788

such a man ordinarily works, his fingers are without inter-mission kept closed about this tube, and the constraintinduces, even within a month, some difficulty in effectingcomplete extension. This difficulty becomes greater andgreater as time runs on, until at last it develops into thecrippled condition of the hand which he has described.

Altogether, he says, the trade of the glassblower as

pursued in France is so unhealthy that the operatives whohabitually take it up as young men are obliged to abandonit on attaining about thirty-five years of age, and do so withtheir hands permanently crippled in such a way as to renderthem useless for almost any other occupation.

BOROFUCHSIN AS A STAIN FOR TUBERCLEBACILLI.

PROFESSOR LUBIMOFF describes in the MeditsinskoeObozrênie a new stain for tubercle bacilli, which he callsborofuchsin. It consists of-fuchsin, 0’5 gramme; boracic’acid, 0’5 gramme; absolute alcohol, 15 grammes; distilledwater, 20 grammes. Prepared thus, it has a slightly acidreaction; it is quite clear and not liable to spoil by beingkept, consequently it is always ready for use. The sputumis dried on a cover glass, and stained by being heated incontact with the borofuchsin for one or two minutes. Thestain is then washed out by treatment with dilute sulphuricacid. The specimen is then washed with alcohol, and sub-sequently immersed for half a minute in a saturatedalcoholic solution of methylene blue. After being washedin distilled water and dried, the examination of the specimenis made in oil of cedar or in a solution of Canada balsam.vn exactly the same way sections of tuberculous organs maybe stained after hardening in spirit, only in such cases thesteps of the operation must be somewhat more prolonged.The main difference between this and other staining pro-cesses for Koch’s bacilli is that, when borofuchsin is used,the process of washing it out with sulphuric acid is analmost instantaneous one. All other bacilli are, as whenother stains are used, rendered colourless and invisible, thetubercle bacilli being alone seen.

THE NATIONAL PENSION FUND FOR NURSES.

THE importance of the steps which have been taken forthe purpose of founding a Nurses’ Pension Fund upon anational scale have induced us to bestow upon the discussionof the prospectus which has been issued a not inconsiderablespace, but it appears that we have not yet given expressionto all the serious objections that are entertained by thosewhom it is the promoters’ object to benefit. Indeed, wehave not pretended-we have not even wished-to make ourstatement exhaustive. Our desire is simply to secure for thenurses the advantages of a sound scheme, unprejudiced bywhimsical regulations on the one hand or by degradingconditions on the other. But it has been brought to ourknowledge that some, at least, among the higher class ofnurses-ladies to whom nursing is a profession rather thana means of livelihood-are deeply affronted by the mannerin which an eleemosynary character has been stamped- upona scheme which is offered for the benefit of all nurses withoutdistinction. They say, and justly, that the proper objectsof a compassionate fund are such as are the victims of mis-fortune, not such as are capable of the efficient pursuit of achosen profession. To these latter the profeered dole is notonly superfluous-it is insulting; and they rightly resentthe offer of undemanded charity. Alike in the interest ofthose who do stand in need of assistance and of those whodo not, they require that what alms the public bestow shallbe bestowed upon the needy, and upon them alone. Toadmit the self-supporting and self-sufficient to a share is, protanto, to rob the others of the one right which misfortuneitself respects--the right to sympathy and help at the hands

of their more fortunate neighbours. And even those whowould profit in a pecuniary sense by such a misapplicationof charitable funds are not to be envied on that account.Could they accept the boon, they would lose much morethan an equivalent in dignity and self-respect, to

say nothing of the moral and material loss involvedin anything which derogates from the public estimation ofany class in the community. Of such sentiments itis impossible to feel even a moment’s doubt that theyare sound and just. The public is beginning, somewhattardily, to recognise the worth and dignity of the

peculiarly womanly work of nursing, and it would be mostunwise, worse than unwise indeed, for those who representthe craft to compromise its position before the world byarrangements unworthy the dignity of self-respecting in-dependence. On the other hand, it is also plain that thisunfortunate scheme has originated in an equally justsentiment of gratitude on the part of the public to

those whose services in times of distress are simply in-estimable. That such a feeling should find expressionin some substantial form is most natural and right. Noris there really any difficulty. Only let the alms be

given to the proper objects, and the subscription benefits bearranged upon a business footing. The unadvised admixtureof these two things in the scheme which it has been ourduty to criticise is one of its greatest blots, but we hopethat such a revision as we last week suggested to the

promoters will shortly enable us to second their endeavours.At present nurses hesitate or even altogether refuse toentertain their proposals, and we cannot but think that,in the circumstances of the case, they are right in doing so.But the difficulty may easily be removed by the adoption ofsound principles in what we are sure is a well-intentionedmovement, and we sincerely hope that no indirect or

unworthy consideration will be suffered to prevent suchan issue of the present discussion.

SUFFOCATION OF INFANTS.

THE frequency with which deaths from suffocation occuramong London children is a matter requiring very carefulattention. Two such cases were lately the subject of inquiryat St. Pancras Coroner’s Court. In both instances younginfants were overlain; and the result can hardly be wonderedat when we read of as many as four persons-two adults andtwo children, including the infant-sleeping together in abed four feet in width. In this case the unfortunate victimof overcrowding was an illegitimate child. The accident hasbeen known to repeat itself in a single family with surprisingregularity. In the majority of cases it would certainly beunjust to impute any wrong intention, but the blame dueto carelessness cannot be so easily set aside by parents whoare thus the direct cause of their children’s deaths. The

practice of having a separate cot for the infant is theone effectual remedy for this evil. Though less generallyrecognised than it ought to be, as these cases of suffoca-tion prove, it is happily not unknown among the poor.If only as a means of allowing the child a freer andfresher atmosphere, apart from any risk of overlaying,its general adoption is quite necessary. The objectionof expense is not a real one, since a chair or two may,and often do, serve as an extemporised cot. However we

regard it, the cot system is one against which nothing canbe said, and it is commended by every rational consideration.Overlaying is not the only fault of its class to which wewould direct attention. Another serious folly is that of

wrapping up young children about the head with a shawlwhile in bed. If this custom be followed, suffocation mayeasily occur should the child turn in sleep and bury the facein its too comfortable surroundings. This habit of turningover, indeed, is one which a careful parent should guard