the principalship of the edinburgh university

97

that although the Club was only in the second year of its

existence, it had, by careful management and prudent fore-thought, already acquired a position which would bear favour-able comparison with any club in London of a similar age.Dating, in the first instance, from the aristocratic region of PallMall, it had now secured a habitation in the most centraland picturesque situation to be found in all London. Thechief object sought to be obtained by the establishment of theClub was to supply the means of increased social intercourse,and to promote harmony and good fellowship between all

members and grades of the profession. The want of such aninstitution had long been felt, especially during that period intheir history when the subject of medical reform occupied solarge a share of professional attention. A club of this kindmust necessarily in time exercise considerable influence uponthe politics of the profession, for there could be no social lifewithout political life. The opinions of the profession couldnot fail, through the medium of the Club, ultimately to obtainincreased weight and importance in the House of Commons.It was not proposed to limit the membership of the Club todoctors, but to admit gentlemen connected with science andliterature generally. Although this was the case, and there werealready several members who were not medical men, still it hadalways been felt that as the Club was established mainly forthe convenience of members of the medical profession, it oughtto bear some distinctive name. Aftermuch careful considerationof the subject, it was ultimately resolved to christen it the"Medical Club. " As there were no more devoted cultivatorsof science to be found amongst any class of the communitythan medical men, it might fairly be anticipated that theMedical Club would ultimately become the favourite resort ofthe scientific men in the metropolis. Since the first estab-lishment of the Club the number of members had continuedsteadily to increase, and now mustered about 700 names onthe roll of the Club. To carry out all the improvements stillin contemplation, it had been decided next year to increasethe amount of the annual subscription. This step had alwaysbeen in contemplation, and its adoption had often been urgedupon the committee by members of the Club, but it had been ’,thought desirable to delay asking for such an increase until the ’,Club was in a position to offer increased accommodation. The ’,carrying out of this arrangement would (whilst it supplied the ’,means of more efficiently carrying on the Club) give greaterconfidence to the public in the soundness of the undertaking;for all knew that a thing too cheap never could be sound andgood at the same time.The Chairman was repeatedly cheered during the delivery

of his speech, and the toast was drunk with the greatest en-thusiasm ; with it was associated the name of Dr. LoryMarsh, the honorary secretary, who had devoted considerabletime and labour to the development of the Club.

THE FATAL ACCIDENT TO VOLUNTEERS ATDEVONPORT.

By the courtesy of Mr. Wolferstan, the house-surgeon of theRoyal Albert Hospital, Devonport, we have received the fol-lowing details of the late melancholy accident which provedfatal to two members of the 3rd Devon Volunteer Rifle Corps.On Thursday, July 2nd, at 5.30 P.M., Mr. Alfred Norman,

aged twenty, and Mr. John Gard, aged nineteen, were presentat a rifle match. They were both standing together near thefiring party, one of which, not knowing his rifle to be loaded,placed a cap on the nipple and discharged it, pointing themuzzle towards the ground. The 1,all, striking the ground,ricochetted, and hitting Norman on the outer part of the leftthigh, four inches above the external condyle, passed throughthe limb obliquely upwards, and, making its exit at the innerside of the thigh, passed over and cut through the trouser onthe right thigh, though without marking the skin. The ballthen entered Gard’s left thigh, about two inches below thetuberosity of the ischium, and, passing obliquely upwards andoutwards, made its exit just below and in front of the trochantermajor. The sufferers were almost immediately removed onstretchers to the hospital, hæmorrhage, which was not ex-eessive in either case, -being- entirely controlled by a twistedhandkerchief.

On admission Norman was not suffering much from shock,and complained but little of pain. It was found, on examina-tion, that the wound of entrance was very small, that of exitbeing very large and ragged. The femur was extensivelycomminuted, and two large pieces of bone were found loose inthe wound and removed.

Gard’s condition was one of profound collapse. As in theother case, the wound of entry was very small, and that ofexit also large and lacerated. In such perfect position and sorigid was the limb when first seen, that it appeared impossiblethat the femur could have been broken. On examination,however, it was found to be much more extensively commi-nuted than in the other case. In neither case was the mainartery of the limb injured, or the joints complicated.

Dr. Row, who took temporary charge of both cases, con-sidered that Gard’s condition precluded the possibility of im-mediate amputation, and he also thought it not advisable toremove the limb in Norman’s case. Both patients were there-fore sent to bed, and subcutaneous injections of morphine weregiven.At 11 P.M. the staff of the hospital met, and Mr. Swain took

charge of Norman’s case. At six o’clock on the followingmorning the medical officers again met, and decided to am-putate in both cases, if the condition of the patients at 1 P.M.permitted it. Mr. Swain amputated Norman’s thigh at thejunction of the middle and upper third, by Teale’s method rhardly any blood was lost. Dr. Row removed Gard’s thighimmediately below the trochanter minor, by the ordinary flapoperation. In this case, too, little blood was lost. Bothpatients rallied well from the immediate effects of the opera-tion, Norman, however, about 5.30 P.M. became very sickand slightly delirious, gradually got very excited, and sank at3.30 the next morning. Gard fluctuated considerably, butgot weaker rapidly, in spite of stimulants and beef-tea ene-mata, and died on Saturday at midnight.

