PROPOSED AMALGAMATION OF MEDICAL SOCIETIES. 63 
seemingly anomalous conclusion that the amalgamation 
would not economise the expenses of working the different 
sections’ of the amalgamated Society if the existing rate of 
expenditure for the publication of transactions was to be 
continued. Indeed, upon this the probable income, he con- 
cluded, would not meet the expenses of the amalgamated 
Society. This result was obtained by excluding all doubt- 
ful sources of income, and possibilities of an increased 
number of members ; and by assuming that the subscription 
to each section would be a guinea, without entrance-fee. 
The important question of the maintenance of the library 
was left out of the calculation. A special, but optional, subscrip- 
tion of two guineas for the library would be called for, so 
far as at present can be seen, to keep it in its integrity, 
and maintain a proper rate of increase. 
The immediate cause of Dr. Greenhow's statement had 
been the requirement of the Pathological Society that the 
accustomed expenditure of the society for the transactions 
should be provided for. Assuming that the number of 
members of the different sections would not diminish after 
amalgamation of the societies, Dr. Greenhow expressed the 
opinion that three-fourths of each section's special income 
would meet the difficulty raised by the Pathological Society, 
and he made a motion for the alteration of Resolution XXI 
for the suggested scheme to that effect. The motion was 
withdrawn for the time being, as the delegates of the Patho- 
logical Society accepted the conclusion of Dr. Greenhow 
provisionally ; and the committee then proceeded to consider 
the resolutions adopted by the Medico-Chirurgical Society 
seriatim. 
The first resolution, reciting the advisability of amalga- 
mation, was passed over, as having been determined by the 
different societies sending delegates in the affirmative. On 
the second resolution — the designation and classification of 
the different sections — Dr. Tyler Smith, supported by Dr. 
Barnes and Dr. Graily Hewitt, took exception to the 
junction of medicine and surgery^ in one section. The 
objection was one of pocket rather than principle. It ran to 
the effect that an injustice would be done to obstetrics if 
the two subjects of medicine and surgery were to be combined 
into one section, with a guinea subscription, while obstetrics 
with its one subject was also to have a subscription of one 
guinea. Either obstetrics was made too dear, or medicine 
and surgery too cheap. A motion to the effect that medicine 
and surgery should be separated into different sections was, 
however, negatived unanimously, the delegates for obstetric 
