534s ANOMALOUS STATE OF MEDICAL LAW. 
of Dr. Smith, we do not hesitate to express our conviction 
that it was more surgical than medical. Why was not 
Mr. Cary prepared with evidence upon this point? True, 
his own opinion was given, and surely it was as much entitled 
to respect as that of Dr. Smith. But who can consistently 
uphold a law which admits of distinctions without differences, 
and permits of the grossest anomalies and absurdities ? Now, 
observe, there are nineteen bodies in the United Kingdom 
which grant diplomas or licences to practice. A practitioner 
may hold diplomas from eighteen of these without having the 
legal right of prescribing and dispensing a single dose of 
medicine in what is called a “ medical” case in England or 
Wales. Now there is no clear or defined limit between 
medicine and surgery. No one can state explicitly where one 
begins and the other leaves off. “ Physicians” constantly 
treat “ surgical” cases. The practice of some 66 surgeons” is 
almost exclusively “ medical.” Dr. Smith may regard a cer- 
tain case as strictly medical, Mr. Jones will equally insist 
that it is strictly surgical. Is this a proper state of things ? 
But this is not the worst. For although a person may hold 
eighteen of the nineteen diplomas alluded to, and yet not be 
able to prescribe and dispense a single dose of medicine in a 
medical case, he may hold not one of them — he may never 
have attended a course of lectures —he may never have had a 
knife in his hand, and yet he may call himself “surgeon.” Not 
only may he do this with impunity, but he may practise as a 
surgeon, and he may recover at law for services rendered 
by him in that capacity. Nay, w T ith impunity he may style 
himself doctor, professor, or physician, and practise in any 
and every case, so long as he does not dispense his own medi- 
cine ; for it is well known that the College of Physicians 
never prosecute. And yet such a system as this meets with 
admiring though interested supporters ! If complaints are 
made against certain persons who prosecute a duly- qualified 
surgeon, their answer is, he is breaking the law. If remon- 
strated with on the injustice of selecting a qualified prac- 
titioner as a victim instead of a quack and an impostor, the 
answer still is, he is practising illegally. But what is the value 
of a law which admits of the absurdities and anomalies we 
have referred to ? Clearly, that though it may have conferred 
many benefits on the profession in times gone by, that it is 
most unfitted for the present day, and calculated to inflict 
great injustice upon many. A change is demanded. A 
change which shall not make the education or examination of 
a medical practitioner more restricted, but one that shall 
render it compulsory for every one who undertakes to cure 
