Imágenes de páginas

with the after condition of the patient; the signs of recovery and the treatment to be adopted in case of pallor, feebleness of pulse, vomiting, &c., are briefly considered.

Altogether Dr. Hewitt's book is a valuable contribution to the already rich library devoted to the subject of anesthesia and anæsthetics.

Special Correspondence.


THAT much-maligned individual, "the printer," is responsible for an error in my last month's note regarding a method of obtaining a good hold for the cement in fixing inlays. By an unfortunate slip "silex" read "silver." Of course, by the method adopted, the tiny ball of silex placed on the floor of the matrix is, after baking, washed out, leaving a stud-head depression in the inlay; and as Mr. Rippon pointed out in giving the "tip,” the dangers and difficulties of cutting with diamond discs are avoided.


An Interesting Point in Operative Treatment of Empyema of the Antrum of Highmore.

In a paper read before the Odontological Society of New South Wales, reported in the Australasian Journal of Dentistry, Mr. J. Houghton Bradley raises a point which he says he can find no reference to in surgical authorities dealing with this branch of practice. After remarking upon the causes of antral empyema and tracing the distribution of nerves, &c., in the region of the antrum, he says:

"It will be obvious, after this description, that in opening into the antrum through the canine fossa, the middle superior dental, or at least that portion of the superior dental plexus supplying the bicuspids, is severed, thus depriving these teeth of their main nerve and blood supply.

"There seem strong a priori reasons for supposing that such an injury to a nerve would be followed by grave disaster to the teeth. The result of severance of the pulp from its nerve supply is, as we know, degeneration and ultimate death. In the present case the bicuspids would be the teeth to suffer. Should death occur, we must then expect, in many cases, pericementitis and abscess to supervene. If suppuration sets in, it seems possible that sometimes pus may find its way into the antrum through the floor, which is perhaps weakened

by long standing inflammatory conditions, and so presumably retard or prevent the cure of the disease. Or, even short of this, the presence of an alveolar abscess in close proximity would seem likely to keep up a reflex irritation in the antrum, tending to prevent or delay the natural healing or cure of the disease conditions therein existing. If it be true that some such causes as these, direct or reflex, are indeed sometimes sufficiently potent to excite inflammation in a previously healthy antrum-and some think that this is the most frequent of all causes of antral inflammation-it is by so much the more likely to have a detrimental influence on the health of an already diseased sinus."

Correspondence between a Member of the Association and the

Hon. Secretary.

We have been requested by Mr. Frederick Page to publish the following correspondence between himself and the Hon. Secretary of the Association with regard to an advertisement issued by an unqualified and unregistered practitioner. The question at issue appears to be whether in such cases a member should be called upon to render individual assistance to the officers of the Association further than drawing attention to the advertisement. No doubt there is a good deal to be said on both sides; opinions differ on all subjects under the sun, happily for the world, but we can see no reason why Mr. Page should consider it hopeless to expect the Association to adopt a proceeding simply because it is a "business-like" one. That is a suggestion which is not altogether justified by past experience.


DEAR SIR,-I am forwarding by same post marked copy of the East of Fife Record, under date September 6, 1901. You will note the advertisement is by one who is unqualified and unregistered, and I shall be glad to hear that action will be taken to prevent an increase of such cases.

6, Hope Street,

Charlotte Square, Edinburgh.

September 9, 1901.

I am,
Yours sincerely,


DEAR SIR, I beg to acknowledge your communication of the 9th inst. Regarding the person therein referred to, I shall esteem it a favour if you will, as nearly as you can, answer the following questions, and add any further information concerning him which may be within your knowledge. When filled in be kind enough to forward this paper to J. G. S. Angus, Esq., the Hon. Secretary of the Scottish Branch, at 256, Bath Street, Glasgow, and oblige, Yours truly, (Signed) W. H. DOLAMORE, Hon. Sec. B.D.A.

British Dental Association,

32, Leicester Square, London, W.C.

(1) Christian and surnames and address at full length. '

(2) Is he, or has he ever been, on the Dentists' or Medical Register?

(3) Give any title, professional or other, by which he designates himself. For example: does he call himself a dentist, or does he use any letters in any way associated with his name which may lead the public to believe that he is a duly qualified dentist?

(4) How or when is the distinguishing title or letters used? On a doorplate? or a card? or in an advertisement, or directory? Please send copy of such door-plate, and, if possible, a card, advertisement, and a copy of directory.

(5) How long has he been located in his present residence?

(6) Can you ascertain his previous place of abode, and if he were in practice in that place?

(7) Is he in practice alone, or is he, or has he been, associated with another registered practitioner? If the latter, give, if possible, the name of the other gentleman.

(8) Are you prepared to appear as a witness, and what other witnesses can you bring to give evidence in case of a prosecution being commenced?




DEAR SIR. I have duly received a printed communication and schedule of questions in reply to my letter of September 9, with which I forwarded copy of the East of Fife Record, containing an advertisement concerning an unqualified and unregistered man, and presumably inserted by him.

Please observe that the answers to questions 1, 2, 3 and 4 can be supplied by reference to the advertisement. With regard to the questions 5 and 6, I will remark that they appear to me somewhat irrelevant and beside the mark. If such information is really required in view of a prosecution the lawyer in charge of the case is the proper person to get and produce it. I cannot supply the information sought in question 7, and I have neither the time or the inclination to act the amateur private detective in order to obtain it.

Regarding question 8, if you will kindly indicate the facts to which you expect me to depone, I shall consider whether I would appear as a witness, but I shall reserve my decision until after precognition by the agent for the prosecution. The bringing of other witnesses is entirely without my province-it is the duty of the prosecution.

