216

I appeal to those gentlemen who were in the room at theinquest whether, up to the time of my cross-examining him,Mr. Gant had said anything that would lead the jury to con-clude that the fearful injuries to the child’s head, which hehad described at great length, were the result of a legitimateand probably necessary obstetric operation, or whether hisevidence up to this point would not rather have led them tothe belief-which he says in his letter to me he at first enter-tained-that such injuries were caused by improper use ofthe ordinary midwifery forceps ? ‘?

I should state that no message of any kind was left for meat the house where the post-mortem took place-not even thetime at which the inquest would be held. We waited one hourand a half at the public-house before we ascertained that.Mr. Gant has wisely abstained from going into the subject

of the adjournment and censure. The medical men whocrowded the room did not censure me; their censure was be-stowed elsewhere.The case of Messrs. Todd and Peilly, and some others, had

more to do than mine with the convening of the meeting atthe Beaumont Institution, and I deny that in anything I saidthere I traduced Mr. Gant, or assailed his professional cha-racter. My allusion to him in connexion with my case wasmerely to show how, under the present system (which we weremet there to condemn), an honourable and upright man and dis-tinguished surgeon could be brought to give evidence under amisapprehension, which would be damaging, and perhaps fatal,to the reputation of a professional brother. I believe someof the arrangements for giving publicity to the meeting wereneglected on account of domestic calamities in the family ofthe hon. secretary. It was no fault of mine.

I hope Mr. Gant will let the matter drop here, or refer it toprofessional arbitration, merely reminding him that such verystrong language as was applied to me in the beginning couldhardly be atoned by such a very simple explanation (to use hisown words) as he vouchsafed to me. Should Mr. Gant again dome the honour to write to, of, or concerning me, I will thankhim, not as a matter of courtesy, but as my right, to give memy proper title, as Mr. Burrows, the beadle, has done. I

might have treated his omission as an inadvertence, and perhapsnot have noticed it at all, but that it has significance from thefact that the coroner thought it right to dwell unnecessarily onthe subject of my foreign degree.

T am Sir your obedient servantR. E. SWYER.Mile-end-road, Feb. 21st, 1865.

MILITIA SURGEONS.To the Editor of THE LANCET.

SIE,—The accompanying memorial has been forwarded tothe surgeons of all the regiments of militia in Great Britainand Ireland, with the hope that the lords-lieutenants may take Iup our case, and obtain for us what is our just due-viz., per-manent status and pay, and that we should not be subject to I,such sudden and serious reductions in the income derived fromour appointments. Our duties are in every way as constantand onerous as those of officers who are on the staff, and yetthe allowances and other advantages of their position are notaccorded to us; but we are at any time to sacrifice, in manycases, half our income without receiving any equivalent. Ido not know what my professional brethren think of it, but I,for one, am ready, should Parliament refuse to do anything forus, to memoralise her Majesty, for the sacrifice many of ushave been called upon to make is something more than serious.To add to our other grievances, the War-office now insist that ’,the assistant-surgeons should also be resident at head-quarters, ’,thereby, in many cases, adding to the medical population, andbringing us into professional competition with our subs. Ishould be glad if you would give us your opinion on the ’,matter. I am, Sir, your obedient servant, ’,

A MILITIA SURGEON.Feb. 1865.

To the Right Hon. Lord Lord-Lieutenantof the County of .

I, the undersigned surgeon of the regiment ofmilitia, beg to draw your attention to our present most un-satisfactory position, and to lay before you what are consideredthe injustices under which we are suffering.

1st. That although our duties as militia surgeons are con-tinuous and onerous, we receive no fixed stipend or lodgingallowance, similar to adjutants and quartermasters; our onlypay being for attendance upon the staff, their wives and

children, at " two-pence " a-head per week, for which sum wehave to include medicine and appliances.

2nd. That having given up private practice to join ihemilitia, very many of us have entirely failed to regain our lastposition as medical practitioners, partly through an " Orde’"from the War-office, that ’’ militia surgeons should reside atthe head-quarters of their respective regiments," though prit-cipally from the fact that families have a manifest repugnanceto employ medical men whose duties they are well awarè

might call them away at short notice to serve in camp, or garrison, or even abroad, as some have done. That although thEabove " Order" is not now adhered to, the permission to resideaway has come too late, as many have reason to know, for theinjustice of compulsory residence still presses heavily uponthem ; and further, it is a well-known fact that, when offeringourselves as candidates for public appointments, we have beendeemed ineligible, simply because we are "militia surgeons,"and liable to be called away on military duty; thereby closingagainst us the leading avenues to success as private practi-tioners.

3rd. That many of us have done duty during two embodi-ments of the militia since 1854, extending over a period offrom four to five years, which in the regular military servicewould entitle such to half-pay.

4th. That in many cases the examination of recruits for theline and marines is not accorded to us, although the value of ourservices in that department is considerable, from our experienceand knowledge of the requirements of the service.

5th. That the pay for the examination of recruits for themilitia is not at the same rate to the civil practitioner andmilitia surgeon, being to the disadvantage of the latter.

6th. We beg respectfully to call your particular attention tothe hardships of the late " Order" reducing the strength ofmilitia regiments to seven hundred men, whereby a largemajority of us are suddenly reduced to inaction, and conse-quent loss of pay in that part of our duty which constitutesthe chief source of emolument - viz., the examination ofrecruits, thus depriving us of one-half, or more, of our militiaincome, which presses with great severity on those surgeonswho, fully believing that the income derived from the appoint-ment would under no circumstances be REDUCED, have sacrificedevery prospect as private practitioners for the militia service.

7th. That the recommendations of the Royal Commissionhave not been carried out.

8th. From the responsible position we occupy, and the im-portant and constant nature of our duties, we earnestly and re-spectfully submit for your serious consideration the greathardships entailed upon us by the uncertain and insufficientpayments to which we are subjected, with the view of

bringing the same under the notice of the proper authorities,in the hope that it will lead to an amelioration of our presentcondition, by placing us upon a more certain and remunerativefooting.

My Lord, your Lordship’s most obedient, humble servant,

CERTIFICATES IN LUNACY.To the Editor of THE LANCET.

SIR,—I shall feel obliged if you will aid me through themedium of your journal to recall the attention of the professionto the position we are placed in with regard to signing certifi-cates of lunacy.

It appears from recent cases that, an action being takenagainst the medical men so signing, although they may havethe verdict in their favour, they are likely to be mulcted inheavy costs if the person taking the action be one of straw.This state of things I consider a great grievance, and one thatought to be quickly remedied by the Legislature.

I was asked last week to examine a patient in order that Imight give the usual certificate. I declined to have anythingto do with the case, losing a fee thereby. This was in accord-ance with a resolution I have made to refuse to certify in allcases where the lunatic or his relations are not in possession ofmeans; secondly, where the relations have means, not to

certify unless fully indemnified against any future proceedingsat law on the part of the lunatic should he recover or other-wise.

I intend shortly to bring the above subject before the MedicalSociety here, with the view to petitioning Parliament, and inaddition calling the attention of the Home Secretary speciallyto tha point I q.Tn oir mnnr obedient. carva.nt

R. P. B. TAAFE, M.B. Lond., &c.Brighton, Feb. 1865.