423

Physic and Surgery,"-Mr. W. J. WEST, of Tonbridge, in thechair; whereupon, after deliberation, it was

Proposed by Mr. HARGRAVES, of Tonbridge Wells, secondedby Mr. STARLINC of Hadlow, and resolved unanimously,

" That this meeting entertain the deepest respect for the senti-ments expressed by the Right Hon. the Secretary of State, (SirJames Graham,) in his speech in the House of Commons, on in-troducing the Medical Bill. They therefore feel equal disappoint-ment and regret at finding many clauses in the Bill quite at

variance with those sentiments, greatly prejudicial to the interestsof the general practitioner of medicine, surgery, and midwifery,and that it ought on no account to pass into a law in its presentform."

Proposed by Mr. GoRHAM, of Tonbridge, and seconded byMr. SEDGWICK, of Maidstone,

" That this meeting approve of a Council of Health, properlyconstructed ; but as the present Bill makes no provision for anyrepresentatives of the general practitioner, in such council, theyare of opinion, that it will neither possess nor deserve the confi-dence of the profession, since seventeen or eighteen thousandmembers will be placed at the arbitrary control of a few."Proposed by Mr. THOMPSON, of Westerham, and seconded by

Mr. HARGRAVES, of Tonbridge Wells," That this meeting cannot refrain from expressing great mis-

trust in the powers invested in the Council of Health, as at pre-sent proposed to be constituted, as likely to destroy that cordialityand good feeling which ought to exist between the differentclasses of practitioners in medicine.’’

Proposed by Mr. DUNCAN, of Tonbridge Wells, and seconded I

by Mr. SANKEY, of Leeds," That it is essential to the respectability of the general prac-

titioner, that he should have authority over the education andexamination of members of his own body. That this meetingtherefore earnestly desire the members to be placed on a properfooting, in their own College, (that of members, or of fellows, ofthe College of Surgeons,) or incorporated in a separate collegiateform, by Royal Charter, confirmed by Act of Parliament; andfurther beg to express their desire that a higher standard ofeducation shall be required by the new College than that requiredby the College of Surgeons."

Proposed by Mr. WALLACE, of Hartfield, and seconded byMr. PowELL, of Tonbridge Wells,

" That in conformity with the spirit of the foregoing resolu-tions, a petition and memorial be respectively presented to theHouse of Commons, and the Right Hon. the Secretary of State forthe Home Department; that copies be sent to the National Asso-ciation, and the Members of the Western Division of the Countybe requested to present the petition, and to support the prayerof it."

BRIGHTON.

A MEETING of the medical practitioners of Brighton and itsneighbourhood was held at the Town Hall, on the 31st March,for the purpose of taking into consideration the Bill lately pre-sented to the House of Commons, entitled " A Bill for regulatingthe profession of Physic and Surgery,"-Mr. DR17MMOND in theChair. The following resolutions were moved and adopted :-Moved by Mr. MOTT, and seconded by Mr. MITCHELL,—

" That this meeting, having considered the provisions containedin the Bi!llately presented to the House of Commons, is of opinionthat the same is highly objectionable to them as general prac-titioners, and would be injurious to the public at large if passedinto a law."

Mr. LOWDELL called the attention of the meeting to a factwhich explained the paucity of numbers of the Brighton practi-tioners present at this meeting. An opinion was entertained by agreat number, that the meeting having been called by a branchof the Association, those attending it must be a part of that Asso-ciation, whereas this was a meeting by itself, and the words ofthe circular shewed it. ,

Mr. CoRDO BURROWS said that he might, as HonorarySecretary of the Brighton Branch of the National Association,be permitted to explain to the gentlemen who attended thismeeting from the country, that there had been some little discus-sion as to the mode of calling it. He himself had been desirousof calling it by requisition, but the majority of the members de-cided that it should be called in the manner it had been. He didnot think, that if any gentleman read the circular, he couldsuppose it was a meeting of the Association. After the admirableaddress of Mr. Mott, which explained the objects of the meetingand the position in which the medical profession stood, it was un-lleeessary for him to make any remarks on the subject.-

Mr. TREW (of Steyning) moved, and Mr. HARRIS (ofWorthing) seconded,-" That a petition [read to the meeting]be adopted, and that the members for the borough of Brighton berequested to present and support it, and that the other boroughand county members be requested to support its prayer."

