270

tion of form only. He thinks if some arrangement of thiskind be not effected, that, after obtaining the desired Charter,the College will be rent by heartburnings similar to thosewhich agitated the College of Surgeons from 1843 till the

grant of the recent Charter.

THE ANALYTICAL SANITARY COMMISSION.

THE VINEGARS OF MESSRS. HILL, EVANS, AND CO.

IT will be remembered that in our last number we publisheda letter from Messrs. HILL, EvANS, and Co., of Worcester, inwhich they stated, that the samples purporting to be theirvinegar, the results of the analyses of which were given by usin a previous report, were either not the products of their ownmanufacture, or that we were mistaken in our analyses. Tothese statements we now reply.From evidence in our possession, there is little doubt but

that the vinegars referred to were those of Messrs. HILL,EVÀNS, and Co., while it is very certain that the amount of

sulphuric acid contained in the samples is correctly stated inour published analyses. The only question to be considered,then, is, whether the sulphuric acid present in the vinegars isin a free or combined state. On this point, after renewedanalyses, we have to state that, with the exception of a veryminute quantity, the acid exists in a state of combination.We have therefore very great satisfaction in adding to thefour firms which do not use sulphuric acid in the manufactureof their vinegars, and whose names have been already pub-lished, those of

MESSRS. HILL, EVANS, & CO.

We have now to inquire in what way it happens that thevinegars of Messrs. HILL, EVANS, and Co. contain so large andunexampled an amount of combined sulphuric acid.The water, we have been informed, used by Messrs. HILL,

EVANS, and Co. in the manufacture of their vinegars, is

obtained from a well on their premises remarkable for thequantity of lime which it holds in solution; this is so great,that when the water is simply exposed to the air for a shorttime, a portion of the lime is deposited; also, that great troubleis experienced from the accumulation of that substance in thepipes and boilers. It is therefore very probable that the

greater part of the combined sulphuric acid detected in theirvinegars is derived from the water used, a small portion alsoproceeding from the other ingredients employed.In order to be certain that this explanation is the correct

one, it is proper that the chemical composition of this well-water should itself be determined. Although it is not un-common for well-water to contain large quantities of carbonateof lime, it is most unusual for natural water to be impregnatedwith so considerable an amount of sulphate of lime as wouldbe necessary to account for the large quantity detected in thevinegars of Messrs. Hill, Evans, and Co.While the quantity of combined sulphuric acid detected in

1000 grains by measure in the three samples of the vinegar ofMessrs. Hill, Evans, and Co., ranges from 2’13 to 2’80, in allother samples of pure malt vinegar it has always been below,and often very considerably under, half a grain.We believe that Messrs. Hill, Evans, and Co., some time

since, were subjected to the charge of employing sulphuricacid in the manufacture of their vinegars; and on that occa-sion, it was likewise ultimately ascertained, after a long andangry controversy, that the acid was combined, and not free;and it was then considered that it was derived from the watertaken from the same wel

It would have been only candid had Messrs. Hill, Evans,and Co., in their letter addressed to us, referred to this

important fact; for it must have occurred to them, on aperusal of our analysis, that it was extremely probable thatthe same unusual circumstance which had before misled, hadagain been the cause of an accidental conclusion.

It is true that certain bottles of vinegar were left at TnaLANCET Office in January last; but neither the letter ofMessrs. Hill, Evans, and Co., nor that of Sir Charles Hastings,M.D., was ever placed before us, and consequently thesamples remained iiiiantlyzed by us.

Relying entirely upon our integrity and accuracy, theEditor of THE LANCET has implicitly confided to us the

power of selecting samples for examination, feeling that ifhe had adopted an opposite course of policy, he might have been inundated with testimonials of the highest character-and none could have been higher than that of Sir CharlesHastings-as to the purity of articles which might have beensent to the Analytical Sanitary Commission for examination.From the system thus pursued the public have the best

guarantee for the accuracy and perfect impartiality of ourreports; whereas an opposite course of proceeding might haveled, from misplaced confidence, to some erroneous inferences;and consequently an enormous number of samples which havebeen sent to the Analytical Sanitary Commission have re-mained unnoticed by us. There cannot be a doubt thatthe public have been best served by the course which hasbeen pursued. -

THE VINEGAR OF MESSRS. CHAMPION AND CO.

To the Editor of THE LANCET.

SiR,-Our attention has just been called by our travellers,who report the loss of several orders in consequence of amost gross libel published in your paper of the 28th of Augustlast, in stating in your No. 2 table, Vinegar Analyses, thatvinegar bought of a Mr. Hardstaffe, and represented to contain4’12 sulph. acid, was vinegar made by Champion & Co. Webeg to state, we never supplied, nor do we know the party;and we must hold you responsible for all loss we may sustainby your giving publicity to a charge so utterly false andunfounded as it is.

