May 22, 1903.] 



SCIENCE. 



803 



takings of this lusty educational giant. 

 But to ensure the permanent publication 

 of the 'Index Medicus' the profession must 

 show that it really values this generous 

 gift. Unless the 'Index' finds a hearty 

 support in the profession abroad and espe- 

 cially at home, we can hardly expect the 

 continued publication of this unique and 

 invaluable publication. May I earnestly 

 ask, therefore, of this audience of the chief 

 medical authors of the United States that 

 each one will demonstrate his appreciation 

 by an immediate subscription to the ' Index 

 Medicus. ' 



There are some matters common both to 

 the medical college and the hospital which 

 may be considered together. The most 

 important of all these is the cordial and 

 hearty cooperation of the medical men con- 

 nected with the college or hospital and the 

 boards of trustees. In order to ensure this 

 the members of each body must be ac- 

 quainted with each other. I have known 

 of instances in which if a professor in the 

 medical school ventured to suggest any 

 changes as to its management, or even to 

 state his opinion as to the qualifications of 

 a candidate for a vacant professorship, his 

 suggestions were resented as an interfer- 

 ence instead of being welcomed as a means 

 of valuable information. I take it for 

 granted that we should not offer such sug- 

 gestions after the fashion of a partisan 

 either of a man or a measure, for the ad- 

 vancement of a friend or to the disadvan- 

 tage of an enemy, but solely for the good 

 of the- institution with which we are con- 

 nected. He who would endeavor to foist a 

 friend upon an institution because he is a 

 friend, and in spite of the fact that a rival 

 is the abler man and better fitted for the 

 position, is just as false to his duty to his 

 college or to his hospital, as the trustee 

 who would vote for the less desirable man 

 on the ground of personal friendship or of 



association in some society, church or other 

 similar body. Of all these influences, that 

 arising from membership in the same re- 

 ligious body is, I fear, the most frequent 

 and yet most absolutely indefensible. What 

 one's theological opinions are has no more 

 to do with his qualification for a profes- 

 sional or hospital appointment than his 

 opinions on protection as against free 

 trade, or whether Bacon or Shakespeare 

 wrote Hamlet. 



I have always honored one of a board of 

 trustees, who was an old personal friend 

 of my father's and who had known me 

 from boyhood, yet who in my early profes- 

 sional career, when I asked for his vote 

 for an important hospital appointment, 

 had the manly courage to tell me that he 

 thought a rival, who was older and more 

 experienced, was the better man for the 

 place and that he should, accordingly, vote 

 for him and not for me. I confess it was 

 at the time a bitter disappointment to me, 

 but I never had so high an opinion of my 

 father's" friend as after he denied me his 

 vote. 



There should be, in my opinion, but two 

 q^^estions asked in considering the election 

 of either a professor or a hospital physi- 

 cian or surgeon. First, which one of the 

 candidates for the place has the best quali- 

 fications from the medical point of view? 

 This should include not only his scientific 

 knowledge, but his ability practically to 

 impart or to apply that knowledge. Sec- 

 ondly, are his personal qualifications and 

 character such as to make him a desirable 

 incumbent of the position? It must be 

 remembered that a man may be scientific- 

 ally and practically an extremely able 

 man, but of such a quarrelsome disposi- 

 tion, or the unfortunate possessor of some 

 other similar personal disqualification, as 

 to make him a most undesirable member 

 of a staffr The personal equation may be 