Mr. GEORGE WEEKES (of Hurstperpoint) proposed, and MrGEAR (of Newhaven) seconded, the appointment of the followinggentlemen as a committee, to carry out the objects of the petition- Messrs. Drummond, Cordy, Burrows, Mott, Seabrookt and.

Mitchell, which was adopted unanimously.THE SURGEONS OF THE COUNTY OF HEREFORD.

To the Right Hon. Sir James Graham, Bart., Her Majesty’sSecretary of State for the Home Department.

The Memorial of the Surgeons of the City and County of HerefordSHEWEtH,—

That your memorialists, members of the Royal College of’Surgeons of England resident in the city and county of Hereford,in compliance with the oath they have recently taken, on beingadmitted members of the College, to maintain its dignity and’welfare to the utmost of their power, feel it to be an imperative’ °duty respectfully to call your attention to the injustice displayedin the mode of carrying out the charter recently granted to theRoyal College.Your memorialists cannot but feel, that the Council of the ‘

Royal College of Surgeons of England has broken faith with thegeneral body of the members, by the principle of election to thenewly-created grade of the fellowship which it has seen fit to

pursue. Full power was given to the Council by the new char-ter to carry out this principle in a way which would not haveinterfered with existing rights and privileges, but it has not doneso; and further, your memorialists consider the course it has

adopted is most injurious and degrading to the overwhelmingmajority of its members, and utterly at variance with those prin-ciptes of honour and justice which should ever distinguish a RoyalCollege.Your memorialists fully recognise the right of merit to the dis-

tinction of the fellowship, but this principle of election can onlybe justly carried out to a very limited extent, and when it is-

thought necessary to go beyond this, they are of opinion that theonly just mode is then to make " length of standing in the pro-fession" the means of admission for all present members to thefellowship, (at once, if they have attained the requisite period, oras they respectively do so,) since it is the only plan which, from.its not being retrospective, would prove satisfactory to the mem-bers in general, and regain for the Council that perfect confidencewhich has been so much shaken by a departure from it in the late,:proceedings.

For these reasons, your memorialists would humbly, butearnestly, suggest for pour consideration the propriety of advisingher Majesty to grant a new charter to the Royal College of Sur-geons of England, or to sanction such a modification of the presentcharter, as will effectually remove the injustice which has been’thus cast upon the majority of the members of the College; or, in-the event of neither of these plans being deemed admissible, yourmemorialists would also respectfully suggest for your considara-tion, the propriety of advising her Majesty to grant a separate-charter of incorporation for the general practitioners, as a measure’then essentially necessary, in their opinion, for the maintenanceof the welfare and prosperity of this most important class of thenrofession..

Date of Diploma.Edward Wallcer, Kington 1796George Rootes, Ross ...... 1812Philip James, Hereford... 1813Henry Rudge, Leominster 1613John M. Probyn, Kington 1815J. B. Shelton, Bromyard 1824R. P. Morris, Kingsland... 1829Wm. H. Denham, Pyon... 1829G. R. Terry, Hereford... 1830Charles Cook, Ledbury... 1830Wm. Thompson, Kington 1830John S. Palmer, Weobly 1830Joseph Thomas, Hay...... 1831H. C. Barnard, Hereford 1834Robt. Archibald, Hereford 1834Edmund Jones, Ross...... 1835G. H. Marshall, Kington 1836Wm. Blakely, Kington... 1838Henry G. Bull, Hereford 1841J. Marshall, Leominster 1841F. R. Trumper, Hereford 1842Geo. Gwillim, Ledbury... 1843

