835

9. When the wants of the organs aregot pressing, the digestion, or, if it be

preferred, the alteration of substancesthat are but little assimilable, such as

crude or dressed fruits, carrots, spinach,and many other vegetable substances, be. Igins towards the ileum. I have alwaysobserved that these substances resistedthe action of the gastric acid and mucousjuices, as also that of the biliary andpancreatic fluids; I have never seen

them, presenting traces of alteration,reach a preternatural anus, which I judg-ed, from the intervals at which hungerwas experienced, and from the odour andcolonr of the residue passed, to existtowards the ileum ; nevertheless vegeta-ble substances are, in the majority of in-dividuals, very much altered when theyare evacuated in the natural way.

GENERAL PRACTITIONERS.

AT an adjourned Meeting of GeneralPractitioners of Medicine, held at theCrown and Anchor Tavern on Saturdaylast, Mr. HAYES was again unanimouslycalled to the Chair, when he addressedthe Meeting as follows : ’

Gentlemen,-Of the various Resolu-tions which it was intended to submit toyou at the last Meeting, two only wereput and carried ; the time occupied intheir discussion preventing the considera-tion of the remainder, which constitute,therefore, the business of this evening.But before we proceed to the subject ofour considerations, I wish to make someobservations, and the rather, as in myformer exposition and reprobation of the5th clause of the Apothecaries’ Act, I

appear to have been a good dealmisnn-derstood.

It has been supposed, Gentlemen, thatin the strong and numerous objectiou,which I made to that Clause, I was de-sirous to shield from punishment or finesnch persons as should wiiftillv, falsely,and fraudulently compound the prescrip-tion of a physician.The resolution whifh is about to be

read to you will sufficiently show whatwere the sentiments of those who framedit, with regard to the point in question,viz. the sophistication of drug’-, and theunfaithful composition of medicines, ne-HI theless it seems to me most consist-ent with our own honour, as it is with

truth, that we should distinctly disclaimthe feelings imputed.Gentlemen, I consider the compound.

in of a prescription with scrupulousfidelity, to be not only an act of moralpropriety, but an indispensable obliga-tion, and that he who undertakes thecompounding, or, in ordinary language,the making up of a medicine, enters intoan implied, I may say a solemn contract,that he will mix and prepare that medi-cine with dru;;s of unexceptionable qua-tity, and with all possible accmacy, sothat it may be in exact conformity withthe wishes of the gentleman prescribing,and as far as the present state of medicalscience will allow, efficient to the endproposed.

This, Gentlemen, is due to the physi-cian who writes the prescription, for onhim principally the responsibility mustrest; it is due to the honour of the pro-fession, of which the apothecary is a mem-ber ; it is due to his own character for in-tegrity, and even to his peace of mind,which, especially if the case should proveuntoward, must be deeply wounded bythe consciousness that he has caused, orcontributed to the termination, and,above all, it is due to the patient, whosewell-being it is the solemn duty of thepractitioner to watch over and promote.

I can conceive nothing, Gentlemen,more abominable than for the practitioner,through selfish or sordid considerations,to interpose between the physician andthe patient, and thus frustrate alike thescientific measures of the one and the justexpectations of the other.The objections which I urged, and I

may safely appeal to the recollections ofthe numerous assembly then present, wentto show, that the practitioner, for variousreasons, ought not to be compelled, as bythat clause he is, to make up prescrip-tions whether he pleases or not ; nor canI allow that mere negligence, not wilfulnor corrupt on the part of an assistant,should subject his employer to the neces-sity of relinquishing his profession alto-

gether; no, although such negligence wereto occur three sevet al times tn the courseof a long and useful life.

It must be recollected, Gentlemen, thatas the law now stauds, an assistant musthave qualified himself for the situationw-fet rrd to, by undergoing an examina-tion at Apothecaries Hall, the Examinerscel tily tor him that he is fully competentto the duties which he undertakes ; in thelanguage of the Resoluvun, there ole, hecomes accredited into the office ; but ifthis quatiticd assistant be guilty of negli-gence, a fine is liable to be imposed, not! on the individual committing the mistake;

