The Sun.
London, England, 1856-04-02 00:00:00

MEDICAL PROFESSION BILL.

On the motion fora ),na into committee on this bill,
Lord R. GROSVENOR, before the house went into
committee on this bill, said that whilst he believed there
was necessity for some legislation on this question he
objected to the bill now before the house, and he called
attention to the notices on the paper amounting to
nearly 100, all affecting the principle of the bill—(hear,
hear)—and asked the hon. member (Mr. Headlam) to
postpone the bill going into committee ti enable mem-
bers to consider the effect of the amendment proposed.
There were many alterations suggested in this bill
which it would be inexpedient to consider in committee,
and it would be better not to take up the time of the
house by discussing it then, but rather postpone it, and
give the hon. gentleman (Mr. Ileadlam) an opportunity
of remodelling the bill, and getting rid of the objec-
tions raise 1 to it.

Mr. BARROW concurred in the opinion of the
noble lord. He agreed with the necessity of such a
measure, but objected to them then pniceeding with it.
He saw that by the bill the medical professi were to be
governed by a repro 4entative body, and the first amend•
ment on the paper affected that principle, and pro-
posed the governing, body should be the nominees of
the Government.

Mr. HEADLAM objected to the postponement of
the bill, because no good would be effected by it. The
great difficulty was with reference to the constitutio❑
of the proposed governing council. There were three
bodies who claimed that right. First, the Government
to the whole nomination ; second, the corporate bodies;
and, third, the great mass of the medical profession,
by an elected and representative body. If they post-
poned the bill for ten years nothing would be gained
by it, for even then the above objection must be met and
decided. Many of the amendments were mere technical
ones, and out of the 70 or 80 amendments there were
not more than 19 or 20 of any importance.
Mr. WALTER considered the amendments were too
important to be considered in committee, but should be
got rid of first. He instanced one amendment, which
imposed a fine of 5/. on every person practising medicine
unless duly registered under this bill.
Mr. MITCHELL opposed the bill. The provisions
of this bile, by repealing the Apothecaries' Act, would
enable cherni•ts and druggists to act as such.
Sir G. GREY said it would be better to get rid of
the suggestion thrown out by the noble lord before dis-
cussing the details of the bill. He regretted the notices
of amendments had been given so late as yesterday, and
he exonerated the Government from any charge of de-
lay, with reference to their amendment, from the Pre-
sident of the Board of Health not being informed by the
councils of the medical profession at an earlier period.
Mr. WALPOLE said the bill was read a second time
on an erroneous unpression that the provisions of the bill
were appr .ved of by the medical profession, but from
what had since occurred it appe.tred the profession was
divided in opinion on it. He agreed with the Govern-
ment in the amendment they had given notice of, that
the council should be nominated by the Crown, arid
thought that the whale of the amendments proposed
were so important that the bill should be postponed,
and the subject be referred to a select committee. anti he
moved the postponement of the committee until Wednes-
day next.
Mr. DRUMMOND supported the amendment.

Lord EBRINGTON also supported the amendment,
to give the country an opportunity of considering the
alterations proposed to be made in the bill. Time would
be gained by the investigation proposed, and benefit
would accrue thereby both to the profession and the
Mr. CR ?iITFURD supported the proceeding with
the bill. It was introduced with the ariet i on of the
maj rity of the inedical profession, who, however, it
appeared had now changed their minds, and had
called on the Government to propose an amendment
that would do away with the representative system in
connection with the constitution 4,f the council. He
trusted the house would not endanger the progress of
the bill by consenting to the amendment for postpone-
ment.

Mr. HENLEY urged the postponement of the fur-
ther consideration of this bill for the reasons thati ad
been assigned by previ.us speakers.
Mr. HEADLAM said that this bill was introduced
last session, and from the returns made during the re-
cess from the profession to the Home-office, after a con-
sideration of its clauses, he had asc' rtained that he
majority of the profession were in favour of the ill.
These returns he quoted on tbe second reading of this
bill this session ; but it appeared that since then many
of the profession bad altered their views respecting it,
and had induced the Government to propose the amend-
ment of which they had given notice. He looked upon
the postponement of the measure as virtually its defeat,
and he declined acceding to it without first dividing the
house.
After some further discussion,

