have been the cause of many more deaths and violent illness than from even the improper use of all preservative agents combined. Now we have the future possibility that the use of one or another antiseptic agent will be demanded by law as a necessary requirement and that, as today we look for the offender who uses an antiseptic, the law will be more vigilant and severely punish the responsible party who fails to use the prescribed preservative agent in certain foods or liquids. THE ABUSE OF PRESERVATIVES. Legislation to govern the use of food preservatives must be welcomed by every honest person having at heart the protection of the customer. Manufacturers and dealers may unknowingly commit wrongs by using preservative agents. The substance, often a mixture of several agents may have marked toxic properties, they may add what should not be added under any circumstances, for the substance may belong to the class wherein we may have the accumulating effect in the system and thus produce harm even if not toxic itself. Some are likely to add an excess of the agent as is so often done in using or rather abusing medicines, and again temptation exists by the dealer to protect the product in his possession by adding additional doses to guard against his loss-therefore they should be sold in sealed and labeled containers. Dependence cannot be placed upon the claims of manufacturers and users of preservative agents and compounds that the substance they recommend is absolutely harmless. Legislative restriction therefore should define what can and what must not be used, how much can be used and who can use it or must add the preservative. Wherever a preservative has been used, plain large letter imprint should state such facts upon the label, thus confine the abuse, if any, at once to the proper person. BORON AND ITS PREPARATIONS. Boric acid as such or as borate is found widely distributed, though only in minute quantities. It is found in the beet root, beet sugar, wine, beer, and if not altogether a constant, certainly a very frequent component of all kinds of glazing on vessels. The caustic alkalies sold by the most reliable firms are reported to contain always boric acid, usually to the amount of 1 per cent (Chem. Ztg. 1896 Rep. 117). Borax, boric acid and boroglyceride, the compounds used for meat, fish and dairy products. Meat will take up from 1 to 1.2 per cent of boric acid. Maceration in water will extract, even from large pieces of meat the following per cent of equivalents of boric acid: per cent in about 21 hours. 50 per cent in about 12 hours. 25 per cent with boiling for about 3 hours. THE PRACTICE OF USING BORON COMPOUNDS. The practice in packing houses consists in rubbing the outside of the pieces of meat with borax-often a mixture of borax and salt, in some cases fortified with the addition of boric acid. In butter, by kneading same with a solution of borax. In milk, a mixture of boric acid and borax has proven more efficient. TOXICOLOGY OF BORON. Even three (3) grams, 45 grains, per day, taken by a healthy adult for a number of days appear not to cause any unpleasant results. EXPERIMENTS WITH MAN. Foster and Schlenger claim that to 3 grams (45 grains) of boric acid Uor M per day, taken with the nourishment, prevents the full abstraction of food value by absorption and think, that an increase in the expulsion of intestinal epithelia or at least an increased secretion of mucus is caused. Dr. Conrad Mann who experimented on himself claims that not the slightest interference was caused. Chittenden and Gies, also Leffmann, after exhaustive experiments, failed to find interference, stating, that judging from our experiments boric acid even when using five grams per day is without influence either upon proteid, metabolism or upon the general nutritional processes of the body. Practically the elimination of borax and boric acid is complete in 24 to 36 hours after the last dose had been given. Obviously this rapid elimination. precludes the possibility of any marked accumulative action from the daily ingestion of moderate quantities. According to Professor Liebreich no bad results can come from the use of boric acid even when used continually in daily amounts of 1.2 grams. Dr. Gaucher claims that 1 gram doses of boric acid given for years to consumptives, did not cause the least disturbance. During the Pure Food Hearings, Senator Wm. E. Mason, chairman, very strong evidence was given in favor of boric acid and borax by C. Y. Knight, of the publication of the Chicago Dairy Produce; Frank Billings, M. D.; Walter H. Allport, M. D.; Ferdinand Henrotin, M. D.; Professor Frank L. James; C. Bruyn Springfield, M. D.; Professor Walter S. Haines, and Arthur R. Edwards, M. D. Foreign literature is rather extensive in advocating the use of borax and boric acid, though we hear also of protests, but mostly emanating from single observation by physicians-which may be due to aversion (idiosyncrasis). Sifting the many, many expressions of authorities, the Boron compounds we believe, the concensus of opinion to be that said compounds may slightly retard, but do not prevent digestion, they do not interfere or retard the digestion or assimilation of foods or detract from or excreed in suspension any of its nutritive quality. These compounds are more effective than salt so universally used and cause probably less disturbance. Food once tainted cannot be restored by any Boron compound, therefore if at present not one of the ideal preservative agents, it is certainly one of the least objectionable especially if used like all good things should be in moderation. FORMIC ALDEHYDE. To judge from its extensive use all over the country this preservative enjoys great popularity. Very small quantities are efficient. Milk containing