from without, and not that examinations in their own university should be conducted only by men who had undergone examination in that university, but men who had undergone examinations elsewhere, so as to give a larger sphere of character to the examination. That might have been Dr. Parkes's meaning. That was a matter often discussed in the University of Cambridge. It did not imply that their own men were incompetent when they appointed members from elsewhere.

Dr. FLEMING observed that it was not the Faculty alone, but it was the Faculty and the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh. The examiners were appointed by both.

Sir WILLIAM GULL would like it to go forth to all the examining bodies in the kingdom that it is an extremely disadvantageous thing where there were over 120 Fellows that the examiners should be selected from those who were the teachers in that particular school. Nor did he believe that out of any number of Fellows of that kind they could select all they wanted. He belonged to the University of London for many years, and one of the most difficult things was to select efficient examiners, and they constantly had to go out of their own body to select the most distinguished person they could. It was no reflection on the Fellows of the College that they were not fit to be examiners. They might be superior as teachers and practitioners, but very bad examiners. The same was the case at the public schools. The teachers at Eton were not the men who had been educated at Eton.

Dr. STORRAR was strongly convinced that the best examiners were to be found amongst the experienced and successful teachers. There was great art in examination, and it was also a great gift. In the University of London it was always considered an extra recommendation that a man had been for a long series of years a successful teacher. It occasionally happened that an examiner had one of his own pupils before him. The principle they adopted was the duplication of examinerships, taking care that the two examiners should come from different schools. Supposing the subject was anatomy, if one of the examiners discovered in the candidate a pupil of his own he handed over the examination to his colleague.

Mr. QUAIN gave his testimony to the same effect. He believed nobody was competent to examine who had not studied examination as an art.

Professor TURNER said a very important question had been raised. Dr. Storrar had spoken with reference to the relation of teachers to examinations. He understood that Dr. Storrar had handed in a distinct motion with reference to bringing that forward for discussion, so that any further consideration probably should be reserved.

The report of the visitors appointed to inspect the first and second examinations of candidates for the diploma of the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow was next taken into consideration.

Dr. AQUILLA SMITH moved, and Sir WILLIAM GULL seconded, the following resolution :-"That the report of the visitors to inspect the first and second examinations of candidates for the diploma of the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow be forwarded to the Faculty for their consideration and remarks."

Dr. FLEMING desired to mention that the examinations of the Faculty are held on the second Tuesday in every month. He thought it was too often. Most unfortunately the second Tuesday of August, 1873, happened to be the twelfth day of the month, and they were all aware that if there was one amusement that a Scotchman loved above all others it was grouse-shooting. That accounted for the mention in some cases in the report that the examiner was absent. would receive all the suggestions of the visitors in good part. He called attention to the following sentence in the report:-"Still less was there any attempt made to test the candidate's knowledge of practical surgery by the performance of operations on the dead subject."

They

Sir WILLIAM GULL suggested that it would be a great advantage to have Englishmen to examine in Scotland, in which case they would not be affected by August 12. Glasgow was so large a city that the science and art of medicine and surgery must have advanced greatly if there were not sufficient dead bodies to enable the students to practise examinations upon them.

Dr. APJOHN said the examination seemed to be an excellent and the answers very good indeed.