Sir G. GREY explained the reasons which bad in-
duced the Colleges of Surgeons in England and Edin-
burgh, and many of the graduates to change their
opinions with regard to this bill. On well re-consider-
ing the que4ion these bodies, whilst approving of the
general principles of the bill, totally objected to:tbe c m-
stitution of the council as provided in the bill, viz,, that of
election by the medical profession, and-wished its n9cni-
nation ehotact 1e by the Goverment. He again urged

on the hon. gentleman (Mr. Headlam) to postpone the
bill for a week.
Mr. DUNCO MBE asked if the bill could be committed
pro forma, and then go to a select committee. He
called the attention of the house to the fact that
the mover of the bill had three pages of amendments
on the paper of the house. He (Mr. Duncornbe)
wished to get rid of this bill. Much had been
said about the profession, chemists, &c., being in
favour of this bill. He had a large constituency com-
bining doctors and quacks, at least the hon. member
opposite (Mr. Brady) would call them quacks because
they were not properly registered practitioners. He
(Mr. Duncombe) claimed the right for the public to be
consulted on this question, aad left to physic themselves
as they thought. proper, and if they liked homoeopathy
let them enjoy it.
Sir J. PAKINGTON thought the bill should not
be got rid of by a side wind but on its merits. If it were
postponed in all probability it could not be again
brought for some time unless the Government took it
under their fostering care. The hon. mover deserved
the thanks of the country for taking up such an import-
ant question and he was entitled to the thanks of the
house and the country for it.
The house then divided when the numbers were
For the postponement of the committee 116
Against it Bl
Majority --35
Mr. HE ADLAM called up-on the Government to
state the course they would now pursue in reference
to this bill. From the interview he had at an early
period with the Home Secretary with regard to this
bill, he relied on the Government support, but instead
of that the Government had thrown him over by de-
feating this bill. (Hear.)
Sir G. GREY denied that anything had been done
or said by him to mislead the mover of this measure as
to the course Government intended to take on this ques-
tion. The bill bad, however, as he had expected, re-
ceived the most decided opposition of the profession at
this stage of its proceedings. He declined to take charge
of the bill on the part of the Government, but he would
give the hon. mover all the assistance he could. It it% as
not the intention of the Government to bring in a bill
this session with reference to this question.
Mr. WALPOLE said that, in moving the postpone-
ment of the committee, he had no wish to get rid of
the bill by a rile wind. He thought the hon. mover
would better accomplish his object by the appointment
of a select committee to consider the bill and report on
it than otherwise.
After some farther discussion, in which Mr. Brady,
Mr. Cowper, Sir J. Pakiogton, and other hon. members
took part,
Lord ELCHO said that in consequence of communi-
cations made to him that morning, he intended to
morrow to ask for leave to introduce a bill relative to
the better regulation of the medical profession.
The further consideration of the bill in committee was
postponed for a week.
FACTORIES BILL.

Oa the motion for the second reading of this bill, a
large number of petitions were presented from the manu-
facturing districts in favour and against this bill.
Mr. W. PATEN moved the second reading of this
bill, which proposed to provide for fencing all the gear
Jug and shafting of machinery in factories. By the
present act a distinction was drawn between shafting
and gearing, the law enforcing the fencing of the for-
mer but not the latter, and hence differences of opinion
existed between the proprietors of fact ries and the
inspectors as to what really should or should not be
fenced. It was for the purpose of settling these doubts
tbat he had introduced this bill, and to put an en.l to
tie T.igation that resulted from an infringement of the
provisions of the present act, which were so diffi-
o ilt of int irpretation. Manufacturers, in this in-
stance, were subject to a law it was impossib!e for
them to comply with, which was a great injustice. The
hon. gentleolar, in the course of k s address, eluaidated
the injustice of the act by the various contradictions that
were issued by the factory inspectors as to the interpre-
tation of the act relative to fencing machinery, and in-
sisted that that injustice might be got rid of by deciding
by arbitration what was dangerous in factories, requir-
ing machinery to be fenced. That was the only object
he bad in view in prop sing this bill, and it was in order
to settle the question that the manufacturers supported
it, aid with a desire of securing to the utmost extent
the lives of the numerous operatives engaged in their
factories.

