IMPERIAL CANCER RESEARCH FUND

1135

IMPERIAL CANCER RESEARCH FUND.

THE annual report of this Fund was adopted at ameeting of the General Committee held at 8, Queen-square on Nov. 19th, the Duke of Bedford presiding.In introducing the report, Sir Humphry Rolleston,Chairman of the Executive Committee, summarisedthe account given by the Director, Dr. J. A. Murray,F.R.S., of the work published from the laboratoryduring the period under review; this extends to16 months since it has been decided in future tohold the annual meeting in November rather thanin July. Among the 11 papers communicated togeneral and special journals attention was drawn toone by Dr. W. Cramer on the influence of innervation onthe experimental production of skin cancer by tar/and one by Dr. G. M. Findlay on the production ofcancer by a single application of tar.2 2 Dr. Cramerdeprived a skin area in a number of mice of the nerve-supply and then painted it twice weekly until cancersupervened. This only occurred after a longer courseof tarring than was necessary in normal animals,and, therefore, absence of nerve-supply certainly doesnot predispose to the genesis of cancer as has beensuggested. The nerves grow again into the dener-vated area, so that the experiment does not give anabsolute answer to the question, whether, if renewalof the nerve-supply could be prevented, cancer wouldnot be produced at all.

Dr. Findlay’s experiments were devised to deter-mine if it is possible to reproduce in animals theremarkable sequence reported in the human subjectfrom time to time, in which an accidental tar burn hasbeen followed after a short interval by the appearanceof typical progressive carcinoma at the point ofinjury. For this purpose a large number of micereceived a single application of hot tar on a small areaof the back. A slight swelling and reddening of theskin followed but soon subsided. It was not till thelapse of a year that any further change was observed,and then three mice showed typical cancer of the skinin the site of the application. This experimentalresult is important in that it shows that generalintoxication with tar, which has been invoked bymany workers as an important factor in the causationof tar cancer is, to say the least, not essential. Dr.Findlay is also continuing his research into the actionof manganese salts, especially as regards the moredelayed effects, but has not published any furtherreport in the year under review.The work under the Atholstan Grant for research

is being carried on with great diligence by Dr. A. M.Begg. His investigations on the Rous fowl sarcomaand the infective lymphosarcoma of the dog haveinevitably taken on a new orientation since thepublication of the work of Dr. W. E. Gye, of theMedical Research Council. Dr. B. R. G. Russell tooka keen interest in this work, and since his lamenteddeath Dr. Begg has had the advantage of closeassociation with Dr. Gye. This informal collabora-tion has been a source of great satisfaction to theExecutive Committee. Dr. Begg’s investigations areprogressing satisfactorily and it is hoped will soon beready for publication. The important work of Dr.Gye and Mr. Barnard, in addition to the many newlines of inquiry it opens up, calls for the most carefulrepetition with as many different kinds of tumoursas possible. This is now occupying much of the timeand energy of the scientific staff.The Duke of Bedford made sympathetic reference

to the loss entailed by the deaths of Dr. Sidney Martin,F.R.S., and of Dr. B. R. G. Russell, for 17 years amember of the scientific staff. As to the report of thehon. treasurer, Sir George Makins, he pointed out thatthe expenditure had exceeded the fixed income of theFund-that is, the income derived from investments-by ;81765. Subscriptions and legacies had made goodthat adverse balance, but to be compelled to rely onsubscriptions and legacies for carrying on the work

1 Brit. Jour. Exp. Path., 1925, vi., 71.2 THE LANCET, 1925, i., 714.

of the Fund was always unsatisfactory. He calledattention to the list in the Director’s report of workersin different parts of the world to whom materialhas been supplied from the laboratories of the Fund.The ability of the Fund to assist in the investigationof cancer in other laboratories, and the willingness ofthe staff to do so seemed a most practical way ofmaking collaboration in research really effective,especially as it did not encroach in any way on thefreedom of the workers. But this service was oftena very laborious one, took up a great deal of the timeof the workers, and consequently entailed a consider-able addition in working expenses. But it was anincrease in expenditure which was a legitimate sourceof satisfaction inasmuch as it means furthering researchthroughout the Empire. It was satisfactory to learnthat the Stroud Laboratory (at Mill Hill) had beencompleted, that full opportunity could now be givento carrying out research under Lord Atholstan’s gift,and that papers relating to the subject of this researchmight shortly be expected.

Sir Thomas Barlow, Bart., was nominated forre-election by the Royal Colleges of Physicians andSurgeons as a member of the Executive Committee,and Prof. William Bulloch, F.R.S., and Prof. A. E.Boycott, F.R.S., were re-elected members of the sameCommittee.

THE GENEVA OPIUM CONFERENCESAND THE HAGUE CONVENTION.

AN epitome of the work accomplished at the twoprolonged Opium Conferences at Geneva has alreadyappeared in THE LANCET,l and full official records 2 ofthe proceedings and a special Foreign Office report 3have now been issued. It will be remembered thatthe first of the two conferences purported to dealonly with the suppression of opium-smoking(Chapter II. of The Hague Convention), while thesecond conference was concerned with the abuse ofmorphia, cocaine, and other drugs of addiction(Chapter III. of The Hague Convention). Again andagain in the course of the debates it was manifestthat this artificial dissection of The Hague Conventionand the reference of its chapters to two differentconferences had no logical justification, and indeedcaused considerable confusion leading to the regret-able withdrawal of the United States delegation,followed by that of China. This unfortunate dicho-tomy occasioned lengthy and somewhat pedanticdiscussions as to the competence of one conference toencroach on the reference to the other, and to theunpleasant suggestion that the first conference(which included only representatives of countriesconcerned with " prepared " or smoking opium)was in fact " a prepared opium bloc " whose memberswere seeking to release themselves from their obliga-tion under The Hague Convention (Article 6) to bringabout the effective suppression of

" prepared opium."The American delegation contended for the limitationof the production of opium so as to preclude the useof it or its products for other than medical andscientific purposes. This general principle had beenendorsed by the Advisory Committee of the Leagueof Nations on the traffic in opium as being the basisof The Hague Convention of 1912, and the FourthAssembly of the League had requested the Council ofthe League to give effect to this principle and tosummon a conference for that purpose. It is truethat the delegate for India made reservation as toopium-eating as practised in that Dependency notbeing regarded as illegitimate, and this reservationoccasioned considerable difficulty in relation notonly to production of opium in India but airo tothe invasion of sovereign rights by internationalengagements.

1 THE LANCET, 1925, i., 878.2 League of Nations. Records of the Second Opium Conference

(Geneva), Vol. I. and II. (C.760, M.260, 1924, xi.). London :Constable and Co., Ltd. Vol. I., 14s. 6d. ; Vol. II., 9s.

3 H.M. Stationery Office. Cmd. 2461.