Mr. QUAIN called attention to one paragraph in the report"In reviewing this examination, it appears to us that the examination in clinical medicine might be somewhat extended with advantage. A written report of two or more cases by the candidate would assist the examiner in forming his judg ment, as it is difficult to avoid putting leading questions to the candidate when the examiner aids, as it were, in the examination of the patient. More specimens should be shown under the microscope, and pathological specimens might be exhibited. The examination in clinical surgery was more extended, but we noticed that no instruments were exhibited to the candidate, that there was no practical examination on bandaging, nor on the management of fractures and dislocations, no pathological specimens were shown, and still less was there any attempt made to test the candidate's knowledge of practical surgery by the performance of operations on the dead subject." His belief was that they required too much. This was only a minimum examination, and it was to enable them to judge whether a man was fit to enter on the practice of the profession. It was not for the higher positions in medicine or surgery, but it was for the ordinary practitioner; and to require from him a high standard of knowledge in anatomy, physiology, and chemistry, and a thorough practical knowledge of anatomy, physiology, and chemistry, at the end of his second session was unreasonable. It was not to be attained by students of ordinary energy and ability, and it was for such that the examinations should be framed. He regretted that such a passage as that should be published. He knew that with the College of Surgeons of London the matter stood thus: those who appeared at the first examination were one-third more numerous than those who appeared at the last examination. At that examination one-third of the students were rejected. Those who appeared at the final examination were never more than two-thirds of those who appeared in the first examination. Thus between the first examination, at the end of the second session, and the end of the fourth session one-third dropped out properly, because they were rejected. Now, was it important that they should drop out? Some years ago he had occasion to go into the subject and to get returns to ascertain what was the proportion at different periods of the medical men of the country in number to the population. He found that for thirty years-from 1830 to 1860 or 1865-the number of medical men by such returns as he could get had not increased, but in that period the population of England and Wales had increased very much-in 1831 it was 13,000,000 odd, and in 1861 it was 20,000,000. Of course, if medical men had not increased in number, they were relatively much fewer in proportion to the population. There was another fact he wished to lay before the Council. He had asked some friends at Guy's Hospital, and he ascertained that the people generally—that is, artisans, the lowest class of tradesmen, people keeping shops and doing business and having a fair income-could not get the attendance of the practitioners of the district. The practitioners were elevated above them in practice, employed by people who are more wealthy, and people in humble circumstances were obliged to resort to the parish doctor, to the dispensary, and to the hos pital. He spoke lately to some friends of his in different parts of the country in large towns, and they told him the same thing that they were too busily employed with persons above them, so that such people are obliged to resort to a form of charitable attendance. He believed that was not a good system. The result would be that those people attended in that way lost their independence of feeling; they were degraded by seeking charity in that manner; and he thought they ought to be very cautious of excluding such large numbers from the profession as was certainly done by an extremely difficult examination, and by requiring a high degree of practical knowledge in elementary scientific subjects at an early period of the study, and so shutting them out of the profession. He did not intend to propose any motion, but he was satisfied that injury was done. Dr. Parkes had said the questions were over the heads of the candidates, and Dr. Bennett said the questions were such that they could not answer efficiently. He thought it worth the while of the Council to take care that, while the questions were sufficient and practical, they were not such as to go in excess of that, or such questions as would exclude men of moderate abilities by too high an examination at an early period. His observations did not refer to the gentlemen who wrote this report: they were intended to be as general as possible.

Adjourned till to-morrow at one o'clock.

THIRD DAY.-SATURDAY, JULY 11.

The Council reassembled at one o'clock, and, after the usual preliminary business, proceeded with the discussion on the reports of the visitors appointed to inspect the first and second examinations of candidates for the diploma of the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow.

His

Dr. MACNAMARA said that the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons was more particularly a faculty of surgeons, and it behoved them to see that the requirements were as nearly as possible up to those of other surgical examinations. predecessor (Mr. Hargrave) had laid great stress upon the importance of witnessing how a student handles his scalpel. In former times, within his own experience, it had happened that the "coachers" or "grinders were so successful that gentlemen who scarcely ever took off their gloves in the dissecting-room were able to answer the questions put by the examining board. Consequently, they were compelled to have proof of the candidate's real knowledge by seeing how he handled the dead subject. It was wrong to certify that a man was a chirurgeon of whose practical skill the examiners knew nothing. He understood that it was said there were difficulties in procuring dead subjects, but he could not understand why; because, though the physicians of Glasgow no doubt were able to combat disease, no physician was able to prevent old people dying. Much had been said about education going over the heads of the students. That might be the case, but it was a great mistake in examining bodies to set questions which were not intended to test the pupil, and which were not expected to be even attempted to answer, but were proposed with the sole view of showing the superiority of the examination. Of course it was but natural that the student would choose the easy ones. As to the very inferior character of the answers given, no one had yet touched upon the cause of that evil. The examining bodies were by no means responsible for the fact that an ill-prepared student presented himself for examination, but it arose from the fact that a student rejected by one body could-hey, presto!-go to another; and until it was provided that a candid ate rejected by one body should not be able by that night's mail to go to another body and procure a qualification, they could not accomplish their object. As a remarkable example, he would state that a gentleman presented himself at the College of Surgeons to which he (Dr. Macnamara) belonged, and after having been solemnly and publicly examined on two separate days, the examiners, with great regret, remitted him to his studies. In six months' time he presented himself again, and, notwithstanding the feeling in the mind of examiners that they should be as lenient as possible with a man who presented himself a second time, he was again rejected. On a third occasion he presented himself, and on December 1 (he would not mention the year, because he did not wish to give a clue to the gentleman's name) he was a third time remitted to bis studies, but in the same month he got from another body both a surgical and a medical qualification.

