The Week in Review.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XLV, Issue 7, 17 August 1910, Page 1

The Week in Review.

NOTICE.

The Editor trill be pleased to receive for consideration Short Stories and Descriptive Articles, illustrated With photos, or suggestions from contributors. Bright, terse contributions are wanted dealing with Dominion life and questions. Unless stamps are sent, the Editor cannot guarantee the return of unsuitable MSS.

Faith. Healing. KROM time to time we read of people being tried for manslaughter, because they believed in faith-healing and refused to call in medical aid for their children or relatives. A man in Sydney has just been committed for trial because he relied on prayers rather than drugs for the healing of his son. who was suffering from diphtheria. There must necessarily be limits to the religious toleration of the State. Every man is at liberty to pray when and where he likes, but if he believes his prayer will be answered the State very properly makes him liable to proceedings for manslaughter. Yet even from a medical point of view faith-healing is hot quite so useless as our legislators seem to imagine. People have died from diphtheria when the best medical assistance has been obtained, and people have recovered under psychic treatment from disorders that had resisted every art of the physician. If a doctor certifies that lie attended a patient, the State dispenses with an inquest, holding that the cause of death is apparent. If no doctor attended him, the coroner holds an inquest to find out why in that case the man should have died at all. The State likes to have a good reason for anybody’s death, and it looks apparently upon attendance by a duly qualified medical man as the best of all possible reasons.

Doctors and Drugs. The late Sir William Gull laid it down as an axiom that faith in your physician was more important than anything else in the cure of disease. Dr. Dubois says that if we neglect the psychic side of the human being the difference (between the veterinarian’s art and that of the physician is only one of clientele. Hack Take, in speaking of Sir Andrew dark, said: “Hia favourite drugs were bicarbonate of potash and a vegetable bitter, but neither drugs nor diet formed the central factor of his treatment, or explained his success. Suggestion lay at the root of it all- (Sir Andrew' was the most successful hypnotist of his day.” In a very interesting address before the Oxford Medical Society, Sir Samuel Wilks said:“To sit down in one’s chair daily, and write on a piece of paper the name of some drug for every ailment is an absurdity, and is simply a pandering to human weakness. I do not say that drugs are not useful in a moral sense—that is to say. their influence in certain cases is purely suggestive—l am merely contending that tlie method is not scientific. I know of no more successful practitioner than the late Sir William Gull, and his prescriptions very often consisted of nothing but coloured water.” Dr. Milne Bramwell quotes instances of eczema and hyperhidrosis that were cured by mental treatment after all other methods had failed. Sandow is a firm believer in the influence of the mind on the body. He says that the amount of benefit derived from exercise is governed almost entirely by the quantity of will power expended, and that it is necessary to concentrate the mind entirely on the group of muscles affected by any exercise. Milo, in his “strength for all,” lays great stress on' the power of the mind and the influence of suggestion. Indeed one could fill a book with quotations from eminent men of science and physical culturists testifying to the value of faith as a therapeutic agent. Mind and Body. Sceptical as the State may lie as to the value of prayer, it is interesting to note that this sceptism is not shared by doctors and scientific writers. Dr.

Dubois, though himself tin agnostic, assigns a leading place to religious faith as a curative agent. He places it before drugs in the treatment of the psychoneuroses. He says that one should make use of religious sentiments to restore patients to health, and adds: “It may seem strange to see u freethinker practising with believers, using religious convictions and recommending them to certain of his patients. Well, no, there is no contradiction in that. I have often been able to feel myself in the spirit of communion with Christians.” Hudson, after giving instances of cures wrought by prayer, says: “It is simply a scientific tfact which we must accept because it is susceptible of demonstration, and not because its ultimate cause can be explained.” The ‘‘British Medical Journal” had a remarkable article recently on the subject of mental healing, in which it stated that for a considerable time there had been a growing reaction against dogmatic materialism, and one of the most remarkable results had been the changed attitude of the medical profession towards faith healing. It published opinions of eminent authorities on the subject. Sir Clifford Allbutt thinks every part of the body is amenable to mental influence. Professor Osler urges that the medical profession should recognise the curative effects of faith. Dr. Claye Shaw’ says that it is outside his province to discuss prayer from the theological point of view’, but it is unquestionable Hint prayer, inspired by a living faith, has a wonderful effect as a curative agent. Sir Frederick Treves says that there are no drugs that are specifies against disease, and in the majority of cases where they are prescribed, they are not prescribed, to cure the disease, but to soothe that inherited craving for physic which in the human soul is almost as strong as the craving for drink. So we are faced with the curious spectacle of doctors themselves doubting the efficacy of their own drugs and of the State prosecuting people who share their doubts. d* The New Zealand B.A. The Roman augurs used to wonder that they could meet each other in the streets without smiling, seeing that they knew each other for hopeless frauds. A similar feeling must sometimes come over our educational authorities, judging by the way in which they d-ecry our university system. Professor I.aby thinks our university does not create new’ knowledge or form character. We have, he contends, a mere examining body, which does nothing to impart or create knowledge, lie advocates that universal panacea for all ills—a Royal Commission. Professor Rutherford considers that our students do not enjoy the facilities and opportunities they ought to enjoy, and that they aimed at passing examinations rather than attaining something. If it is true that our university does not impart knowledge or give attainments, the fault must lie largely with the authorities themselves. But we fancy the professors take too pessimistic a view. Our degrees rank higher than Hwy would have us believe, and a New Zealand pass degree is more than equal to a puss at. Oxford or (Cambridge as far as mere book knowledge is concerned. The standard for matriculation is quite equal to the

