horrible faces and gesticulations they said: "That's not fair; that's dishonorable! If you want to fight us, stay round in front of our big guns." The resemblance is reversed, however, in the attitude of the attacking and defending parties, since it is the defenders of the National Code who are now refusing to have the opium forced upon them, and the attacking force which complains that the defenders do not stay in front of their big guns.

After the decisive defeat, by a few members, of the simple and fair proposition to ascertain the true sense and judgment of the entire membership of the Kings County Society, there remained only the alternatives of abandoning the object altogether, or of trying to accomplish it through a temporary organization of the profession outside of the Society, as had been done in other counties.

To abandon the object at this stage and under these circumstances was out of the question, and therefore, a meeting was called to form a temporary association for the single and simple purpose of defending the Code of Ethics of The American Medical Association, and resisting any change in it which does not emanate from the body which formed the Code.

This meeting adopted the plan of organization proposed for the counties, by the Central Association of the State, and decided to act in affiliation with that Association so as to ensure the effect of concerted and combined action at the next meeting of the State Society. An executive committee of nine members was selected and authorized to carry out the objects of the Association.

The Committee met and decided upon a very simple, open and logical plan of action, the first step of which is to make a thorough personal canvass of the regular profession of the county by the list of the Medical Register by one or more authorized agents, earnestly soliciting each member of the profession, by a personal interview, to sign his name and append to it his deliberate vote, either for the National Code, the New Code, or no Code. Anticipating an attempt at defeating this vote, by those who defeated it in the Society, through a refusal to sign on such grounds as that they had already taken action, and that the question was definitely settled,—that it is a great hurt to scientific interests to keep up this agitation,nullification to resist the new Code, etc., the committee would take the names of all who decline to sign, thus making the record complete for a final counting.

Then when this count is made the Committee will have a sound

basis for further action, such as they could have in no other way. If the majority was found to be against the Association, then it would only have the weight of a minority influence in association with the other counties, and would have to be satisfied with this; and but little farther action would be needed than simply to see what the minority was, and that it be fairly and actively represented in the convention of the counties. But if, as is confidently hoped for, there should be a majority on the side of the established rules,, and against the disturbing agitation, then much could be done to give legitimate effect to so important a decision so fairly made by. a county so prominent, and one which up to this time has been so emphatic in supporting and defending the National code.

The recent action taken in the N. Y. Academy of Medicine seems to be briefly and substantially as follows: It was not known how the Academy stood upon this question, and yet its delegates at the late meeting of the State Society had committed it to the new code side by voting two for the new code and one for the old. It had not, however, altered its By-Laws, which embrace the National code, nor had it acted in the matter in any way, but probably no member failed to realize that the issue must come, and that the disturbing elements were earnestly and actively though quietly at work. New members were applying for admission, and if the majority of the profession in New York County in favor of overturning and reversing the old code was as large as it was claimed to be, a majority of these admissions would be no code men, and the no code party in the Academy would be constantly gaining strength, while every new member was signing a Constitution and By-Laws, containing the old code and promising to uphold them, as the conditions of his admission to membership. If then a majority of the new members, being no code men, were signing a compact which they would take the first opportunity to oppose, and if possible break up, it was fair to suppose they might be signing merely in a perfunctory way, and in ignorance of the fact that they were pledging themselves to uphold a code which, their convictions being opposed to, they were really seeking to destroy. Others might sign with the mental reservation that since the action of the State Society, and especially as that action had been supported by the Academy's delegates, the old code was really

abrogated, and the new code was that which he actually was signing. This is not a violently strained position for a no code man to take, for it is the logical deduction from their arguments that the old code is void in this State, because it is unlawful in the State and in the State Society and all affiliated bodies.

At all events new members were being admitted and were all pledging themselves to the old code by their signatures; and none of the old members were resigning since they had changed their convictions, nor withdrawing their signatures and pledges to a code which they were now striving to abolish, and almost if not all the officers of the Academy were prominent active opponents of the old code By-Law.

Under these circumstances it was not only perfectly fair, but entirely legitimate, proper, wise and just to bring resolutions instructing the Committee on Admissions not to report for admission to membership any person who could not conscientiously sign a Constitution and By-Laws which contained the national code of ethics, the effect being, as stated, to refuse admission to all new code and no code men until the Academy should change its constitution and code of ethics. That is, it would not let in men who would pledge themselves to the old code as a condition of admission and then continue to be elements inside, as they had been outside, for abrogating the rules which they signed.

