Friday, June 18.

A discussion took place on the motion of Dr Wood, seconded by Dr Apjohn,— "That the remarks of the licensing bodies on the reports of the visitors of the examination be taken into consideration seriatim."

After a somewhat lengthened discussion, Dr Andrew Wood, with the permission of the Council, withdrew his motion.

Dr Parkes moved, Dr Quain seconded, and it was resolved, “That a Committee be appointed to consider the reports of the visitations which have been submitted to the Council, and sent down to the licensing bodies, and of the remarks of the licensing bodies upon them, and to draw up a report for the present meeting of the Council."

The Committee was appointed, to consist of Dr Parkes (Chairman), Mr Quain, Dr Apjohn, Dr Humphry, Mr Bradford, Dr Begbie, Dr Quain, and Dr Rolleston. The report of the visitors to the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, and Aberdeen, were then held as read and discussed, and it was moved and seconded for each University separately, that the report be sent down for consideration.

Saturday, June 19.

The report of the visitors of examinations in the University of Edinburgh was discussed.

Mr Turner, after pointing out that the term "assessor," applied by the visitors to the additional examiner, was erroneous, said it appeared from the report on the final examination for M.B. that the non-professorial examiners took an important part in the examination. The Council had now before it an account of the system pursued at the universities in regard to the matter. Of the four examiners at the Oxford examination, three were professors. At Cambridge the professorial element was not so large, but it was well represented on the board. At Durham, the first professional examination was conducted wholly by professors. At Dublin the system resembled that adopted at Edinburgh. In fact, the whole university system throughout the country appeared to be one in which the teaching element was well represented on the examining boards. With regard to the final examination at Edinburgh, the visitors had nothing to say but in the way of approval, except as to the clinical examination, with reference to which they said: "It was well conducted, as far as it went, and calculated to give a good estimate of the practical knowledge of the candidates. We think, however, that it would be an important improvement if each candidate were required to investigate, in the presence of the examiners, some one or more cases in addition to that of which he writes the report." He (Mr Turner) was not a clinical teacher, but he could not help thinking that if a candidate acquitted himself satisfactorily in regard to one selected case, it was really as good as half-a-dozen cases. On that matter,

however, he bowed to the opinion of those who had larger experience.

Dr Andrew Wood called attention to a statement in one of the reports, that the examination in Midwifery was conducted entirely by Professor Simpson. If an additional examiner were present, and took no part in the examination, the principle was not carried out.

Dr Rolleston said that at Oxford continuity of examination was secured by having the Regius Professor of Medicine as supervisor; but there were no other ex officio examiners. The University had repeatedly appointed examiners ab extra. In this way, they prevented things from falling into such a groove in such a way that it might be possible for any one to publish a little work of questions for the guidance of students, as was done on the other side of the English Channel.

Dr Sharpey said that for some time the papers at the Universty of London had not been signed with the names of the candidates, but with numbers, so that a teacher did not know when he was examining the answers of his own pupil. He thought that the selection of co-examiners in Edinburgh was a very good one.

Dr Storrar remarked that the University of London was not a teaching but

VOL. XXI.-NO. II.

2 A

an examining body. It would be impossible to find examiners without appointing some who might have to examine their own pupils.

Mr Quain said that, where there was a small number to be examined, as in London and Durham, the selection of examiners was not a matter of so much consequence as in a large school, such as Edinburgh.

Dr Humphry said that, when he was present at the examination in Edinburgh, there was a co-examiner, who took notes, and conferred afterwards with Professor Simpson. Referring to the report on the University of Cambridge, he said that the term "assisted" was not correct in reference to the co-examiner, who was intended to be as much an examiner as the Regius Professor. As in Oxford continuity was secured by means of the Regius Professor; but the professorial element was reduced to a minimum in the examinations, perhaps even the principle was carried to an extreme Although he had been Professor of Anatomy several years, he had only once been an examiner. He had no voice as a professor in the examinations, though he sometimes attended them.

After some remarks from Mr Macnamara, Dr Fleming, Dr Bennett, and Dr Smith, the motion was carried.

The report on the examinations at St Andrews was then discussed, and a pretty fervid discussion followed as to the worth of the St Andrews degree, and the propriety of its retaining its privilege of conferring ten annually.

Sir Dominic Corrigan thought that it should relinquish its privileges, following the example of the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Dr Fleming defended the retention of the power.

Dr Sharpey thought it unnecessary to go to the trouble and expense of visiting the examination.

Dr Humphry said the University of St Andrews did not merely grant honorary degrees, but instituted an examination by which candidates were admitted to the Medical Register; and it had a medical school at which one annus medicus could be kept. With regard to the granting of honorary degrees, the visitors felt that the privilege was one that might be exercised with advantage to the profession, but they considered that it was not exercised, the degrees conferred not being limited to distinguished men.

Sir D. Corrigan did not understand how an annus medicus could be kept at St Andrews, there being there no infirmary, no dissecting-room, no chemical laboratory, and no medical students.

