been adduced, both in his ownetatements, and in the acknowledgments, from time to time, ofhis contemporaries, to prove that he was the first modern ob-server to take a step towards a correct knowledge of thefunctions of the nervous system; and we accordingly claimthe sympathy and aid of the profession for one who has longlaboured unrequited for the advancement of others and thegood of posterity. A painful, though not an uncommon spec-tacle, is that of a man devoting his energies and years for thebenefit of an after generation, all the while waging an unequalwarfare with pecuniary difficulties. Such has long been thecase (and, as regards his embarrassments, is peculiarly so atpresent,) with the author of the papers in question. Mr.

ALEXANDER WALKER, who had unquestionably the first idea ofthe separate, function of the roots of the spinal nerves, and ofthe anterior and posterior columns of the spinal cord-a discoverypossibly as prolific of practical results as that of HARVEY-is now living in grievous perplexities. This is not as it

ought to be. There should be a state-provision, in this

wealthy empire, for those who dedicate their time and

energies-neglectful of self, forsaking the road to fortuneor competence-in a zealous prosecution of science, espe-cially a branch of natural science which demands prolongedand intricate research, and the utility of which cannot,from its very nature, be appreciated by the community atlarge. Failing such a resource, it becomes a matter of neces-sity to lay the appeal before the limited class which alone is

competent to decide the merits of the claims for which a re-

compence is due.

Mr. ALEXANDER WALKER is the author of an elaborate

work on the Nervous System, in which some very peculiarviews are announced. He is also the. author of works on" Beauty," " Woman," " Intermarriage," and a work on

some fundamenta principles of Pathology, all characterizedby much originality of observation and thought; and thoughlast to be mentioned, by no means least in importance, hewas, in 1809-10, the editor (and, we believe, almost the sole

351SIR HOWARD DOUGLAS’S SPEECH ON THE ARMY-SURGEONS’ BILL.

’writer) of the "Archives of Universal Science," a work

abounding in questions of recondite philosophy.The question of the correctness or incorrectness of Mr.

WALKER’S views is, in this place, wholly beside the mark;nor have we here anything to do with the polemical disqui-sitions which are lavishly scattered through some of his trea-tises. We only wish to recal attention to the fact that he

appears to have been the first to point out that the two rootsof the spinal nerves were endued with sensation and motionrespectively, and thereby to lead to the true knowledge ofthe physiology of the spinal cord, although a theory dif-ferent from his own, on this head, is the doctrine generallyaccepted in the present day. But, for our own parts, weconsider some of the other works of Mr. WALKER, in

branches of inquiry which he has made peculiarly his own, tobe of at least equal importance with that on the NervousSystem. We may instance, particularly, his work on " Inter-marriage," which exhibits great ingenuity of thought, andis stamped with the impress of well-directed labour.

Differences of opinion upon scientific points will perhapsever agitate medical minds; differences in schemes of medicalpolity may disunite our ranks; but there is one ground onwhich all members of our fraternity can unite-in the self-sacrificing spirit which characterizes our profession, to openthe heart and hand to raise up a distressed brother. It were

well, considering what Mr. WALKER has done for science, if arepresentation of his circumstances were made by his profes-sional brethren, to the Government, to obtain for him, if pos-sible, some pension for the remainder of his life-a pensionfrom the Government fund, which ought to be devoted to per-sons who by their scientific or literary labours have renderedservices to their country.* Meanwhile, it is necessary to

relieve Mr. WALKER’S embarrassments; and in proposingthat a subscription be opened for that purpose, it affords usgreat pleasure to be enabled to state that " Dr. ALisoN, Pro-" fessor of Practice of Medicine in the University of Edin-" burgh, Mr. GOODSIR, Professor of Anatomy in the University" of Edinburgh, and the Rev. W. STEVENSON, of South Leith," have consented to receive contributions." We are also

glad to announce that Professors SHARl’EY and GRANT, ofUniversity College, and Professors TODD and BOWMAN, of

King’s College, London, agree to become treasurers, and wehope their example will be followed in other parts of GreatBritain, by gentlemen who will communicate with the trea-surers in Edinburgh or in London. Let his medical brethren

now rally round, and aid Mr. WALKER in his extremity,nor give cause for it to be said, that our profession-so justlyesteemed for its warmth of charity-has neglected and aban-doned one of its most laborious and deserving members.

ABSTRACT OF A SPEECH IN THE HOUSE OF COM-MONS, BY LIEUT.-GEN. SIR HOWARD DOUGLAS,BART., M.P., ON THE ARMY-SURGEONS’ BILL.

