MEDICAL LEGISLATION. 
395 
Mr. Wharton Jones’s intention has been good ; but we 
cannot speak with very high praise of his performance. 
Indeed, we feel that, as an acknowledged physiologist of 
excellent repute, he has not on this occasion sufficiently 
guarded his well-earned fame. Idis Catechism is totally 
deficient in that indispensable adjunct to a popular work on 
physiology — representations of the things described ; for 
anatomy and physiology cannot be usefully taught by words 
alone. For our own part, moreover, we object altogether to 
the system of instruction by catechisms, as one fitted for 
implanting in the mind of the learner words rather than know- 
ledge, and set phrases rather than ideas . — Sanitary Review. 
MEDICAL LEGISLATION, AND THE PRINCIPLES WHICH 
OUGHT TO REGULATE IT. 
Mr. Thomas Duncombe has in some degree simplified 
the question of medical reform. Although the avowed 
object of his bill, as stated in the title and preamble, differs 
from that of the usual medical bills, the tendency is in the 
same direction, so far as relates to the important feature of 
establishing a register of all qualified practitioners. The 
customary aim of medical reformers is the restraint and 
punishment of unqualified persons, the protection of the 
public by the aid of the medical corporations against the 
mischief of quackery, and the protection of legitimate and 
recognised practitioners, by privileges having the nature of a 
monopoly. 
Mr. Duncombe entitles his bill “ A Bill to define the 
Rights of Members of the Medical Profession, and to protect 
the Public from the abuses of Medical Corporations.” 
He commences his preamble thus: “ Whereas, it is expe- 
dient that every person should be at liberty to obtain medical 
or surgical aid wherever such person may wish, and that 
persons desiring such aid should be enabled to distinguish 
qualified from unqualified practitioners. Be it therefore 
enacted,” &c. 
From this introduction it would appear that the author of 
the bill is in favour of absolute “free trade” in medicine and 
surgery, with the simple condition that the patient shall not 
be imposed upon by persons practising under false preten- 
sions. If this point were conceded literally, and to the full 
extent, the propensity of the public for the marvellous w T ould 
be even more than it is at present a source of profit to the 