standard for the “Little-go” and “KesponsioiK, and in general knowledge our graduates are better equipped than many graduates from older institutions. As regards outside examinations, which s-eem to be especially distasteful to the professors, there can be no doubt that we could not get examiners as eminent in our own land. We always have peop’e clamouring for reform in every walk of life, and all reformers are more concerned to magnify defects than to suggest practicable remedies, Conditions in New Zealand are vastly different from conditions either in England or America, but we do not think our students, despite many disadvantages from which they sutler, will Ik* found to com pure unfavourably either as regards learning or character with student.- from other lands. The Value of Examinations. The university professors urge that too much stress is laid on examinations ami examination results. They say that it is of far more importance to know how and whore a man was trained than to know what examinations he has passed. This is in a sense undeniable, but examine tions properly conducted should test a. student’s training. The difference be tween the Honours papers and the Past papers is that the higher examination is supposed to test the acquisition of a faculty, while the lower examination tests the acquisition of a certain amount of knowledge. Thus a wrangler is supposed to have acquired the faculty of solving problems, a classic is supposed to have acquired a sense of style in literature, a science man the faculty of scientific observation and deduction. The skilled examiner can detect mere cram, and can assign merit to the papers that show signs of careful and intelligent training. Doubtless some element of luck enters into all examinations. A brilliant man may fail, while one less brilliant may succeed. Newman took a low second in classics, and C lerk Alaxwell was beaten by Routh for the senior wranglership. The world, often reverses the verdict of the schools. But wa have never yet found a substitute for examinations, and, properly conducted, they test training as well as knowledge. It is true that very little interest is taken in our university, but that is probably due to the fact that the practical value of a degree is not apparent. The successful man is often the man who has passed no examination and taken no course in arts or science. If reform is needed, it must be reform that will bring the university more into touch with the daily life of our people, ami the requirements of their vocations. This can only be done by a thorough revision of the syllabus and the elimination of many subjects that make for culture, but that are of little practical use to the masses of vur people. Al 'Wellington Children's Hospital. Few causes appeal to us more than those that aim at relieving suffering and ministering to the sick. 'lbis is especially the ease where the sick and suffering are little children. For this reason

It is not surprising to find that the appeal for funds in aid of a children’s hospital in Wellington has met with a ■no-t liberal response. The rich have given their hundreds, and the poor their pennies, and everyone has been anxious to help in the good cause. Mr. Ward lias done yeoman service by offering the services of his company for a benefit performance, and other proprietors of popular entertainments have followed suit. Only one discordant note has been struck. The following letter was addressed to the editor of the “New Zealand rimes*’:- Sir, Please correct tomorrow the statement you made to-day that my church is taking offerings next Sunday for the hospital fund. I don’t know where you got the news. I said plainly yesterday that until Mr. Hugh Ward is out of it we are not in it. I expect we shall join in collection, but not till he goes, ami this is a pretty general attitude among the churches.— I am. etc., J. J. NORTH. It is hard to believe the fast statement that this is a pretty general attitude amongst the churches. There was a certain parable spoken of by the Founder of the Christian religion to the effect ■that a certain man stood and prayed •thus with himself, “God, I thank 'Thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.” But the despised publican wa - justified above* the self-righteous Pharisee. St. Luke tells us that this •parable was addressed to certain which trusted in themselves that they were night eons, ami despised others, but nowadays many people have found reTuge in the higher criticism, and they reject as interpolations those parts of the Bible that don’t suit their pet theories. Perhaps the critics h ive also explained away •tin- text which says “Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the lea»st of these, ye did it not to me.”