345

THE PARKE MEMORIAL FUND.To tk6 Editors of THE LANCET.

SIRS.—On the 13th ult. I was at the Army MedicalDepartment, London, and in the waiting-room I noticed anappeal card for subscriptions to the above fund. TheDirector- General also informed me that there was a greatneed of further support. After leaving this office I went toMessrs. Holt and Co. of Whitehall-place, and paid in thesmall sum of 10s. They told me that Surgeon-CaptainF. A. B. Daly was hon. secretary to the fund. 1 have to-dayheard from this gentleman that a statue has been erected tothe late Surgeon-Major Parke in Leinster-lawn, Dublin; thatthe sum of £600 has been subscribed, but that nearly £100more is required to clear off the cost of the memorial.In THE LANCET of May 23rd, 1891, a letter appeared fromCaptain N. E. Stairs, headed " A Tribute to Surgeon Parke."The following week I wrote, pointing out how truly deservingSurgeon-Major Parke was of the honour of the Albert Medal.I would now take the liberty of asking those who have notalready subscribed to the Parke Memorial Fund, and whowould be glad to help perpetuate the memory of one of thebravest and most unselfish of our profession, to senddonations to Messrs. Holt and Co., 17, Whitehall-place,London, S.W., or to myself. In either case the sums sub-scribed will, by the kind permission of the Editors, beacknowledged in THE LANCET. I would suggest that theamount sent by any subscriber should not be more than tenand not less than five shillings, and I would not limit thisfund to only gentlemen of the medical profession. The post-script is an extract from Captain Stairs’ letter in 1891.

I am, Sirs, yours faithfully,Canterbury, Jan. 19tb, 1897. PUGIN THORNTON.

" I beg of you space to insert hese few lines as a small tribute to amedical man who has done his work so well and nobly. I refer to myold comrade, Dr. T. H. Parke, of the late Emin Pasha Expedition. Ifeel certain people have not fully realised the services of Dr. Parketo humanity. It matters nothing where or under what circumstancesthese services were rendered; blacks are capable of just as keen sufferingand anguish as we white men are, and I therefore ask you to recordthe following incident, which is by far the bravest and noblest ithas ever been my lot to be a witness of :-’When a portion of theExpedition was stationed at Fort Bodo, in Central Africa, Dr. Parke,who was one of the number, was seized with a violent attack of biliousremittent fever; each day he grew worse, his temperature for the wholetwenty days of illness never falling below 101° F. Quinine and arsenicand all other medicines failed, and Captain Nelson and I gave up allhope of his ever recovering. He was able only to crawi slowly about hishut, and could keep nothing of the poor foods we had to give him on hisstomach. In spite of this, after about fifteen days’ illness, when wornaway to nothing, he crept out of his hut unawares to Nelson and myself,reached the hut of a black chief, Khamis Pari, and lanced for him a largeand painful abscess, cleansed and dressed the wound, and was found byNelson and myself in an absolutely helpless condition, and carried backby us to his hut. Next day reaction set in, and both Nelson and Iexpected he had only but a few hours more to live. He has neverspoken to any of us, or to anyone that I know, a single word of this. Ithink it only fair to show to his brother medical officers what one of theirnumber has done. Those who have suffered the agonies of a heavy feverwill, I feel sure, appreciate and remember this brave action on the partof Dr. Parke."

____________

"THE HALF-YEARLY MEETING OF THEFELLOWS OF THE ROYAL COLLEGE

OF SURGEONS OF ENGLAND."To the Editors of THE LANCET.

SIRS,-No one will be surprised that Mr. Heath has

nothing more to say about Mr. Anderson’s case. What couldhe say when he found from my letter that the propositions headvanced so confidently-viz., that the Council of the

