naval assistant-surgeons

243

issued, a canvass of the profession was established, and thesecretaries have, up to the present date, ascertained thatabout half the medical men in this city and its immediateneighbourhood are disposed to co-operate in refusing to supplythe offices with the requisite certificates without a fee. Ofthe consent of others they entertain no doubt, when the can-vass has been more carefully made. The committee are, how-ever, of opinion, that they must have promises of supportfrom a much larger proportion before they can recommendthe profession to take so decisive a step as the one contem-plated. In the meantime, they have circulated among theirown members the subjoined list of the companies that haveagreed to their proposals, which they request you now topublish for the benefit of the profession at large.

Finally, the committee are determined not to relax theirexertions in bringing this protracted dispute with the officesto a successful termination; and as a powerful auxiliary means,they recommend the establishment of local associations for thesame object, that so the union of numbers may effect whatcannot be accomplished by separate and disjoined efforts.

We are. Sir. vour obedient servants.RICHARD ALLEN,Hon. Secs.JOHN AIKENHEAD,Hon. Secs.Manchester, Feb. 19, 1849.

Britannia........................... 1, Prince’s-st., Bank, London.Professional........................ 76, Cheapside.British Mutual .................. 17, New Briclge-st.,Blackfriars.Yorkshire ........................ York.Church of England ............ Lothbury.National Mercantile ............ Poultry, Mansion-house.Solicitors’ and General......... 57, Chancery-lane.Westminster and General ... 27, King-st., Covent-garden.General Benefit .................. 4, Farringdon street.English Widows’ Fund......... 67, Fleet-street.Legal and Commercial ......... 73, Cheapside.Medical, Invalid, and General 25, Pall-mall.

Engineers, :MasoDic, and Uni- 345, Strand.versal Sl ," I an .

Star ................................. 44, llloorgate-street.London Indisputable............ 31, Lombard-street.Royal Farmers and General... 346, Strand.Prudential ........................ 14, Chatham-place.

To the Editor of THE LANCET. BSiR,—I cannot refrain from handing you the accompanyingletter-or threat, shall I call it-from the hands of Mr. GeorgeFarren,Resident Director oftheAsylum Foreign and DomesticLife Office, in reply to a refusal on my part to answer ques-tions, without remuneration, respecting the health of a gentle-man proposing to assure his life in the al’ove-named office.I send you, likewise, a copy of my answer appended thereto,and trust that my professional brethren will, whenever oppor-tunities occur, mark in a similar way their contempt of the ,

said Mr. George Farren, and his pitiful attempt at intimida-tion.-I am, Sir, your obedient servant,Lewisham, Feb. 13, 1849. C. WILSON STEEL.

Asylum Foreign & Domestic Life Office,February, 1849.

SiB,—When a party referred to by a proposal to this Officerefuses to give the necessary information, it is our custom tosend an intimation to the life sought to be assured, who isunder terms to furnish the required testimony. Shall I for-ward your letter to Mr. ? or would you prefer answeringmy former inquiry ? I write this purely out of professionalcourtesy to you, and shall feel obliged by an immediate reply.

I am, your most obedient servant,To C. W. Steel, Esq. G. FARREN, Resident Director.

-

Lewisham, Feb. 13, 1849.MR. STEEL begs to inform Mr. George Farren that he is

not disposed to yield to an insolent threat an opinion basedon principle.To George Farren, Esq.

NAVAL ASSISTANT-SURGEONS.To the Eclitor of THE LANCET.