Dr. QUAIN asked where the qualifications were obtained, and urged that the Council had a right to know the name of the body who admitted a person charged with inefficiency.

Dr. MACNAMARA replied that he should like to have time to consider, and if the Council thought he ought to disclose the name of the body he would do so, though he would rather not, because he did not wish to gibbet particular bodies, but to amend these bad ways. Another gentleman who was rejected by the College of Surgeons in Ireland went forthwith to another body (not the same as that concerned in the previous example), and with such success that his name appeared on the Register as a licentiate of the body which examined him. In conclusion, he expressed a hope that practical examinations should be the rule and not the exception.

Sir DOMINIC CORRIGAN mentioned the case of a candidate rejected by an Irish examining body for his failure to perform some extraordinary operation; but he received the qualificafion from a Scotch body, and had since discharged his professional duties in the most satisfactory manner.

Dr. ANDREW WOOD thought that Dr. Macnamara seemed to claim infallibility for his own body. They were not to be told that because the Irish College of Surgeons were unable to appreciate the merits of a man they were not to take up the case. The man to whom Sir Dominic referred had the offer of a professional post, and was perfectly competent, but he was rejected upon a very absurd question by the College of

Surgeons of Ireland. Was such a man to be precluded from going where his real worth would be recognised?

Dr. A. SMITH added that the man in question obtained the highest marks at the M.B. examination.

Dr. PARKES thought that no man rejected by one body should have the power to go up to another licensing body until a certain time had passed.

The PRESIDENT said the matter had been some time since debated in the Council, and it was felt that it was rather like gibbeting a man to send his name to all the other bodies.

Dr. STORRAR recollected perfectly well the debate; and in addition to what was stated by the President, it was the opinion of the Council that if a man presented himself before a certain body for examination, having complied with all the previous conditions of the examination, it was for that body to determine for itself whether the candidate was qualified, and that it ought not, in fact, to be guided by any conduct on the part of another body.

Sir DOMINIC CORRIGAN thought it unfair to send the names of rejected candidates to all the licensing bodies, because a man might be rejected under accidental circumstances; and if such a plan were adopted they would be sinking themselves to the level of insurance companies, which got confidential certificates from medical men as to the condition of proposers for insurance, which, in case of rejection, were forthwith sent to every company in the United Kingdom-a most disgraceful proceeding. Every case that came before a licensing body should come on its own merits.

Dr. FLEMING stated that he should bring the subject of requiring candidates to perform operations on a dead body before the Faculty.

UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW.

Dr. QUAIN moved "That a copy of the reports of the visitors to the several examinations of the University of Glasgow be forwarded to the University for its consideration and remarks."

Dr. HUMPHRY, in seconding this, wished to correct a figure on page 116-45 for 40-so that the passage would read, "In some instances, however, a deficiency (provided it is not below forty-five) in one subject is allowed to be compensated for by a higher number of marks in another subject," etc. Upon the question of the award by figures, what they meant to convey was that, supposing three questions were asked, 100 being the maximum and fifty the minimum of marks, the minimum would be the half of the number of marks given in respect of the three questions.

Dr. THOMSON explained that fifty was the pass mark; anything above that meant "worthy of praise," as being better than the pass mark. Therefore it seemed to him that two matters were confused in the words of the report-"Still, as the previous rule reduces the requirement to the answering of one-half of these questions, and those necessarily simple ones, in any subject, we think it better that the number of questions, and the time allowed for answering them, should be increased." The number of questions was not there taken into account. It was merely the examiner's judgment of the whole answers in that particular part of the examination. As to the visitors, he hoped the Council would not arbitrarily change them, because he thought it of importance that they should have an opportunity of comparing the different examinations with one another. The business of examination was far more difficult than that of teaching, and excellence in it could only be attained after long practice; but, having been engaged both in teaching and examining for a long time, he did not find himself indisposed still to learn from the suggestions of the visitors. As to making dissections a part of the examination, it was adopted in a great measure. From time to time he dissected a part, making notes and exposing parts as rapidly as he could, and examining the candidates on the parts exposed. It might be said that the candidate did not himself dissect or handle the knife; but in answer to that it should be remembered that they were perfectly acquainted with the dissections of all those students; therefore, what was required in the examination was to fix in the examiner's own mind the rate at which the student's knowledge should be accounted, rather than practically to test their dissecting. There were very great difficulties in bringing about a thoroughly practical examination on anatomy during such examinations; it must be done by some arrangement which would not interrupt the ordinary course of an examination where a very large number of persons were examined together. There was an abundant supply of

