In comparing these two cases-the lady's age being between 60 and 70 and the boy's about 7-the latter had the advantage of youth and a good constitution, the former had not. No improvement took place in her case while I used the wet dressing, but immediately I began the dry, healing took place. In regard to the grafting in the case of the boy, which was not tried in the other patient, no benefit I believe was derived from it.

The strength of the boracic acid lotion used was an ounce and a half to forty of water, first dissolved in several ounces of boiling water and put into a bottle that would take forty fluid ounces, and when required the whole shaken up, and the quantity to be used at dressing time heated, being more than a saturated solution.

CURRENT TOPICS.

TREATMENT OF FLOATING KIDNEY BY FIXATION.-We are informed that Dr. David Newman has performed, for the first time in this country, the operation of nephroraphy. The right kidney was exposed by a vertical incision in the loin, immediately external to the outer edge of the quadratus lumborum, and extending from the lowermost rib to the crest of the ilium. The capsule containing the kidney was then opened and stitched to the edges of the wound, and two catgut sutures were passed through the cortex of the kidney, the muscles, fascia, and skin, and secured externally by means of buttons. The operation was performed three weeks ago; the patient has now completely recovered from the effects of it, and the severe symptoms from which she previously suffered have entirely disappeared. Dr. Newman described the operation at the last meeting of the Pathological and Clinical Society, and will no doubt publish the case when the ultimate results of the operation are known.

TRENDELENBURG'S METHOD OF AMPUTATION AT THE HIP JOINT. In the American Medical Journal Dr. Varick of

Jersey City Hospital describes an amputation at the hip joint, which was successful mainly through the saving of blood by using Prof. Trendelenburg's method of preventing hæmorrhage. This method requires a flat steel rod a foot long and inch wide, with a movable lance-shaped point, the rod to be biconvex in section, of an inch thick in the middle, with blunt but smooth edges. This rod is thrust obliquely through the soft parts in front of the joint, in the same way as the twoedged knife in the well known method of Lisfranc, but nearly an inch higher. The rod enters 11⁄2 in. below the anterior superior spinous process of the ilium, passes between the femoral artery and the bone, and emerges at the fold of the scrotum. The point being removed, an elastic band is firmly wound figure-of-8 fashion around the projecting ends of the rod, compressing effectually the great vessels. Lisfranc's knife is then introduced a little below the rod, and by cutting from within outwards in the usual way the anterior flap is formed. The vessels being tied, the band and rod are removed and the joint disarticulated and the posterior flap formed. The patient made a good recovery.-Pacific Med. and Surg. Journal.

[In The American Journal of the Medical Sciences, vol. lxxxiii, p. 582, there will be found an almost exact copy of an item which appeared in our pages in February, 1882, in which the operation performed by Trendelenburg is described. In the same journal for October, 1882, Dr. Varick describes the operation performed by him, and in his paper transcribes the description from the former number of the American Journal. Dr. Varick does not appear to have seen Trendelenburg's original paper in the Archiv für Klin. Chirg., Bd. 26, H. 4, otherwise he would have known that Professor Trendelenburg does not claim the operation as his own, but acknowledges having received the idea of the operation, which he, however, modified slightly, from an article by Dr. David Newman, of Glasgow, which appeared in our pages in October, 1876.]

To the Editors of the "Glasgow Medical Journal.”

2 PARK TERRACE, QUEEN'S DRIVE, CROSSHILL, 16th April, 1883.

DEAR SIRS,-In your last issue appears a letter from Mr. Cadell, making correction of a statement contained in my paper on the "Treatment of Syphilis." The words repudi

ated by him do not appear in inverted commas in my paper, and therefore did not purport to be ipsissima verba, but to convey the general effect of his teaching. Nevertheless, I frankly regret that he should have found it necessary to take exception to my manner of putting the case, and acknowledge that a re-perusal of his paper justifies his contention that he did not put forth his views as those of the majority.

At the same time, I regret having to remove a misconception which Mr. Cadell himself has made. I do not think the language of my paper can be fairly interpreted to mean that I believe "mercury to be necessary to the healing of hard chancre" in all cases. I certainly did not mean to convey that idea, and none of the members of the Southern Medical Society (to whom the paper was originally read) derived that idea from it. What I contend is, that in the great majority of cases of typical hard chancre, the tendency is not towards spontaneous repair, but that it becomes the reverse whenever the patient is placed upon mercury. I believe this to be the rule, but I know there are exceptions to it, as there are to every rule. I have a patient presently under treatment who appears to have a hard chancre (according to him it did not appear till six weeks after connection, but by reason of its situation at the frænum, its typical features are somewhat modified) which is healing without mercury. But, at the same time, I have another whose sore was not healed at the end of nine months when he first came to me, cachectic, impotent, and covered with secondary eruptions; the sore yielded at once, and healed before the patient had taken 36 Plummer's pills, with a local dressing of iodoform vaseline.

