Tributes 



schmidt, to prove their point about the value of bleeding in gas 

 poisoning, which was at that time so controversial. I can still see 

 Barcroft trying to find out whether our tobacco smoke (a liquid particle) 

 would go through the respirator then in use. It was at the time the 

 irritant smokes were brought out by the enemy ; the smoke did go 

 through that respirator. It was great fun acting as Adjutant, and one 

 thing has not been said about the experiment with hydrocyanic acid ; 

 he did it after we had all left one night, with the help of a corporal whom 

 I had brought from the 60th Rifles, called Carlile, who was a grand 

 fellow and had been a stretcher bearer. I think that Barcroft must 

 have thought we might have tried to stop him. We were just a little 

 upset that he had done it in this way, but quite understood why. 



There were other things about him that were very characteristic — 

 sometimes a little difficult. The head of the station was very orderly — 

 Barcroft not always so. Sometimes the files from the Physiological 

 Department would mysteriously disappear ; they would be off in the 

 bag when he was examining in Ireland. I would be rung up by head- 

 quarters and asked for papers, and the file was not there. One had to 

 hedge until the files came back, which they always did in the end. 



As far as capacity for committee work was concerned I can remember 

 him a year before World War II coming into my laboratory. At that 

 time he was trying to get people to say they would be reserved for work 

 in World War II. He told me incidentally that he was devoting much 

 of his time to getting shells and fuses put together, because apparently 

 things had got behind. This direct attention to the main point, what- 

 ever this might be, was a well marked characteristic of his mental 

 elasticity. 



Latterly there was his interest in the Nutrition Society, which owes 

 an enormous amount to his drive and enterprise. 



He disliked working in busy fields. This was connected with his 

 originality ; if any subject got really busy, I think that he enjoyed 

 going off into something new. I do not think that those of us who had 

 the privilege of knowing him all this time, probably had anyone to 

 whom they could go and be so certain that they would get honest advice. 

 You knew that if you went to him and asked for an opinion, he would 

 give his view whether you agreed with it or not. You always knew 

 one thing also, that what you said to him would never get away. This 

 was a very important point in having Barcroft as a friend. Then, of 

 course, there was his capacity for keeping whole audiences intensely 

 amused. I can remember one incident in Oxford. It must have been 

 in 1927-28, when he came and talked to us about haemoglobin, and the 

 ' span ' in Angstrom units. I had the Regius Professor of Medicine, 

 Sir Archibald Garrod, next to me. As happens in an after-dinner society 



22 