SiR,—It admits of no denial, that in 1848, " efficient medicalassistance could not be procured for the navy." Such was thestatement of Mr. Hume in the house, which information wasderived from Sir William Burnett, medical director-general.At this crisis, to procure medical men for the naval service,it was proposed, by an Admiralty lord, to lower the qualifica-

tion of candidates, which is contrary to an extract from a

" letter of the commissioners of sick and wounded seamen,dated the 8t.h of December, 1804;" This extract is sanctionedby the order in council of 1805, which order in council givesus the rank and privileges of our army compeers :—" that nopersons in future shall be appointed to serve as an assistant tothe surgeon of any of his Majesty’s ships, who shall not havebeen found qualified on his examination to serve as surgeon."From the tenonr of this extract, it will be perceived, that forthe Admiralty to lower the qualification, and even to admitmen as assistant-surgeons, with a mere certificate of qualifica-

tion, is contrary to the command of the sovereign. There isreason to believe that this latter anomaly will be shortly ex-punged by the heads of our profession.With many of my ill-used brethren, I was rejoiced to learn

the spirited conduct of Professor Syme and Professor SirGeorge Ballingall, with reference to our heartless treatment.]It is not generally known that when the Admiralty vested inthe Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh the privilegeof appointing naval assistant-surgeons, this step was not inaccordance with an order in council of the 23rd of February,

, 1831 : -" Whereas, by the regulations relating to your). Majesty’s service at sea, it is ordered, that surgeons and

assistant-surgeons shall be appointed by the commissioners forvictualling your Majesty’s navy; and whereas we are ofopinion that it would be conducive to the good of your’ Majesty’s naval service if the appointment of those officers to

I your Majesty’s ships should be transferred to the lord highadmiral, or to the lords commissioners for executing the ofliceof lord high admiral-we beg leave most humbly to proposeto your Majesty that your Majesty will be graciously pleasedby your order in council, to direct that all surgeons andassistant-surgeons of your Majesty’s fleet shall, in future, re-ceive their appointments from us."

’ A letter Irom VI’. Healy, addressed, through your columng,to B. Osborne, Esq., M.P., the hon. member for Middlesex, is

an excellent, concise, and spirited critique on the Admiraltyobjections to our having an increase of comfortable privilege.There is an order in council, of the 10th of August, 184(l,which clearly defines the rank and privileges of mates of theroyal navy, and is not, I believe, generally known :—" In orderto improve the situation of mates, it is humbly recommendedthat instead of receiving, as at present, warrants under thehand of the captain or commanding officer of the ship inwhich they may be serving, they shall in future be appointedby commissions or warrants from us; and that during the first

three years of their actual service as such, the mates of yourMajesty’s navy shall take rank with ensigns in the army, andafter three years’ service, with lieutenants in the army, accord-ing to their seniority as mates, to be computed from the datesof their original warrants under the formed regulations inrespect to mates."

These extracts, which I have never before seen quoted, will,there is reason to believe, elicit some comments from yournumerous naval medical correspondents. It is to be hopedsome hon. member of independent spirit will inquire whyour rights are so unjustly withheld by the Admiralty, in directopposition to orders in council, which are positive commandsof the sovereign : the duty of the board of Admiralty was toexecute these commands, and not disreSDectfullv to disregardthem. I am, Sir, your obedient servant, February, !849. AN ASSISTAiNT-SurGEOAT R.N.

F.S.—It is worthy of being recorded, to the credit of Com-mander Thomas Hope, of II. M. Ship " Bittern," recently paidoff, that the assistant-surgeon of this ship was permitted tooccupy the cabin erected for the third lieutenant, after thewithdrawal of the latter officer by order of the present boardof Admiralty.

NOTE IN ADDITION TO MR. WALKER’S PAPER*ON THE PHYSIOLOGY OF THE NERVOUSSYSTEM.

To the Eclitor of TI-IE LANCET.

SiR,—One year after the publication of my discovery in" Thomson’s Annals of Philosophy," and seven years after thefirst announcement of it in the Archives of Science," in 1809,it was reserved for Tiedemann, by far the greatest anatomistof the time, to make a similar representation. In this mostelaborate work on the anatomy and structure of the brain ofthe foetus,! I derived extreme satisfaction from seeing furtherdecided proofs that the anterior cerebral masses, the anterior

* THE LANCET, December 9th, 1848, p. 634.t Tiedemann—" Anatomie und Bildungsgeschichte des Gehirns in Fœtus

des Menschen," &c. Nuremberg, 1810, in 4to.