434

more frequent amongst the lower than the upper ranks, both inthis country and in France; whilst he would further say, iloftener attacked males compared with females. This was certainly the case in many French asylums which he had recentlyinspected, where male Epileptics predominated considerably,Respecting the causes often producing epilepsy, he consideredterror as one of the most powerful; of which a very strikingexample some time ago came under his observation. It waithat of a young woman, who was frightened by a fellow-servan1disguised as a ghost, with a light in his hand, when he suddenlyappeared before her at the end of a dark passage. She becameso alarmed as to fall down in a fit of epilepsy, which afterwardsfrequently returned; and in oae of these violent seizures Dr,Webster attended the patient. This disorder he consideredalmost incurable during the latter periods of life, or even inadults, especially when complicated with insanity. Instances oj

recovery might be occasionally reported, but they were so rareas to render the prognosis always unfavourable. In early age;or before puberty, the prospect of recovery was much greater,and he might refer to several cases proving this inference, butit seemed unnecessary, as the fact must be well known to prac.titioners. Dr. Radcliffe’s observations relative to the treatmentof this often terrible disease coincided very much with the prin-ciples he (Dr. Webster) would recommend. Respecting bleedingthere could not prevail two opinions, and to use the lancet wasmost objectionable. Even the topical abstraction of blood inyoung, plethoric subjects, required great caution, and then onlyto relieve local congestion. With the author Dr. Webster alsoentirely agreed regarding the use of purgatives, although hewould not employ drastic cathartics, as similar remedies occa-sioned too much debility. Allusion having been made to variousmineral preparations at one time enjoying considerable reputa-tation in epilepsy, but now seldom reputed efficacious, he (Dr.Webster) must mention one recently employed by a friend ofhis own-namely, Dr. Fornasari, physician to the Fains lunaticasylum in France, which he had visited last autumn. The remedywas valerianate of zinc, given in doses from half a grain to one,night and morning, which might be increased to three grains perday. Occasional purgatives were also prescribed, and frequentbaths, the diet being also carefully regulated. Dr. Fornasarispoke favourably of the benefits it produced; and several casesthen in the asylum had derived so much relief, that fits whichat first recurred every three, six, or eight days, had not super-vened for more than three months. Supported by the aboveauthority in favour of valerianate of zinc, Dr. Webster adminis-tered it lately to a patient labouring under epilepsy, and appa-rently with such advantage as would induce him to recommendemploying the same mineral in other examples. Althoughnutritious diet and generous regimen were often essential forepileptic patients, he thought indigestible food frequently actedin an injurious manner. Indeed, a full meal of improper sub-stances often proved the exciting cause; and he could quote onecase which came under his own observation, where a personhaving eaten freely of fried bacon and eggs at supper, was seizedwith so severe a fit, about three o’clock next morning, that deathfollowed in consequence. Notwithstanding wine and malt liquors,even in large quantities, had been recommended by several fellows,such stimulating beverages might be taken too freely; and hemust remark, unless under special circumstances, much porter orale was by no means so useful as wine diluted with water, wherestimulants were really required. Great caution, therefore, becamenecessary when adopting that kind of treatment. Before sittingdown, Dr. Webster observed, although he coincided with Mr.Richardson in opinion that many lesions of the brain andnervous system did not produce epileptic seizures, still theseaffections generally depended upon or indicated organic changesof structure within the cranium; at least, his individual experi-ence fully warranted such conclusions respecting the pathologyof epilepsy.

Dr. RADCLIFFE, in answer, said, that the very extended ex-perience of Dr. Davey as to the necessity of good diet with wineand beer in epilepsy, was a strong argument in favour of the viewhe had advocated. He said any one would be sensible of the advan-tages of such a course, who, remembering the appearance of epi-leptics in our own or in foreign hospitals a few years ago, nowpaid a visit to Colney Hatch or Hanwell. He would at leastlearn that good food and wine and beer did no harm. In answerto Mr. Richardson’s objection that the epileptic was not alwaysdepressed before the fit, he called up Mr. Richardson’s own ad-mission that he had not watched that point particularly. Toanother objection from the same gentleman, that Mahomet wasepileptic during the most vigorous period of his life, he answeredthat Mahomet saw visions in his fits, and that on that accountthose fits could not be epileptic, inasmuch as the consciousness

