and high-tension discharges being excluded by the manipulations employed). High-frequency currents have a marked destructive action on plate cultures of various organisms, and their effects can be shown to be largely due to sparking and other high-tension discharges, for if the latter are earthed by means of a suitable metallic plate bacteriocidal action becomes practically nil.

The marked physiological effects of general autoconduction in the solenoid cage which D'Arsonval and other observers have described have not been noted in Dr. Freund's experiments, but he does not deny that other profound though less striking effects may be produced by this method.

D'Arsonval describes, for instance, a loss of weight in a small guinea-pig of 30 grams in 16 hours when it was exposed to the influence of the oscillating high-frequency discharges in a solenoid cage. The reported increased excretion of urea and carbonic acid and increased reducing power of oxyhemoglobin also lack confirmation by later experiments, as does the reported rise in blood-pressure under autoinduction.

For x-ray work Dr. Freund recommends the Rhumkorf coil on account of its adaptability to various methods of work and the large amperage furnished.

To obviate the bad effects of reversal of the current in the Crooke's tube, due to self-induction in the primary coil, a divided primary is used.

Among self-regulating tubes Dr. Freund prefers those acting by osmosis, on account of their simplicity and long life. The non-adjustable tubes he has wholly abandoned.

The suitable diseases for x-ray treatment are classified as follows:

I. The so-called diseases of the hair (hypertrichosis).

2. Ulcerative processes in the skin.

4.

Diseases originating in marked changes in the blood-vessels.

5. Progressive disturbances of nutrition in the skin.

Of the action of light, one of its most marked effects seems to be the rapid destruction of bacteria, to which it is applied in concentrated form, the violet and ultra-violet rays having the most decided action. Strong light has been shown to pass completely through the body, although the more refrangible rays, particularly ultra-violet and violet, are arrested in the skin layers.

The most simple, ancient, and well known of phototherapeutic measures is the sun bath. Chromotherapy has been popularized by Finsen's red-light treatment for smallpox. Other methods of concentrated-light treatment described are concentrated sunlight, incandescent bath, Finsen, and other arc lights. The striking results of the latter in the treatment of lupus vulgaris have fairly established the value of the Finsen treatment.

As regards the Becquerel rays produced by radioactive substances, particularly polonium, uranium, radium, and other salts, the most divergent opinions are expressed by competent observers. Some preparations appear therapeutically inactive. On the other hand, severe burns and ulcers have been both accidentally and purposely produced by comparatively short exposures to radium salts, and undoubted and very pronounced effects have been produced upon the growth and nutrition of animals exposed to radioemanations.

In order to escape notoriety one should beware of the pauses in popular chatter. Whoever pipes up during an intermission gets his reward. The easiest way to achieve fame is to watch the newspapers, and at the moment of hiatus set up some unfamiliar twitter.

It was Dr. Osler's fortune, on February 22, to be the central figure in the annual celebration of Johns Hopkins University. The degree of LL.D. was conferred upon him, and he delivered his valedictory to the University in whose service his remarkable powers have developed. It was for Dr. Osler a very great occasion, and he brought to it the very best of his heart's coinage. The message which he delivered was, we may be sure, the sound and wholesome fruit of his experience as a teacher, and ripened for the hour in which it fell. Certain parts of the address excited the press to such an uproar that it seemed to many as if the occasion and the man were not happily met. It was the very irony of Fortune that the parting words of a man so esteemed for kindness and sincerity should have been so wrung from their true and salutary meaning. His main theme was the metabolism of university life, and while considering the very delicate question of the uncertain period of efficiency in a teacher's life, he said that in some young universities whose professors are growing old together the situation can be saved only by "an epidemic, a time limit, or an age limit." His own amiable suggestion was that teachers should be retired at 60 on double pay. He gave his well-known views about the intellectual climacteric which usually occurs in the fifth decade. He alluded more than once to his own tally of years, and the reporters suspected him of joking. When he recalled Donne's account of the deponati, and the humorous suggestion of Trollope, who in a book written at the age of 67 proposed to give sexagenarii a merciful exitus by chloroform, the light-weight intellectuals were persuaded that Dr. Osler was jesting, and they called all the world to witness. So the cheerfulness of his intrepid soul became a contribution to the gayety of nations.

If President Roosevelt, who made an address on the same day, had sounded a new note, Osler's stirring address would not have been caught in the blast. But there was a hiatus in newspaperdom, and Osler's speech set every quill a-flutter. The capricious American public showered upon him all the motley insignia of fame. Cartoonists, paragraphers, prizefighters, ad-writers, anonymous avengers, and inventors of cocktails bestowed on him marks of esteem. Best of all, solemn editorial writers searched all Scriptures and made an exhaustive catalogue of the worthies

who have been fruitful of good work after 40, so that Osler must at all hazards now redeem his promise of a book entitled "La Crise de Quarante Ans," for half the necessary rummaging of history was done for him in the week following February 22, 1905.

THE USES OF OLD AGE.

