72

for the past month, and having nothing to conceal, he could notrest until the facts of the case were brought to light.

Mr. WAKLEY was proceeding, when the jury again protested,and the coroner rose to adjourn the court, amidst a scene of thegreatest confusion.

Mr. BALLANTINE said he should have to cross-examine thewitness at the next sitting.Mr. WAKLEY-But I have not yet finished my statement, and

I shall insist upon Mr. Collett being examined, in order to ascer-tain by whom he is employed, and who is to pay him for all he isdoing.The CORONER-I think you have made a very good defence,

Mr. Wakley. You need not say any more. (Indescribable con-fusion and excitement, amid which the court was ultimatelyadjourned till next day.)

TENTH DAY—JULY 18TH.

MR. WAKLEY, sen., was further examined.- He said that Mr. Gay had stated that he was dismissed from the Royal FreeHospital for having given him (Mr. Wakley) offence. He gavethat statement the most positive and unqualified denial. The

Biography which Mr. Gay states gave offence was published inMarch, 1853. He never saw it, nor read one word of it, tillthree months afterwards, when the subject, without any previousknowledge on his part, was brought before the committee by Mr.Halswell, an influential member of the committee and a magis-trate for Middlesex (Mr. Halswell was sitting on the bench bythe coroner). When the subject was mentioned he (Mr. Wakley)thought and said that it had better be left alone, and that if Mr.Gay was questioned upon the subject he would be able to give asatisfactoy answer.The jury here appealed to the coroner whether they were bound

to listen to irrelevant matter.The CORONER-Mr. Wakley stands in a peculiar position ; he

is one of the coroners of the county, and his character has beenpublicly assailed.

Mr. BODKIN hoped that the jury would continue the greatpatience they had shown throughout the case, and hear Mr.

Wakley’s statement, which, no doubt, the witness would make asshort as possible.Mr. WAKLEY, in continuation-The committee was adjourned,

till July 27th, and on the 25th he received a letter from Mr. Gay,dated July 21st, 1853, the tenor of which was an explanationrelative to the publication of the Biography, which Mr. Wakleyprocured and read on the following day, when he was quite dis-gusted at finding Mr. Gay had allied himself with persons whowere constantly traducing him (Mr. Wakley) and his family Hethought that Mr. Gay wanted him (Mr. Wakley) to interfere withthe committee in his behalf. He determined at once to write suchan answer to Mr. Gay, as would show the committee that hecould take no part at the board against Mr. Gay. This letterwas dated the 26th of July. On the 27th the committee met,and he told them that he would take no part whatever in theaffair. Mr. Halswell, with whom he (Mr. Wakley) had had nocommunication whatever, had brought forward the subject ofthe Biography without his (Mr. Wakley) knowing anything aboutit. With respect to Mr. Gay’s returning to the hospital, Dr.Tyler Smith first made the proposition to Mr. Wakley and askedif he had any objection. The question was a startling one, andafter consulting with his son, Mr. T. Wakley, the latter said thathe would be the first to shake hands with Mr. Gay. Dr.. Marsdenand Mr. Nelson had no objection to the return of Mr. Gay. Mr.

Wakley called upon Mr. Watson, one of the most influentialmembers of the committee, on the 9th of June last, and endea.voured to persuade him to consent to the return of Mr. Gay; bidwithout success.

Cross-examined by Mr. BALLANTINE-Had become a member Iof the committee several years ago, but believed that he did notbecome a committee-man until after his son was appointed sur-geon of the hospital.The jury again interfered-that the examination of Mr. Wakley

further was wasting time, particularly as the matters alluded tohad, some of them, taken place seven years ago, before the de-ceased was born. Mr. Wakley wished it earnestly to proceed.The FOREMAN intimated that with one exception it was the

unanimous wish of the jury that the matter should be thoroughlygone into.Mr. BALLANTINE said that the entire point of the case was

whether men of inexperience were to be appointed throughfavouritism, over the heads of men of experience, at the cost ofthe lives of the poor, and if this inquiry were stopped it wouldnot be his fault.