College had twice negatived a grant in aid of the appeal tothe Privy Council, that such a grant would be illegal, andthat the solicitor of the College had declared it to be

illegal-were at variance with facts ? Nothing whatever,unless he retracted his statements-a course which I regret tothink that we cannot expect from him, even when he makespublic charges against individuals which are absolutelyunfounded. For example, at a public meeting Mr. Heath made an entirely irrelevant attack upon my election com- Imittee for issuing a statement, and at the same time on ’!myself for having, as a member of the Council, permitted astatement to be issued, which he regarded as reflectingon the Council of the College for its action towards me

during my tenure of office on the Council. WhenI show that Mr. Heath’s imputation is unfoundedbecause the statement did not relate to the periodof my tenure of office as a Councillor, without re-

tracting or expressing regret for an unfounded charge

Mr. Heath shifts his ground to the different and wider im-putation that the statement itself is untrue. He also makesit a,ppear as if his fresh attack sprang from my letter dealingwith a part of his speech which was not reported instead offrom the fact that I had made his first position untenable,thereby implying that having been deprived by the abruptclose of the meeting of the opportunity of correcting hismis-statements I might have submitted to them in silence.Mr. Heath’s second attack and so-called proof are as un-

founded as the first. He states that I made my first speechon behalf of the Members in November, 1886. I beg to-refer him to THE LANCET of Dec. 26th, 1885, where he willfind a report of my first speech on behalf of the Members,occupying about two columns of the paper, and delivered onDec. 17th, 1885. The speech was briefly reported’ in theBritish Medical Journal and inserted in extenso in the,Jfedical Times of Dec. 19th, 1885. This is an unhappymistake in one who goes out of his way to remove

the beam which he fancies that he sees in hisbrother’s eye and destroys Mr. Heath’s so-called proof.Both from my "literary efforts" " and my speeches,at the College in 1885 and 1886 my advanced-

opinions became well - known. That such opinionsand their expression at the College in direct opposition to,and criticism of, the memoranda issued by the Council wereinjurious to my " collegiate interests " is not open to reason-able doubt. That I was well aware of this and deliberatelydisregarded it at the time is shown by a passage from thevery letter of Nov. 8th, 1886, to which Mr. Heath refers andwhich runs as follows : "From long-standing convictionand from a sense of what is due to the Members of theCollege and to the profession at large I have come forwardagain (and as I am informed and believe in opposition to myprivate interests) to aid a righteous and most importantcause." Views such as mine, opposed to the views of those-in office at the College and of the majority of the Fellows,were certain to make any other candidate (from the point ofview of Mr. Heath and his friend), as Mr. Heath says,"a more eligible candidate" for office in the Collegethan myself. From any other point of view I trustthat I may be permitted, without want of modesty, to

challenge comparison of my claims to the examiner-

ship with those of any who were preferred to me.

Mr. Heath’s reasons, however, for confining the meaningof the words "collegiate interests" to an application foran examinership are best known to himself. Perhaps hewill explain them. Mr. Heath calls the Association of-Fellows-a body which includes such high-minded andpublic-spirited gentlemen as Mr. George Pollock, Mr.

Holmes, Dr. Robert Barnes, Mr. Gant, and others whom Ineed not mention and which publishes its proceedings-" aclique." To the action of this clique, which has been

guided by the principle that the College is not for theCouncil only, but for the Fellows and Members as well, the

, Fellows and Members are indebted for many reforms andimprovements at the College-the annual general meetingof Fellows and Members, the annual Report of the Council,the simplification of the system of voting papers, thecommon room at the College, and the half-yearly meeting ofFellows. To such a " clique I I consider it an honour tobelong, and I have very little doubt that such attacks asthose of Mr. Heath will impart fresh vigour to its efforts forthe promotion of the best interests of the greatest of allour professional institutions.

I am, Sirs, yours truiy,Wimpole-street, W., Jan. 26th, 1897. WALTER RIVINGTON.

THE USE OF TUBERCULIN IN A DAIRYHERD.

To the Editors of THE LANCET.

SIRS,-In the Farmer and Stockbreeder of Jan. llth a,

notice appears under this heading giving an account of theresult of using tuberculin as a means of distinguishingbetween tuberculous and non-tuberculous cows on a dairyfarm of Mr. H. Purrott, of St. Albans. It appearsthat 50 per cent. of the cows tested reacted to thetest, and that of the cows supplied by a dealer to

replace those rejected 30 per cent. were found to reactto the test. It further appears that the cows originally on the farm which reacted to the test were fed off,and when slaughtered were all found to have tubercle,"but few or none in more than one organ, and not at