materials for such practical examinations, and therefore he hoped that in some way the suggestions of the visitors would be carried out, as also the suggestions relating to anatomy and chemistry. It was perfectly obvious that there had lately been immense progress made in those subjects, and therefore those engaged in teaching and examining must not only keep their attention alive to the progress that is being made in science, but must also be quite capable of taking advantage of the progress and making the most of it. Speaking for his colleagues and himself, he would assure the Council of their great desire to have such an examination as would promote the object they all had in view-namely, that no one should enter the profession without sufficient knowledge and skill; and they would do their best to raise the standard of medical education.

Professor TURNER called attention to a passage in the report stating that no examination indicating a higher standard of knowledge than that for the M.B. examination was passed before taking the degree of M.D. The whole paragraph was constructed so as to make that remark applicable not only to Glasgow, but to the universities of Scotland. Certainly, it was not so in Edinburgh, for that university required that the candidate for M.D. should present an original thesis, which was made the subject of examination. It was often stated that examinations were so conducted that there was no power at all for calling forth any originality on the part of the candidate, but the examinations were the mere records of a cram which a student had gone through in preparing for the examination. He conceived that, when a candidate was called upon to produce an original thesis containing the results of his own observations, it was one of the most important features that could be introduced into the examination system, because it enabled a candidate who had in him the ability to do and search out for himself to show his examiners that he had done so. It by no means followed that the presentation of a thesis was sufficient to enable a man to be promoted to the degree, for in 1872 out of twenty-one candidates who presented themselves for the M.D. degree, four were rejected in consequence of their theses being insufficient; and in 1873, four out of twenty-eight were rejected for the same reason. University of Glasgow followed the same plan, and, out of fifteen who presented themselves in 1873, four were rejected. So that the paragraph in the report was scarcely correct, and he thought it would require some modification. Probably the visitors' attention was not directed to that point. He objected also to the statement in the report that the honorary title was "bestowed when a comparatively low standard only has been reached," as being incorrect. The examination was thorough and practical in every part of it.

The

The PRESIDENT said it was quite clear that 50 per cent. in the University of Glasgow meant an entirely different thing from what it meant in Dublin or Cambridge. As he understood it, the candidate at Glasgow was desired to answer only four out of five questions, and then the examiner exercised a sort of general judgment as to what percentage of knowledge the man possessed in medicine. That might possibly be with judicious Scotchmen a better method than the English method, but it did not seem to admit of the same precision.

Sir WILLIAM GULL opposed the numerical system. One of the questions in the examination papers of the University of Glasgow was, "Distinguish congestion from inflammation." Who could say whether the answer was worth seventy-five or fifty marks? Another question was, "With what object are emetics employed, in what circumstances are they contra-indicated, and what evils are they liable to produce?" Who was to say with what object they are employed? The numbers given for the answer would depend upon the prejudice of the examiner. Again, if the question were asked, What is the treatment of typhoid fever? in proportion as the student was educated and the examiner ignorant, he would get nothing. He did not think it possible to lay down a standard of figures. One of the best men he ever educated at Guy's Hospital was placed at the bedside of a patient to examine the case. He was allowed half an hour to write out a clinical history, and one hour to write his comments upon it. The case was stated as one of hysterical paralysis. He wrote his history and comments most carefully, and made his diagnosis most perfectly, yet he was put into the second class simply because of the ignorance of his examiner.

Dr. ANDREW WOOD called attention to the fact that the Society of Apothecaries used the terms "Optime bene," "Satis bene," "Vix satis bene," and "Male," which were quite as near an approximation to the estimation of a candidate's answering as

if they were to take 100 and 50 as their maximum and minimum standards. As a matter of fact the numerical standard had to be translated into a written one. The bodies should, however, be left to adopt their own method of judging a candidate's qualifications.

The resolution was then carried.

ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS IN IRELAND.

letters

Dr. A. SMITH moved, and Professor TURNER seconded-"That the reports of visitations of the examinations for testimonial' of the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland be forwarded to that College for its consideration and remarks."

Dr. MACNAMARA, after paying a tribute to the courtesy of the visitors, said he wished to make a few explanations. The visitors reported that upon their arrival they found that the examination in dissection had taken place the previous day. The fact was that the examiners had completely forgotten that there was going to be a visitation. A more serious point was the refusal of the examiners to give the visitors a copy of the answers of a successful candidate. The Secretary wrote the following letter to the visitors: "I am directed by the President and Council to inform you that they regret they cannot comply with the request contained in your letter of the 13th inst., inasmuch as it is the practice in this College to destroy the candidates' papers as soon as the examiner has read them." That had been the practice for years. In the case of the examination for letters testimonial, the examiner tore up the papers and threw them aside; and in the examination for the Fellowship the written answers were preserved for one year. There was an imperium in imperio in the College. The examiners had to conduct the examinations under rules framed by the Council, and the Council had ruled that these papers should be destroyed. Consequently, the examiners had no option in the matter. Then the report went on to state-"At the second vivá voce examination, on January 27, we gave verbal notice to the examiners that we should ask for the written answers, and at the same time requested that the papers might be preserved. Our application was not acceded to, and before we left the hall we placed in the hands of the Registrar a formal letter, addressed by us to the President and Fellows." The Registrar's reply was-"I beg leave to inform you, in reply to your letter of the 27th ult., that the President and Council of this College will afford every facility to the visitors of the General Medical Council to inspect the written answers to examination questions at the time of the examination; but it has not been usual in the College to preserve these papers, or submit them to subsequent inspection." The Council, whether rightly or wrongly, were not prepared to change that which had been from time immemorial the usage of the College; but it was possible that, in deference to the opinion of the Council, they might see fit to reconsider their practice.

Dr. ANDREW WOOD was very glad to gather from Dr. Macnamara's concluding words that the Irish College of Surgeons -that infallible body who alone were capable of judging of the qualifications of men-had resolved no longer to be recalcitrant, because he thought it was not fair to other bodies that the candidates' answers should be printed with all their imperfections, whilst an Irish college might say-"You may come and inspect our papers, but we will not preserve them because our usage has been not to preserve them." The custom would be more honoured in the breach than in the observance, and the sooner the Irish College got quit of the habit of destroying papers after the examination had taken place, the better. He begged to call attention to a more serious complaint of the visitors, viz. :- "We felt that we ought not only to hear the answers read over by the candidate or the examiner, when only fifteen minutes is allowed both for considering their value, and for conducting the viva voce examination of each candidate," etc. If this meant that the oral examination of the candidate in anatomy, physiology, or any other subject only lasted during the small portion of the fifteen minutes that remained after the examiners had considered the written answers, and that that was the whole time consumed in the examination of a gentleman who was to obtain the immaculate diploma of the Royal College of Surgeons, it was a very startling thing.

Sir WILLIAM GULL thought that this was the most serious report which had come before them. The whole of the examination from beginning to end was as bad as could be. He then went through several passages, commenting upon them, and concluded by saying that he did not think that ever before had anything been brought to the attention of a council of medical

men which so painfully showed the utter paltriness of an examination. Either the report was written in an extravagant way, or the examination was extravagantly imperfect. Feeling that it was something that called for special notice on the part of the Council, he moved as an amendment-"That the Council has had its attention drawn to the many sources of imperfection in the examinations conducted for letters testimonial of the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, and trusts that the accompanying reports of the visitors at those examinations will receive serious attention on the part of the authorities of the Royal College; and that in any future visitation the written papers of the candidates may be preserved and submitted without restriction to the visitors.”

Dr. PARKES seconded this.

Dr. A. SMITH, referring to the last words of Sir William Gull, could only say that Mr. Power and himself were scrupulous to confine themselves to matters of fact. Each of them took notes independently of the other, and wrote out separate reports, the result of which was what was now before the Council.