Mr. COBBETT moved the second reading of the bill
that day six months. He contended the bill would not
attain the object, it professed to have in view, bat would
have the effect of mutilating the salutary provisions of
the present Factory Act fur the prevention of accidents
in factories by machinery. He reviewed the legislation
that had taken place on this subject since 1833, and re-
ferred to the orders that had been issued by the factory
inspectors. It was thought at first that shafting 7 feet
from t'ae ground need not be covered, but, in
1854, in consequence of a communication ad-
dressed to the inspectors by Lord Palmerston, the then
Home Secretary, from the increase of accidents from
shafts 10 feet and more above the ground, an order
was issued for securely and entirely fencing these
shafts. A deputati n of manufacturers then waited
on the noble lord, and represented to hire
how inconvenient it would be to case them, but that
they would have recourse to a mode that weul I r.vett
accidents, viz., the application of "strap hooks." Un-
fortunately the manufacturers did not use them
se much as was desirable, and it was in
consequence of that neglect that too often acci-
dents still occurred. The present act afforded every
security possible for the prevention of accidents in facto-
ries from machinery, except from the culpable
reglect of the party who was the sufferer.
He thought that the bill as it stood was an extremely in-
ju Ileums measure, and.he therefore thought it hie duty,
representing as he did a large manufacturing district, to
move that the bill be read a second time that day six
months.
Lord J. MANNERS seconded the amendment. He
believed that the present bill was entirely uncalled for,
and that the objects set forth in the preamble emit I not
be carried out. It was unreasonable on the part of those
mill-owners, who proposed to do;nothing to prevent the
number of accidents that so frequently occurred, t ask
the house to pass this • bill, which- would be to throw
back the factory legislation of the house. Entertaining
this feeling, he cordially concurred in the amendment of
the bon member opposite
Mr. T. M. GIBSON differed entirely from the h-m.
member who ha f just sat down. The effect
of the present measure would not throw back factory
legislation, but would only fully deve'ope the factory
act that had but lately been passed. The law was
very indefinite with respect to factory machinery,
but lately a decision had been taken which was consi-
dered to be definite on the point. By that decision it
was imperative for mill-owners in all cases to apply to
all machinery a secure fencing. Nov, what did
Mr. Horner say on this point! Why, he said to
fence in all parts of machinery was impossible
—you could not fence the drums of machinery. He
gave his cordial support to the bill, and he thought the.;
nothing but misrepresentation would prevent its receiv-
ing the sanction of the house.

Sir G. GREY argued that if it were fund that the pre-
sent law afforded sufficient protection to the operative
from danger by machinery, no relaxation of the law should
be sanctioned, butthere was evidently uncertainty arieing
out of the uncertainty of the provisions of the Fact)ry
Act, for which some remedy ought to be applied. On the
other hand, he was of opinion t'iat they should not hat-
tily take away from the operatives any safeguard
Which they now possessed. The danger referred to
did not appear to arise from the shafts of machinery ;
but the point at which accidents were' moot likely to
arise was the driving bands, and he was of opinion that
band fencing should c nue under the 43J sec. of the act,
which related to machinery He thought some settle-
ment of the law was absolutely necessary, and if the
hon. member would agree to certain modifications which
the Government would arrange with him, they were
willing to support the tootion for the second reading of
the bill.

Lord STANLEY, on the part of his hon. friend who
had introduced the bill, begged to say that the tnodifi
cations which the right hon. hart. who had just sat
down, had mentioned would be adopted. What toe sup-
porters of the measure contended was that there we=
nut sufEcivnt distinction between shafting and
other tna.chinvy to juitify its being placed in
i ffer en t positi ,ns in anlact of Parliament, and this would
be remedied by placing the shafting under the 431 sec.
Mr. HARDY opposed the measure. Inspectors had
been appointed to decide as to the fencing of mill gear-
ing, and be did not think that any advantage would be
gained by taking that power out of their hands and
g v ng it to arbi rators.
Mr. MUNTZ said this was a very important question.
It vas clear that the drums and horizontal shafts were
quite ok tof the re: ei of the law. It was impossible to
feiLce the drums without doing more harm than good.