836

not on the persons who have certified tohis competency ; no ! but on the unfortu-11ate practitioner who, on the faith of thatcertiticate, has received him into his

house, and who confides in his accuracy.Now, Gentlemen, I think that the ex-

amination, thus required, is a just andproper measure-an assistant is therebyrendered of more importance in thescale of society ; under particular circtim-stances, or in the absence of his employer,he may be called upon, and he often isso called on, to officiate in cases of diffi-culty and danger. The welfare of the

public, therefore, requires that he shouldbe an educated, and so far as his youthwill allow, a competent person, and it isto be regretted, that the state of the pro-fession linllts the recompense of his ser-vices within such narrow bounds ; but Ithink that after he has qualified himselfby a course of study,and obtained, in dueform, his certificate, the onus, so to speak,of his conduct, onght not to rest so hea-vily on his employer.You uill perceive, Gentlemen, so far

have I been fiom asserting that negli-gence or misconluct in the compoundingof medicines is not reprehensible, that 1think it deserves the severest reproba-tion, as an offence deeply injurious to

society, and to the character of thatbranch of the profession. (Applause.)There is, Gentlemen, another point on ,

which I am desirous to be clearly under-stood ; it has been said, I am told,that several Practitioners have declined I

attending here to-night, " because no

prospect seemed to be held out, of imme- diate benefit to their class, or, in other

IIwords, of increasing the emoluments of Ithe profession."To this charge, my abler colleagues

and I must, per force, plead guilty, butwe say in reply, that it has not been our

object; we have had, in our minds, otherconsiderations, and of a more honourablekind ; into no part of our resolutions hasthe word emolument found its way ; ifwe mean really to benefit the comntunity,nay, to advance our own respectability ;if we intend to interest the legislature, orthe public, in our proceedings, it must beby a total abandonment of all sordidmotives ; we must impress them with theconviction, that we are not seeking anyselfish or exclusive advantages, but thatthe whole course of our proceedings is instrict harmony with the profession wemade at the ontset, viz. that we soughtthe public good.To those who are of my own standing,

or even who have fairly engaged in priic-tice, it might seem arrogant in me tooffer advice, but I trust, that to our

younger brethren (on whom, in a few

years, must rest the maintenance of the

respectability and usefulness of our pro.fession ;) I may say, Gentlemen, if yonlook to the practice of medicine as a

fruitful source of gain, and that you shallamass wealth from yonr talents anti ex-ertions, do not enter on our profession,tor you will be egregiously di,appointfdin your expectations. You have taken avery erroneous view of the prospect be,

fore you, and the sooner you retrace yoursteps the better; petseverance can onlylead to farther disappointment, and in-creased chargrin. As a source of wealth,therefore, it will mock your pursuit—no, no, Gentlemen, in the language ofthat inimitable writer, Goldsmith, (usedon another occasion,) I would say

I- 11’

yon are for a genteel easy profession,bind yourselves for seven years to ttun ii acutler’s wheel," but never think of the

practice of medicine ; its calls and 11,

cares, its fatigues and its anxieties arenot for you, since they never can be cotn-pensated by pecumm ary reward. Youmust lay yonr account to experiencingcavilling and coldness, where you areentitled to con fidence-suspicion, andsometimes to say ingratitude, for muchkindness received, even after you havedevoted anxious days and sleepless nightsto the preservation and welfare of yourpatient.Gentlemen, it may be readily supposed

that at my age, busily engaged as I havebeen from an early period of life, in thestudy and exercise of our profession, Imust have seen a good deal of humanaffairs; I have, indeed, mingled withvarious descriptions of men, of every pro.fession and business, several of them en-dowed with extraordinary abilities a 1111of most persevering industry; the resultof my deliberate observations is a cun-

viction that there is no profession umoccupation in life in which there is so largean expenditure of intellect, and of labour:none which is fraught with so much ofmental anxiety and bodily fatigue, and atthe same time so slenderly remunerated,as the medical rofession, taken not in arestricted sense of these words, but withreference to its several branches ; yet benot disheartened, to the medical prac-titioner, almost exctusite)y, is given th’;glorious, I had almost said the godlike at-tribute of alleviating largely the miseriesof mankind, and of rescuing our teilow-creatures from danger and distress.

In this hope, if you t’dithfully dischargethe important duties of the profession,v ou can scarcely be disappointed, and evenif the consciousness of having deservedwell of mankind be insufficient to console

837

you, there i*. yet in reserve a reward whichvu cannnt fail to reap.—(Applause.)It only now remains, Gentlemen, thatI recommend to you the appointment ofa Commitee, agreeably to the ten our ofone of the resolutions, invested with

powers as ample as the occasion requires,and that a subscription be entered intofor the purposes which you have in view.

