THE GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL AND DR. LLOYD
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] Sia,—The conclusions adverse to the decision of the General Medical Council in the case of Dr. W. Lloyd would appear, having regard to the report of the hearing published in the supplement to this week's British Medical Journal, to be based on false premises. As you rightly point out, if a medical man tries to sell remedies and withholds the prescription from the rest of the profession, he deserves his punishment. In this case' the article in the Daily Mail stated that the composition of the remedy was a secret, and, according to Dr. Lloyd's evidence, it contained many other untruths, yet Dr. Lloyd did nothing to draw the attention of the paper to the facts— did nothing at all, except make what he recognized at the time was a completely ineffective expostulation to the writer; of the article—whom he did not call to give evidence.
Much more important, it appears that the persons who
inquired from the Daily Mail the identity of the doctor did not put themselves into communication with him. Their names and addresses were sent to Dr. Lloyd, and his secretary wrote to them offering an appointment.
I submit that these facts place an entirely different com- plexion on the ease, and made the finding of the General Medical Council inevitable.
I should perhaps add that I am not a member of, nor have any connexion with, the medical profession.—I am, Sir, &c.,
W. S. JONES.
Junior Constitutional Club, Piccadilly, IF. 1.
Previous page