At this point Mr. Ballantine said that he had just that momentheard young Mr. Wakley say, " What a ruffian he is."Mr. WAKLEY, jun.-And so you are.Mr. BALLANTINE said he did not feel himself properly protected

after that expression.Mr. BODKIN said that such an expression by an interested

party was very improper.Mr. WAKLEY, jun., apologised.Examination of Mr. WAKLEY, senior, continued-His son had

told him about the operation a few days after it took place, andand that Mr. Cooke had operated. He said, "Why did not youextract the stone ?’’ when his son replied that he took the knifein his hand, but did not like to incur the responsibility, as thechild had been so long on the table. It would not do to hold

inquests in cases of unsuccessful operations-it would ruin thehospitals, and be the worst possible thing for the poor them-selves ; for no medical man would undertake the operations, andhundreds of the poor would die, because the medical men wouldnot incur the risk of fatal results. He had known governingbodies of institutions endeavour to stop inquiries ; and part of hialife bad been nas-ed in exnosinw such abuses. The broder wayin these cases, would be tor the aggrieved party to complain,in the first instance, to the governing body; and unless the

grounds were very strong indeed, he should decline to hold in-quests in cases of deaths following operations. Many personscalled for inquests from bad motives, and sometimes even toavoid payment of a doctor’s bill. He had handed over the caseto Mr. Baker, as he thought it ought to be held by a gentlemanunconnected with the hospital ; and it was Mr. Baker that haddeclined the inquiry upon the official representation that had beenmade to him, that the parents were satisfied with the testimonyof the medical gentlemen. He would act precisely in the sameway if the same circumstances occurred to-morrow.The CoRoNER said that he would act just as Mr. Wakley haddone.

Mr. WAKLEY continued-Before he had joined the hospitalcommittee, a number of anonymous letters reached him, and Mr.Gay often called on him to complain also that the fundewere grossly ;perverted. He subsequently went upon the com-mittee. He did not grant the inquest under a threat of a, mandamus. He believed that the mother’s motives were

good, but that she might have been urged by parties whoseobject was to obtain money. He never had any conversation with

Mr. Watson about the inquest. No man had been more wrongedthan he had been by Mr. Gay. He wished to heal the wound inthe profession, and to convince the profession and the public thathe had no motive throughout the whole of Mr. Gay’s case butto reconcile all existing differences which had arisen. He ap-plied to Mr. Watson, Dr. Marsden, and Mr. Nelson, on the 9thand 12th of June last, in the hope of restoring Mr. Gay to hisformer position in the hospital; but he never stated that thecommittee had offered Mr. Gay to return. It was impossible.When Dr. Marsden mentioned the subject at the Weekly Boardon the 14th of June last, he understood that Mr. Watson stated ifMr. Gay returned, he should leave the committee. His (My.Wakley’s) intarfaranna there ended

By Mr. WAINWRIGHT. -Had asked the mother if any one hadoffered her money, but did not believe that she was actuated byany bad motive. Believed that some days since the subject ofthis inquest was mooted at a meeting of the committee.By Mr. METCALFE. --Had been informed that at the time the

mismanagement of the funds was alleged, the late Mr. Walter,M.P., with Mr. Masterman, the banker, and others, after an in-vestigation, declared that they were perfectly satisfied with thestate of affairs. Mr. Masterman was then appointed treasurer,and still remains so.

By Mr. SLEIGH-He should not consider the representation ofa discarded officer, acting from vindictive motives, a sufficientcause to hold an inquest. He had never known an inquest heldin a fatal case of lithotomy, nor could he find a report of one inany book upon medical jurisprudence.By Mr. BODKIN. -He had nothing to do with Mr. Gay’s dis-

missal ; he intended to prosecute him for perjury. Mr. Gay hadgrossly libelled him. Mr. Gay must have known that he (Mr.Wakley) had nothing whatever to do with his dismissal in anyway. What he meant in his letter by " abiding by the conse-quences" was, that nothing but disaster would befall him fromforming an alliance with such parties.WILLIAM HICKS, porter at the hospital, was then sworn, and

said he was present at the operation. At first he looked on ; at thelast part he did nothing ; but in the middle he held the leg of the

.

child, and saw Mr. Cooke make the incision. Mr. Wakley, jun.,applied a probe to the wound. He did not see him use either a

1 knife or forceps.

