1806

urge him to appoint a Statutory Commission forthwith. It

is regrettable, we think, that the election of a Fellow torepresent the Faculty of Medicine in the Senate should bedetermined by such sectional differences, but with the

existing tension of feeling in the University we see no wayout of the difficulty. The Faculty of Arts, with its large andincreasing majority of votes, has the decision in its hands,whatever may be the opinion of the medical graduates. I

KING’S COLLEGE: PRESENTATION TOPROFESSOR CURNOW, M.D.

LAST Tuesday afternoon the operating theatre at King’sCollege Hospital was the scene of an interesting ceremony onthe occasion of a presentation to Dr. Curnow by his old pupilsand students on his retirement from the office of Dean ofthe Medical Faculty after thirteen years’ service. The chairwas occupied, and the presentation made, by Mr. P. T. B.Beale, F.R.C.S. Mr. Beale, in making the presentation,referred to Dr. Curnow’s valuable services in the department,laying particular stress on the kindly sympathy which thelate Dean had invariably shown towards students who con-fided in him. Many a man at present in a position of import-ance might be said to owe his success in life to Dr. Curnow’skindly guidance and sound advice. The presentation con-sisted of an illuminated scroll, containing the names ofmany students past and present who had pursued their

studies during his tenure of office, a handsome silver salversuitably engraved, and a complete tea and coffee service ofvery handsome workmanship and design. The subscriberswere limited to those who had been students at the hospitalduring Dr. Curnow’s deanship. Dr. Curnow, in warmlythanking the subscribers and those present for their greatkindness, assured them that he would, as in the past, do any-thing he could to assist them in the pursuit of a peculiarlyarduous profession.

-

THE PERILS OF DOING GOOD.

UPON June 19th, in the Southern Divisional Police-courtof Dublin, Mr. Auchinleck of Harcourt-street was chargedbefore Mr. Swifte, Q.C., with having committed an assaulton a married woman named Lepper in the month of Februarylast. Mrs. Lepper stated on examination that she was twenty-three years of age, married for about thirteen months, andhad no children. Having suffered from illness last Februaryshe was recommended to consult Mr. Auchinleck and did soon two occasions, on the second of which she was assaulted.Mr. O’Shaughnessy, Q.C., in addressing the Court said

that it was a fortunate thing in the interest of truth

and to prevent the occurrence of shameful blackmailactions that he was entitled, under the Criminal LawAmendment Act of 1885, to examine the defendant, whowould tell his worship that the woman first consulted

him in the ordinary way; that on a subsequent occasion sherequested to be examined and was examined, and that hehad never used the expressions or done the acts imputed tohim. There was a long delay about these proceedings.There were present in court two medical gentlemen of thehighest eminence in their profession in the city, who wouldstate that medical men had often the greatest difficulty indealing with the maladies peculiar to women, and that

charges such as had been made on the present occasion werevery frequently made against medical men under similar cir-cumstances. Mr. Auchinleck, the defendant, was now

examined and deposed to the facts put forward bycounsel, stating, moreover, that he had been for twenty-three years practising in the city of Dublin, his practicebeing largely in connexion with midwifery ; that he wasmarried and had a wife and five children who lived with

him ; and, finally, that in cases of this kind, leaving thequestion of blackmail out of the question, it was a fact well

known in the profession that medical men never knew whatwomen might possibly say or do. Dr. William Josiah

Smyly, master of the Rotunda Hospital, and Dr. More

Madden, obstetric physician to the Mater Misericordise

Hospital, were also examined and supported Mr. Auchin-leck in his statement that charges of the sort were

likely to be made by married women under similar

circumstances and that, in fact, it was one of the

dangers connected with the treatment of married women

suffering from such maladies. Dr. More Madden statedthat he considered this woman to be labouring undera hallucination. Mr. Swifte, in dismissing the case,said from the bench that the question for him was whetherhe thought a jury would convict in the case of a man ofirreproachable character favourably known in the city fortwenty-three years. He thought that the delay in takingproceedings and the fact that Mrs. Lepper did not give anyalarm or make any complaint at the time would weigh verymuch in the matter and prevent any jury from convicting inthe case. We congratulate Mr. Auchinleck upon the resultof this case. Charges of this kind are so easy to bring andso hard to refute that we almost think the wisest coursewould be for medical men to refuse to examine women

except in the presence of a third person.

THE POLLUTION OF THE RIVER BRENT.

MOST Londoners, especially skaters, are familiar with thatbody of water known as the "Welsh Harp reservoir, butprobably it is not so generally known that the "lake" inquestion, which feeds the Regent Canal, was brought intoexistence by constructing a dam across the valley of theRiver Brent, One of the effects of this work has been todivert from the natural bed of this river much of the waterwhich formerly found its way into it, and hence any pollu-tions of the stream are less diluted than they would other-wise be. The river, if such water as is let out from thereservoir can be dignified by that name, passes through orabuts upon several sanitary districts, and amongst them

may be mentioned Willesden, Ealing, and Hanwellurban and Hendon and Brentford rural. Within recent

years complaints as to the condition of the river here-

abouts have been loud and long, and in 1893 Dr. MoncktonCopeman, a medical inspector of the Local Government

Board, made an inspection of the river. Dr. Copeman hadno hesitation in pronouncing the condition of affairs

eminently unsatisfactory. He found the bed of the river forsome 300 yards below the reservoir completely dry, with theexception of two small pools some ten feet in diameter,and apparently no water had left the reservoir in thisdirection for several weeks. On following the bed of thechannel for some distance down Dr. Copeman came uponwhat he states was practically, at that time, the source of theRiver Brent-i.e., the effluent of the Willesden sewage farm,samples of which contained much suspended matter andgave off a faint sickly smell. A short distance further down" the whole bed of the stream was absolutely black as if ariver of ink had been flowing over it," a condition ofaffairs produced, it appears, by decomposition of the sewageeflluent. At the point near to which the Grand JunctionCanal crosses the Brent Dr. Copeman found ’’enormous

heaps of London refuse " which, draining into the stream,fouled it to an extent which could only, he says, be ap-preciated by inspection. Further down the stream other

pollutions were discovered, but it is needless to recapitulatethem. Suffice it to say that Dr. Copeman reported amongstother things that the sewage effluents from districts abuttingon the stream are for the most part "decidedly unsatis-factory," and that throughout the course of the streamcrude sewage and putrescent fluids are discharged. In

a word, the stream is much polluted and the abstraction