Mr. CH EETHAM then made a few observations tri
:hi hou-e, and read an extract 'rom a paper which, be
stated, c mtained an account of the me tang ► eld be
the tdiort time committee shorty after Mr. Hot ner's
circular was issued, at which one of the spea'ers, a
pricti,-al working man, stated that if drums and shafts
situated above seven feet from ~;he ground were en-
closed, more harm than good would he the result.
Mr. PROT HERTON defended the bill.
Col, W PA. rTEN replied.
Cf,l. DUNNE, amidst cries of " Di:i le," rose, and
moved the a lj turnment sf the delate.
Mr. M. CHAMBERS t-e.tonded the motion for the
a,lj.turnment of the debate.
The hous the; (livid:A, when there appsarad—
For the aojourument of the debit, 9
Against it l9B
Majority
The SPEAKER then annouc that according to the
standing orde-s the debate mu-t be adjourned, it being
beyond a quarter to -ix o'clock.
NEW WRITS.'
On the motion of Mr. HAYFER, a new writ was
ordered to be issued for the election of a member for the
borough of Athlone, in place of the Hon. William
Keogh, who has accepted the office of one of the puisne
judges in Ireland.
A new writ was also issued for Ennis in place of Mr.
J. D. Fitzgerald who has accepted the office of Attor-
ney-,Genera f r Irelt ad.
The house then adjourned.

The Journal de Dresde mentions that some magni€.
cent horses, coming from Russia, and supposed to be a
present to the Emperor Napoleon, passed through that
city on the 25th.
The four colossal allegorical statues intended for the
Berlinand
middle roof of the new Museum at Berlin, and repre-
bs tni_Dg cast Airnt,
ziPnecacaet,
dFiffoerrtuennte,
foundries. They
will be (levered with a sandstone coloured paint; and
then be erected at once. The relieve for-the frontispiece,-
MOdelled by Prof, Kin, will Non be Swished.

MEDICAL REFORAL

Yesterday, a succession of deputations of gentlemen
of the medical profession, representing both the profes-
sion at large and several of the licensing corporate bodies',
waited on Sir George Grey and the President of the
Board of Health, at the Home-office, in reference to the
bill at present before Parliament on the subject of
medical reform, and which is better known as Mr.
Headlam'e Bill. The first deputation—that of the medical
graduates—was introduced by Mr. Grogan, M.P. Dr.
O'Connor explained that the members of the profession,
while they desired to see those portions of the bill which
would secure a uniform qualification throughout the
three kingdoms, and also a registration of those possessed
of that qualification, they were opposed to the mode in
which it was proposed to form a central representative
body, as it was their opinion that the clamourous moun-
tebank would, in the spirit of electioneering, be likely
to obtain a seat there before the man of real merit. They
also, in detail, objected to the amount of the registration
fee (101.) as excessive, and complained that the 21st
clause would exclude from practice all medical gra,luatcs
who were not licentiates or fellows of the College of
Physicians. They would propose an imperial council cif
12 members, nine to be appointed by Government, and
one by the suffrages of the licensing bodies in each of
the three kingdoms ; that of the nine appointed by Go-
vernment three shoul I be laymen, and the other six
medical men, equally selected from England, Ireland,
and Scotland. This imperial council should enforce the
education of candidates for the profession in medicine,
surgery, and pharmacy ; while local subordinate coml•
cils should superintend their examination in those
studies. Dr. Leet, of the Apothecaries' Company in
Ireland, on behalf of the licentiates of that body, corn-
plained that their existence was ignored by the bill.
The next deputation, that from the College of Sur-
geons, Edinburgh, was introduced by Mr. Blick, M.P.,
when Professor Syme, as spokesman, stated that they
were alt .gether opposed to the bill. They had the
same objections to the Central Council as the last
deputation, and complained that the bill, if passed
into law, would deprive the graduates of their college
of the right of practisii g, which had as yet never been
called in question. They also reprobated the division
of members of the profession into surgeons and physi•
cians, as in reality no such distinction exited. They
were all general practitioners. Mr. Black, M.P., also
introduced the deputation from the College of Physicians
of Edinburgh. Dr. LI. Begbie, the president of the col.
lege, stated in the main they approved of the bill, but
wished to see the portion of it relating to the council
altered. They thought that it should consist of net
more than 12 members, five from England, three from
Ireland, and three fram Scotland, with the President of
the Board of Health at its bead. They wished also to
-ee a separate registration kept in each portion of the
United Kingdom. They were favourable to the proposi-
tion of a second examination, on the principle that as
the first was conducted by those who were themselves
the teachers, it was open to objection. Each deputation
approved of the proposal that registration should en-
title the person registered to practise all over the em-
pire ; and on retiring expressed their acknowledgments
of the attention with which they had been listened to.