’ Having been thus necessitated to address you, we feelourselves in some measure compelled to notice your state-ment in other respects, so far as it refers to vinegar made byChampion & Co., and which we shall do by simply stating,that it is equally incorrect and groundless in its premises, andunfounded in fact.

We are, sir, yours respectfully,Sept. 14, 1852. WIDOW CHAMPION & Co.

We ought, being under the government of our most graciouslady the Queen, to entertain great respect for the ladies, andfor female authority; we shall therefore not reply to therather angry note of Mrs. CHAMPION in any harsh or severeterms. If this lady-manufacturer will take the trouble tolook at the published analyses, she will perceive it is noteven stated that any sample of her vinegar was purchasedof Mr. Hardstaffe. In Table 2, it should be " Grimble andPodmore," in place of Champion & Co., which is a mere mis-print, as is plainly shown by the analysis and the othertables. The tables, with the exception of such a misprint asthat pointed out to our notice by Widow Champion & Co.,are mere compilations from the analyses.

Correspondence.

SURGEONS TO EMIGRANT SHIPS.

"Audialteram partem."

7’o Me Editor of THE LANCET.SiR,—Reading with pleasure your well-judged remarks in late

numbers of your valuable journal about the gratuitous services ofmedical men, and agreeing fully in them as I do, have suggestedto me to call your attention to a class of men, who, though not somuch known or thought of as the hospital men, are neverthelessnot less useful in their way-namely, the surgeons to emigrantships. It is not to be wondered at that our noble profession doesnot stand as it ought with the public, or that we do not receivethat consideration which should be due to it, when our membersare constantly cutting each other’s throats. We set a low estimateon our own and each other’s services, and why should not the

271

public ? Are there not men connected with our (ours only) pro-fession anxious and willing to undertake the most troublesomeand responsible appointments gratuitously ? Those so acceptingappointments to hospitals and dispensaries have a hope thereby ofgetting a name and practice, but what can justify the folly ofmen advertising their gratuitous services to shipowners, knowing,as they must, that the law requires emigrant ships going to cer-tain parts of the world, to take surgeons, and prevents theirweighing anchor without one? Here is one of the very few in-stances in which the laws of our country protect or offer anyencouragement to our profession ; and yet her own members areso lost to the general interest, that to serve some selfish purpose,they contravene the law, and set the whole body, as it were,a-begging. Would it not be more respectable for those men whogo hat in hand to the counting-houses of shipowners, offeringtheir services for free passages to Australia, to pay their own fare,even in the lowest class, than to destroy that which might bemade a useful, and moderately-remunerative employment to somehundreds of the profession? Why should we be the only profes-sional men giving their services for nought; as you justly re-marked, the clergyman, though he ought to be supposed to enterthe Church for spiritual motives only, is not expected to attend tosoul-saving without being paid; yet medical men offer theirs inpreserving life. Why the hospital porter and cuddy servant aremore alive to the interest of their class.

Surgeons accepted by shipowners, because offering their servicesgratuitously, cannot stand high in the estimation of their em-

ployers. Would not any rational man think that services offeredfor nothing are scarce worth having ? So with the shipowner andsurgeon : the former accepts the latter, not for his worth, but onaccount of the money he saves him, not caring whether he becompetent or well-conducted, although in their advertisementsabout the sailing of ships, the recommendation of having an ex-perienced surgeon is held out to the passengers ; the owners, orcharterers, are indifferent about the respectability or competencyof the individual, so that he be (what the law requires) in posses-sion of a diploma, leaving the poor passengers to find out duringthe voyage that their experienced gratis-working surgeon turnsout to he an ignorant drunkard. Few such, it is to be hoped, areto be found in the profession, but all must admit that some are tobe found amongst us; and who is so likely to offer himself fornought to the shipowner, who will ask but few questions, andsupply plenty of lush ? It is bad enough to have a trader in drugsannounce that he can provide surgeons at twenty-four hours’notice, with the addition of a testimonial of competency from him..self, but far worse is it to hear of the set of men who beg appoint-ments at the shipowners and agents’ counting-houses, and to hearshipowners tale of a gratuity of £ 2u for the voyage to Australia,when they require an extra decent fellow.Can it be that the example set by the hospital and dispensary

medical men in giving their services for nothing is followed bythe juniors wishing to go to sea? As great men despise largerewards, so little men despise small rewards.

It is to be hoped, Sir, that as your journal so well advocatesthe well-being of the profession generally, you will find time towake it to its own interest as regards emigration. That whichwould employ and benefit the juniors must also benefit the seniors.Emigration might employ hundreds annually, and thereby assistin doing away with the shabby trading which all must regretexists in the profession, which is overstocked. Teach the would-be emigrant surgeon what he ought to expect and insist on, asyou have the naval and hospital men, as also the referees to in-surance offices, and you will soon do away wtth gratuitous work-such remuneration as is advertised by the Central London School,(Times, Sept. 6th,) as also shipowners talking of gratuity to menwhose services they cannot and must not dispense with. You willthen more than ever deserve the thanks of the profession, in-cluding

Your obedient servant,September, 1852. M. S.

