MR. HUDSON'S SYRUP OF SARSq

765

evidence of hundreds of talented and ex-perienced mcn in its favour.

Dr. Stevens will greatly oblige many ofyour readers, hv giving his authority for

stating that citric acid is fortunutety nolonger in general use as a preventive ofscurvy, andheneethe variety of the disease,although salt meat is as much used now asformerly. Being an officer in his Majesty’snary, I can positively say that the re-

verse of this is the case. When a man-of-war has been fourteen days at sea on salt

provisions, lime-juice is served out to all themen daily, being mixed with their spirits,with a due proportion of sugar, and hasbeen attended with the most beneficialeffects in preserving them from a diseasewhich was so common and fatal before itsintroduction. The diet of the men is also

very much improved. Pease and flour are

liberally supplied, and the bread is far su-perior to what it was formerly. Largequantities of preserved fresh meats are alsoplaced under the charge of the surgeonfor the use of the sick, and immediatelythe vessel arrives in port, fresh meatand vegetables are purehased for the crew,whatever they may cost. The scurvy is,I am happy to say, under these circum-stances, almost unknown in the service.

I remain, Mr. Editor,Your very obedient servant,

BtCHARD BIRTWHISTLE,M.R.C.S.L. and ASST.-SURG.R.N.

Skipton Craven, Sept. 10, 1832.

BtCHARD BIRTWHISTLE,M.R. C.S.L. and ASST.-SURG. R.N.

LONDON HOSPITAL PUPILS AND

MR. ANDREWS.

To the Editor of THE LANCET.SIR,-I am sorrv to trouble you again,

but I trust you will be able to give me asmall space in your valuable publicationfor the insertion of this letter. Mr. Brownin your last week’s LANCET says, that heheard no animadversion from Mr. Andrewsdisreputable to himself as an examiner ofthe College, or that could detract from thecharacter of the gentlc-man referred to. Tothis I give a most positive denial, and Imost faithfully pledge myself that my com-munication was correct, and that 1BIr. Brownknows it to be so, for in my presence hemade some severe remarks upou Mr. An-drews’ conduct. The gentleman who hasbeen the cause of this correspondence, im-mediately after the occurrence stated the

subject to me and three or four others ; hethen laboured under feelings which you,Sir, may better imagine than I can describe.Independently of these circumstances, it hasbeen the common conversation with themedical officers attached to the hospital,

who one and all say, that " having granted

the diploma, it would have been better tohare said nothing about the examination."So much for Mr. Brown’s letter.Dut, Sir, this is not a solitary case.

About six months ago, a Mr. H—— passedthe College, and on the following dav Mr.Andrews said, that " he had made himselflook like a fool at the College on the pre-ceding night," thereby implying that hisexammnation was anything but creditable tohim. This gentleman left the hospital indisgust.

1 shall close these remarks with askingyon if it be consistent in an examiner totiffix his name to a diploma in the evening,and in the morning to make a statement,that the individual who holds it is unworthyof possessing such a document. 1 remain,Sir, your obedient servant,

JuNius.

September l1th, 1832.

MR. HUDSON’S SYRUP OF SARSÆ.

To the Editor of TtiE LANCET.

SIR,—I have just read in Tnr. LANCETsome remarks respecting the effect of’ theConcentrated Syrup of Sarsæ, prepared byMr. Hudson, and that sold by the Wership-ful Company of Apothecary Druggists,and I perfectly agree in the justice of yourremark, as regards the efficacy of the onepie operation over that of the other. The dif-ference of expense is great, but the value ofthe material (Jamaica sarsæ), the very greatcare taken, and the length of time expendedin the production of a superior and effica-cious article, must be taken into account,and the ’° dear success" complained of, willnot be found very alarminsr. But my eyewas directed to the paragraph at the bottomof the page, respecting a percentage, and Ifelt satisfied that the Editor could not

know the party, or he would not have in-serted an insinuation so degrading, and yetso utterly groundless.

I have lived in Mr. Hudson’s house asan assistant, and all who have had a likeadvantage must join me in vouching, thatsuch a vile system is positively incompa-tible in one, whose conduct as a7 tradesmanis most honourable, and whose privateworth is the admiration, and ought to bethe guide, of loll who know him. Mr.Editor, I repeat that such conduct is con-trary to Mr. Hudson’s principles ; and re-main, Sir, your constant reader,

JUVENIS.