AT

British Journal of Dental Science.

LONDON, MARCH 15, 1881.

Ar page 299 of this number will be found a remarkable letter written by a gentleman who has the right to sign himself L.D.S.I. As he admits towards the end of his epistle, his subject has already been treated of almost ad nauseam in the pages of this Journal, and although we might have inserted his letter as being somewhat of a curiosity, we should not have thought it worthy of editorial notice were it not that we believe that it expresses, though in a very exaggerated and unreasonable style, a feeling which finds some place in the minds of many members of the profession. We all remember with what a flourish of trumpets the passing of the Dental Act was hailed. There was good reason for this; it was certainly "a great triumph," it did "mark the commencement of a new era in the history of the profession," in fact the occasion deserved all, or nearly all, that was said about it. But unfortunately people in general do not seem to have realised the fact that the Act would only take effect gradually and almost imperceptibly. They appear to have jumped to the conclusion that it would at once cause a revolution in the profession, and that its benefits would be immediately apparent. And now when nearly three years have elapsed since the passing of the Act, and when quackery, so far from being effaced, appears to be more rampant than ever, the late unfortunate decision of the Medical Council has caused in some quarters a sudden revulsion of feeling, and men are trying to persuade themselves that, as the Act has not done what they chose to expect that it would do, it has done nothing, and will do nothing.

To proceed to answer "Diomede's" letter in detail would be an insult to the common sense of our readers. Some of his remarks, as, for instance, that about the necessity of chemists

EDITORIAL ARTICLE.

practising Dentistry, are pure nonsense; so we will confine ourselves to the last paragraph.

"Diomede," and others like him, fall into the mistake of looking at the subject solely from their own point of view. But let us put the case a little differently. Suppose that the medical profession had brought forward a Bill restricting the practice of Dentistry to legally qualified surgeons and suppose that the Bill had passed, what would "Diomede" have said? Why, that it was a case of gross injustice, robbery, and confiscation. And our Bill would have been equally unjust if it had not contained provisions for securing to all any right of which they had already possessed themselves. The "members of foreign professions" &c., had been in the habit of performing Dental operations, not from any public necessity, but from choice and for profit, and to have deprived them suddenly of this liberty without adequate compensation would have been robbery and confiscation.

The Bill could only be passed by a series of compromises, and powerful opposition had to be bought off by suitable concessions. That the Act is perfect no one has ventured to assert, but that it is, taking it altogether, the best that could be obtained under the circumstances we firmly believe. That its immediate effects have been bad is true. It has raised up

a most astonishing array of Dental quacks. These men have pushed themselves forward into unaccustomed publicity, partly from a desire to secure their position on the Register by making an evident display of "bonâ fide practice,” and partly in the expectation that their position on the Register would itself prove a sure stepping-stone to fortune. The decision of the Medical Council has now relieved their minds in one respect, whilst as to the other we fear that the majority must have been bitterly disappointed, and as their capital becomes expended and their credit exhausted, they will gradually take in their gaudy signs and show cases, and will return to their workrooms and chemists' shops, poorer and possibly wiser men.

Before the passing of the Act there was no limit to the number of these pretenders; now there is a strict limit. We knew the worst on August 1st, 1879, we have seen the worst

since. As Professor Turner remarked at the dinner of the Odonto-Chirurgical Society, time will of itself rapidly cure the evil which the Dental Act was passed to cure, but which it has temporarily tended to aggravate.

All this seems so trite and stale that we are almost ashamed to print it; but men, when suddenly disappointed of some pet hope, are apt to turn tail like sheep, and rush blindly into the depths of pessimism. We are quite willing to believe that "Diomede " is, under ordinary circumstances, a man of good common sense and sound judgment, though one would not think it from his letter, and that even in his present bereft condition he is no worse than many of his neighbours and possibly better than some. We call upon all such not to give way to unreasonable fits either of panic or of temper, but to think over the matter calmly, and they cannot fail to appreciate the good which the Act has already done, especially in the impetus which it has given to Dental education, and to have faith in the still greater benefits which must accrue from it in the not very distant future.

Literary Notices and Selections.

THE DENTISTS AND THE COUNCIL.