La.tIy, let me recommend to yon, in thediscussion about to take place, the utmostcourtesy and forbearance ; be assuredthat an opposite course would be produc-tive of misrepresentation abroad, andinjury to our cause, and I cannot help ex-pressing my fervent hope, that whatevermay be the collision of sentiment, how-ever numerous may be the objections tothe conrse recommended, no gentlemanwill allow himself in any way to debasethe useful and highly respectable profes-sion to which we all belong, and whichwe are anxiously endeavouring to upholdand exalt.

(The conclusion of the worthy Chair-!man’s address was succeeded by loudand tong-continned cheering.)Mr. ALCOCK stated, that the few obser-

vations which he had made at a former

meeting had been greatly misrepresented,in making it appear that te was engagedin preparing ignorant candidates for ex-mnination, which was wholly withoutfoundation.The instance of a candidate, grossly

ignorant in anatomy the day before hepassed his examination, to which he hadaltuded, was communicated to him by agentleman who was in the habit of pre-paring candidates for examination at

Apothecaries’ Hall, and did not relate tothe College, as stated in the reports. Themisstatements of which he complainedhad appeared in the Observer and theMorning Chonicle, and although he hadwritten to the Editors to point them out,they had not, so far as he knew, beencorrected. He further observed, that farfrom engaging in preparing persons for,or approving of the existing imperfectsystems of medical and surgical exami-nation, which he believed to be fraughtwith danger to the health and lives of thecommunity,he had steadily maintained asessential to the security of the public,that these examinations should be so

comprehensive and efficient, that no pre-paration by question and answer shouldenable an ignorant candidate, incompe-tent to the duties of the medical profession,to obtain a legal sanction to practise, andthereby inflict misery bv his ignorance.Mr. Alcock proceeded to point on’ the

degrading influence of the third and fifthclauses of the Apothecaries Act ; the

former of which subjects the shops ofApothecaries throughout England andWales to search, by persons, the rivals intrade of those who may supply them, with-out any warrant from a magistrate, or anyalleged deviation from rectitude,btit merelyby the authority of the Society of Apo-thecaries. The natural result of auch apower was to drive the timid to the shopkept by those to whom this enormouspower was intrusted.The fifth clause was still more objec-

tionable, since, with many other incon-gruities, it subjected slight or unimpor-tant errors to the same excessive

penalties as the wilful and fraudulentsophistication of remedies. In fact thisclause placed the Apothecary in a worsecondition than the hackney coachman ;for though the coachman may be fined forrefusing a fare, yet he is not prohibitedfrom following his occupation in future ;but if the Apothecary be found guilty ofrefusal to compound the prescriptions ofcertain physicians, he is liable to fine forthe first and second offences, and for thethird to be rendered incapable of followinghis profession in future, unless hy pro-mise and security that he will not againbe guilty of the like offence !That the Apothecaries’ Act had boon

useful either to the Profession, or the

public, was more than he had been ableto learn ; for whilst any individual mightpractise with impunity, by calling himselfchemist and druggist, the few individualswho had been prosecuted under thisact had been, by their extreme ignorance,so perfectly insignificant, that it may bedoubted, whether the practice of thewhole of these individuals were equivalent

i to that of one well establisbed retail

druggist.That the act had not been withoat its

use to the Society of Apothecaries mightbe inferred from a document ordered bythe House of Commons to be printedlast year, from which it appears that theamount received by the Society in feesfor examination in a period short of tenyears, exceeded the stim of 17,000l.; ofwhich the Society had only paid for theimportant services of Examiners, Secre.tary, Comts to elect Examiners eAchyear, servant!l, for extra trouble, t’or-nitme for examiners, &c., the smallamount of 10,000l. and upwards !