If the British Dental Association demands that all the preliminary investigation and collection of evidence should be done by a private individual totally unskilled in such work, before it takes any steps to prevent or procure the punishment of a flagrant breach of the law, it assumes a position which will induce most of its members to conclude that it is desirous of shirking its duty to the profession, and proclaiming its own impotence.

If it be the wish of the Association to burke any and every enquiry, I can conceive nothing more admirably adapted to that end than the printed circular and schedule of questions which are truly calculated to disgust any member who takes the trouble, as I did, to supply what should be quite good and sufficient primâ facie evidence of illicit practices.

I shall forward our correspondence to the Editor of the JOURNAL OF THE BRITISH DENTAL ASSOCIATION for publication.

6, Hope Street, Edinburgh,

October 1, 1901.


I am, dear Sir,

Yours sincerely,


DEAR SIR,-In reply to your letter of the 1st inst., I do not think you quite realise the idea of the form I sent you in reply to your previous letter, in accordance with custom. It is assumed that if a member takes the trouble to send primâ facie evidence against an illegal practitioner, he would not object to answer such of the questions on the form as he is able to; moreover, it suggests that it should be sent to your Branch Secretary, who would probably submit it to his Council, some of whom, being resident in the district might supply further evidence. All this might, as you suggest, be left to our lawyers, but I need not remind you that if this course were adopted in all cases sent up (most of which present equal primâ facie evidence) the cost would be very large. Hence, in the interest of the Association, that is of ourselves, (you, I, and other members), it has seemed desirable to collect as much preliminary evidence as possible.

It is obvious that our strength or impotency will depend on the willingness or otherwise of the members to help.

British Dental Association,

I am, dear Sir,

32, Leicester Square, London, W.C.,
October 7, 1901.

Yours faithfully, (Signed) W. H. DOLAMORE.


DEAR SIR, I have to thank you for your reply to my letter of October 1. It is possible that I do not quite realise the idea of the printed form, although I do not think it should be beyond my capacity. But the idea that I want the Association (¿.e., you, me and the other members) to realise is very distinct in my mind. It is this. That, whether the framers and issuers of the form know it or not, the form deters and disgusts those who would gladly aid the Association in the work of repressing illicit practice.

You say most of the complaints sent in contain primâ facie evidence of illegal practices. "According to custom" a form is issued to every person sending in such evidence. The Executive of the Association probably plume themselves on the fact that the forms issued are either not returned or are returned insufficiently filled in, and in consequence very few of the cases are proceeded with. But if they were in earnest in the matter they would recognise what the bulk of the profession have long since realised, that to evade the responsibility which rests on the Association, by placing on the shoulders of private members the burden of getting up a case, is a dereliction of duty.

A man joins an Association in the expectation that certain duties of a public nature, including the prosecution of quacks, will be performed by the Association. He draws the attention of the Association to a flagrant case, he receives a form, and finds that he must "get up" a case before the Association will take any action in the matter. The impression left on his mind is that the Associa

tion having burnt its fingers badly in several mismanaged cases, does not want to have anything more to do with the enforcement of the Penal Clauses of the Dentists Act.

If he is a business man, the futility of the printed form strikes him very forcibly, for he knows that any information he can give is quite valueless as evidence, and that before a case can be brought into Court it must be verified in every particular by the lawyer in charge of the case. Further, he knows that the last witness a clever lawyer wants in such a case is a dentist, especially one residing in the same locality as the culprit, as the appearance of a rival, though regular, practitioner in the box, always allows an opportunity which the counsel for the defence will not be slow to take advantage of for the assertion that jalousie de metier is the motive for the prosecution.

In my own case perhaps you will allow me to describe the official course. I happen to be convener of the East District Committee of the Scottish Branch, and as such may claim to have shown my willingness to contribute by any help in my power to the potency of the Association. I do as you suggest, fill up the form and forward it to the Council of the Scottish Branch. A month or two elapse, the form is brought before the Conncil, and remitted back to the East District Committee with instructions to collect more information, but not to incur any expense. The Committee collect what information they can at their own expense, and send in a report to the Council of the Scottish Branch. More months elapse; a matter of such importance is probably postponed to the Annual Meeting. Let us take the most cheerful view and assume that the Scottish Branch determines to recommend the Association to prosecute. The whole question is again debated by that august body, their decision is on the knees of the gods.

In the meantime the offender has got wind of the affair, withdraws his advertisement, or moves on to a new pitch, or having made his pile retires to enjoy his otium cum dignitate, with his pictures, Louis Quinze furniture and well stocked cellar, to excite the envy of struggling young members of the British Dental Association.

You will perhaps desire to know if I have any course to suggest alternative to the circular-issuing one, which I condemn as inept and inoperative. I would have in connection with each large Branch, or combination of smaller branches a Vigilance Committee. To this Committee should be remitted the consideration of all breaches of the Act of which information might be laid. The Committee should consist of not less than three or more than five meinbers. They should be empowered to engage a legal adviser to act as Secretary at a small honorarium. They should be empowered to sit in camera to collect and sift evidence, and having, with the assistance of their legal Secretary, prepared a case, they should submit the case to the standing counsel of the Association, and the Association should then be bound by his advice to abandon or proceed with the case.

The legal secretary of the Vigilance Committee would conduct the prosecu tion. But this would be a business-like proceeding, and it is perhaps hopeless to expect its adoption by the British Dental Association.

6, Hope Street, Charlotte Square,


October 27, 1901.

I am, dear Sir,

Yours sincerely,


« AnteriorContinuar »