1706

and he reported that the society had recently elected a largenumber of foreign and colonial secretaries from whom

important contributions to the study of epidemiology mightreasonably be expected. In urging the need for more

extended epidemiological research in our vast colonial

possessions Dr. Manson described in very happy terms thechaotic and untrustworthy condition of nomenclature anddeath certification in various parts of our empire. In

announcing that the Council of the Epidemiological Societyhad decided to bestow its Jenner Memorial Medal, whichwas founded at the Jenner Centenary by public subscrip-tion, upon Dr. A. Laveran of Paris, the President referredto the peculiar gratification it gave him to occupy the pre-sidential chair at a time when the medal was bestowed

upon the discoverer of the plasmodium malariag. As to

the importance and far-reaching effect of Dr. Laveran’s

work there could be no question, and of all living epidemio-logists none was more worthy of honourable recognitionby the society than was Dr. Laveran. Dr. Whitelegge, H. M.Chief Inspector of Factories, proposed the toast of "TheChairman," which was most cordially received. Dr. Manson

replied and proposed the health of Dr. Bulstrode, the joint i

honorary secretary of the society, who briefly responded.

THE DESTRUCTOR NUISANCE AT TORQUAY.

IN the issue of THE LANCET of May 17th, p. 1416, we com-mented upon the report of Mr. George E. Davis of Man-

chester, the expert employed by the Torquay Town Councilto report upon the alleged nuisance caused by the destructor.Although the Town Council at the meeting on May 6thprofessed itself quite satisfied various residents were

of opinion that the noxious smells still existed. At a

meeting of the Destructor Committee held on June 3rdletters were read from Dr. Henry Humphreys andfrom the Misses Tapper complaining of smells caused

by the destructor. Dr. Humphreys asked to be allowedto inspect Mr. Davis’s report but the committeerefused. Mr. Alderman Cumming said that in refusingthe committee was following the instructions of the

council, while the mayor, in reference to the question ofpublishing the report, is reported as saying : " This is one ofthose questions in which you must trust the committee.

There is really nothing to keep back but it is not thoughtthe best thing to do. The committee is acting upon legaladvice." As far as we understand the committee recom-

mends the council not to publish the report, whereuponthe council tells the committee not to publish it, and

when any inquiring ratepayer makes himself a nuisance

committee and council act on the Spenlow and Jorkins

principle. The mayor, however, revealed the true inward-ness of the matter when he talked about "legal advice."The committee further resolved that persons complainingshould send a special message to the chairman or the boroughsurveyor the next time they found cause for complaint.Dr. Humphreys, writing on June 7th, tells ns that heacted upon this recommendation with the following ex-

tremely unsatisfactory result. He applied to the chairman." I went at 9.30 one evening to fetch him, as our house forthree hours had been pervaded with the smell as of a dirtyblown-out paraffin lamp. Arriving at the house I found itdark and shut up and I failed to make anyone hear my ring.Writing the next day to the town clerk to ask when andwhere the gentleman was to be found I had to wait a

fortnight before I got an answer. Hence the proposedprocedure is likely to be very successful in causingfurther procrastination, which I suppose is really its object."It is, we think, evident that the nuisance is by no meansabated’ and we advise the Town Council to publish the

report, to take the ratepayers into its confidence, and to

try to make the beautiful town of Torquay worthy of itsreputation as a health resort and of the unrivalled sceneryin which it stands.

THE MIDWIVES BILL.

ON Friday, June 6th, the House of Commons devoted!several hours to the consideration of the Midwives Bill a&

amended by the Grand Committee on Law, when an im-portant modification was introduced. For an amendmentmoved by Mr. Ambrose and seconded by Mr. T. P. O’Connor,aiming at the abolition of the Gamp, met with the approvalof the House. As the first clause now stands a womanuncertified under the Act is not only prevented from

assuming the title of midwife, but is also prevented frompractising the habitual role of midwife for gain. This is an

alteration in the Act which we have already stated to benecessary. The Home Secretary, however, took serious

objection to the amendment and has almost intimated hisintention to oppose it at a later stage. This attitude of

Mr. Ritchie was not unexpected. For on Tuesday, June 3rd,.when a deputation representing the Council of the British’Medical Association waited upon him and urged that theMidwives Bill left the parturient poor still at the mercy of

dirty, ignorant women, he replied to the effect that there-was no obligation on the part of the Government to interfere.The House of Commons has now interfered, and it remains to,be seen what the Home Secretary will do. In the House ofLords it will be within his power either to have the amend-ment struck out or modified, or to have the whole Bill

rejected.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE UNIVERSITYOF LONDON.

i PROFESSOR E. H. STAPLING delivered at the University1 College, London, the Foundation Day Oration on June 5th,.1 in which he discussed the University of London under thei title of "The Building of the University." He pointede out that the skeleton of the University was already present.g The supreme ruling body, the Senate, contained repre-e sentatives of convocations, of the faculties of teachers, andf of various public bodies, and was guided in academicf affairs by the advice of boards of studies appointed chiefly. from among the teachers in the University. According tot the scheme advocated by Professor Starling there would be1 under the control of the Senate, but administered byL- local councils appointed by the Senate, four or more-

n University centres. In these centres the main teachingd and research of the University in all faculties would be-e carried out. In addition to these centres there woulds be a number of schools of the University which wouldl- preserve their autonomy but would direct their teaching"

according to the requirements of the University. Such

g schools would be mainly post-graduate in character in that ith would be their office to graft on the general training and!j. method acquired within the walls of the University itself the-e special professional training necessary to fit men for the.c- pursuit of medicine, law, commerce, or administration.L Among such institutions would be the 12 medical schools’)r attached to the great hospitals of London, the School of

y Economics and Commerce, and various training schools, and,.it it was to be hoped, the great legal corporations which had so.;. far failed to grasp the extent of their responsibilities.d in the formation of a legal faculty of the University.a In any policy decided upon it must be remembered that the-d whole object of the University was the improvement of the.g mental training of their fellow citizens and not the distribu-" tion of degrees. The possession of a London degree by anyis man should be a sign that he had received a thorough.ie training and was an expert in the subject of his degree and)0 was not a mere bundle of second-hand facts. It was vital to>