Mr Turner said there were at St Andrews courses of lectures on other subjects, such as chemistry, embraced in the course of medical education. He thought that the University should retain its privilege of granting degrees, but it should make the examination a thorough testing one, and the matter should be strongly pressed upon the authorities.

Dr Bennett thought that if the degrees were really conferred honoris causâ, there could be no objection to them. But that was not the case at the present time, and he hoped that the authorities would take seriously into consideration the objection that had been made to the present system, which certainly acted in a very mischievous way.

The next report considered was that of the visitors to the Royal College of Physicians of London, in the course of which a somewhat acrimonious and almost personal discussion took place regarding defects in the clinical examination, and in the examination on Medical Jurisprudence. It ended in a vote on the apparently somewhat mild addition to the ordinary report of the following clause moved by Sir William Gull, and opposed by Dr Bennett,— "And that special consideration be requested to be given to such part as refers to the clinical examination for the licentiates, and to the deficiencies in the department of Medical Jurisprudence."

After some further remarks, the motion, with Sir William Gull's addition, was carried; 11 voting for and 10 against. Dr Bennett required that the names of those voting should be taken down. There were-For, Dr Rolleston, Dr Haldane, Dr A. Wood, Dr A. Smith, Dr Leet, Dr Apjohn, Sir Dominic

Corrigan, Dr Sharpey, Dr Parkes, Sir W. Gull, and Dr Stokes; Against, Dr Bennett, Mr Quain, Dr Humphry, Dr Pyle, Dr Storrar, Dr Fleming, Dr Thomson, Mr Macnamara, Dr Quain, and Dr Begbie. The President and Mr Turner did not vote.

The Report on the Royal College of Surgeons of England.-The report on the Primary Professional Examination for the Membership was made by Dr Fleming and Dr J. K. Barton; and that on the Second or Pass Examination by Dr Parkes, with Dr Struthers as an additional visitor.

Dr Storrar moved, and Dr Humphry seconded,-"That a copy of the report of the visitors of the examinations of the Royal College of Surgeons of England be forwarded to that College for their consideration and remarks; when, after a few remarks by Sir W. Gull, Mr Quain, and Dr Storrar, the discussion was adjourned.

Monday, June 21.

The discussion on the Report of the Visitors to the Royal College of Surgeons of England was resumed. After a pretty long discussion, Sir William Gull moved, and Dr Andrew Wood seconded, "That attention be drawn to the incompleteness of the physiological part of the examinations, and deficiency of the clinical examinations for the membership; also to the total want of any examination in chemistry and materia medica, though these subjects are in the curriculum."

After several other members had spoken, Sir William Gull's motion was then put to the vote and lost, 8 voting for and 12 against it.

King and Queen's College of Physicians in Ireland. The report on the examination of this body was made by Dr Risdon Bennett, member of Council, and Mr William Stokes, visitor appointed by the Council.

Dr Bennett moved, Dr Quain seconded, and it was resolved,-"That a copy of the report of the visitors of the examinations of the King and Queen's College of Physicians in Ireland be forwarded to that College for their consideration and remarks."

The motion was carried.

Apothecaries' Hall of Ireland.-The visitors of the examinations were Dr Risdon Bennett and Mr William Stokes.

Dr Storrar moved, and Dr Pyle seconded, "That a copy of the report of the visitors of the examinations of the Apothecaries' Hall, Dublin, be forwarded," which was agreed to after a discussion.

Tuesday, June 22.

After returns from the Medical Department of the Army were presented, Mr Macnamara moved,-"That, in the opinion of this Council, all examinations on anatomy should, as far as practicable, include the performance by each candidate of actual dissections; and that all those on surgery should include the performance by each candidate of two or more operations on the dead subject;" and supported the motion in what seems to have been a telling speech, after which, Dr Pyle seconded the motion.

Dr Rolleston agreed with Mr Macnamara in principle. The members of the Council were at one as to the importance of practical examination. He would suggest, however, that candidates should understand that they would be liable to be called on to dissect, and perform operations. He moved as an amendment, and Dr Thomson seconded, "That it is desirable that candidates in examinations in anatomy should understand that they may be called upon to perform actual dissections, and that candidates in examinations in surgery should understand that they may be called upon to perform one or more operations on the dead subject."

The amendment was carried nem. con., Mr Macnamara having expressed his approval of it.

Wednesday, June 23.

A great part of the time of the meeting was occupied on this day with the discussion, in committee, of the reports of the visitors on the Universities of

Dublin and of Durham, regarding both of which the ordinary resolutions were passed.

The Council having resumed, the adoption of the proceedings of the Committee was proposed and carried; an amendment moved by Dr Allen Thomson, to withhold approval from the resolution calling the attention of the Royal College of Physicians of London to certain defects, being lost.

Letters were read from Miss Jex Blake and two other ladies, on the subject of the admission of women to the medical profession; from Mr A. T. Norton, regarding the medical school for women in London; and from Dr G. E. Shuttleworth, advocating the registration of foreign degrees obtained by practitioners already registered.

