A speech on medical reform, delivered by Lord Elcho, M.P. in the House of Commons, July 1, 1857, on the second reading of the Medical Profession Bill (No.1) : with appendix.

Wemyss, Francis Richard Wemyss-Charteris Douglas, 10th Earl of, 1818-1914.

Date:: 1857

Credit: A speech on medical reform, delivered by Lord Elcho, M.P. in the House of Commons, July 1, 1857, on the second reading of the Medical Profession Bill (No.1) : with appendix. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Glasgow Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Glasgow Library.

8/48 (page 6)

$consult in London with any of Her Majesty^s Physicians on the state of ller J\Iajcsty's health, he would render himself liable to prosecution by the London College of Physicians, who have by law a monopoly of practice in London and within a seven-mile radius. We, who live in the metropolis, are in fact the private property of the Royal College of Physicians; we are, as it were, a preserve kept up for their especial benefit, and London is their happy hunting-grounds.'^ Next, let me refer to the case of the London University. The Medical degree of the London University is, T believe, justly held to be one of the highest medical testimonials in Europe; yet the holder of that degree, although thereby entitled to practise in the rest of England, is prohibited from practising in London, the very place where the University is situated from which his degree is obtained. The third absurd anomaly to which I would call attention is the simple fact, that the Archbishop of Canterbury possesses the power of granting medical degrees without any previous examina- tion whatever. The honourable Member for Finsbury has quoted the analogy of the hackney-cabmen with respect to registration. I would venture to follow up the figure, and saj^, that the present state of the law with regard to the ]\Iedical Profession is as absurd as if the cabmen in Palace Yard, with certain badges round their necks, could only convey gentlemen to Belgrave Square, and that those who wanted to go to Hanover Square must procure a cab from some other quarter. So far from wishing to rival my honourable friend as a Medical Reformer it will be sufficient to state, that when my honourable friend gave notice of his Bill, I asked him if it were the same as that which was reported to the House by the Select Committee on which we both sat last Session, stating, that if it were so, any sort of assistance which I could give him was at his service; and it was only upon finding that his Bill was not the amended Bill of the Committee, but the very same Bill, with the exception of some alteration in the constitution of the Council, which he had brought in at the commencement of 1856, that I determined to oppose it. I do not pretend to be more practical than other men, but I venture to think that if we wish to pass a good measure of Medical Reform, the practical$