722

enthusiasts lay most stress on the building up of goodsound teeth, which will resist decay, by means ofmore careful attention to the dietary of childhood andadolescence. The committee appointed is a represen-tative one, and we do not doubt that its findings willgive a great and much needed stimulus to the campaignagainst this extremely important cause of ill-healthand physical disability. Sanitary reformers, who knowthe far-reaching effects of dental decay and oralsepsis, have been anxiously waiting for a lead.

OSWALD SCHMIEDEBERG.

THERE is something pathetic in the fact that OswaldSchmiedeberg should have outlived the post of professorof pathology in the German University of Strassburg,which he held during the whole period of Germanoccupation from 1872 till 1918. Born in Kurland inRussia in 1838, he died after a short illness on July 12thof this year at Baden Baden, where he had goneto live near his friend Naunyn. Even the Germanmedical papers seem to have lost him in his retirement,for they do not report his death till September. Hewas a prolific writer himself, and the articles inspiredby him would be difficult to count. He is known forhis theory that alcohol is in no sense a stimulant ofthe central nervous system, but that it depressesfrom the beginning, dulling the highest centres firstand the medullary centres last of all, the so-calledstimulant effects being merely due to depression ofthe inhibitory centres. He was less happy in hisadvocacy of organic iron compounds. His well-knownArzneimittellehre, translated into English in 1887as " Elements of Pharmacology," has served as a

model for text-books on pharmacology. Sohmiede-berg’s life was bound up in his institute and hisscientific work, and he was one of a group of Germanscientific workers who have formed a school roundthem by attracting students from all parts of the world.Cushny and Stockman studied under him in Strassburg."BVhile not coming into the class of Pasteur, Ehrlich,and Koch, he was certainly one of the great pioneersof experimental pharmacology.

MEDICAL EVIDENCE FOR THE DEFENCE.

Sir Edward Marshall-Hall, K.C., in addressing thejury on behalf of a medical man charged withadministering drugs to women for an illegal purpose,made the interesting suggestion that the MedicalDefence Union should organise a rota of medicalmen who would be prepared to give evidence onbehalf of an accused person, or to give the advan-tage of their knowledge to the court. In saying thisSir Edward Marshall-Hall appears to have had in hismind the power of the Crown to assemble medicalwitnesses against a prisoner, and the inability inmany cases of a prisoner to obtain expert evidenceon his behalf through lack of means. He referred,no doubt, to all classes of accused persons and notonly to medical men, who generally can obtain suchevidence owing to their professional position. Hemeant also, we presume, that such evidence shouldbe given gratuitously. From a medical point of viewthe suggestion is rather attractive. It is certainly ahardship that a man’s liberty should be placed indanger for lack of a medical witness able to criticisethe medical evidence given for the prosecution andto put the medical aspect of the prisoner’s case in amore favourable light. The giving of such aid as isindicated might, in conceivable cases, be a work ofthe truest charity. Whether the innovation would begenerally practicable and welcomed by all parties is aslightly different matter. Sir Edward Marshall-Hallhas had very great experience, perhaps greater thanany other present member of the Bar, in the defenceof difficult criminal cases. One would like to askhim whether, apart from the particular case that hewas fighting, and the needs of a particular client, he

1 THE LANCET, Sept. 24th, p. 677.

would wish to see the system instituted which he hassuggested, and considers that it would prove workablein practice. Probably in many instances the suggestedmedical witnesses would agree with the evidence givenby the witnesses on behalf of the Crown. Furtherquestions suggest themselves for consideration. Wouldthe fact that such witnesses were not called prejudicethe defence, and would the jury be unduly influencedagainst a prisoner by their absence ? Would they beregarded as putting themselves forward as professionalwitnesses for the defence, and would the weight of theirevidence be lessened therebv ? It would be useful toknow whether other counsel of experience in criminalcourts agree with Sir Edward Marshall-Hall.

SMALL-POX AND VACCINATION.

AT the present time a considerable proportion ofthe English people are under the impression thatsmall-pox is no longer to be looked upon as a formid-able disease, and that they may safely ignore theVaccination Acts. The present generation has had noobject-lesson of epidemic small-pox, and consequentlyhas no fear of the disease ; the belief appears to bewidely prevalent that small-pox is to be reckonedamong the diseases which have practically becomeextinct in England and Wales in consequence of thehigh standard of sanitation now exacted by localhealth authorities. The former ravages of variola inthis country in pre-vaccination days are not realised-the heavy mortality of children, the blindness amongmany of the survivors, the facial disfiguration, alongwith other sequelae. Nor does it appear to be generallyrecognised that small-pox is continually manifestingitself in epidemic form in one or another part of theworld, that the infection is constantly being carriedby shipping from one continent to another, and thatEngland, from its geographical position and its world-wide commerce, is peculiarly exposed to the risksof imported small-pox.To dispel this ignorance and remove the misappre-

hensions which have arisen in the public mind isa course that is obviously necessary in the interestsof public health. Something could be done to improvethe present situation if the public were put in possessionof trustworthy information concerning small-pox andvaccination. Probably it has been with this objectin view that the Medical Department of the Ministryof Health has prepared for circulation a small pam-phlet 1 on this subject, written in plain and conciselanguage, and summarising the main facts concerningsmall-pox and its only prophylactic-vaccination.An account is given of the behaviour of the diseasein pre-vaccination days, and a description of howinoculation was tried and found wanting, howvaccinia was introduced by Jenner, and what werethe early experiences of it in this country. There isalso given a brief résumé of the present administrativearrangements for vaccination in England and Wales,and a short description of the Government CalfLymph Establishment. Perhaps the most interestingsection is that which deals with the present state ofvaccination in the population of this country. Inthis connexion our readers may remember that theRoyal Commission on Vaccination, in its final reportpresented in 1896, recommended that exemptionshould be granted to those parents who honestlybelieved that vaccination would be injurious to thehealth of their children. The Vaccination Act of1898 therefore contained a provision allowing exemp-tion in cases in which the applicant satisfied themagistrates that his conscientious objection was

a genuine one. The Act of 1898 also instituteddomiciliary instead of stational vaccination, andmade obligatory the use of Government glycerinatedcalf lymph by public vaccinators. These concessionsresulted in a better observance of the vaccinationlaws, and the percentage of vaccinations to births,

1 Reports on Public Health and Medical Subjects, Ministryof Health, No. 8, Small-pox and Vaccination. London:H.M. Stationery Office. 1921. Pp. 19. Price 3d.