SHIP SURGEONS.TREATMENT OF SURGEONS OF EAST INDIA COMPANY’S SHIPS.

To the Editor of THE LANCET.SIR,-Permit me to address a few lines to you on a subject

which, though of considerable moment, has not yet occupied yourcolumns. I refer especially to the iolibc:rality and injustice usuallypractised towards ship surgeons. It is, I apprehend, one of theconditions of modern conventionalism, that this class of men,though holding a position involving more real responsibility thanany equal number of junior members of the profession, should beregarded as ignorant, uneducated, and unworthy of gentlemanlytreatment. It is hardly worth while to enlarge upon the inadequate

remuneration which they receive, as the disgraceful awards madeby the public to the time, labour, and skill of medical men are sooften the theme of your just censure. I wish to direct yourattention to a system practised by some shipowners, which,though not legally fraudulent, in the abstract is most strictly so.Most of your readers are probably not aware that the Indiamenbelonging to our large firms are most generally employed by theEast India Company for the transport of troops, invalid andotherwise, (as the case may be,) to England. Further, that theCompany give a gratuity to the surgeon, of fifteen shillings ahead for every man and woman landed, and ten shillings forevery child, provided that the treatment of the medical man incharge shall appear to have been satisfactory to the properauthorities in England. This is technically termed " headmoney," and is intended by the Company as a remunerationto the surgeon for the increased trouble and anxiety whichthus devolve upon him, as well, no doubt, as an efficientstimulus to exertion. And a liberal remuneration it is, werethe surgeon permitted to receive it. But what is the system? The surgeon, on applying to the owners for employment, iscompelled either to sign an agreement consigning the whole ofthe head money to the principals, and resigning all interest in itwhatever, or-sad alternative-to go about his business forthwith.Appended to this document is, generally, a saving clause, statingthat he will be dependent wholly upon their generosity, or

liberality, or some such misnomer. Again: on the vesselarriving in England, the surgeon is obliged, before receivingthe pay due to him from the ship, to sign a document, authorizingthe owners to receive the amount of head money. Frequently,also, the surgeon is put to considerable expense by remaining inLondon, in order to obtain the documents necessary to thepassage of the accounts at the India House; but he looks invain to be reimbursed.

It is useless to comment upon the injustice and nefarious cha-racter of these transactions; but the remedy I shall propose isthis-that the East India Company peremptorily refuse to payover the head money into the owners’ hands, and even to thesurgeon himself, unless he adduce satisfactory proof that heneither has been, nor will be, a party to its transference intoother hands.The sanguine hope that I entertain, that this abuse, exposed

through the medium of your columns, will be reformed, has in-duced me to trespass thus far upon your space.

I remain, Sir, your obedient servant,September, 1852. M.R.C.S. Eng.

THE COLLEGE FELLOWSHIP.

To the Editor of THE LANCET.

SIR,-Concurring entirely in your correspondent’s (A. P. C.)letter, concerning the new batch of Fellows, may I be allowed toinform him, that the public actually entertain the opinion thatthe "distinction" obtained by ten guineas and an old diploma ismore honourable to the profession than the same rank earned byanxious study. The motive of the College in admitting Fellowsupon such terms is worse than anomalous, for the regulationsstate, " that any member holding a diploma dated before Sept. 14,1844, can, after eight years," escape the preliminary examination.Therefore the hardship of getting up their classics and mathema-tics cannot be pleaded as an excuse for not submitting to an exa-mination, by the fifty-five new Fellows. obedient servant,Your obedient servant,

Sept., 1852. ________________

QUIZ.

THE ABERDEEN UNIVERSITIES.To the Editor of THE LA.NCET.

SIR,-I was a student in Arts and Medicine twelve yearsago, both in the King’s College and University, and in theMarischal College and University, Aberdeen.The dispute concerning the legality of the latter in granting

degrees, then occupied the leisure hours of the student, as itnow occupies the leading columns of THE LANCET.

In their locality, both institutions are equally respected.Several of their professors and lecturers are men of morethan average abilities, and the medical staff of the notable" Royal Infirmary" is selected from their number. I alsoknow something regarding their examinations, and believe’that during the last fifteen.years, the one in this respect is asrigid as the other.

Although neither Professors Clark or Fergusson are nativesof the neighbourhood, yet, from the positions they hold in therival colleges, they cannot fail to know that this nnneigh"bourly dispute, divested of the " war of words," is of the usual