Mr. Alcock concluded, by proposingthe following resolution :-" That the third clause of the Apothe-

caries’ Act of 1815, subjecting the shopsof Apothecaries throughout England andWales, to be searched by persons depntedby, and forming part of, the Society of

Apothecaries which Society, being *

838

trading Company dealing in the articlesto be examined, cannot be wholly dis-interested, is degrading to the characterof the Apothecary, and without any cor-responding benefit or protection to the

public."Mr. ADAMS seconded the Resolution,

which was then put and carried unani-mously.—(Loud applause.)Mr. CIIURCHILL, iu proposing the next

Resolution, satd, the Act had emanatedfrom a trading company. He thought itdegrading to an apothecary to be theslave of the physician, in the way that ob-noxious clause, which the Chairman hadso justly stigmatized, seemed to renderhim. If this clause were suffered to re-main, he should really fear to be pointedat, as he walked the streets, as one of thepersons who were most disgracefully sub-ordinate to the physician. All who va-lued their own respectability, or the dig-nity of their profession, ought, he was ofopinion, to prevent any degrading inter-ference in their own department. He,however, did not think there was a dis-

position on the part of the physicians,generally, to obstruct the apothecaries inthe honest discharge of their duty. Heproposed the Resolution relative to the5th Clause of the Apothecaries’ Act, forwhich see THE LANCET of March 4.-Carried uuanimously.Mr. FINCHAM, on moving the 5th Reso-

lution, which has been already given inTHE LANCET, (vide Meeting of the 25th ofFebruary,) stated several instances of

gross mat-treatment ot diseases on the

part of chemists and druggists, who had,notwithstanding their entire incompeten-cy, ventured to prescribe and administermedicines to persons suffering from com-plaints which they had quite misunderstood.Mr. CHURCHILL thought that the evi-

dence of druggists ought not to be re-ceived on Coroners’ Inquests, as manylives had been sacrificed through their ig-norance. Their evidence, in general, wasof a most loose and vague description, andwholly unworthy of being received in a Icourt of justice, in cases where the livesof individuals might pay the forfeiture oftheir mistakes.The next Resolution (for which also see

THE LANCET of March 4) was moved byMr. BLATCH, who stated very briefly hisfirm conviction, that it was absolutely ne.cessary, for the safety of females, that allpersons desirous to practise the art of

midwifery, should undergo an examina-tion, in order to avoid the mischiefs

which, from his own experience he couldtestify, were continually arising in thatbranch of surgery, as at present prac-tised.-Carried unanimously.

Mr. JoNES said, that apothecaries, aftera long and expensive education, were

compelled to sacrifice their time and

health, without any adequate return,while the druggists bore away all the re-ward. The druggists reigned absolutemasters of the field; they certainly ap.peared, in many instances, to hold thephysician in complete dependence. Afterall, they were only tradesmen, unstudiedin the various and solemn duties of theprofession, and therefore had no right topractise the science of medicine. If apo.thecaries were bound to make up physi-cians’ prescriptions, the latter ought, inreturn, to be obliged to send their pre-scriptions to be compounded by the apo.thecary, and not to druggists, who werenot under the same compulsory re;ula-tions. It had been said, that the ancientsendeavoured to make the study of medi.cine a science, and failed ; but that themoderns had tried to make it a trade, andhad succeeded. If the insinuation had

any foundation, it could only apply to thedruggists, and not to the educated prac-titioner.Mr. POWELL, in an appropriate speech,

then moved the following Resolution :-That the Committee now appointed be

empowered by this Meeting to take allsuch measures as they may deem bestcalculated to further the objects in view;and, whenever they shall think it expe-dient, to call a general meeting, to whichare to be submitted the draft of the pro-posed Petition, and the general result oftheir deliberations.The resolution respecting a Petition to

Parliament (for which see THE LANCETof the 4th instant) was, with a short pre.fatory address, moved by Mr. Hillmanand seconded by Mr. Adams.—Carriedwithout opposition.Mr Randall, Mr. Jervis, (from Dlar-

gate,) and several other gentlemen,whosenames we could not collect, severally ad-dressed the Meeting, and were heard withgreat attention ; but we regret that thelimits assigned to this part of our workdo not allow of our attempting to givetheir observations.

It was afterwards resolved unanimous-ly, that a Committee, consisting of fifteengentlemen be appointed, to carry intoeffect the measures proposed ; that a

subscription be immediately entered intoto defray the necessary expences, andthat this Meeting do now adjourn untilre-assembled by the Committee.Thanks having been voted to iiir.Haves

for his impartial conduct in the chair, thatgentleman briefly returned thaukt, andthe Meeting then separated

839

To the Editor of THE LANCET.