SISGULAR DETECTION OF ROBBERY
ON TILE MIDLAND RAILWAY.

The number of robberies which are known to take
place on the various railways of the country induce us
to give publicity to the following narrative, as proving
what may be done in their detection by well directed
energy and perseverance. Persons unacquainted with
the difficulty of obtaining evidence necessary for prose-
cution can have no idea of the difficulty of sustaining a
railway indictment. The number of miles to be travelled
--the variety of persons through whose hands the stolen
property may have passed, and all of whom may be
required as witnesses, render such a proceeding alike
expensive and tedious. It would appear that in the
early part of February last a railway servant named
William Godwin, acing in the capacity of porter for
the Midland Railway at Glocester, was detected in the
commission of an offence which led to the searching of
his house, and in which were discovered a quantity of
articles suspected to have been stolen from the com-
pany. There were no fewer than nine new carving
knives and forks, a quantity of ironmongery, and
other descriptions of wiscelisneous property. Among
these were found a very handsome sugar-basin, or, as the
trade call it, a sugar bor. This parti,ular article wa. a
certained to ha the manufacture of Messrs. Copeland
and Garrett, and of this pattern and number, strange
as it may appear, only bur were made or sent out.' The
one in question was soli to a firm in Worcester, the
second to a gentleman in Cheltenham, the third to a
China depot in Bath. and the fourth to Messrs. Child
and Co., of Edinburgh. The lady to whom it was
sold by the firm in Worcester letnoved in the early
part of 1853 to Bath, taking with her her china, plate,
glas<, &c. On the return of the family in June, 1854,
she gave directions that the china, together with other
things, should be returned via Gloucester to her h-tuse in
Worcestershire. At Gloucester the package containing
the sugar-box and the rest of the service of which it
formed a part sustained such damage as rendered its
detention necessary for repair=. Here it was Viat the
robbery was committtd, Godwin being one of the por-
ters engaged in the transshipment of that particular
package. Although the sugar box was missed by the
servant who unpacked the china, be concluded it had
been broken in use, and consequently no inquiry wa.-
made after it, so that its owner was not aware of
her loss until the box was shown her by the company's
police superintendent. The difficulties which interposed
at every step of this protracted investigation can scarcely
be conceived ; but they were overcome by the skill, tact,
and unwearied perseverance of Mr. Farmer, the super-
intendent of the detective police employed on the Mid
land line. A great many miles had to be travelled,
parties who had left their previous occupations had to
be seught out, books lug consigned to dust and for-
getfulness to be dragged to light, and the whole facts of
the case, in all their rainificati,ns, to he elicited and
woven int.) a chain of consecutive ev:deuce. All this
was accomplisheii by Mr. Farmer ,Tl, ,st satisfactorily.
The trial of Godwin took place at the Glocester session-
on Friday last, when the whole of the four saga,-b xcs
were produced in court, together with 23 witnesses
front various parts of the country, including p,reei s
from E inburgh, London, Newcastle, Bath, Cheltenham,
Worcester, Stoke-upon Trent, &c ; and after an inquiry
which lasted for several hours the prisoner was fon d
oiiity and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment with
hard labour. At the conclusion of the cause the chair-
man remarked upon the good which must necessarily
result from the present prosecution, and observed that,
heavy as was the expense, and enormous as had been
the trouble bestowed upon the getting up of the case, it
would show that for the future the Midland Railway
Coinp?ny would not suffer themselves to he robbed with
impunity. It is to be hoped that the spirited manner
in which the investigation has been conducted, and the
almost insurmountable eifficulties of the case surmounted,
will lead other railway establi,hmente to follow the ex.
ample of the Midland C.oupany. If such should be the
case we shall have to record fewer instances of raiiway
robberies than we have had to do for a long series of
years. It was stated in court that Mr. Superintmdent
Farmer bad travelled 1,900 miles in profe:utiou of his
inquiries.