Date of Diploma.James Price, Hereford ... 1806J. W. P. Lyde, Hay..... 1807T. F. Watling, Leominster 1813James Lane, Urosmont... 1813S. Millard, Whitchurch... 1826Chas. E. Thomson, Ross 1828H. J. Jenkins, Madley ... 1829Miles A Wood, Ledbury 1830Thos. Pritchard, Hereford 1830’Edwd. James, Kington ... 1830E. W. Howey, Bromyard 1831’John Tanner, Ledbury... 1832;T. Burlton, Leominster... 183.John Morris, Hereford ... 1837T. T. Price, Hereford ... 1838G. Woodcock, Eardisley 1839Peter B. Giles, Byford ... 1840-Joseph G. Barrett, Ross... 1841Saml. Wandby, Hereford 1842’’Thos. Bishop, Hereford... 1842H.W.Watling,Leominster 1843

424

Protest of Surgeons of the and County of Hereford to thePresident, Vice-Presidents, Council of the Royal College ofSurgeons of England.GENTLEMEN We, the undersigned members of the Royal

College of Surgeons of England, resident in the city and countyof Hereford, in compliance with the oath we have taken on beingadmitted members of the college, to maintain its dignity andWelfare to the utmost of our power, feel it to be our imperativeduty most strongly and firmly to protest against the injusticedisplayed in the mode of carrying out the charter recentlygranted to the royal college.We cannot but feel, that the principle of election to the newly-

created grade of the fellowship, which you have pursued, is mostinjurious and degrading to the general body of the members,subversive of their undoubted rights and privileges, and utterlyat variance with those principles of honour and justice whichshould ever distinguish the royal college.We fully admit the right of merit to the distinction of the

fellowship, could this principle in election be justly carried out,but since your experience has already shown its impracticability,by compelling you to depart from it, we would therefore suggestto your consideration, in the event of additional power beinggranted to you, the superior advantage of making -1 standing inthe profession" the means of admission for all present membersto the fellowship of your college, as, in our opinion, it is the onlymode of election which, from its not being retrospective, wouldprove satisfactory to the members in general, and regain for youthat perfect confidence so much shaken by your late proceedings.(The protest was signed by all the gentlemen whose names

are attached to the preceding memorial, and has been forwardedto its proper destination.)

WARRINGTON.

ON Wednesday, the 2nd instant, a special general meeting washeld at the Dispensary for the purpose of taking into considera-tion Sir James Graham’s new " Bill for regulating the professionof Medicine and Surgery." Most of the medical practitionersresident in the town and neighbourhood were present. Dr. KEND-RIcK in the chair.

It was unanimously resolved that a memorial, embodying theviews of the meeting, should be forwarded to Sir James Graham.The various clauses were proposed as distinct resolutions, andgave rise to a very animated discussion respecting the effects ofthe Bill on the interests of the profession and the welfare of thepub’ic, both of which it was conceived would be materiallyadvanced by the measure.The conduct of the Council of the Royal College of Surgeons

in obtaining their new charter was severely censured, and theirmode of proceeding in making up their list of fellows excited fre-quent expressions of indignation and resentment. Instanceswere cited where members of only three or four years’ standinghad been elevated to that rank, as well as others who had neverperformed a single surgical operation; whilst members of verymuch older standing, and far greater professional attainments,had been overlooked. There were several present who, for

twenty years and upwards, had been attached to a public institu-tion, where they were not unfrequently required to perform themost difficult operations, and exercise the highest functions, ofsurgical art, and yet their just claims on the Council had beenwholly disregarded.

In addition to the memorial, it was also unanimously resolvedthat a petition, founded upon it, should be presented to the Houseof Commons, and every effort made to obtain the redress of thegrievances occasioned by the conduct of the Council of the RoyalCollege of Surgeons.The following are the most important passages of the memorial

adopted :-That, although your memorialists approve generally of the

measure, (the Bill,) they would respectfully submit that it wouldbe more satisfactory to the profession, and more beneficial to thepublic, if the second clause of the Bill was so far altered as toenact that two at least of the six members of the Council ofHealth, to be nominated by her Majesty, should be general prac-titioners in medicine and surgery.