Glasgow, March 7th, 1826.SIR—In giving the following a place in

your next Journal, yon will be conferringan obligation on a constant reader.In the course of Mr. Lawrence’s speech

at the late Meeting of the 18th nit. thefollowing observation falls from him :" But, Gentlemen, I have a more materialobjection to state, and it is to the cata-

logne of the schools of instruction towhich the privilege of recognition hasbeen conceded-Aberdeen, Glasgow !We know, Gentlemen, that at least ana.

tomy cannot be studied in those placeswith any hope of success. We are all,I believe, aware, and no one is more

ready than mysl.lf to acknowledge the

great talents and acquirements of theGentlemen at the head of the anatomicalschools in those places ; but we are alsoaware that theyaredestitute of subjects,’and without subjects, without the ueces-sary means, no talents in the teacher, 80acquisition of which he can boast, no pe-culiar fitness for the office of instructionon his part will avail the student in the

study of anatomy."Had these observations fallen from any

less conspicuous character, they wouldperhaps have passed unheeded; and inattempting to prove Mr. Lawrence’s opi-nion erroneous in the most essential point,I can only suppose him to have been ig-norant of the real state of this school at

least, with that of Aberdeen I have no

personal acquaintance. Had such re-

marks fallen from any other, and withwhose character I was less acquainted Ishould have called them illiberal ; those,however, who have the pleasure of know-ing Mr. Lawrence will say, " that traitforms no part of his character."His principal charge against the schoolsmentioned by him is the want of subjects.As far as tilit school is connected with thecharge, I can vouch for its incorrectness.

During the whole of the session therehas been no lack of subjects here ; on thecontrary, there has been as many as sixin the rooms at a time all occupied bystudents; and now, far advanced as theseason is, there are no less than threeoccupied, and two others ready whencalled tor; added to this, Sir, we havebeen, and are still supplied with them, atthe moderate charge of four guineas per.subject, (injected if required,) whitat in

Edinburgh the lowest price which haabeen given for subjects is nineteen

guineas, and this by a private lecturer.1 can, as well as many others, vouch for

the fact of twenty-five guineas being

refused for a subject offered at the Col-

lege the commencement of this spssion.At this price, Mr. Editor, there will befound very few laborious dissectorsamongst any number of studenu.

I myself, Sir, was a pupil of one of theoldest and most respectable schools inLondon, consequently may be allowed anopinion on this subject. I know whatdissection in London is, and what it is inGlasgow or Edinburgh, the conveniencesattending each with their respective col-lateral advantages I am also aware of;and while I give the palm to London torthe scope which it offers to a student inevery branch of his profession, candourcompels me to say that Glasgow offersadvantages quite sufficient to any studentwho comes and sits down with an intentionto learn his profession. Anatomy learntfrom books we all know is of very littlepractical use, and would eventually onlymislead the student; if a student wishto learn anatomy he must dissect. Invonching for the truth of the above state-ment, I shall be borne out by every stu-dent in the anatomical classes of Glasgow.

Palmam qui meruit ferat.

I am, Sir, yours repectfully,VERITAS.

To the Editor of THE LANCET.SIR,—On reading in your Number of

Feb.25th an account of the Meeting, thattook place in the Freemasons’ Tavern,on the evening of the 18th ult., for thepurpose of devising the best means forremedying the abuses which exist in thegovernment of the College of Surgeonsin London, I was much pleased with theconcise, clear, able, and extensive man-ner in Mbich the abuses were pointed outby the eminent chairman, Mr. Lawrence.In my opinion, his able and independentconduct that evening does credit to hisgreat talents.Having so premised, yon could not sup-

pose thdt I am about to find fault. Nor isthat my intention ; but it is my object, topoint out what I consider to be an iuac-curacy arising from not being possessed ofcorrect information. An inaccuracy not

only calculated to mislead the public, butto injure the reputation of a school thatis not surpassed in its opportunities foraffording anatomical, medical, and snr-

gical knowledge by any school in Britain.I In this I am sure of support from every individual who has studied in that school! and elsewhere, and the number is not? few.