Correspondence.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP OF THE EDINBURGHUNIVERSITY.

"Andi alteram partem."

To the Editor of THE LANCET.

SiR,-You say, " The manifestation of feeling in connexionwith the appointment of a Principal to the Edinburgh Univer-sity is one of the most unseemly things that has occurred oflate years." In making this statement, you proceed uponthe suppositions that " Sir James Simpson’s election has vir-tually been defeated by the extraordinary opposition of hismedical colleagues in the Senatus;" and that "the principalobjections were that he was a physician, especially an obstetricphysician." But as, of the sixteen Professors who objected, onlyseven belonged to the medical profession, and not more thanfour of them were engaged in practice, the first of these groundscan hardly be regarded as tenable ; while the second, being amere invention, and utterly devoid of truth, should, if possible,still less justify your censure. It is true that the letter re-

questing signatures, which accompanied the memorial in itscirculation, did contain the allegation you have quoted; butthe protest itself made no allusion to any such subject, andplaced its objection on an entirely different foundation, as willappear from the following copy :

" We, the undersigned members of the Senatus Academicus,having heard with regret that it is the intention of the Curatorsto appoint our colleague Sir James Simpson to the office ofPrincipal of the University, and having reason to believe thatthe Curators are proceeding under the impression that thisappointment would be acceptable to the Senatus generally,deem it our duty to express the conviction that it would notbe for the advantage of the University."

If a majority of the Senatus believed that the appointmentof a particular chairman was calculated to interfere with theircomfort and usefulness, they were surely entitled to opposeit, and you or others totally unacquainted with the con-

siderations that actuated their conduct are hardly warrantedto characterise it by the use of offensive language. You saythat the 800 gentlemen who were beguiled into signing the

98

memorial should vote against the Lord Justice-General at theapproaching election of Chancellor. But when they learn thetrick that has been played upon them, they will probably bemore disposed to express approval of the Curators who haveprotected the University from the appointment of a Principalcapable of sanctioning a procedure so disingenuous.

I am, Sir, &c.,Edinburgh, July 13th, 1868. JAMES SYME.

*** We do not begrudge Mr. Syme any consolation he canget out of the above attempt to disparage the accuracy of ourstatements in regard to the recent election of Principal of theEdinburgh University. Of course we do not pretend to sucha knowledge of all the means by which Sir James Simpson’selection to the Principalship has been prevented as Mr. Symehas. " Where ignorance is bliss," &c. : we know more thanwe are glad to know. But we are somewhat astonished at Mr.

Syme’s courage in impugning the correctness of our statementswhen his own letter proves their truth. We spoke of the pain-ful fact that Sir James had been virtually defeated by the extra-ordinary opposition of his medical colleagues. Mr. Syme saysof sixteen professors who objected, seven belonged to themedi-cal profession. This word " objected" is convenient. We be- ilieve we are right in saying that only twelve professors signedthe memorial presented to the Senatus. Of these twelve,seven were medical professors. Not only were they a majority,but Mr. Syme knows that they were the influential names inthe memorial. Mr. Syme’s attempt to weaken our statementthat Sir James was objected to as an obstetric physician is stillmore lame. The objection was not put in the memorial; butas the memorial went round for signature-according to ourinformation it was taken from house to house by a very dis-tinguished professor-it was accompanied by a letter request-ing signatures; and this letter-Mr. Syme tells us-" did con-tain the allegation" that Sir James was an obstetric physician.We never said it was in the memorial. Mr. Syme admits itwas among the written arguments of the memorialists againstSir James Simpson’s appointment. Mr. Syme’s admissionsonly assure us of the accuracy of our information, both ofthat which we have published and of more that we havewithheld. As to the bearing of the Lord Justice-General’sbehaviour in this matter on his prospect of election to theChancellorship, we shall see. Mr. Syme’s language on thatpoint is not much more convincing than on others.-ED. L.

JAMES SYME.

ON THE TREATMENT OF FRACTURES OF THETHIGH WITH TRACTION BY WEIGHT ANDPULLEY.

To tlte Editor of THE LANCET.