such small amounts as 1 in 100,000 to 150,000 will keep for two days, which is sufficient for all purposes. Milk taken with clean methods (clean hands, clean receptacle, udder washed, cow covered with a moist cloth t o prevent dung, etc., from falling into the milk) will keep for three days with the above given quantities. In beer and wine 1 in one million seems to prove effective. Fruit preserves keep reasonably long when they contain 1 part in 10,000 parts. All objections to the use of Formic Aldehyde are based on the use of an unreasonable large amount. Strychnine is one of the most dreaded unrelenting poisons-yet even doses of 1-20 of a grain are found beneficial when used as a judicious medicine-is Formaldehyde more obnoxious than Strychnine? Laboratory experiments made with the different forms of digestion, also with milk preserved with Formaldehyde on infants were reported by me about 1 years ago, the report appearing in full in the Kansas City Medical Record of March, 1900, where many interesting details are reported. At that time I state that when I was asked to make experiments with a preparation that contained Formaldehyde as the active ingredient-I felt very reluctant to undertake the work, as many in authority proclaimed against its use. As I progressed in the work, the numerous experiments demonstrated that the objections to its use were not based on facts, saying, "Today (one and one-half years ago) I believe that 'the pure Formaldehyde, if used judiciously, is rather beneficial than objectionable." An assertion which I can corroborate again today. The reasons advanced at that time for a proper amount of Formaline proving beneficial were: It does not interfere with the human gastric, intestinal or ptyalin digestion. Infants that did not prosper with various kinds of infants' foods and milk, also cow's milk prepared according to the best authorities, at once changed for the better when supplied with milk treated with Formaldehyde, and they continued to augment in weight and health. Formaldehyde is the best milk preservative and does not introduce any mineral matter. *REMINISCENCES OF A RECENT TRIP ABROAD, INCLUDING VISITS TO JOHN PUNTON, M. D., Kansas City, Mo. Professor Nervous and Mental Diseases University Medical College, Editor INDEX-LANCET, Etc. LONDON HOSPITALS, MUSEUMS, COLLEGES AND LIBRARIES- CONTINUED, In addition to the hospitals already mentioned, there are many others worthy of remark, such as the Middlesex, Charing Cross, Westminster, Royal Free, St. Katherine's, beside a large number of special hospitals, which more especially attract those physicians in search of special knowledge. Among these may be mentioned the Brompton Hospital for Consumptives, the Cancer Hospital at Fulham, the Ophthalmic in the Strand, as well as Moorfield's, both of which are specially devoted to the care and treatment of diseases of the eye. The Merchant Seamen's for Sailors, the Lock, the German, the Lying-In, as well as the hospital for women. Moreover the various hospitals for the insane, such as Old Bedlam or Bethlehem, St. Luke's, Colney, Hatch and Hanwell are worthy of mention. Being more especially interested in neurology and psychastry, it was natural that hospitals devoted exclusively to the care and treatment of nervous diseases would receive especial attention. The principal special hospital in London, and the one that enjoys the distinction of having upon its staff England's greatest neurologists, is that known as the National Hospital, for the paralyzed and epileptic, situated in Queen Square, Bloomsbury. Here I met Hughlins Jackson, Ferrier, Gowers, Victor Horsley, Bastian, Buzzard, Ormerod, Beevor, Tooth, Taylor, Ramskill, and many others. Where can be found such a rare galaxy of medical talent, and an equal number of brighter constellations in the neurologica! world? With possibly one or two exceptions, all of them are recognized authors of international repute and unexceptional ability. The lectures and clinics are, for the most part, free to medical men; and with proper credentials, each of the above-named gentlemen deem it a pleasure to escort those interested through the various wards to see their own special cases. Being properly armed in this direction, I. had very little dif *Continued from February number, Article V of the Series. ficulty in meeting and conversing with them; but without such pre-requisites the American physician would find the English hospital methods rather too exclusive, bordering on snobbery. To attend the lectures and clinics one has to register his name and address each day in a book provided for the purpose, which the hall porter has in charge, and while they are free, yet you are expected to make a donation to the hospital fund, as the hospitals are all more or less supported by voluntary subscriptions. These clinics are held daily in the afternoon by the different members of the hospital staff, and I think I can truthfully say that no larger neurological clinic can be found anywhere in the world as is found in connection with this hospital. Every conceivable form of general nervous disease can be found within its walls, and the more rare forms are quite common. Here one has an opportunity, not only to learn types, but also anomalous forms of both organic and functional diseases of the nervous system, as well as study the influence of different remedial agents for their alleviation and cure. It is an open question with many American physicians whether the opportunities and facilities for medical studies are greater in Europe than in America. So far as my observation goes, I think the honors are evenly divided, providing we treat the subject in a general way, but if we wish to limit it to special departments of study, then I think Europe