There is nothing in the action to indicate any opposition to a member's pledging himself honestly to the existing laws, and then after admission as honestly changing his mind and then working against his signature which carried former convictions now changed.

On the contrary, the most prominent men in the new code and no code movement were present and were exactly in this position, and their rights and votes were fully recognized. It is true that under the excitement of the discussion several of them resigned, including the President, Vice-President and Treasurer of the Academy, as from their position of intense antagonism to the organic existing law of the Academy they were logically bound to do. But the resignations appear not to have been accepted, and it is now publicly announced that they will withdraw them, although this announcement seems to be a mere rumor that cannot be confirmed until the next meeting of the Academy in October.

It must therefore be acknowledged that this action by the Academy was eminently right and proper, and had due public notice

been given for a month there could be no just cause of complaint. But, on the other hand, it was done exactly as the new code was adopted in the State Society,—that is, practically without due notice, and in that respect both actions were equally illiberal, unfair and unjust. On both occasions earnest appeals were made for time for mature deliberation and wider action, but in both cases this was arbitrarily refused and voted down, and both measures were pushed through by solid voting.

The meeting of the State Society of 1882 was an ordinary meeting with the customary notification, and the meeting of the Academy was exactly the same, both meetings under the control of officers publicly committed to the attack upon the old code. The new code movement was a surprise at an ordinary meeting, and the resolutions at the Academy were no greater surprise, but were simply on the opposite side of the issue, and both surprises were managed with the same skill and dexterity in obtaining a two-thirds majority for the surprise, and this majority in a small ordinary meeting will probably be found difficult to overturn at larger meetings, at which neither of them could have been carried by the requisite two-thirds. The strong contrast between the two movements is that the last one excited by far the most intemperate action on the part of the defeated element, and got into the newspapers in a very sensational way.

Why this method by surprise was taken in either case can only be conjectured of course, but the probability is that the motive was the same in both cases,-namely, to carry the measure through. If this was wrong in the first instance it was of course equally wrong in the second, and it was undoubtedly wrong in both.

If the first wrong had not been perpetrated, and had not been followed by a series of similar wrongs, like that in the Kings County Society above mentioned, then it is probable that this action in the Academy would not have been taken.

It is a platitude to say that one wrong does not justify another, or that any series of wrongs should excuse or extenuate a single one, but society is at present so organized that when men's passions and prejudices are fairly roused the law of retaliation is about as sure as the law of gravity, and he who sows to the wind sooner or later reaps the whirlwind.

Civilized society goes on condemning retaliation and preaching against it, but continues to practice it with unfailing certainty.

OPIUM ASSAYS.

Since the last note upon this subject, at page 175, thirteen cases of opium have been assayed, including nine cases of Persian opium, the latter being quite new to this market, though long known in other markets, and to makers of morphia salts.

In January two cases of Yerli opium were sampled and assayed by the process given at page 14. The opium was of tolerably uniform consistence and color and of good appearance, and contained the amount of leaden bullets so common to Yerli opium as to be almost characteristic of this variety,-that is in working up a series of cases bought as Yerli opium, if no bullets were found this would be some cause for suspicion that the opium was not of the kind properly called Yerli. From these two cases about 1.2 pounds of bullets were obtained. The results of the assay were as follows: In the moist condition, as received :—

Case 1. Water 21.77 p. c.; Residue 29.40 p. c.; Morphia 12.92 p. c.;

They were, therefore, practically the same Opium, the difference being quite within the liability to error in assay.

When dried and powdered, the yield of morphia from the powder was 16.52 and 16.35 p. c., and the powder, in common with powdered opium in general contained about 4 p. c. of hygrometric moisture lost in farther drying to a constant weight at 100° C.= 212° F.

In March,-Yerli, Salonica and Bogaditch being all accidentally absent from the ordinary channels of the market and noticeable from the rarity of the accident, a selected case of Karahissar opium, of very fine appearance and uniform consistence, was assayed with the following results:

Water 20.88 p. c.; Residue 34.83 p. c.; Morphia 12.15 p. c.; Reduced by calculation to the condition of powdered opium, Morphia 15.51 p. c.

In April one case of Bogaditch opium,—a special importation,— arrived and was assayed with the following results:

་

Water 18.40 p. c.; Residue 30.14 p. c.; Morphia 13.27 p. c.; when dried and powdered the powder gave 16.26 p.c. of morphia. Thus the powdered opium from these four cases would be, say, 16.5, 15.5 and 16.3 p. c., averaging about 16.16 p. c. and not differing in the extremes more than about 1 p. c. Powdered opium for medicinal uses should not vary much more than this.