Sm H. DOUGLAS rose, pursuant to notice, to call attention tothe cases of medical officers, surgeons, and paymasters of re-giments, who have not been included in the warrant issued inMay, 1846, consequent upon the motion he made in April,1845, for an improved retirement to a limited number of me-dical officers, and all officers of regimental staff, to extend tothem the benefits conferred by the war-warrant dated the 1 st

* We shall be glad to give a place, in an early number of THE LANCET,to any representation that may be drawn up, with the view of bringing the isubject of Mr. WALKER’S claims before Government. I

October, 1840, to officers of all other branches and arms of theservice. In October, 1840, a warrant was issued, granting full-pay retirement to a limited number of officers of infantry andcavalry, including 20 lieutenant-colonels, 20 majors, and 115captains, of whom 45 might be brevet-majors. This boon wassoon after extended by war-warrant to a limited number ofofficers of artillery, engineers, and marines, and navy. Thisfull-pay retirement, however, was not extended to medicalofficers, nor to the officers of the regimental staff-namely,surgeons, paymasters, quartermasters, and veterinary surgeons.Deeming this distinction unjust, he (Sir H. Douglas), in theyear 1845, in Committee on the Army Estimates, brought thesubject under the consideration of the House, when his viewsappeared to meet with unanimous approbation, at least no ob-jection was urged against them. In May, 1846, a warrantwas issued, granting an increased retirement to quartermas-ters and veterinary surgeons to the extent of about five-sixthsof their pay, but neither paymaster nor surgeon were included.The improved retirement granted to veterinary surgeons andquartermasters was 8s. and 10s. a day, respectively, after thirtyyears’ service. His object was to urge the just claims of pay-masters, regimental surgeons, and medical officers, to partici-pate, in like proportion, in those advantages. The principle ofthis arrangement was not confined to the two classes of offi-cers to which he referred, but was established by Actof Parliament to regulate the amount of retired allowanceto all public functionaries in certain proportions to theirfull pay, or salaries at the time of retirement, increasingby twelfths for every five-years’ service, commencing afterhaving served ten. The efÌect of this would be to increasethe retiring pay of the other two classes, from 15s. to 18s. anda fraction. The measure, as he had stated, would, to a certainextent, be self-sustaining, for the pay of a regimental surgeonwho had served thirty years, being ae1 2s. a day; and that ofa paymaster, Sl 2s. 6d. ; and the former being succeeded by a.surgeon, commencing on 13s. a day, and the paymaster by oneon 12s. 6d. a day, there would obviously be a commensuratesaving. But what paymaster or surgeon would give up 22s. aday in addition to the advantages which he derived from bar-rack accommodation, lights, fuel, a soldier servant, and theadvantages of a mess, which might be taken altogether, equalto 10s. more, to retire on 15s. a day1 What was the conse-quence ? That these officers were obliged to cling to activeservice long after their physical powers were too much im-paired to discharge efficiently their laborious duties, and muchlonger, consequently, than was consistent with the good of theservice or their own comfort. With respect to medical offi-cers, surgeons of regiments, whatever argument could be urgedon behalf of paymasters, might be applied with greaterforce to the case of that learned, most important, and, as hethought, rather neglected class, entitled on every account tothe first consideration and distinction. The army surgeon, itis true, does not purchase his commission; but the expensenecessarily invested on his education must not be forgotten;and he, like the paymaster, cannot realize this by sale, for thebenefit of his family. No one who knows anything of thesevere and painful duties which a medical officer has to dis-charge, and the services in which he must be engaged, in thepresence of disease of every kind, facing death in every shape,can doubt of the hardships which officers of that class musthave undergone during a service of thirty years. The surgeon,too, let it be remembered, must be in full possession of all hisenergies, keep himself well up to the mark in every improve-ment in practical surgery and in medical science. Paymastersand quartermasters may, with rather diminished powers, clingto the service without any great detriment to it, or inconve-nience to themselves, after these had somewhat faded; butthere was a period of life beyond which the medical officer,however perfect his intellect, could not discharge effectuallyhis duties on the field as surgeon of the regiment-a periodbeyond which vision becomes imperfect, the nerve unbraced,the hand too unsteady in the difficult and delicate operationswhich a surgeon was called upon to perform. No man of theage of sixty or sixty-two could be expected to retain thesefaculties unimpaired; and as the great bulk of medical offi-cers enter the army at the age of twenty-four, thirty-twoyears’ service would bring them near to that stage in humanexistence, beyond which it would be vain and unreasonable toexpect that a medical officer of thirty or thirty-five years’ ser-vice in all climates should retain his efficiency. Officers socircumstanced are aware of this sad truth, but continue toserve, knowing that the half-pay to which they are entitled isinsufficient for their wants; that, from bodily infirmities anddeficiency of mental energy, they cannot add to their incomeby private practice, being unequal to compete successfully