has the advantage of America in many respects. There is no doubt that so far as the theoretical study of medicine is concerned, the facilities are on a much larger and higher plane in Europ than in America, and the method of training thus afforded (all things being equal) tend to equip the student far better to grasp the more obscure abstract problems connected with diseased conditions; but when it come to downright practical methods and those best suited for every day service, America can challenge the world. The slower methods which obtain in the old country are not adapted to the needs and demands of the new world. For this reason many physicians become dissatisfied, and often criticise, unjustly, the seeming imperfect, slow, routine methods which characterize European medical teaching. But after all, the knowledge is there for the getting, but, unfortunately. it demands that which the American physician, as a rule, thinks he can least of all afford to pay, viz.: Time. This element is an all important one, however, with the Europeans, as they are willing to plod day by day, month by month, and year by year to acquire a thorough knowledge of some of the more intricate theoretical problems of medicine, which we in America would care to give but passing notice. This slow but sure method is characteristic of all their movements, and consequently the American physician who goes to London, for instance, expecting to acquire a thorough knowledge of some special department of medicine in a few weeks (which, by the way, so many claim can be done here), utterly fails to accomplish his purpose and returns to America wholly disgusted and fully prepared to make false statements about that which he knows so little about. This careful and painstaking training, which is the common requirement, explains the reason of their characteristic thoroughness, for I believe there can be found few (who knows whereof he speaks) that will deny the statement that the medical profession, taken as a whole, in England, represents a class of men of higher literary qualifications than the American profession. The foundation for their medical education is much more solid and real than that found in America. While I believe this to be true, yet I am satisfied that they are not nearly as practical or energetic as their brethren in America. The inventive capacity is not as great nor the mechanical side of practical medical utility nearly as well developed in our English cousins as is found to be so common an inherent part of our American physicians. This can be accounted for, no doubt, by the fact that so many of the members of our profession are in the fullest sense self-made men. While, on the other hand statistics prove that so few, comparatively speaking, in England have to provide themselves with either their literary or medical education. Notwithstanding their more profound learning and, perhaps, comparatively greater number of "bright constellations," yet I am free to confess that when impartially compared with their American confeeres, I think the English medical teacher, as a rule, is a poor excuse, and, in a sense, greatly overrated. Environments have much to do with individual greatness or littleness, and London possesses all that can be desired in point of size and opportunity to satisfy the most aspiring mind. Hence many of them are only great in point of greater opportunities, facilities and favorable surroundings. It is not, therefore, because of greater mental capacity that these men attain such marked distinction in the medical world, but because of their unequaled location or favorable situation in the world's metropolis; and this same principle, to a greater or lesser degree obtains in every large medical center. The wonderful opportunity for clinical study, the magnificent medical musenums, libraries, and all that serve as aids in acquiring medical knowledge is furnished on a larger scale in London than in any other city in the world. This has its effect in attracting to itself the more earnest students from all parts of the globe who are willing to use and utilize to the best advantage possible the opportunities thus afforded, and in this way they assist those who are in charge to obtain distinction in a comparatively easy manner. Many a man becomes great at the expense of some other person's labor, and this statement can be better understood after spending some time in the larger hospitals of London. This principle also holds good in America, but not to so large a degree, unless it be in Philadelphia, where the teachers have at their command every facility to make themselves known to the medical world. In attending the English clinics the American physician can readily recognize the intense ignorance of the masses pertaining to medical subjects. They have no idea of disease or its effects, and consequently have unbounded confidence in the infallibility of the doctor. Whatever the English doctor says "goes with the layman," whether he is right or wrong, and I saw several amusing incidents during my sojourn there. Much of the success of the English doctor is due to this confiding faith on the part of his patient in his infallibilty, and fortunately he is not annoyed by the inquisitive questions that form so common a part in American medical practice. Very few persons are guilty of pretending to know more about medicine than the doctor, much less draw from their book-shelf an antiquated copy of doctor somebody in support of a certain statement they may have made concerning a phase of the disease they knew nothing about, which better knowledge had promptly refuted. Such healthy lessons as these could, with much profit to both patient and doctor, be introduced into American medical practice, and the cause of |