73

Mr. WEBBER, said that he had taken up the case upon publicprinciple in writing to Lord Palmerston to bring this matter tolight; and he hoped the jury would see that he had done hisduty.Mr. BALLANTINE interfered, and said he hoped that Mr. Webber

was going to be prudent for once in his life.Mr. Webber then sat down ; when the jury adjourned for a

short time, as the evidence was now closed.(The shorthand writer’s notes of the able summing-up of the

learned coroner had not arrived at the time of going to press ;we hope to insert it verbatim in the next number of this

journal.)The CORONER having concluded the summing up, at five o’clock

the jury retired to consider their verdict, and returned into courtat about half past nine o’clock, at which time the court was

densely crowded with spectators, who awaited the verdict withbreathless interest.The FOREMAN read the verdict as follows :-"That the deceased, Alfred Richardson, died of inflammation

caused by an operation unskilfully performed by Mr. ThomasWeedon Cooke and Mr. Thomas Wakley, jun."That the jury, finding great difficulty in coming to a satis-

factory conclusion respecting other matters deposed to beforethem, they have resolved to exercise the discretion permitted tothem by declining to give any opinion upon them."The inquisition having been duly signed, the court broke up.

Some of the jurymen, on retiring through the passages, werehissed.

Medical News.

ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS.-The following gentle-men, having undergone the necessary examinations for thediploma, were admitted Members of the College at a. meetingof the Court of Examiners on the 14th inst. :-

BURG, WILLIAM HENRY, Spalding, Lincolnshire.DYSON, EDWARD, Almondbury, Yorkshire.GooDDY, GEORGE, South Hiendley, Barnsley, Yorkshire.HARPER, CHARLES HARRIS, Hon. East India Company’s

Service.HARRIS, SAMUEL, Quorndon, Leicestershire.HORSFALL, JAMES SMITH, Halifax, Yorkshire.HuRMAN, HENRY BIFFEN, Curry Rivell, near Taunton.MARR10TT, ROBERT BUCHANAN, Ipswich.MILLARD, RAY SAMUEL, Whitchurch Asylum, near Ross,

Herefordshire.MORRIS, EDWARD, Stoke Damarel, Devon.SUMMERS, SAMUEL, Hemel Hempstead.The following gentlemen were admitted Members on the

17th inst. :-DoBiE, WILLIAM MURRAY, Chester.IRVINE, ALEXANDER, Aberdeen.NORRIS, NATHAJSTIKL, Liverpool.ORTON. THOMAS JERRAM, Guelph, Canada West.RussELL, EDWARD, Liverpool.VEAL, THOMAS STICK, St. Columb, Cornwall.WILSON, WILLIAM, Royal Navy.WRENCH, EDWARD MASON, Cornhill.

APOTHECARIES’ HALL.-A list of the names of gentlemenwho passed their examination in Classics and Mathematics on Tues-day and Wednesday, the 18th and 19th July:-William Chenhall,Princes-street; Charles Wotton, King’s Langley; William Hick-man, Melcombe-place, Dorset-square; Frederick William Greene,Leadenhall-street; Hugh P. Olivey, Mylor, Cornwall; HenryGervis, Tiverton, Devon; John H. Smyth, UpperFinchley-road;Thomas C. Mitchell, Kempston, Beds; Blair H. Williams,Kempston, Beds; Thomas Dowling, Chew Magna; Samuel H.Adams, Bedford; Rayner W. Batten, Plymouth; James Somer,Barnstaple, Devon; John H. Tylecope, Haywood, Stafford ; Wm.Gimson Gimson, Walton, Leicestershire; Henry T. Lanchester,Yoxford, Suffolk; William Orange, Torquay, Devon; ThomasP. Smith, Croydon; Juhn Candy, Harleyford-place; ThomasTrimnell, Harleyford-place ; Alfred Winkfield, Bedford; WalterMorgan, Tremains, Bridgend; Otbo F. Wyer, Bedford; JohnCook, Northampton; Josephus A. Williams, Scarborough;John Alderson, Aslackby, Lincoln; Samuel C. Noble, Kendal;Arthur G. Lawrence, Carmarthen; John Easton, Blackfriars-road ; Robert S. Belcher, King’s College; Reginald Harrison,

Stafford; John C. Armstrong, Gravesend; Frederick Dunn,Wolverhampton; John D. Bird, Tollerton Easingwold; EdwardFurse, Southmolton; Charles W. C. Madden, Bristol; William

