ALLEGED QUACKERY.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2078, 2 January 1908, Page 4

ALLEGED QUACKERY.

am. LABOUCIIERE AND TIIE DROUET INSTITUTE. . IMPORTANT MEDICAL EVIDENCE. It may bo mnenibored that somo i time buck n certain l)r. Darkhyl, for- • merly connected with the “Dronet > Institute,” brought ail action for libel against Mr. Labouchoro as pro- , priotor of “Truth” for calling him I a “quiiVk.” He obtained a vorl diet, but aii-. Labouchoro appealed • and got a new trial, which was held . earli in November. Some of the pro- > feedings have been extremely divert- -- iug. 1 Sir Victor Horsley, the eminent physician, Mas the chief witness for 1 Mr. Laboucliere. Ho told tho Court > that he bad read all the questions ■ sent out to patients by tho Dronet ‘ Institute. • Mr. Bankes, K.C., asked: Assuming that those questions were caro- ’ fully answered, in your opinion would ' it bo possible to arrive at a reliable i diagnosis of the patient’s case?— , “No,” replied Sir Victor., . "Would it in your opinion bo safo to attempt to do so?—No. Would it bo proper on the part [ of a medical man to attempt to treat i patients by correspondence ?-—No, certainly not. And assuming that any medical man on llie register attempted to treat by correspondence, what would the result bv, to him?—He would certainly find himself before the General Medical Board. Mr. Justice Darling: What could they do to him?—They could strike him off the register. In your opinion is that all they could do?—lt depends upon the circumstances of the case. “One question, please,!’ sgid Air. Justice Darling, as Sir Victor was leaving the box. “Is it possible or impossible for the remedial ingredients contained in tho Dronet planters (which are put behind the ear) to pass through the bone into the ramifications of tho inner ear?”—lt is not possible. ' Well—suppose anyone told you that 1 From a plaster put on like that tho i remidial ingredients would go through the bone into the inner ear “like a shot”—what would you call him?— I should' call him a quack, :my lord, snid Sir Victor emphatically. Many other medical witnesses of eminence in car, throat and nose diseases wore called, and they wore all of the same opinion on the point of “quackery.” Dr. Arthur Henry Cheatle, aural surgeon at King’s College Hospital, said he had examined the pathological form containing the questions .issued by the Dronet Institute, the advertisements of the Institute, and Dr. Drouet’s prescriptions and plasters. In answer to Mr. Bankes. he said is was not possible to make a satisfactory or a reliable diagnosis of ear diseases by correspondence. It was always unsafe to do this. There were many diseases of the ear which exhibited very much the same symptoms, and even in personal examinations it was highly necessary to check most carefully tho answers given by patients. Among the many aural diseases catalogued by Dr. Cheatle one was tuberculosis of the inner ear. The Judge: For tho cure of that an operation would be necessary, would it not?—Yes, my lord. You liavo looked through tho prescriptions of tho.Drouet Institute?— I have. And have you found anything there which would cure tuberculosis?—Nothing at all. Among the various ingredients, of the Dronet prescriptions was hemlock. “What are the properties of hemlode ?” asked Mr. Justice Darling. “I don’t know, my lord,” was the reply. I think that Socrates took that, didn’t he? Mr. Bankes: Yes, my lord—that’s whet killed him 1 Going through the plasters one by one, Dr. Cheatle stated in each case that it would be impossible for the ingredients to work through the bone and so reach the inner ear. The Judge: Dr. Dakhyl said in his evidence that the ingredients of his plaster would go through the bone “like a shot.” Is that possible?— Absolutely impossible. Mr. Bankes: Taking the plasters as a whole, is there anything in the , ingredients which is likely to be use- ! ful in cases of deafness when applied behind tho ear?—Nothing. One of Dr. Dakhyl’s patients was told that he had “eruptive eusteclti--1 tis.” “What’s that?” as'ked the Judge. “Jargon,” replied the witness, “but I sunpose it has a sort of meaning.” The Judge: Well, we know what “eruptive” means; what about “eusteebitis?”—Eustachius was an anatomist, my lord, so I suppose it means eruptions of that gentleman 1 (Loud laughter.) The Judge: When did Eustachius the amatomist live?—Oh,, hundreds and hundreds of years ago. So he would have got over his eruptions by now?—Probably yes. Sir Edward Clarke: You don’t suggest that the Drouet remedies are mischievous?—No—they are not in sufficient quantity to do harm. Sir Edward: Aro belladonna plasters familiar to you?—l have beard of them. (Laughter.) The Judge: You aro a specialist in diseases?—Yes, my lord. And therefore you don’t treat people for pains in the back?—No, I don’t. Showing how difficult and dangerbus it was to treat patients by correspondence alone, Dr. Cheatle explained that tho early symptoms of cancer of tho inner ear and the presence of a ping of wax were almost exactly the same. Mr. Bankes: Would you under any circumstances treat a patient by correspondence?—Under no circumstances whatever, sir. Dr. Charles Alfred Ballance, M.V.0., surgeon at St.Thomas’s Hospital, and well known as a practitioner in Harley street, corroborated Dr. Cheatle in his views. It was impossible to properly diagnose without seeing a. patient, or to treat by correspondonc. For instance one of the question sent out by the Drouet Institute was: Is the voico husky? A husky voico might bo due to many causes. The Judge (looking at Mr. Slice, Iv.C.): Makiug long speeches, for instance? Witncs: Yes—or cancer of the vocal chord, serious disease of the chest or brain, tuberculosis, or even common cold. Each of course, would have to be treated differently. A. husky voice is often tho symptom of tuberculosis. There aro other causes The Judge: Of course, you might know why your voice was husky. After a general election, for instance. Sir Edward: II a patient complained of noif.es in the head, what would you do?—Witness: I would endeavor to find the seat of the disease. The Judge: But if he came to your surgery end said ho had those diseases, would you examine him or cross-examine him?—l would endeavor to do both. Sir Edward: Surely that is contrary to tho rules of evidence, my lord 1 Another specialist—Mr. Herbert Tilley—sail] that treatment by correspondence was dangerous, because patients’ symptoms us described bv the patients themselves were very often misleading, so as to indicate various forms of disease. One olt the Drouet patients suffered, from boilermakers’" deafness. On this .Dr. Yieavs’ey. of Harley street, gave his opinio n The proper treatment of this man'.was to give him - large doses of strychnine—beginning with small doses and working up. . -Tho Judge: Strychnine is used as a 'tonic?-—Yes. You. begin' with small doses—for a tpnic; bllt if/ you don’t wish it to he a iqiiicinyou give large doses firstn-. ;. This; witness said the gargling was no good,(beyond being.a mouth, wash." Sir Edward: How long has that 'ocfokl icliorl P T T Awei

heard it 13 years ago. The Judge: Since this case began I have been improving my mind with “Lo Mnlnde Imnginuire, ’ to find out what tho highly-sciontific people gave in Molioro’s day. Since then, I suppose, medical science has boon advancing gradually ?—Exactly. The case was 'adjourned.