I must also ask to be allowed to remark that I do not think the main question at issue, to wit, Whether syphilis can be cured without mercury? is one upon which we can agree to differ, as it is not a question of opinion, but a most important question of fact. If a patient suffering from syphilis can be cured, say within three years, without the use of mercury, then the fact ought to be demonstrated.

I am, dear Sirs, yours faithfully,

ROBT. PARK.

REVIEWS.

Anatomy, Descriptive and Surgical. By HENRY GRAY, F.R.S., with an Introduction on General Anatomy and Development. By T. HOLMES, M.A.Cantab. Tenth Edition. Edited by T. PICKERING PICK, Surgeon to St. George's Hospital. London: Longmans, Green & Co.

GRAY'S Anatomy has been long a favourite, and the appearance of a tenth edition, carefully revised, published by the same enterprising firm that gave to the world the other day a ninth edition of Quain's Anatomy, is proof enough that it continues to hold its ground, and that the publishers look on it as a valuable property worth conserving. We think that it deserves to hold its place, though even this new edition is far from perfect. For we must judge by comparison with other textbooks in the field; and truly we know not any work in the English language, nor any work at all, to which we can point, and tell the student that it is all that we could desire.

A textbook on anatomy should be concise, scientific, and complete; details should be stated with clear precision, and their bearing on morphological generalisation, on function, and on surgical or medical practice, should be indicated shortly in such a manner as to awaken the intelligent interest of the student, and help him onwards by fostering the conviction that the dead body can be made to live in the mind which earnestly studies it. For such a work we wait, and shall wait long.

Gray's Anatomy has the advantage of being in one volume, though the page is large, the type sufficiently small, and the thickness greater than we believe to be necessary for the scope. In fact, it is beyond all question exceedingly verbose. If we compare with the ninth edition of Quain, to which we have already referred, we shall find that the voluminous character of the latter depends mainly on a different cause-namely, the introduction of many things not even alluded to in such a work as Gray, not to mention an occasional unwise expatiation on trifles not necessary to the completeness of even a work that aims, as Quain's Anatomy does, at giving a full account of the state of the science at the present time. It is a delicate problem which presents itself to the intending purchaser who happens to turn up the second page of the advertisements bound up in the volume before us. There he finds the volume itself, or rather the previous edition, advertised, and immediately above it a two volume book at a

slightly higher figure; and a cursory inspection of the works themselves will show him that the two volume book professes to go a great deal deeper into the subject than the book in one volume; but that each is supposed to be fitted for its purpose, whatever that may be, and not considered by the publishers as likely to destroy the sale of the other.

Gray's Anatomy owes much of its popularity to its illustrations. They have been much found fault with as inartistic; but they have the advantage of being of large size, and students like them, and find them convenient. It is a serious fault, however, that the inartistic passes in many instances into the inaccurate. Thus, in fig. 363, the ascending colon is, at the lower part of the figure, represented as coming up from an unknown region and crossing the external iliac artery parallel to the ureter, while the spleen is shaped like an ear. Fig. 269 is said to represent the convolutions and fissures of the outer surface of the cerebral hemisphere; but, however well it may be adapted to enable a student to grind his way through an examination, it is such a diagram as Nature refuses to accommodate herself to in any circumstances of race or development; while the view of the island of Reil, in the following figure, is equally misleading. Many of the original representations of the bones we count as extremely good.

Reference is made very properly in a distinct footnote to the different view now taken of the position of the stomach from that which was formerly current, according to which its long diameter was held to be horizontal. But we cannot admit that the corrected view of the matter is so recent as the International Congress in London, as the note seems to indicate. It was pointed out by Luschka, in his Anat. des Menschen, twenty years ago, as is mentioned by Prof. Turner, in his Introduction to Human Anatomy, in which also he figures the stomach in the vertical position. For ourselves, we have never failed for many years past to observe that when the stomach is empty its lesser curve is vertical in at least twothirds of its extent. In the account of the mucous membrane of the stomach a serious error occurs, which does not look well for the author's personal acquaintance with the things which he describes. The description of the gastric glands is an account not of what is found in the human stomach, but of the glands of the dog's stomach, and the same remark holds good of the woodcuts showing the peptic and mucous glands; yet no intimation is given that it is not the human structure which is figured and described. We attract attention the more to this, because teachers are often very careless in allowing