ignorant of his doings. No information was at any time vouchsafed to me. Of the 100 cases, one (No. 49) was not cancerous, sixty-six were post-operative failures, and eighteen were “inoperable,” making eighty-nine out of the 100. Of the remaining eleven, four are described as “ lost sight of “ and three as “ alive.” Of the class of case which a scientific test demands—viz., an absolutely unoperated one—the 100 cases include seven, as against sixty-six recurrent cases after one or several operations. Of these seven cases, three were “lost sight of,” three were “alive,” and one was dead. Five of the cases at least were syphilitic, and my experience hitherto has been that no good results can be hoped for in cases suffering from such a complication as syphilis. Ten of them had been treated with the X rays, which, looked at scientifically, must be regarded as one of the best stimulants of cancer ever discovered. How far the eighteen inoperable cases were suitable ones for the treatment it is impossible to say. Here, as in all other respects, Dr. Bainbridge was his own judge, jury, prosecuting advocate, etc., and all the scientific man need say to sum up shortly what the report is, apart from all other considerations, there are in it no evidences at all to show that Dr. Bainbridge ever considered, much less sought to eliminate, all or any possible sources of error in his experiments.
On the fifth line of his “scientific report” the author refers to the determination he had expressed in 1907 to give the enzyme treatment “a thorough, scientific test.” A study of his report reveals that (1) five strengths of trypsin injections were used, of which the strongest is stated to have had six times the potency of the weakest but no attempt is made in the report to discriminate between these five injections, or the cases in which each