- Email: [email protected]
METROPOLITAN HOSPITAL SUNDAY FUND.
1853
METROPOLITAN HOSPITAL SUNDAY FUND.
Correspondence.
THE following are some of the principal amounts, additional to those already announced in THE LANCET, received at the Mansion House up to Wednesday evening, when the sum paid in was about 30,000. 2
St. Paul’s, Onslow-square St. Jude’s, South Kensington Theistic Church,
.................. ...............
Swallow-street, W. (per Rev. Charles
Voysey ......................... .................. St. James’s, Piccadilly Union Chapel, Islington St. Stephen’s, South Dulwich Holy Trinity. Tulse-hill
.................. ...............
..................
Emmanuel Church. Wimbledon ............... St. Matthew’s, Bayswater Bromley Parish Church and St. Mark’s Chapel of Ease St. Mary’s, Stoke Newington, Parish Church and Church of the Redeemer St. Peter’s, Bayswater St. Stephen’s, South Kensington St. Mary’s, Kilburn St. Mark’s, North Audley-street ............... St. Paul’s Presbyterian Church, Westbourne-grove Temple Church......... ’............... Grosvenor Chapel, North Audley-street............ St. Andrew’s, Leytonstone St. John’s, Kidbrook ...............
... ...
.....................
..................
...............
.....................
......
..................
.....................
City Temple Holy Trinity, Marylebone St. Mark’s, Reigate, and Nutley-lane Church ......... St. James’s, Paddington Greek Church, Bayswater St. Mary’s, Boltons St. Thomas’s, Portman-square ........................
..................
..................
..................
..................... ...............
St. Margaret’s, Lee Church of the Annunciation, Chislehurst St. Michael’s, Blackheath Park St. George’s, Beckenham Christ Church, Lee St. John Presbyter, Kensington Dutch Church, Austin Friars St. John’s. Blackheath Brixton-hill Wesleyan Circuit St. John the Evangelist, Putney............... Weybridge Parish Church Christ Church, Brondesbury ............... St. Gabriel’s, Pimlico ..................... .........
...............
..................
.....................
............... ...............
..................
...............
..................
.....................
Oratory, Kensington
.....................
St. Stephen’s, Ealing Lemsford Parish Church
..................
All
..................
.....................
Saints, Margaret-street
St. John’s. Downshire-hill .................. Hornsey Parish Church Messrs. Longmans, Green, and Co............. St. Paul’s, Camden-square .................. Dulwich College Chapel ..................
..................
Gray’s Inn Chapel ..................... Westminster Congregational Chapel St. Mary Plaistow, Kent St. Michael’s, Highgate St. Mark’s, Marylebone St. Stephen’s, East Putney Chapel Royal, St. James’s Church of the Immaculate Conception, St. Matthew’s, Brixton St. Magnus Martyr, London Bridge St. Saviour’s, Denmark Park St. Saviour’s, Paddington .................. St. Luke’s, Nightingale-lane ............... St. Mary Magdalene’s, Enfield St. Germain’s, Blackheath West Wickham Churches St. Peter’s, Streatham St. Stephen’s, Portland Town ............
..................
..................
..................
..................
.................. .
Farm-street
...
..................
............
...............
...............
..................
..................
.................. ............
Grafton-square Congregational Church, Clapham...... St. Saviour’s, Brixton hill St. Stephen’s, Westminster.................. St. Luke’s, Nutford-place ..................
..................
Ewell Parish Church St. Matthias’s, Earl’s Court.................. Blackheath Wesleyan Church All Saints, Orpington, and Church of Ease Ascension Church, Blackheath St. Saviour’s Cathedral Church ............... Christ Church. Beckenham .................. .....................
...............
.........
...............
St. Alban’s, Holborn ..................... Ilford Parish Church ..................... St. Olave’s, Woodberry Down St. Mary’s, West Kensington St. Mary’s, Paddington Central-hill Baptist Norwood St. Andrew’s, Totteridge St. Mary’s, Putney ..................... Christ Church, Woburn-square St. Mary Virgin, Primrose-hill St. Matthew’s, Sydenham Holy Redeemer Mission, Stoke Newington St. George’s, Tufnell Park St. Luke’s, Holloway St. Thomas’s, Telford Park Mitcham Parish Church ...............
...............
..................
Church, Upper
.........
..................
...............
...............
............
.........
..................
..................... .................. ..................
d. 0 0
s.