Sm,-Since my memoir on difficult dentition was sent off, myfriend, Mr. Lydall, who kindly suppliesme with that informationwhich my sad loss of sight would have otherwise excluded, readto me Mr. Erichsen’s important communication with respect tofractures of the thigh. To these my attention has always beenespecially directed. Mr. Erichsen mention thethree modes of treat-ment employed at University Hospital-i.e., by the long splint,permanent bandage, and traction by weight and pulley; the lastin terms of considerable approbation. He seems to consider Dr.Buck, of New York, as the originator of this mode of treatment.I am sure that if he had been aware that I had any just claimto the introduction of the method, he would not have omitted tohave mentioned it. I may, however, state, that in the intro-ductory address given by me at the meeting of the ProvincialAssociation, at Liverpool, in 1839, I gave an account of themethod I had been in the habit of employing for some time, bytraction with weight and pulley ; and this account, as containedin my address, was published in the " Transactions of the Pro-vincial Medical and Surgical Association," vol. viii. p. 215 ; to-gether with a plate, showing the apparatus. A model was alsosent to the Exhibition of 1851. Up to this time I was notaware that this mode of treatment had ever been employed ; and Ibelieve we must go back as far as Hildanus for proof that it hadbeen.A few days after the meeting at Liverpool I was at Edinburgh;

and I am glad to have this opportunity of acknowledging thevery kind attention I received from Mr. Syme. He informedme that Hildanus* had described an apparatus for the purpose. It,however, appears that his patient could scarcely have borne itas there represented--at all events it fell into disuse.

It is now more than thirty years since I was induced to

employ this plan, from occasional failure in muscular subjects,by Desault’s long splint, however carefully applied. The failureproceeded from the constant tendency of the muscles to contract,while the control over them was at intervals only ; and anyfailure in the retentive apparatus would give them the advantage.This is met by the constant action of the weight and pulley ; andI found it very advantageous in fractures of the lower part ofthe femur.

I found ere long that although this method of extension in thestraight position was successful in the lower part of the thigh, itfailed to obviate the difficulty which has always been found toexist in the upper third, especially in muscular subjects, wherethe flexors of the thigh and the pelvis exert a predominant power,and produce what is called " The rising end of the bone ;" whichif it cannot be controlled, produces both an angular union andshortening of the limb. To obviate this, Mr. Pott, as is wellknown, laid his patient on the side and placed the limb in theflexed position ; but although this is calculated to bring the twoportions into a straight line, yet it provides no adequate powerto prevent shortening, and if the patient cannot be preventedfrom occasionally turning on his back there is a strong tendencyto carry the upper portion inwards with the pelvis. To meetthese difficulties I availed myself of the bed the grandson of thatcelebrated surgeon brought into use-I mean my late friend, Mr.Henry Earle’s. The thigh, being surrounded by four light splintsto prevent lateral displacement, I laid upon the second segmentof this bed at the most convenient angle, the knee correspondingwith the joint of the bed-which is capable of adaptation as tolength-the leg and foot resting on the third segment. Twoshort pads of a wedge-shape, with the base corresponding to thecondyles, and short splints over them, are grasped by a cordhaving a clove hitch, the two ends carried down from the con-dyles united at a convenient distance and then carried over apulley, and connected with a bag of sand, which I found themost convenient mode of proportioning the weight. The use ofthese short pads and corresponding splints was to prevent thecord from slipping over the joint (and I may mention that I havefound the same plan useful in reducing dislocations). The counterextension was provided for by a firm buckle belt round the pelvis,with straps carried round the lower part of the first segment ofthe bed, and occasionally with a permanent strap also. By thismode the fractured pieces were kept in a straight line, displace-ment in every direction being provided against, and sufficientextension maintained to prevent overlapping. The cases treatedin this way did perfectly well.

Since the account was published to which I have alluded, Ihave in vain hoped that the method proposed would have beencarried out by others. But I may fairly conclude that from themanner in which Mr. Erichsen speaks of Dr. Buck’s plan, thatthis hitherto has not been the case. It was with great satisfac-tion I found that one so distinguished as Mr. Erichsen hadadopted it with satisfactory results.Although now for some years I have been unable to pursue

my profession, yet I feel the greatest interest in all that apper-tains to it ; and if in introducing the principle of traction I mayhave contributed to promote it, more especially if the methodswhich I adopted should be found useful, it is all that Idesire.The Transactions in which the account was published unfor-

tunately were discontinued, and have since been greatly neglected;but had the memoir I published met Mr. Erichsen’s eye, I amsure he is the last person who would have omitted its mention.

I am yours obediently,Exeter, May 25th, 1868. J. H. JAMES, F.R.C.S., &c.J. H. JAMES, F.R.C.S., &c.

THE LOTHIANS’ MEDICAL ASSOCIATION.

THis Society, which was formed two years since to furtherthe common interests of the profession, and to promotefriendly feeling amongst its members, has just issued its

second annual report, which contains the results of the deli-berations, and the recommendations of two separate committeeson "The Medical Charities of Edinburgh," and on "Medical

* Hildani opera, p.47.