Kennedy, Worcester; Henry A. Day, Pembrook; Paul Belcher,Burton-on-Trent; Benjamin Browning, Hurley-street: RichardW. B_igstocke, Milford Haven; Henry C. March, Newbury,Berks; Thomas P. Daniel, Beaminster; Henry T. Wade, GeneralHospital, Birmingham; Frederick H. Smith, Greenwich; CharlesJ. Hellicar, Clifton, Bristol; Thomas Leachman, Islington;James Ford, Barnstaple, Devon; John H. Jenvey, Upper Stam-ford-street ; John T. Seccombe, Dalston.TESTIMONIAL TO DR. F. J. MOUAT, PROFESSOR OF

MEDICINE IN THE BENGAL MEDICAL COLLEGE, BY THE

GRADUATES.-Dr. Mouat being about to leave Bengal for ashort period, the graduates of the Bengal College have takenadvantage of this opportunity to present him with a handsometestimonial. The testimonial, consisting of a very splendidvase and salver, was accompanied by an address, expressive of £the high sense which the graduates entertain of Dr. Mouat’slabours as a professor in the College, and his exertions inbehalf of the graduates. Few men, we believe, have donemore than Dr. Mouat to develop the intellects of native pupils,and he has justly earned their gratitude. The following is anextract from the address :-‘ It may not be in keeping withthe design of this address to expatiate upon those high qualifi-cations and eminent abilities which have so long commandedour respect and admiration, but we may be permitted to dwellwith grateful feelings upon the uniform kindness of mannerand the genuine goodness of heart which have so justly earnedfor you the affectionate regard and attachment of every studentof this College, past as well as present; while, upon morepublic grounds, our most sincere thanks are due to you for thefriendly and effective advocacy with which you have, for along series of years, supported every measure tending to ad-vance and improve our position in life, and for those great anduntiring exertions which have so materially contributed toincrease the resources, and to enhance the reputation, of ourCollege as a school of medicine, especially by so activelyassisting in the establishment of the magnificent new hospitalwhich now constitutes the chief ornament of this institution,and affords so large an amount of aid for the relief of humansuffering. When we turn to survey this noble structure, withits complete and extensive organization, and its unlimitedmeans of instruction to the student of the present day, im-parting, as it were, a fresh and powerful impulse to the

practical study of the healing art, it is impossible not to feelproud of our Alma Mater; and while we exult in that feeling,and rejoice in her well-earned prosperity, we must not beunmindful that to you, Sir, is in a great measure due themerit of having thus raised her to her present position ofdignity and usefulness." Dr. Mouat replied in suitable terms.On one side of the vase was embossed the southern view of theNew Medical College Hospital, with the following motto:"Homines ad Deos nulla re propius accedunt quam salutemhominibus dando." On the reverse side of the vase was

engraved the following suscription: "Presented to FredericJ. Mouat, Esq., M.D., F.R.C.S. Eng., Professor of Medicine,Medical College of Bengal, &c. &c. &c., in grateful acknow-ledgment of lasting benefits conferred on themselves and theirAlma Mater, and as a testimony of high respect for his pro-fessional talents and esteem for his private worth, by theGraduates of the Medical College of Bengal, Calcutta, April17th, 1854." DISCLOSURES RESPECTING SPIRIT-RAPPIKN.-At the

meeting of the Academy of Sciences of Paris, on the 12th ofJune last, M. Rayer called the attention of the members tosome experiments of Dr. Schiff, of Frankfort, touching spirit-rapping. This physician had under his observation a younggirl, with whom certain noises took place, attributed to therapping of spirits. Dr. Schiff, by paying much attention tothe case, found out that the sonnd issued from the girl herself,and not from any other source. The noise is, in fact, pro-duced by the repeated slipping of the tendon of the peronasuslongus from the sheath in which it glides in passing behind theouter ankle. Dr. Schiff succeeded in repeating upon himselfthe same phenomenon presented by the girl, which was sup-posed to depend upon a rapping spirit. When the sheath ofthe tendon is weak and lax the noise is very easily made, andmay be produced without moving the foot in the least; butwhen the finger is placed behind the outer ankle just when thesound is being made, the alternate and repeated displacementis felt without difficulty, the action being accompanied by arapid up and down movement of the same tendon. The Secre-