347 345
0 0
325 0 0 314 3 0 234 0 0 196 0 0 186 0 0 157 0 0 145 0 0 138 0 0 131 131 126 123 122 122 110 109 107 107 106 103 102 100 90 83 80 73 73 71 68 66 65 64 63 61 60 60 59 58 58 57 57 56 53 52 52 50 50 50 50 49 48 47 47 47 47 46 46 46 45 45 44
43 43 41 41 41 40 40 39 39 38 38 38 37 36 36 35 35 34 34 34 33 32 32 32 31 31 31 30 30 30 30
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
"Audi alteram
11
partem."
HYGIENIC MEASURES AGAINST SYPHILIS. To the Editors of THE LANCET.
S]IRS,-In Professor Metchnikoff’s lecture on this subject at King’s College I note three important points-obscured a little
by
romance
permitted
its or
pervading tone of enthusiasm-from which glamour of scientific exploration should
no
be
to divert attention.
1. The first is his emphatic warning that the demonstration incomplete. It is not only that the experiments in human prophylaxis have been few but that every one of them is unfinished. The suppression of primary symptoms-which 0 is as far as we have got yet-does not prove immunity from 0 those tertiary disorders which characteristically follow a mild 0 and 15 to 20 years is the normal distance between 0 infection, first infection and the onset of (e.g.) general paralysis. Each 0 0 experiment, therefore, takes fully 20 years to run. It is most 0 important that this fact should be firmly grasped and that 0 we should not let our imaginations run away with us. 0 0 2. Again, the very striking instance given by Professor 0 Metchnikoff of the accidental inoculation of a laboratory 0 attendant goes to show that the immunity of the individual0 if it be immunity-does not exclude the danger of infection 0 0 for others. Here a patient in whom Professor Fournier him0 self could find no trace of syphilis is proved to have been in 0 0 a state of active contagiosity-a very notable warning as to the distance which still lies between us, and any trustworthy 0 0 prophylaxis by inoculation. 3. Driven back, therefore, for 0 the meantime on purely therapeutic measures, Professor 0 Metchnikoff recommends the immediate use, after a sus0 0 pected infection, of certain mercurial frictions to prevent the 0 of the poison through the system. Here, again, how0 spread 0 ever, the experiment is equally incomplete ; and the student 0 who permitted himself to be inoculated with syphilis in 0 order to test the value of the remedy mUE-t for 20 years to 0 0 come be uncertain what the experiment will cost him. Thus the upshot of the matter is, that while Professor 0 0 Metchnikoff applies the spur to investigation, he applies 0 We must be patient. Success, on his 0 the rein to hope. own showing, has not yet arrived ; it is only discernible on 0 0 the far horizon. This on the one hand. On the other, how 0 does Professor Metchnikoff conclude his lecture ?7 By call0 0 ing for the coordination meanwhile of every means of 0 diminishing the scourge-medical, educational, moral, social, 0 administrative ?7 No, but by reiterating the parrot cry that 0 0 hygiene must be paramount over morality, as if hygiene 0 and morality were antagonistic to each other, a supposition 0 absolutely contradicted by experience. What does he mean 0 Does he mean the attitude assumed by those 0 by morality?1 0 people-I do not know where he finds them ; not, I think, 0 among those who have given any intelligent thought to the n matter-who oppose themselves to any cure for syphilis, 0 0 however innocent in itself, on the ground that disease is 0 the proper penalty of vice ?7 If this is what he means, it is 0 a flagrant misuse of terms. Or does he mean that 0 surely the combat with disease is to be unflinchingly carried 0 out even by means which involve a definite deteriora0 0 tion of public morality ?7 This is what he appears 0 to mean, and a most dangerous position it is for any 0 For the supreme ally of the hygienist 0 hygienist to take up. 0 in this matter is, precisely, morality, and a rising level of 0 morality, which, by diminishing the area of vice itself, 0 diminishes pari passu every difficulty attending the hygienic 0 0 campaign against the consequences of vice ; and every 0 who casts contempt upon virtue is deliberately hygienist 0 0 adding to the weight and momentum of the forces which are 0 already too strong for him. 0 I would venture to add a most earnest appeal to the pro0 fession generally, and especially to medical officers of health, 0 whose rôle is so eminently practical and who are in con0 0 tinual contact with the masses, not to allow themselves to 0 Venereology is not the whole 0 be befooled in this matter. of hygiene, and hygiene itself is not confined to the 0 0 material side of things. In a matter affecting so inti0 the social and civic life of a people it is of the most 0 mately 0 vital importance that it should not be treated from a 0 purely specialist point of view. The specialist who clears is
METROPOLITAN HOSPITAL SUNDAY FUND.