THE address of Dr. Osler was worthy of the occasion, of the audience, and of the speaker. What he said concerning the motives which have led to his removal from Johns Hopkins is as good as anything that Osler has said on any subject. "After years of hard work, at the very time when a man's energies begin to flag, and when he feels the need of more leisure, the conditions and surroundings which have made him what he is, and that have molded his character and abilities into something useful in the community-these very circumstances insure an ever-increasing demand upon them; and when the call of the East comes, which in one form or another is heard by all of us, and which grows louder as we grow older, the call may come like the summons of Elisha, and not alone the plowing of the day, but the work of a life, friends, relatives, even father and mother, are left to take up new work in a new field; or, happier far, if the call comes, as it did to Puran Das in Kipling's story, not to new labors, but to a life 'private, unactive, calm, contemplative.'" This is enough to satisfy best those who most desire that Osler might remain among us.

Every occasion is Osler's opportunity to praise the times gone by, and a considerable part of this stirring address is devoted to a hearty appreciation of the splendid work of organization done by the original trustees of Johns Hopkins Hospital, not one of them now alive, every one of them past the "golden years of plenty" when the work was undertaken. Of course, this portion of the speech was lost in the newspaper snapshot.

Looking squarely at that prospect which all of us must realize who keep our footing on the bridge, who can desire for himself or for another anything better than Osler proposes? Even in the intellectual life most of us are but hewers of wood and drawers of water, and to ask for ourselves relief, before the days of lighter fagots and shallower laden pitchers, is but to plead for the economic use of old age. If one may cease before "the sport is stale and all the wheels run down," one may tell a tale worth hearing, even though one's wagon was never hitched to a star. The uses of old age should be exploited. Its good fruits are of necessity precious, being rare, for the old are but 4 per cent. of all of us. If anywhere, certainly in university life, the uses of old age should be profitable, and here, if anywhere, by exacting of flagging powers a daily round of service, instead of employing such powers on more appropriate and no less precious tasks, the chief value of age is wasted.

THE NOMADIC SPIRIT AND THE HOMING INSTINCT. IF Osler's idea that the president of a university should "cherish a proper nomadic spirit in his faculties" seems novel, there is no novelty, at least to his friends, in his opinion that a student "should begin his wander-jahre early, not necessarily postponing it until he has taken his M.D. or Ph.D." Similar views, less radical perhaps, pervade the whole faculty of the medical school, and a graduate who leaves that school with a strong prejudice or a mental astigmatism must have brought an incoercible defect into the school. Nor

do such views tend to weaken either the influence of teachers or the loyalty of alumni. On the contrary, this noble amplitude is the best guaranty of inexhaustible devotedness on the part of both teachers and students. Such breadth of view might make an inspiring teacher of a less man than Osler. In his own case it is, while important, not the chief element of his remarkable influence upon the student body. The compelling force of his character as a teacher is difficult to define, though, happily, easy to illustrate. Among the senior students of 1905, Johns Hopkins Medical School, is a left-over. He has been a left-over often enough to have earned a sobriquet. Class after class has with keen regret gone out without him, and succeeding seniors have claimed him as their own with great joy, for his is a rare spirit to knit men's hearts into fellowship. He may receive his degree with the class of '05, or at all events he must leave the school, and the professor of medicine himself will not carry away any distinction substantially greater than that of the senior student, William Osler. To give himself, without reserve and without condescension, to his pupils, and to be repaid on their part by equal self-surrender-this is Osler's way, and so are physicians made. Athletes are made no better. To be employed "in the work of the hospital as parts of its human machinery, without which the work could not be done efficiently"-this is a vocation which a fit youth cannot resist. To be sure that fruitful effort will not want appreciation, and that the Chief will lose no chance to say, as he says here, that the professors of the University are to be congratulated on nothing more than upon "the sympathy and fellowship with their junior associates, upon whom in many departments, in mine certainly, has fallen the brunt of the work”-such assurance begets a loyalty quite true to its kind.

DR. REED'S REPORT ON THE CANAL COMMISSION. DR. C. A. L. REED of Cincinnati, ex-president of the American Medical Association, stirred up a sensation by his recent report to the Secretary of War on sanitary conditions and prospects at the Isthmus. As the report led to the reorganization of the Canal Commission, it must be considered an effective document, but the character of the report is nevertheless disappointing, and its publication in the Journal of the American Medical Association caused general surprise. The Canal Commission no doubt deserved a severe scoring, but not at the hands of Dr. Reed. Having qualified himself under instructions to testify about conditions at Panama, it seems unfortunate that he did not scrupulously maintain the character of a disinterested witness. It was a decided breach of propriety for him to appear at Washington in a dual rôle as prosecutor of the Commission and as a mentor to the President. His iterated "more especially Mr. Grunsky" was in bad taste, and his quotations from Mr. Roosevelt's remarks to the Commission at the time of its organization were impertinent. Mr. Taft's comments throw a somewhat palliative light on Dr. Reed's intemperate style. It appears that Dr. Reed's instructions did not relate to the sanitary service. His observations on that subject were made on his own initiative and were elicited by the inquiries of Mr. Taft, who requested him to make his statement in writing, "which he did the same day by the use of a stenographer." In ordinary prudence Dr. Reed should have asked for time to formulate a prudent and dignified report, and every precaution should have been taken to prevent its untimely appearance in print.