The proceedings on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday (24th, 25th, and 26th), were almost exclusively devoted to the question of admission of women into the profession, introduced to the Council by the following letter from Mr Simon:-"Medical Department, Privy Council Office, 8th June 1875.-Sir, -I am directed by the Lord President to request that, at the meeting now shortly to be held of the General Medical Council, you will have the goodness to bring under the consideration of that body the bill which has been introduced into the House of Commons by Mr Cowper-Temple 'to amend the Medical Act, 1858, so far as relates to the registration of women who have taken the degree of Doctor of Medicine in a foreign university,' and that you will move the Medical Council to favour his Grace with their observations upon it. It appears to the Lord President that Mr Cowper-Temple's bill, though very limited in its direct scope, can hardly fail to raise in Parliament the general question whether women ought to be able to look to medical practice, or certain branches of it, as open to them equally with men as a profession and means of livelihood. And I am to say that, as Government may have to express an opinion on this general question, with regard, on the one hand, to women who desire to obtain legal status as medical practitioners in this country, and, on the other hand, to the examination rules, or other conditions, which prevent them from accomplishing their wish, his Grace would be glad that the observations with which the Medical Council may favour him should not be restricted to the particular proposal of Mr CowperTemple's bill, but should discuss, as fully as the Medical Council may see fit, the object to which that proposal would contribute.—I am, Sir, your obedient servant, JOHN SIMON."

After a long discussion as to whether the Council should enter into the merits of the question at all, a report in answer to Mr Simon's letter was discussed, paragraph by paragraph. Many racy and amusing speeches seem to have been made by Sir Dominic Corrigan, Dr Andrew Wood, Dr Humphry, and Dr Rolleston. Numerous votes were taken, and in the end, the answer to Mr Simon seems to have been in terms more favourable to the cause of female education in medicine than might have been expected from so conservative a body.

A short discussion on Visitations of Examinations and the Conjoint Scheme, concluded the business of the session.

DINNER TO DR LOWE.-Dr Lowe, the President of the Edinburgh College of Physicians, was on 13th June entertained to dinner by a large party of his professional and other friends: the occasion for the demonstration being the fact that Dr Lowe is about to leave Edinburgh. Sir Robert Christison was in the chair; and a number of the leading members of the profession were present. The chairman, in proposing the toast of the evening, assured Dr Lowe that, wherever he might take up his abode for the future, he would carry with him the warmest wishes for his welfare of the numerous friends he had left behind him in Edinburgh.

PRESENTATION TO DR MUNGALL OF COWDENBEATH.-On 22d June, Dr Mungall, who has for the last twenty years gone through at Cowdenbeath an immense amount of hard work, was presented at a public dinner with a handsome testimonial, consisting of a carriage, horse, harness, epergne, and a purse of sovereigns. The dinner was a marked success, the attendance being large and the enthusiasm great.

ERRATUM.-For "corn " read "horn," in Mr Chiene's remarks at the Medico-Chirurgical Society, at page 73 of the Journal for July, second line from bottom.

OBITUARY.

PROFESSOR OSWALD HOME BELL, of St Andrews.-Few men will be more missed and none more truly mourned than Oswald Bell. Dying of a painful and lingering disease, while scarcely in his prime, leaving a career of much usefulness and honour, in which he was universally beloved and esteemed, his removal is one of those mysteries which we cannot understand, and yet dare not question. In the period of less than twenty years he had worked at St Andrews, he had made himself known, and was universally consulted in the east of Fife. He had worked a Chair which might have been almost a sinecure in the most conscientious manner. Dean of the Medical Faculty, he was most kind and courteous. it is at the bedside that he will be most missed and mourned, for few men had such a hold on the affections and gratitude of their patients, as, by his patience, gentleness, and skill, Oswald Bell had gained."

As

But

DR HENDERSON, AUCHINBLAE, FORDOUN.-This medical practitioner, much esteemed and respected in the district where he has enjoyed an extensive practice for half a century, died there on the morning of Thursday, 3d June, his death being the result of a fall from his horse on the evening of the previous Sunday, while on his way to visit a patient a few miles from home. Dr Henderson was a native of Fife, and served an apprenticeship to Dr Goodsir, the father of the late celebrated Edinburgh professor of that name. He received the diploma of the Royal College of Surgeons, Edinburgh, in 1824, and settled in the village of Auchin blae, in the parish of Fordoun, Kincardineshire, in the early part of the following year. In this extensive country district, the Doctor laboured unremittingly and with much acceptance, for the long period of fifty years; and, when overtaken by the sad accident which resulted in his death, was still able for a large amount of work-even unseasonable workalthough in his seventieth year. When seen by his friend Dr Johnston, Kair, within an hour of the accident, the condition of shock was so intense that death seemed imminent. He was able to whisper in slowly articulated words, that he had got his death