Correspondence.
THE following are some of the principal amounts, additional to those already announced in THE LANCET, received at the Mansion House up to Wednesday evening, when the sum paid in was about 30,000. 2
St. Paul’s, Onslow-square St. Jude’s, South Kensington Theistic Church,
.................. ...............
Swallow-street, W. (per Rev. Charles
Voysey ......................... .................. St. James’s, Piccadilly Union Chapel, Islington St. Stephen’s, South Dulwich Holy Trinity. Tulse-hill
.................. ...............
..................
Emmanuel Church. Wimbledon ............... St. Matthew’s, Bayswater Bromley Parish Church and St. Mark’s Chapel of Ease St. Mary’s, Stoke Newington, Parish Church and Church of the Redeemer St. Peter’s, Bayswater St. Stephen’s, South Kensington St. Mary’s, Kilburn St. Mark’s, North Audley-street ............... St. Paul’s Presbyterian Church, Westbourne-grove Temple Church......... ’............... Grosvenor Chapel, North Audley-street............ St. Andrew’s, Leytonstone St. John’s, Kidbrook ...............
... ...
.....................
..................
...............
.....................
......
..................
.....................
City Temple Holy Trinity, Marylebone St. Mark’s, Reigate, and Nutley-lane Church ......... St. James’s, Paddington Greek Church, Bayswater St. Mary’s, Boltons St. Thomas’s, Portman-square ........................
..................
..................
..................
..................... ...............
St. Margaret’s, Lee Church of the Annunciation, Chislehurst St. Michael’s, Blackheath Park St. George’s, Beckenham Christ Church, Lee St. John Presbyter, Kensington Dutch Church, Austin Friars St. John’s. Blackheath Brixton-hill Wesleyan Circuit St. John the Evangelist, Putney............... Weybridge Parish Church Christ Church, Brondesbury ............... St. Gabriel’s, Pimlico ..................... .........
...............
..................
.....................
............... ...............
..................
...............
..................
.....................
Oratory, Kensington
.....................
St. Stephen’s, Ealing Lemsford Parish Church
..................
All
..................
.....................
Saints, Margaret-street
St. John’s. Downshire-hill .................. Hornsey Parish Church Messrs. Longmans, Green, and Co............. St. Paul’s, Camden-square .................. Dulwich College Chapel ..................
..................
Gray’s Inn Chapel ..................... Westminster Congregational Chapel St. Mary Plaistow, Kent St. Michael’s, Highgate St. Mark’s, Marylebone St. Stephen’s, East Putney Chapel Royal, St. James’s Church of the Immaculate Conception, St. Matthew’s, Brixton St. Magnus Martyr, London Bridge St. Saviour’s, Denmark Park St. Saviour’s, Paddington .................. St. Luke’s, Nightingale-lane ............... St. Mary Magdalene’s, Enfield St. Germain’s, Blackheath West Wickham Churches St. Peter’s, Streatham St. Stephen’s, Portland Town ............
..................
..................
..................
..................
.................. .
Farm-street
...
..................
............
...............
...............
..................
..................
.................. ............
Grafton-square Congregational Church, Clapham...... St. Saviour’s, Brixton hill St. Stephen’s, Westminster.................. St. Luke’s, Nutford-place ..................
..................
Ewell Parish Church St. Matthias’s, Earl’s Court.................. Blackheath Wesleyan Church All Saints, Orpington, and Church of Ease Ascension Church, Blackheath St. Saviour’s Cathedral Church ............... Christ Church. Beckenham .................. .....................
...............
.........
...............
St. Alban’s, Holborn ..................... Ilford Parish Church ..................... St. Olave’s, Woodberry Down St. Mary’s, West Kensington St. Mary’s, Paddington Central-hill Baptist Norwood St. Andrew’s, Totteridge St. Mary’s, Putney ..................... Christ Church, Woburn-square St. Mary Virgin, Primrose-hill St. Matthew’s, Sydenham Holy Redeemer Mission, Stoke Newington St. George’s, Tufnell Park St. Luke’s, Holloway St. Thomas’s, Telford Park Mitcham Parish Church ...............
...............
..................
Church, Upper
.........
..................
...............
...............
............
.........
..................
..................... .................. ..................
d. 0 0
s.