’: The expression which I shonld wish to;! be cot rected, is contained in the following

840

passage of Mr. Lawrence’s speech. Afterstating many of the corrupt laws, whichexist in the government of the College,he says :

" But, Gentlemen, I have a

more material objection to state, and it isthe catalogue of the schools of instruction,to which the privilege of recognition hasbeen conceded-Aberdeen, Glasgow !We know, Gentlemen, that at least ana-tomy cannot be studied in those placeswith any hope of success ; we are all,I believe, aware, that no one is more

ready than myself to acknowledge the

great talents and acquirements of theGentlemen at the head of the anatomicalschools of those places : but we are also Iaware, that they are destitute of subjects;and without the necessary means, no ta-lents in the teacher, &c. &c., will availthe student in his study of anatomy."

I am ready to agree with Mr. Lawrence,that anatomy nor any other science can-not be studied successfully without thenecessary means ; but that the school ofmedicine and surgery in Glasgow is des-tltute of those means I most unequivocallydeny, and shall endeavour to point outthe error of the assertion.

In 1814, upwards of 400 pupils attendedDr. Jeffreys’ anatomical lectures ; and inthe same season the lectures of Mr. Pat.tison,?the able successor of Allan Burns,and those of Drs. Monteath and Robert-son, were also very numerously attend-ed. The students of anatomy in Glas-

gow that season, in all amounting to about800, and I am sure that this calculationis considerably within the actual number.Notwithstanding, these schools being socrowded, I never knew a student obligedto wait for longer than three or four daysbefore he could be amply supplied withdissection. At the moment I am writingthis, one of my friends, who is at this timea pupil at one of the largest anatomicalschools in London, tells me that he hasbeen obliged to wait for upwards of a:nonth, and to this day has not been able Ito get a single extremity. Such a scarcityI have never seen in Glasgow. 1 haveknown a difficulty of procuring bodies toexist, for two or three days, both in Edin-burgh and Glasgow, but never knew thesupply so inadequate to the demand ineither of those schools as in the instancewhich 1 have just now cited ; and the de-mand amongst 800 individuals must havebeen considerable every person must

allow, and for that great number a suffi-ciency was always found.That anatomy cannot be studied sne-

cessfuity in Glasgow is a most sweepingconclusion. I should wish to know fromwhom Mr. Lawrence received the infor-mation, warranting such, and I doubt not

but the authority would be found to be

vague and incorrect. Allow me, Sir, tosay, that I have studied in Edinburghand Glasgow, and have spent two yearsof my time in going through the hospitalsand anatomical schools of London, andthat in all its schools of anatomy, which ex-isted four years ago, I have had most ampleopportunities of knowing the means theyafforded their students for acquring ana-tomical and surgical knowledge, and

highly as I appreciate the talents of theirteachers, and their unremitting endea-vours to instruct the students in the prin.ciples of their profession-divestingmyself of every thing like prejudice-Icannot agree that the schools in Londonare, in any one point of view, superior tothose of Glasgow ; but, on the contrary, itis my most decided opinion, that they arein some respects inferior. This I statewith every deference. In giving an opi-nion of this kind, it ought to be con-scientious, and if I am wrong, I am notsingular. I never knew an individualwho had studied in Edinburgh or Glas-gow, and afterwards came to London forthat purpose, but was egregiously dis-

appointed. The system of the latter isdifferent, and certainly not improvedupon. However, I am ready to acknow-ledge, that the spirit for acquiring mi-nute anatomy seems to me to be sreater

amongst the London than the Scotchstudents; but more cannot be said, andthat arises from the regulations of theCollege not enforcing the study of anyother branch of the profession but thatof anatomy and surgery. Whilst thestudent in Scotland must qualify himselffor being examined in all the collateralbranches of the profession; viz. anatomy,physiology, surgery, theory and practiceof medicine, materia medica, pharmacy,and chemistry.

In consequence of these diversifiedstudies, the sole attention for the time

cannot be bestowed on anatomy as inLondon, nor would it be proper; but tomake np for this, the period of study ismuch longer-sufficiently long to enablea person of ordinary talents to becomewell acquainted with the principles ofthe whole. And after all, if I may beallowed to judge from my intercourse

with the students of both London andGlasgow, the latter are not in the leastinferior to the former, even in thpir ana-tomical acquirements; there has alwaysseemed to me to be more of prejudicethan truth in the repoit. In proof ofwhat has been stated, I should like Mr.Lawrence to inform me, whether or nothe has known many Glasgow studentsrejected at the College uf Londor for

841

their want of knowledge of that im-portant branch.