Dr. MACNAMARA complained that Sir William Gull had taken no notice of a most important passage in the report, which came between two passages, which he read "In conclusion, we may remark that the good points of this examination are sufficiently obvious. It combines, in a very appropriate and advantageous manner, a written, an oral, a clinical, and a practical examination, and, if efficiently conducted, it is difficult to conceive that any candidate could who had not acquired a thorough knowledge of the foundations of professional attainments." Whatever could be said against the College had been put very forcibly; whatever told in its favour was suppressed.

pass

Upon being put as a substantive motion, Sir WILLIAM GULL moved, and Dr. PARKES seconded, as an amendment-" That the report of the visitors on the examinations of the Royal College of Surgeons of Ireland be forwarded to the College for its consideration and remarks. The Council has had its attention drawn to the many sources of imperfections in the examinations, and trusts that the accompanying reports of the visitors will receive serious consideration on the part of the authorities of the Royal College, and that in any future visitation the written papers of the candidates may be preserved and submitted without restriction to the visitors for their perusal." Sir DOMINIC CORRIGAN said that the proposal was one which was against the commonest principle of British law-that no man should be condemned unheard.

Dr. A. SMITH also thought it would be unfair to send such a censure down.

Sir WILLIAM GULL asked the Council to remember that they were not condemning anybody. If they were not to proceed except on the strictest legal proceedings, how were they to give their judgment on any body? Were they to summon all the authorities of all the bodies and bring in counsel? Such a course would be an insult to the common understanding of mankind.

The amendment was put, and carried by 13 to 3, and was afterwards carried as a substantive motion. The Council then adjourned.

FOURTH DAY.-MONDAY, JUNE 13.

The Council reassembled at two o'clock, and proceeded to consider

THE RETURNS FROM THE MEDICAL DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, DATED RESPECTIVELY SEPT. 8, 1873, AND MARCH 4, 1874. Dr. APJOHN moved, and Dr. PARKES seconded-"That the returns from the Army Medical Department be entered on the minutes, and that the thanks of the Council be given to the Director-General for his courtesy in forwarding the returns."

Dr. ANDREW WOOD called attention to the state of matters as they now stood compared with what they were five or six years ago, and said that it could no longer be urged that they were not advancing without the necessity of legislation. The resolution was carried.

REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON LETTER OF DR. MACKERN.

This report, which had relation to the proceedings of a certain quack, was read, and upon the motion of Dr. MACNAMARA,

seconded by Dr. STORRAR, was entered on the minutes. It is as follows:

The Committee having looked into the case referred to in Dr. Mackern's letter, have to state to the Council that, though Dr. Mackern's letter is addressed to the President and members of the General Council, it refers to a matter which, in compliance with Standing Order of the Council (VIII.-1), ought "to be investigated in the first instance by the Branch Council of that part of the kingdom in which the person whose name is proposed to be removed from the Register may reside." The Committee therefore recommend that Dr. Mackern's letter be referred to the Branch Council for England, and that Dr. Mackern be informed that this step has been taken.

On the motion of Dr. STORRAR, seconded by Dr. ANDREW Woon, it was agreed-"That the correspondence with Dr. Mackern and Dr. Dawson be referred to the Branch Council for England."

UNIVERSITY OF LONDON.

The following letters from the Registrar of the University of London and the Home Secretary were read :—

University of London, Burlington-gardens, W., July 7, 1874. Dear Sir, I am directed by the Senate of the University of London to forward to you the accompanying copy of a letter from the Home Secretary, from which it will be seen that the University will now be enabled fully to co-operate in the scheme of Conjoint Medical Examination, which has been approved by the Medical Council. I remain, dear Sir, yours faithfully, Dr. Francis Hawkins.

(Signed) WILLIAM B. CARPENTER. [Copy.] Whitehall, 29th June, 1874. Sir, I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 18th instant, and to inform you that I approve of the following resolution of the Senate of the University of London, viz. :-"That henceforth no candidate, unless he have passed the Preliminary Scientific (M.B.) Examination before the final adoption of the scheme of Conjoint Medical Examinations, shall be admitted to the second M.B. Examination of the University of London until he shall have passed the Final Examination of the Conjoint Board."

I have the honour to be, Sir, your obedient servant, (Signed) RICHD. ASSHETON CROSS. The Registrar of the University of London.

