drainage-tube to come through. Then come the dressings, consisting of a few handfuls of bichloride gauze, over which is placed a large mass of bichloride cotton, which is held in place by a bichloride gauze bandage. A very thick, bulky dressing is necessary, in order to provide an antiseptic receptacle for the fluids which drain away from the wound. If the dressing is small, it quickly becomes soaked with drainage, which soon decomposes on coming in contact with the air. This necessitates the undesirable step of an early change of the dressing, in order to avoid the still more undesirable complication of suppuration, or something worse. In applying the dressings, they are handled as little as possible, and of course only with surgically clean hands. The best way is for an assistant to bring the receptacle which contains the dressings, open it and let the surgeon take out what he wants. In this way the dressings are touched by no hands but the surgeon's.

It is not claimed that the foregoing description covers all the latest ideas in antiseptic technique. It is intended merely to give the details of a method of doing antiseptic work, which is practicable in country surgery, and not to give a resume of the most recent progress in antiseptics. Nothing has been said, for instance, of the disinfection of instruments by heat, because it cannot, so far as it has been tried, be carried out so thoroughly in the country as in a hospital. But I speak from experience when I say that the method of operating above described can be practiced amidst the most unfavorable surroundings, and with excellent results-no infectious diseases, no suppuration, but healing per primam almost the invariable rule in all incised wounds. It is not claimed that there can be no better way of operating antiseptically. Any method which is simpler and more thorough, ensuring greater perfection of cleanliness and disinfection, is better. This is offered as a method which, by the use of antiseptics of known and proved value, and of materials and apparatus easy for any practitioner to obtain, will give first-rate results, if faithfully and thoroughly carried out. The choice of an antiseptic, of antiseptic apparatus and of materials for dressing, is comparatively of minor importance. If the surgeon has a horror of dirty fingernails, filthy instruments, and an unscrubbed field of operation, and if he abominates the idea of approaching a wound with anything which is not surgically clean, he will do good antiseptic work, in whatever way he goes about it.

Discussion-Dr. Wilder. I, for one, feel very thankful to Dr. Wheeler for the concise and practical manner in which he has given us his paper. The success of antiseptic surgery depends upon the thoroughness with which we execute it, the minutiae, not the declaration that we are going to carry out antiseptic surgery, but in the actual fact that we carry it out, and that implies, as has been well said, a thorough cleansing, and going even beyond what we are able to do by ordinary cleansing power, and us

ing means to destroy the germs. Oftentimes it has been my observation to see men sometimes practice antiseptic surgery that were very careful in some things, but a little negligent infothers, and a few neglectful acts will destroy the whole work. I am very much pleased with the manner in which the paper is presented. I think it is a fact that our older physicians are apt to look lightly upon this matter of antiseptic surgery, but I think, go where you will, among the successful surgeons of this country, and other countries, (and you can count upon your fingers those whom you might call successful surgeons), you will find the successful men in large majority are strict followers of antiseptic surgery. I would like to ask Dr. Wheeler in regard to iodoform. Is there any way in which we can get along without that?

Dr. Wheeler. I have already mentioned the use of iodoform but not in the way of dispensing with it. I do not know of anything which costs no more than iodoform, which is equally efficacious. Iodol would be equally good, but that is much more expensive. Some surgeons use bismuth, claiming that they can get good results with that, but I have never tried it in the same way that I use iodoform. The principal value of iodoform, which has beca the subject of much debate for the last few years, is not so much its antiseptic properties as the fact that it coagulates serum, and dries, and helps to stick the edges of the wound together. If used on a granulating surface, it stimulates granulation and hinders the formation of pus.

The following physicians were elected to membership during the meeting.

C. W. STROBELL, Middletown Springs

O. W. PECK, Winooski,

M. D. LAMB, Waterbury,..

F. W. SEARS, Grand Isle,

L. D. ROOD, Jericho,

.U. V M., 1882

do

1880

do

1882

do

1888

do

1881

The Executive Committee made the following report :

The semi-annual meeting for 1890 will be held in Rutland.