I can tell Mr. Lawrence of many from

Glasgow who had received their appoint-ments for a public service, before theywere qualified to pass their examinationsin Glasgow or Edinburgh, from not hav-ing fulfilled the period of studv requiredat these colleges. Such individuals havecome to London and been immediatelvadmitted as Members of the College;instances of this description are of dailyoccurrence. These individuals are not

found deficient in that branch.That anatomy cannot be studied in

Glasgow ! I am surprised at the incon-sistency. If I do not mistake, Mr. Law- !rence, at the last meeting of the Mem-bers of the College of Surgeons, eulogizedMr. Allan Burns as an anatomist and snr-geon, and it appears to me that he alsosaid something to the same effect of hissuccessor, Mr. Pattison. Where did thesegentlemen learn their anatomy ? In Glas.gow! The first from his brother, JohnBurns, the present Professor of Surgeryin the Glasgow University; the latter,from Mr. Allan Burns ; and both in thatverv Dlace where anatomv now cannotbe taught. It may be said, that Mr.Allan Burns was a Member of the Col-lege of Surgeons of London ; so he was ;hot I can assure Mr. Lawrence that hedid not imbibe his scientific knowledge ofanatomy from it, or any of its members.But why should I say so much about thisexpression of Mr. Lawrence; it avails

nothing ; he must have meant nothing byit. If I do not misunderstand him, hiswir,h is, that students from all parts ofttie world, who can produce certificatesof having received a liberal education,medical and otherwise, should be admit.ted for examination, and if found properlyqualified, that they should be received asmembers; and if not, by all means letthem be returned to their studies.Under these circumstances, what had

he to do with the supposed inefficiency ofthe anatomical schools of Aberdeen andGlasgow ? When their students are foundnot to be competent, as I before said,return them to their studies ; but why passa censure upon a school or its pupils be-fore putting them to the test of a trial.Such a proceeding would be ungenerous,and altogettier repugnant to our commonfeelings. Rut what is Mr. Lawrence’s rea-son for not including Edinburgh amongstthe inefficient schools ? The fact is, thatso far as subjects go, the dissecting-rooms of Glasgow are three to one bettersupplied than those of Edinburgh, andthis can easily be accounted for. I havehad several years’ experience in both

schools, and I can assure Mr. Lawrence,that Dr. Barclay’s dissecting-room was,in a great measure, supplied from Mr.Pattison’s, of Glasgow, in 1816 and 1817.Mr. Lawrence, in his oration, could nothave included Edinburgh ; it would nothave been so well received ; but couplingGlasgow as he did with Aberdeen, cal-culating a little upon the credulity of hishearers, and upon the general prejudicethat exists against Aberdeen, it musthave been received as was intended,issuing from such a source.

Regarding the medical school of Aber-deen, how far popular feeling may becorrect I know not, but an inferencedrawn from that alone ought not to beconsidered as infallible. But in truth, Imust say, that their mode of grantingdiplomas, or of selling them as it is term-

ed, goes a great way to raise the publicvoice against them, and in some respectsdeservedly so. However eminent thepersons possessing their honours may be,still there is a stigma attached to them,and it will continue so long as they aregranted in the present loose way. Butbe that as it may, I most unequivocallydiffer from Mr. Lawrence in the opinion,that the admission of certificates fromAberdeen and Glasgow constitute theworst of the bad regulations of the Col.lege of Surgeons; and thp.t this is theinference to be drawn from Mr. Law-rence’s speech, as reported in THE LAN-CET, no one can deny ; and Mr. Lawrencehimself, upon a second consideration,must agree with me, that if worse lawsthan that did not exist in the governmentof the Royal College of Surgeon*!, thatthere would be no great need for reform.

I am ready to absolve Mr. Lawrencefrom any feeling of prejudice or illibera-lity, or of an intention of misleading hishearers ; no such motive could ever in-duce Mr. Lawrence to wander from thetruth, and it is from a futi conviction ofthis, that I have been induced to lay theforegoing statement before you, and asan act of justice to which I think the

surgical school of Glasgow is entitled.I have sent you these observations,

relying upon your general wish to cor-rect abuses, aud your anxious desire, atall times, to state facts.

I should have sent yon the above aweek since, but, although one of your con-stant readers, I had not an opportunityof seeing your number containing thearticle alluded to until a few days ago..! I am, Sir, your’s, &c.

I lOth March, 1826. J. T,