is suspended in epilepsy. He thought it better to reason fromrecent cases, the particulars of which were better known, andfrom the general history of the disease; which being done, he(Dr. Radcliffe), thought Mr. Richardson would be obliged toadmit that the system of the epileptic was always marked byprostration, and most of all, so marked in the fit itself. In replyto Mr. Dendy’s defence of bleeding, he thought the utter absenceof plethoric excitement and of nervous hyper-activity, and thepresence of signs directly opposite to these in their nature,together with the absence of any ill effect from the generoustreatment pursued at Colney Hatch and elsewhere, were insuper-able objections to bleeding in any form. If Mr. Dendy tookexception to Dr. Davey’s arguments for a good diet and wineand beer from his experience and particular views of the natureof insanity, he must object to the necessity of bleeding inepilepsy being deduced from what Mr. Dendy had seen incholera. Nor could he admit the soundness of the practice ofcombining remedies of opposite qualities, as local bleeding withtonics, which practice in his opinion was the relic of the ancientpractice of jumbling all manner of remedies together, in the be-nevolent hope that one or other of them might chance to dogood.

Correspondence.

THE GRADUATES’ COMMITTEE OF THEUNIVERSITY OF LONDON.

"Audi alteram partem."

To the Editor of THE LANCET.SiB,ňThe discussions which you have permitted from time to

time, in the pages of THE LANCET, in connexion with thegraduates of the University of London, show how deeply yourinterest in the subject extends. I feel, therefore, full confidencethat you will afford space for the following brief observations. Ido not propose to discuss the question of the propriety of afford-ing the graduates the right of representation, and of control overthe senate; though many influenced by the evil examples presentedby the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, xl2ay question theadvantage likely to result from its application to our institution,an impression which has been greatly strengthened by the wantof judgment shown, in some instances, by the graduates, in re-jecting the liberal views and arrangements of the senate. Thisis not my purpose. You showed, some months ago, Sir, that thegraduates’ committee, which talks so very loudly, was a self-constituted body. Your remarks led to a change in its constitu-tion, and to an apparently real election by the graduates. I will notseek to show how this election very closely resembles the universalsuffrage election in the hands of the préJets in an adjoiningcountry, as the committee has made it-hedged in by formalities andprotracted forms of notice. No, Sir; I shall merely seek to showwhat a sham and a delusion is the election now about to comeoff, of nine members in the place of an apparently like number,who have retired from the committee of thirty-six, as represent-ing the great body of graduates. I have received the balloting-paper, containing the names of these nine gentlemen, and thirty-six names as their proposers and seconders-that is, four to each.I have looked, Str, at these thirty-six names, and find that thirty-three of these proposers and seconders belong to the members ofthe committee who remain in office, and three only to other gentle-men. In fact, the committee nominates itself as much as ever itdid-not the committee exactly, but a portion of it, assumesthis duty. Attend to this, graduates of the University of Lon-don ! The thirty-three names of the members of the com-mittee belong to only thirteen individuals. Thus one member(Mr. Osler) proposes or seconds six of the new members; threeothers (Messrs. Foster, Shaen, and Roscoe) propose or secondfour each; Drs. Storrar and Wood, three each, and so on. Thisis the committee which is said to represent the graduates !-the1nedical graduates too! whilst among the thirty-six names

taking part in this ci-demnt important matter we find but sixmedical graduates. The inferences which I draw from this ex-position, and which you and all whojl1dge rightly, Sir, will like-wise draw, are, that a large majority of the graduates take butlittle interest in the matter; secondly, that they do not approveof the past or present proceedings of this committee; and thirdly,that they prefer to leave their interests in the hands ofthe senate to consigning them to the care of a restless, agitatingbody, which employs a barrister as one of its secretaries, andpays an attorney as another.

Your obedient servant,London, April, 1852. A GRADUATE.