347 345
0 0
325 0 0 314 3 0 234 0 0 196 0 0 186 0 0 157 0 0 145 0 0 138 0 0 131 131 126 123 122 122 110 109 107 107 106 103 102 100 90 83 80 73 73 71 68 66 65 64 63 61 60 60 59 58 58 57 57 56 53 52 52 50 50 50 50 49 48 47 47 47 47 46 46 46 45 45 44
43 43 41 41 41 40 40 39 39 38 38 38 37 36 36 35 35 34 34 34 33 32 32 32 31 31 31 30 30 30 30
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
"Audi alteram
11
partem."
HYGIENIC MEASURES AGAINST SYPHILIS. To the Editors of THE LANCET.
S]IRS,-In Professor Metchnikoff’s lecture on this subject at King’s College I note three important points-obscured a little
by
romance
permitted
its or
pervading tone of enthusiasm-from which glamour of scientific exploration should
no
be
to divert attention.
1. The first is his emphatic warning that the demonstration incomplete. It is not only that the experiments in human prophylaxis have been few but that every one of them is unfinished. The suppression of primary symptoms-which 0 is as far as we have got yet-does not prove immunity from 0 those tertiary disorders which characteristically follow a mild 0 and 15 to 20 years is the normal distance between 0 infection, first infection and the onset of (e.g.) general paralysis. Each 0 0 experiment, therefore, takes fully 20 years to run. It is most 0 important that this fact should be firmly grasped and that 0 we should not let our imaginations run away with us. 0 0 2. Again, the very striking instance given by Professor 0 Metchnikoff of the accidental inoculation of a laboratory 0 attendant goes to show that the immunity of the individual0 if it be immunity-does not exclude the danger of infection 0 0 for others. Here a patient in whom Professor Fournier him0 self could find no trace of syphilis is proved to have been in 0 0 a state of active contagiosity-a very notable warning as to the distance which still lies between us, and any trustworthy 0 0 prophylaxis by inoculation. 3. Driven back, therefore, for 0 the meantime on purely therapeutic measures, Professor 0 Metchnikoff recommends the immediate use, after a sus0 0 pected infection, of certain mercurial frictions to prevent the 0 of the poison through the system. Here, again, how0 spread 0 ever, the experiment is equally incomplete ; and the student 0 who permitted himself to be inoculated with syphilis in 0 order to test the value of the remedy mUE-t for 20 years to 0 0 come be uncertain what the experiment will cost him. Thus the upshot of the matter is, that while Professor 0 0 Metchnikoff applies the spur to investigation, he applies 0 We must be patient. Success, on his 0 the rein to hope. own showing, has not yet arrived ; it is only discernible on 0 0 the far horizon. This on the one hand. On the other, how 0 does Professor Metchnikoff conclude his lecture ?7 By call0 0 ing for the coordination meanwhile of every means of 0 diminishing the scourge-medical, educational, moral, social, 0 administrative ?7 No, but by reiterating the parrot cry that 0 0 hygiene must be paramount over morality, as if hygiene 0 and morality were antagonistic to each other, a supposition 0 absolutely contradicted by experience. What does he mean 0 Does he mean the attitude assumed by those 0 by morality?1 0 people-I do not know where he finds them ; not, I think, 0 among those who have given any intelligent thought to the n matter-who oppose themselves to any cure for syphilis, 0 0 however innocent in itself, on the ground that disease is 0 the proper penalty of vice ?7 If this is what he means, it is 0 a flagrant misuse of terms. Or does he mean that 0 surely the combat with disease is to be unflinchingly carried 0 out even by means which involve a definite deteriora0 0 tion of public morality ?7 This is what he appears 0 to mean, and a most dangerous position it is for any 0 For the supreme ally of the hygienist 0 hygienist to take up. 0 in this matter is, precisely, morality, and a rising level of 0 morality, which, by diminishing the area of vice itself, 0 diminishes pari passu every difficulty attending the hygienic 0 0 campaign against the consequences of vice ; and every 0 who casts contempt upon virtue is deliberately hygienist 0 0 adding to the weight and momentum of the forces which are 0 already too strong for him. 0 I would venture to add a most earnest appeal to the pro0 fession generally, and especially to medical officers of health, 0 whose rôle is so eminently practical and who are in con0 0 tinual contact with the masses, not to allow themselves to 0 Venereology is not the whole 0 be befooled in this matter. of hygiene, and hygiene itself is not confined to the 0 0 material side of things. In a matter affecting so inti0 the social and civic life of a people it is of the most 0 mately 0 vital importance that it should not be treated from a 0 purely specialist point of view. The specialist who clears is