205

"EVIDENCE OF NURSES AT THE LORDS’COMMITTEE ON HOSPITALS."

To the Editors of THE LANCET.

SIRS,—The attention of the House Committee of theLondon Hospital has been called to a letter in THE LANCETof the 12th inst., signed by Mr. E. Hooper May, F.R.C.S.I have been directed to ask you to be so kind as to state inyour next issue that Mr. May, having been applied to, verycourteously forwarded the name of the 11 probationer " whowas, he said, summarily dismissed. Mr. May was furtherkind enough to explain that the lady in question belongedto a nursing institution for which the hospital sometimestrains nurses. The lady was therefore not a probationerof the London Hospital, and could never have been dis-missed by the hospital authorities.

I am, Sirs, yours obediently,G. Q. ROBERTS, Secretary.

London Hospital, Whitechapel-road, July 22nd, 1890.’

THE STING OF THE HONEY BEE.To the Editors of THE LANCET.

SIRS,—Will you kindly allow me to say a word or twoabout the sting of the honey bee? A few days ago I wastold by a gentleman of the greatest veracity, who as amatter of pleasure keeps bees, that in consequence, hebelieves, of previous inoculation by bee stings, he is proofagainst pain-that is, he does not feel pain when stung bythe insect. Fifteen years ago, when this gentleman beganbis favourite pursuit, he suffered severe pain in the partsstung, but for several years past the sting of the bee hasproduced only a little pleasurable sensation, which con.tinued for a few seconds and then ceased. I may say thatthe gentleman is not pain-proof against the sting of thewasp, for, when stung by one of these formidable insects ashort time since, his sufferings were acute and prolonged.But it might be that after a few repetitions the sting ofthe wasp might cease in him to produce its stinging effects.I therefore made the suggestion that, for the sake ofscience, he should take the matter up and thoroughlyinvestigate it, in order that he might discover whether hecould not also fortify himself against the pain caused bythe sting of the wasp. This he declined to do, his thirstfor science not being sufficiently great to induce him toIiave any further intercourse with a wasp if he could help it.

I am, Sirs, truly yours,Lincoln, July 22nd, 1890. WILLIAM O’NEILL, M.D. &c.

MONOPOLY OF HOSPITAL APPOINTMENTS.To the Editors of THE LANCET.

SrRS,-In your leading article of last week on the abovesubject, the following paragraph occurs: "Mr. Stewart......holds the Fellowship of the Royal College of Physicians ofEdinburgh. He did not testify to the severity of theordeal by which this latter title was attained, though evi-dence would have been helpful to the main purpose of hisargument."Permit me to say that I would have done so had I not

been stopped in the middle of my speech by the applicationof the " ten minutes’ rule "-a rule which had never before,in my experience, been applied to the mover of a resolution.I was on the point of stating, when "time" was called,what I now assert without fear of contradiction-namely,that the examination for the diploma of M.R.C.P.Ed. isquite as searching in every particular as that for the corre-sponding London diploma. As regards the practical partof the examination, the ordeal, indeed, is a more severe one.Moreover, I intended drawing attention to the fact thatthis ordeal had to be gone through by 85 per cent. of thoseadmitted to the Membership of the Edinburgh Collegeduring the quinquennial period ended last December, andthat the remaining 15 per cent. were all over forty yearsof age, all, with a solitary exception, being either honoraryphysicians to general hospitals or medical superintendentsof public asylums. I would have asked whether thenumber of exemptions had been equally few for the Londondiploma during the same quinquennial period. But it is im-portant to note that we did not ask that the latter-thoseadmitted to membership of a college without examination-

should be eligible for a hospital appointment. To us (theconsulting staff and myself) it seemed that the precautionreferred to would sufficiently safeguard the Committee ofElection from the possibility of having before them any can-didate except one of exceptional merit.But this part of my argument, as well as my contention

on behalf of the Members and Fellows of the Irish Collegeof Physicians, I was unable to put before the governors,owing to the very unusual circumstance already referred to.

I am, Sirs, yours faithfully,JAMES STEWART, B.A., F.R.C.P.Ed.

Clifton, July 22nd, 1890.

FEES UNDER THE NOTIFICATION ACT.To the Editors of THE LANCET.

SIRS,—In the case of the second fee obtained by Mr.Kesteven under the Infectious Diseases Notification Act,you say that Dr. Watson saw the patient for Mr. Kesteven.Surely if one medical man kindly sees a patient sufferingwith infectious disease for another, both practitioners canhardly claim a notification fee ; if they have a legal rightso to do, such action on their part will not redound to theircredit in the eyes of the public, for it seems to me thatunder a pretext of this kind an unscrupulous practitionermight, through his qualified assistant, perpetrate a whole-sale fraud on the public by charges for unnecessary notifica-tion certificates.

I am, Sirs, yours truly,MAJOR GREENWOOD, MD.

Hackney-road, N.E., July 19th, 1890.

*. Dr. Greenwood undoubtedly seizes the most plausibleobjection to Mr. Kesteven’s view, but the inexorablewords of the Act still remain, "Every medical man" &c.and the Local Government Board very emphaticallyexpress their opinion that they justify the view taken byMr. Kesteven.-ED. L.

M. PASTEUR AND HYDROPHOBIA.To the Editors of THE LANCET.

SIRS,—I am anxious that this refutation of Dr. Dolan’smisstatement of my opinions should receive publication ina scientific journal like yours, as I have neither time norinclination to answer them in a merely popular review.Hoping that you can find space for it,

Believe me yours truly,Park-street, Grosvenor-square, W. VICTOR HORSLEY.

80, Park-street, Grosvenor-square, July, 1890.SIR,—My attention has been drawn to a popular article on " M. Pasteur

and Hydrophobia," written by you in the Contemporary Revieao for July,1890. I took the trouble to correct, in the Brit-ish Medical Journal, inSeptember, 1886, numerous erroneous statements which you publishedon the same subject, and am consequently surprised to see themreappear, to the easy misleading of a public imperfectly educated inmedical and scientific matters. That such a republication of state-ments, the incorrectness of which has been demonstrated, has notoccurred unintentionally, is unfortunately made unmistakably clear bythe manner in which you have taken isolated portions of my evidencebefore the House of Lords’ Committee to support your contentions. OnFeb. 13th, 1889, I read a paper on the subject before the EpidemiologicalSociety. You were present. I therein proved that the death-rate ofthose bitten by unquestionably rabid dogs was 15 per cent., whereas thedeath-rate among the same class of patients when treated by M. Pasteurwas less than 1’6 per cent.You quote (p. 92) general statements of mine in which I explained to

the House of Lords’ Committee that a very large proportion of humanbeings who are bitten by rabid dogs do not become rabid, but I wouldask why, in this connexion, you have suppressed the facts stated above.and instead of the whole truth have only given a part, which thuspresented alone is most misleading. I will only conclude by invitingyou to repeat your misstatements in a medical journal or before amedical or scientific society, where they can receive the correction theyso urgently need, instead of before a public necessarily ignorant uponsuch matters. Faithfully yours,

T. M. Dolan, Esq., M.D. VICTOR HORSLEY.

A NEW OPERATION FOR PROLAPSUS ORPROCIDENTIA OF THE RECTUM.

To the Editors of THE LANCET.

SIRS,—It was with much interest that I read in your issueof July 19th, 1890, Brigade-Surgeon K. McLeod’s paper onthe treatment of procidentia, and am glad he has carriedout successfully in an ordinary case a mode of treatment Isuggested when editing my father’s book on Diseases of theRectum in 1888. On page 187 I wrote as follows : "As it