§ MR. DAVENPORTsaid, he wished to ask the President of the Poor Law Board, Whether it is true that the Birmingham Guardians of the Poor have cut down the number of the District Medical Officers from eight to five, thereby giving to each District Medical Officer an average population of 45,000; whether any Memorial of the 20th day of February 1869 has been sent in from the Medical Practitioners of Birmingham protesting against this alteration; whether the Birmingham Branch of the British Medical Association have sent in a similar Memorial; and, whether he will lay upon the Table a Copy of such Memorial and the Correspondence that has passed between the Guardians and the Poor Law Board?
§ MR. GOSCHEN, in reply, said, it was 1090 so far true that the Birmingham Board of Guardians had cut down the number of their district medical officers from eight to five—that at the election which was held lately they elected only five of those officers instead of the eight they formerly had. But the question was by no means settled as between the Poor Law Board and the Birmingham Guardians. Remonstrances had been made against the proposed alteration of these numbers; and a letter was addressed in consequence by the Poor Law Board to the Birmingham Guardians, asking for an explanation of the grounds of the alteration. The Guardians did not answer that letter, but on the 4th of March they elected five instead of eight district medical officers. On the 6th of March the Poor Law Board wrote to them again, asking for an explanation of that election having been held notwithstanding its previous letter, and in that later communication the Poor Law Board said it was at a loss to know what were the grounds on which the proposed reduction in the number of district medical officers rested, and stating that, the Board must refuse its sanction to that reduction unless it could be satisfactorily shown that the duties of the district medical officers had very materially diminished. That reduction had however been made, and officially the Poor Law Board had no information of the circumstances; but he was informed that while the district medical officers had been reduced from eight to five, their salaries had been increased from £150 to £200; and a public vacci-nator—whose duties were previously performed by the district medical officers—had been appointed; so that the reduction in the number was rather from eight to six than from eight to five. However, unless good grounds were shown for the alteration, it would not be sanctioned by the Poor Law Board. The Memorial received on the subject from the Council of the Birmingham I Branch of the British Medical Association alleged that the proposed reduction: was contrary to the interests of the poor and of the medical profession. It was, however, not with its bearing on the interests of the medical profession so much as with its bearing on the interests of the poor that the Guardians and the Poor Law Board were properly concerned.