That your memorialists do not desire a separate incorporationof general practitioners, provided that the present members ofthe Royal College of Surgeons can obtain, by other means, therestitution of their rank and privileges. They would remindyou of the gross injustice which vast numbers of the presentmembers of that College have sustained at the hands of theCouncil, by being debarred admission to the fellowship on thesame terms as those who (possessing only equal rights and equalprivileges before the granting of the new charter) have already

been elevated to that honour without examination, and with-out reference to age, extent of professional attainments, or

public usefulness. And they earnestly entreat that you will bepleased, either by the grant of a new charter, or by such altera-tions in the new Bill as may be adequately effectual, to restorethem to their lost rank, or at least enable all those who mayhave held the diploma for the space of ten years, to be admittedto the fellowship without further examination.That your memorialists conceive the institution of a new class

of practitioners, entitled " Inceptors in the Faculty of Medicine,"to be altogether uncalled for, either by the wants of the profes-sion or the necessities of the public.That your memorialists gratefully acknowledge the service

you propose to render the profession by the adoption of a clause(the 35th) for the suppression of quackery. But they desire atthe same time to express their firm belief that the public will notbe sufficiently protected from the artifices of ignorant and reck-less empirics without the repeal of the penal clause of the Apo-thecaries’ Act, (which, from its costly and impracticable nature,is wholly inoperative,) and the substitution in lieu thereof ofsome more stringent clause in the new Bill, whereby the practis-ing for the sake of gain, in any department of medicine or sur-gery, by unqualified persons, shall be made a misdemeanor,punishable by fine and imprisonment, on conviction before two.magistrates.

WESTMINSTER MEDICAL SOCIETY.

SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 15.—DR. REID, PRESIDENT.

A paper was read by Mr. R. GREENHALGH,ON THE INDICATION OF PREMATURE LABOUR,

in which he introduced the subject by giving a statistical accountof the frequency of midwifery operations in Germany, France,and England; by which it would appear that out of 71,552 cases,889 were delivered by instruments; that the perforator was usedin 262 cases, and the forceps applied 627 times. Out of these 262cases in which the perforator was used, about 174 were cases ofpelvic deformity.He then proceeded to point out, that if this deformity could

have been detected, and premature labour induced, that, on anaverage, only five mothers and 131 children would have beenlost, whereas by perforation, 43 mothers and all the childrenperished; thereby shewing that 169 mothers and children wholess than a century ago perished by the hand of the midwiferypractitioner, would now be preserved.He then gave a brief account of the origin of the operation in

the year 1756, since which period the morality and success ofthis proceeding were attested by its results, and that it was nowresorted to, not only in cases of pelvic deformity, as formerly, butwhere ovarian growths and exostoses obstructed labour at the fullperiod, and where the symptoms of pregnancy were so urgent asto threaten the lives of patients; and also in cases where thedeath of the fœtus had been known to take place at a particularperiod of pregnancy.As to time, he preferred seven months and a half, but he would

not hesitate to sacrifice the child for the safety of the mother atany period of pregnancy.He considered, with Dr. Merriman, that the position of the

foetus should be ascertained, if possible, previous to the perform-ance of the operation, and that some delay should take place, ifpreternatural, to allow of its rectification; for out of 156 cases ofpremature labour, 71, or nearly one-half, of the children presentedpreternaturally. He then detailed the case of a Mrs. Hartley,aged thirty-five, of a strumous diathesis, who suffered fromovarian growths, upon whom premature labour had been threetimes induced at seven months and a half, prior to his (Mr.Greenhalgh’s) attendance. Two of the children were still-born,the third having lived three days. She was seen on March 1st,1842, by Mr. North, in consultation with Mr. Greenhalgh, who,agreed, from the urgency of the symptoms under which she was-suffering, and from her previous history, that premature labourshould be again induced, but by the ergot of rye; accordingly, onthe 7th, the ergot of rye mixture was administered, as recom-mended by Dr. Ramsbotham; pains speedily ensued, and con-tinued, with varied severity, for a day and a half, when the osuteri was dilated, and the membranes protruding were ruptured.Delivery took place on the 14th. The breech presented. Sex,female-weight, five pounds-is living up to the present time.Violent haemorrhage followed the expulsion of the placenta, whichwas arrested by the ordinary means.On the 28th Nov. 1844, she was again seen by Mr. North, and

a very intelligent pupil, (Mr. Nelson,) who agreed with Mr.Greenhalgh, from the extreme pain, rapid pulse, tenderness ofthe abdomen, sleeplessness, vomiting, dyspnoea, &c., from which