It is only fair to the Medical Council, when considering the unsatisfactory position in which Dental registration now stands, to remember that the Dentists themselves have brought the trouble upon their own shoulders, although probably they can shelter themselves under the plea of defective legal advice. The resolution adopted by the Medical Council on the subject, on the motion of Dr. Quain and Dr. Pitman, was: "That, with reference to the Lord President's Bill, entitled Medical Act (1858) Amendment Bill, as ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on June 13th, 1878,' the Council desires to express its wish that the Bill entitled the Dental Practitioners' Bill be brought into conformity with the Dental clauses of the Lord

VOL. XXIV.

19

;

President's Bill." Now, if the Lord President's Bill (No. 216, 1878, House of Lords) be referred to, it will be seen that the registration clause ran as follows:-"If a scheme for the examination, licensing, and registration, under the control of the General Medical Council, of Dentists is submitted to the General Medical Council by any corporation, persons, or person, the General Medical Council may, if they think fit, submit such scheme to the Privy Council; and such scheme, when approved by the Privy Council, shall have effect as part of this Act, subject to being from time to time revoked, altered, and added to, by any subsequent scheme submitted by the General Medical Council to, and approved by, the Privy Council." It is obvious that, under these ample provisions, the Dental Association would have had the power of preparing a satisfactory scheme, excluding improper persons, and settling suitable schedules and forms which scheme could have been thoroughly, carefully, and deliberately considered, and would have provided against the unpleasant circumstances which have now occurred. Instead of this, they adopted a scheme suggested by the clauses of the Medical Act of 1858-an Act which has had to be repeatedly amended, and which has never proved satisfactory in working. The General Medical Council have acted, in their interpretation of the clause, on a case drawn by the most eminent solicitors in London, and on the opinion of the law officers of the Crown. It is not easy to see how they could go beyond or behind the powers thus defined for them, nor to blame them if the instrument put into their hands has been thus defective. It is quite true that the President of the General Medical Council might have opposed the Bill actually passed, and caused its rejection, on the ground that it did not accord with the terms of the resolution of the General Medical Council; and we regret that he did not do so. It is impossible, however, severely to blame any medical person for not foreseeing difficulties which were neither foreseen by Mr. Tomes and his friends, nor by the draftsman who, acting for them and for the Government, prepared the Bill as it stands. Exaggerated blame, where none is fairly due, is short-sighted policy, as all forms of injustice are in the end. The sins and imperfections of the General Medical Council are enormous enough, and it has fallen already into a stage of discredit and decrepitude; but in this matter we are unable to say that it deserves many of the bitter reproaches which are urged against it in this particular respect. We may say the same as to the schedule of additional qualifications. The Council was anxious to have a schedule of additional qualifications, and framed one with a

column for the purpose; it was only upon the advice of the present Mr. Justice Bowen that no such column could properly be added, under the provisions of the Act, that they reluctantly withdrew it. Here, again, the fault is not with the Council, but with the draftsman; and Mr. Tomes, Sir John Lubbock, and their legal advisers, are the persons who were at fault, if any one, in the matter.

The above appeared in the British Medical Journal' of February 26th, and on March 5th appeared the following reply, written by Mr. Tomes.

SIR,-Owing to a partial examination and quotation of the minutes of the Medical Council, the article under the above heading in last Saturday's journal attaches unmerited blame to Sir John Lubbock, the Dentists, myself, and our legal advisers. In justification of the accused I must beg you will allow me to extract the following quotations from the Council's minutes :

Antecedent to Dr. Quain's motion (printed in the article) to the effect that the Dentists' Bill should be made conformable with the Dental section of the Government Medical Bill, the Council had passed the following resolution respecting the clause, for the omission of which in the Dentists Act we are blamed:

"Moved by Dr. Rolleston, seconded by Mr. Bradford, and agreed to: That it is not desirable that the Medical Council should be required to undertake to originate a new scheme of examination rules-Section (1) of Clause 23—but that it should be entrusted with some such supervisory power as regards the educational details from time to time proposed by the medical authorities authorised in the Duke of Richmond's Bill as it already exercises with regard to other examinations.'" (Minutes of Medical Council, April 13th, 1878.)

When the Medical Bill reappeared before the Council in July the Dental section remained, but, having become a dead letter, was not rediscussed. The clause objected to in April had in the interval received an addition whereby other bodies or persons might propose "schemes" for the consideration of the Council, but all questions relating to registration were governed by Clause (6) of the section, and put beyond the reach of "schemes." The following extract from the Council's minutes shows that the Government had determined to withdraw the Dental section from the medical, and to embody its provisions in the Dentists' Bill. In fact, the amendments necessary to its embodiment had been prepared by the Government draftsman before the Dentists'