Dr. STORRAR moved-"That these letters be entered on the minutes." He said the Council would remember that the University of London had entered very earnestly into a scheme for securing a general Act enabling all the bodies represented in the Council to take a part, if they desired it, in the conjoint examinations. In March, 1873, he stated to the Council that the arrangements for a Bill had been proposed by the University and approved by the Home Office, and that all their efforts were rendered abortive by the interference of the Privy Council. He also, upon that occasion, stated the principal points of the conversation he had with the Vice-President, Mr. Forster, who gave as a reason for the opposition of the Privy Council that they did not think it a desirable thing for Government to introduce a measure, the tendency of which might possibly be to narrow the entrance into the profession and prevent the public from having the advantage of a sufficient number of qualified practitioners. The tendency, in fact, might be to create a monopoly in the medical profession. The result of his statement was in the minutes of March 26, 1873, and a motion was made by Sir Robert Christison, seconded by Sir William Gull-"That the President of this Council be requested to communicate with the Lord President of the Privy Council, in order that at its meeting tomorrow this Council may be supplied with authentie information as to the intentions of the Government." deputation waited on Lord Ripon, and this is the account of the conference. "That the conference lasted an hour and a quarter; that there was no difference of opinion as to the desirability of the medical authorities in each division of the kingdom combining their examinations so as to reduce the number of entrances into the profession; that the Lord President was not disposed to introduce into Parliament for this purpose a measure that would be limited to conferring on the medical authorities a merely permissive power to combine. His Lordship was favourable to the introduction of a measure of this limited kind by some private member, but with the understanding that it would not preclude his consideration of a larger measure if on further thought he should find it expedient.' The state of matters was this-they had an interview of an hour and a quarter, but after that interview, in which they were treated with the greatest possible courtesy, all they could make out of the intention of the Privy Council was the equivocal report he had just read. Speaking after an interval of more than a year, he would say that the Lord President of the Council would not have sacrificed any dignity if he had been more candid as to the intentions of the Privy Council on the subject; but they were left in a state of mystery and perplexity as to what the Privy Council intended to do.

A

The President said the Government perfectly approved of a private member taking charge of a Bill, but with the understanding that it would not prevent his consideration of a larger measure. In fact, they were left entirely in a state of doubt. This was considered at the time, and he thought it would be admitted now to have been rather perplexing to the Medical Council, who were exceedingly desirous of getting forward with these conjoint examinations, which had received their formal approval. Feeling very anxious that this matter should go forward, and that they should find some means of inducing the Privy Council to declare itself, he quoted a motion moved Sir William Gull, seconded by Mr. Hargrave, on March 28, 1873,-"That a deputation from the Council be appointed to ascertain from the Government whether they are willing to aid the Council in the removal of any legal difficulties that may exist in carrying out the objects of Clause 19 of the Medical Act." He lost no time in putting the whole matter before the Senate of the University of London, and, as there was a difficulty in getting the member for the University to introduce a Bill because he was a member of the Government, they applied to the Vice-Chancellor, Sir John Lubbock, who at once expressed his willingness to take charge of the Bill, the idea still being to get an enabling Act which would not give to the University of London any more than was given to any other representative body. The Easter vacation came on shortly after the Council rose last year, and there was no possibility of calling a meeting of the Senate at the time. Time wore on until they got to the Whitsun holidays, and then Sir John Lubbock said, "If you want to get this Bill through Parliament this year you must get the assistance of Government, because the rule is now in force that prevents a private member bringing on a private motion after half-past ten; and without the assistance of Government you cannot get this Bill through." Sir John Lubbock communicated with the Government, and asked whether they would assist him in getting on this private Bill. After some time Sir John Lubbock came to him with a paper in his hand, from which he saw very clearly that the condition imposed by the Privy Council was that unless the University of London introduced into their Bill a provision that all the bodies who were to profit by this Bill should consent to put their necks under the yoke of the Privy Council, the Privy Council would not consent to the legislation. For his own part he felt that would be a very serious responsibility for the Senate of the University of London to undertake. He showed the paper to friends whose judgment and position in the profession were of value. He showed it to Sir William Gull, to the President of the College of Physicians, and others, none of whom liked it. He went a step further, and ascertained that the University of Cambridge were by no means favourable to it. If an Act of this kind passed the Legislature, it would be a recorded declaration of Parliament that no conjoint examinations ought to take place unless under the direction of the Privy Council. That was too strong a step, and the result was that the whole thing was given up. There had been a difference of opinion between the Home Office and the Privy Council on the matter. He saw the late Mr. Winterbotham, then Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, and talked the matter over with him. He said, however unreasonable it might be, there would be no getting over the objection of the Privy Council; "but," he added, "I will tell you what to do. The University of London is in this position already with regard to all its regulations-that they require the confirmation of the Secretary of State for the Home Department. If the Secretary of State discovered through the law officers of the Crown that the charter was an obstacle, why should you not be content with a Bill which will simply remove this obstacle so far as the University of London is concerned?" He (Dr. Storrar) was very reluctant to throw over the other bcdies. He always greatly preferred in legislation to deal with all the bodies in the profession, and not to deal with details; but really he felt that the honour of the University of London was pledged to go forward with these conjoint examinations, and that it was the duty of the Senate to take whatever step was practicable. A Bill of this nature was accordingly introduced and passed, and under that Act they had now the authority of the Secretary of State to take part in these conjoint examinations. He could not sit down without expressing the great satisfaction he felt at the removal of all the obstacles. He had been on this Council since its formation. He had confronted various difficulties, but he was never placed in a more painful position than when he was obliged to say that there

