36

Annotations.

THE NEW YEAR HONOURS.

"No quid nimis." "

THE list of New Year honours, although short, Iincludes the names of 14 members of the medicalprofession. Sir Donald MacAlister becomes a baronet.Among those upon whom knighthood is conferred areDr. Henry William Russell Bencraft, of Southampton,well-known alike as a sound practitioner, now retired,as a sportsman, and politician; Dr. Byrom Bramwell,a great physician and teacher, recently honoured byhis colleagues and friends on the occasion of his seventy-fifth birthday; and Dr. Harry George Waters, P.M.O.of the East Indian Railway. Dr. Henry LindoFerguson, Dean of the Faculty of Medicine, OtagoUniversity, Dr. David James Galloway, member ofthe executive and legislative councils of the StraitsSettlements, and Lieut.-Colonel William ThomasProut, one of the medical advisers to the ColonialOffice, also become knight bachelors. In the MilitaryDivision of the Order of the Bath Lieut.-General SirWilliam Boog Leishman, K.C.M.G., Director-Generalof the Army Medical Service, becomes a knight, andMajor-General Dennis Joseph Collins, C.M.G., DeputyDirector-General in the Southern Command of theEast Indies, and Air-Commander David Munro, C.I.E.,of the Royal Air Force Medical Services, Companionsof the same Order. In the Royal Victorian OrderSurgeon Lieut.-Colonel Sir Warren Crooke-Lawless,C.B., C.I.E., C.B.E., is made a knight, and Dr.Alexander Hendry, Surgeon Apothecary to H.M.Household at Balmoral, is promoted from M.V.O. toC.V.O. Dr. Behari Lal Dhingra, Chief Minister of theJind State, Punjab, receives a Companionship of theIndian Empire, and Dr. Louisa Helena Hart, medicalmissionary at Madanapalle, Madras, receives the IKaisar-i-Hind Medal. To all these we offer in thename of the medical profession our hearty congratula-tions.

____

A FRENCH MEDICAL COUNCIL.

THE note by our correspondent in Paris, whichappeared on p. 1318 of our issue of Dec. 15th, 1923,in regard to a proposed Medical Council in France,is of much interest. It suggests the establishment inFrance of what at first sight might seem to be a bodyanalogous to our own General Medical Council, butthis would be a wrong idea of what is so far projected,in spite of certain similarities of design and function.It appears that local councils are to be establishedfor dealing with conduct in a professional respect.These appear to resemble in some degree the com-mittees of inquiry set up under the Insurance Actsin this country to deal with offences under those Acts.This will no doubt be of considerable help in checkingabuses, but there is always a risk with local tribunalsthat personal factors may not be eliminated, andthat the judicial aspect may be to some extentoverlooked. It is understood, however, that inaddition to this there is to be a National MedicalCouncil sitting in Paris, of whom half are to be legalmembers and half members of the medical profession,with the President of the Academy of Medicine aspresident and member ex-officio. To this bodyappeals from the local tribunals can be made, and asafeguard is therefore provided against any localprejudice. The details of the working of this Councilare not set forth in the note, and there is nothingto show whether there is power to summon witnesses,or to take evidence on oath. The right of appeal isset down as being in regard to charges of incompetence,exceeding of duty, or violation of the law. The firstand last of these are not matters which would comebefore the General Medical Council of the UnitedKingdom. The first is a matter with which it neverdeals, leaving persons who feel themselves aggrievedto take what action they think well in the civil courts.

! The term " exceeding of duty is not very clear, andit is difficult to say what is meant by it. Violationof the law in this country would be dealt with in thefirst instance by the civil courts, but the GeneralMedical Council has the duty laid upon it of consider-ing convictions and judging whether the gravity ofthe offence is such as to warrant the erasure of aname from the Register or not. There does not appearto be any provision for either the local council orthe National Council to deal with offences which inthis country come under the heading " infamousconduct in a professional respect," and include offencesfor which no civil remedy is provided. In view of thelong experience of the General Medical Council andthe large number of recorded judgments which appearin its publications the authorities in France mightdo worse than to consult the Council, and, if necessary,to ask for its observations before any new law on thissubject is finally settled.

THE CONTROL OF ALCOHOL.Dr. Arthur Shadwell has long been known as a

leading student of the drink problem and moreespecially of the possibilities of keeping its evils withinbounds by legislative measures. His writings on thesubject are remarkable-one is almost tempted to sayunique-because he seems really to occupy thatdetached and impartial position which every brewerand equally every teetotal fanatic claims as his own.He has just published a volume, written originallyas one of the war monographs to be issued by theCarnegie Fund for International Peace, which gives adetailed history of the controls which graduallyrestricted the facilities for getting drink during thewar and of their partial relaxation since 1919 ; in anappendix of 82 pages are printed a selection of theorders and regulations which were made and a varietyof statistics. The effect of these various measures

cannot, of course, be stated in such objective terms,but the author has no hesitation in affirming hisconviction that the police returns give in a generalway a satisfactory gauge of alcoholic excess,especially where, as in the present instance, thefluctuations are so large. Whether the scale is the con-sumption of alcohol (which is at one end of the seriesof possible measures) or convictions for drunkenness(which is the other end of the series), there is no

doubt that the imposition of control was followed byless drinking, and that drinking became progressivelyless as control was made more stringent. The con-sumption of beer in 1914, 1918, and 1922 was as 100,38, and 65, of spirits as 100, 28, and 54 ; the con-victions for drunkenness as 100, 16, and 42.

There is much (If interest in the details of thestatistics-the seasonal and local changes and so on-but most readers will probably prefer to treat themin the broad way which the author encourages andturn to the chapter in which he summarises theresults which he deduces. These are four in number :(1) While engineering, shipping, and other vastindustries had to be dealt with because they wereuseful for the conduct of the war, alcohol was theone thing which had to be dealt with because it,interfered with the conduct of the war. Drinking wasfound to be a serious national disability and remainsso. (2) It is possible effectively to check excessivedrinking by legislative control which leaves an

amount of liberty sufficient to prevent substantialresistance or evasion. (3) The chief measures inproducing this result were shortening of hours,limitation of supply, diminution of strength,and raised prices. (4) It is possible under peaceconditions to keep the volume of intemperance farbelow its old level by means of shorter hours andhigher taxation. And as corollaries we may par-ticularly notice three points which Dr. Shadwellinsists on. Control will reduce consumption only to a

1 Drink in 1914-1922 : A Lesson in Control. By ArthurShadwell. London : Longmans, Green and Co. 1923. Pp. 245.10s. 6d.