The following gentlemen are appointed to prepare and present papers.

Applications for Licenses to practice medicine in the State, were received by your Censors from fourteen parties. Of this number, twelve were graduates of regular Medical schools, and received licenses as follows:

J. H. WOODWARD, Coll. P. & S, New York.

A. O. CLOTHIER, Victoria Coll., Med. & Surg., Montreal.

FRED LUTHER OSGOOD, Med. Dept. U. V. M.

OSCAR H. PERKINS, Bellevue Hospital Medical College.

E. C. STIMSON, Dartmouth Medical College.

Dr. CRAM, Med. Dept. U. V. M.

E. M. POND, Bellevue Hospital Medical College.

F. A. GARCERUX, Laval University.

R. E. WELCH, Bellevue Hospital Medical College.

GEORGE B. HATCH, Ohio University of Medicine, Cincinnati.

W. S. MANUEL, Med Dept. U. V. M.

R. M. PELTON, Med. Dept. U. V. M.

Two were not graduates, and such were informed that they could only receive licenses by submitting to an examination. Only one did this. He was vouched for by several practitioners, and your Censors endeavored to give him a fair chance to establish his right to practice. Each member of the Board gave him two questions upon each of the seven branches. Of these questions, less than 44% were correctly answered. Viewed in the most favorable light, we could not do otherwise than decline to grant him a license. Cases similar to this one doubtless arise every year. Some unfortunate, who has failed to get his diploma when expected, is referred by practitioners or college professors to the Censors of the State Society. While there may be exceptions, it is safe to say that as a rule, they are totally unfit for practice.

While your Censors endeavored to do no one an injustice, they determined if possible to know something about the qualifications of such candidates for licenses.

66

In this connection, we wish to call the attention of the Society to the report of the Committee on Uniform Medical Legislation," at the last meeting of the American Medical Association. This report is found in the last number of the Journal of the Association. This Committee reports a bill similar to laws now in force in several States, which is commended to the careful attention of this Society. It provides for a State Board of Medical Examiners, who shall examine into the qualifications of all persons who wish to practice medicine in the State, whether graduates or not. That this law is a good one, is abundantly proven by the experience of States where it has been tried.

Would it not be well for our Society to take this matter up, and endeavor to get a law in this State which will give the profession and public alike, some assurance of protection from ignorance and quackery. That the present law does not do this we all know, and while we may be skeptical about meeting with success before the Legislature, our Society can in no better way show its progressiveness and its desire to make itself a power for good in the State.

C. S. CAVERLY,

J. D. BREWSTER, Censors.
J. N. JENNE.

Delegates to Medical Department of U. V. M., present the following

report:

TO THE VERMONT MEDICAL SOCIETY.

Mr. President and Gentlemen :

Your delegates appointed to attend the examination of candidates for the degree of M. D., as conducted by the Medical Faculty of the University of Vermont, devoted two days, July 10th and 11th, to the performance of their duties. The examination of Professors Towles and King, were oral, and were conducted in such a manner as to show the real knowledge the candidate had of the subject, and that if he passed, it must be on his own merit. The examinations of the other professors were all written, but the papers were placed at our disposal, and we had all the opportunity desired to examine them and the workings of the professors. The examinations were difficult, yet very practical, and of such a nature as to place each candidate on his own footing, to stand or fall, according to his own ability. The markings of the professors were close on all subjects, and the men of '89 who passed the examination and obtained their degree, stand in high esteem with your delegates.

It has been a pleasant task for us, who of the Alumni, to return after several years of practice, and participate in the examinations of the class,

It is with pleasure that we note the enlarged advantage and increased facilities secured to the College by the new College building and the Mary Fletcher Hospital.

It is our opinion that the instruction given students by the Medical Faculty of the University of Vermont, is of a high order; that it is as complete as it is possible to be in the time allowed, and that it is fully abreast of the Medical knowledge of the day.

Respectfully submitted,

JOEL ALLEN, M. D.

A. L. BINGHAM, M. D. Delegates.