was a legal obstacle in the way of the University of London taking part in these conjoint examinations. It would be remembered by some now present, that at the conference which took place at the College of Physicians, the University of London led the way to the other Universities concurring in the scheme for conjoint examinations, and he had felt that there might possibly be in the minds of some members of the Council a lurking thought that the University ought to have found out the difficulty earlier-in fact, that they were hardly ingenuous in this matter. He was, therefore, very happy now to be able to show that the honour of the University was established, and that they had really taken very extraordinary pains to put themselves right and to enable all other bodies who felt inclined to follow their example.

Sir WILLIAM GULL, in seconding the motion, congratulated the Council on the result of the labours of the Committee. He had always felt that such bodies as the universities were better occupied in the Honours department, and that there should be a conjoint scheme to settle the smallest amount of qualification. A similar communication had been received from Oxford and Cambridge, so that the period for conjoint. examinations had at last arrived.

The motion was carried.

THE BRITISH PHARMACOPIA.

Dr. AQUILLA SMITH moved "That a Committee be appointed to prepare a new edition of the British Pharmacopoeia, to be ready for publication in January, 1877." He said it was very desirable that there should be a new edition every ten years, which had been the rule in the United States for the last fifty years, and the American Pharmacopoeia had obtained a very high reputation. During those fifty years there had been a standing committee to watch the progress of pharmacy and note all improvements.

The motion dropped, there being no seconder.

Sir WILLIAM GULL observed that before 1877 the epitaph "Fui" would be upon many a now popular remedy.

LIST OF REGISTERED MEDICAL STUDENTS.

Dr. A. SMITH moved "That the publication of the Annual List of Registered Medical Students be discontinued." This motion also dropped for want of a seconder.

ALTERATION OF NAME IN THE MEDICAL REGISTER.

A petition was read from Mr. Raye, a licentiate of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ireland, stating that his name had been erroneously printed without a final “e," and he had applied to the Irish authorities in vain.

Dr. A. WOOD wanted to know what possible difficulty the Irish bodies could have in putting a man's name right, or on what ground they refused to correct a blunder made in entering the name.

Dr. MACNAMARA said that, to the best of his recollection, there was no error in entering the name; the gentleman had signed it Ray, and now he wished it to be changed to Raye. He apprehended that they were right in refusing to do that for him; but they had advised him to apply to the proper legal authority.

Dr. PARKES moved, and Dr. FLEMING seconded-"That the letter from Mr. John Joseph Raye be referred to the Branch Council for Ireland, for the purpose of ascertaining the facts, and of altering the spelling of the name, if it be found proper to do so."

This was carried.

ERRORS IN THE MEDICAL REGISTER.

Dr. MACNAMARA moved-" That it is advisable that in future proof-sheets as printed, but previous to publication, of the General Register should be forwarded to the Branch Registrars for each division of the United Kingdom for revision." He said that if there was anything the Council ought to be proud of, it should be the accuracy of their Register; but his attention had been at various times called to errors of various kinds. The most glaring one was that Mr. Adams, Senior Surgeon to her Majesty in Ireland, appeared about three years ago in the Register as an Assistant-Surgeon in the Navy. Clerical errors could only be corrected by the proof-sheets being sent to the respective registrars.

Dr. A. SMITH seconded the motion, which was carried.

Dr. MACNAMARA then moved-"That it be referred to Mr. Ouvry to instruct the Executive Committee as to the strictly legal manner in which additional titles, changes of residence, and erasures of names should be effected on the General Register."