PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
1 2 3 4
Fmi C.O.885
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO
19 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
~~1392
891
(No. 600.)
2
No. 2.
EAST AFRICA PROTECTORATE.
THE GOVERNOR to THE SECRETARY OF STATE.
(Received January 12, 1909.)
Governor's Office, Nairobi, December 15, 1908. [Published in Appendix I. to [Cd. 4476] March, 1909.]
No. 3.
MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE TROPICAL DISEASES RESEARCH FUND ADVISORY COMMITTEE, HELD ON THE 13TH OF JANUARY, 1909, AT 4 P.M., AT THE COLONIAL OFFICE.
PRESENT:
Sir West Ridgeway (in the Chair).
Sir Thomas Barlow.
Sir Thomas Holderness.
Sir Charles Lucas.
Sir Patrick Manson.
Dr. Rose Bradford.
Mr. Read.
Mr. Keith (Secretary).
1. The Minutes of the Meetings of the Advisory Committee of the 27th of November and the 10th of December, 1908,* were approved.
2. The question of the publication of Dr. Fraser's report was considered. Mr. Read explained the circumstances in which the report was laid before the Advisory Committee. The work was being carried on in the Research Laboratory at Kuala Lumpor, in the Federated Malay States. An abstract of the report in its original form had been drawn up and sent to the editor of the "Lancet" for publication, and the editor had called the attention of Sir Patrick Manson to the fact that difficulties would arise with the public if the report were to be published as it stood, and Sir Patrick Manson then called the attention of the Colonial Office to the matter, with the result that the Secretary of State addressed a telegram to the High Commissioner for the Federated Malay States, instructing him that the report (which would normally have appeared in full as a publication of the Research Laboratory) should not be issued as it stood. The High Commissioner had accordingly sent Dr. Fraser home to lay before the Secretary of State a revised report in order to obtain approval of its publication, and the Secretary of State desired the advice of the Advisory Committee on the question.
Before discussing the report Sir West Ridgeway raised the question whether the Advisory Committee were to consider merely the scientific aspect of the question or the political aspect. Sir Charles Lucas pointed out that the position of the Secretary of State was a difficult one, as a publication of work done in a research laboratory under the control of the Administration of the Federated Malay States ultimately rested on his responsibility, and Sir West Ridgeway agreed that in considering the report, it would be necessary to take the political work as well as the scientific into consideration.
Attention was called to expressions on pages 2 and 7 of the draft report. The criticism was made that too much stress was laid in the wording of the report on the deliberate nature of the experiments carried out, and it was pointed out that much of the objection to the report could, no doubt, be removed by the use of more guarded language, and after some discussion, it was agreed that Dr. Fraser should revise his report in consultation with the Secretary of the Advisory Committee, and that if necessary the matter should be mentioned again at a subsequent meeting of the Committee.
• Nos. 60 and 68 in Miscellaneous No. 221.
3
Sir Patrick Manson also called attention from the scientific point of view to the fact that the results of the research were stated somewhat too positively, and that all that would be proper to say was not that the origin of the disease in the Federated Malay States was due to the use of white rice, but that the use of white rice stood in close connection with the disease; and it was agreed that Sir Patrick Manson should, before the next meeting, indicate to Dr. Fraser the alterations he would desire to see made in the summary of the conclusions.
Subject to these alterations it was agreed that the report should certainly be published, and the scientific members of the Advisory Committee expressed their opinion of its great value.
3. Dr. Fraser then proceeded to lay before the Committee his plans for future work, approval of which he desired the Committee to give. He proposed to carry out detailed observations in the Taiping Gaol by selecting from the long sentence prisoners who had 15 months or more of their sentences to serve some 400 indi- viduals who would be examined to see that they were free from beri beri. They would then be isolated, and would cease to perform work outside the gaol, to prevent the possibility of accidental infection. They would then be divided into four groups, of which the first would have a fixed diet of which white rice would form part; the second would have a similar diet, except that parboiled rice would be substituted for white rice; the third would have a different diet, in which white rice would form part; and the fourth would have the same diet as the third, save that for white rice, parboiled rice would be given. All these diets were adequate to maintain the prisoners in health. Dr. Fraser, however, admitted that the first two diets were monotonous, because of the use of salt fish and the absence of fresh meat. He also stated that the officer in charge of the gaol in which the experiment was to be carried out was not prepared to accept the proposed diets, on the ground that the medical officer would not himself certify that the diet was adequate, though that officer was prepared to accept Dr. Fraser's assurance of the adequacy of the diet, and it would need some alteration to be made in the approved scale of diet for the prison before his experiment could be carried out. It was his desire to obtain the approval of the Committee for his proposals in order that the Govern- ment might feel justified in making the necessary alteration in the prescribed diet.
The members of the Committee immediately expressed their sense of the difficulties of the proposal made by Dr. Fraser. Sir West Ridgeway pointed out that the experiment would be regarded as a deliberate attempt to produce the disease in prisoners who were not, of course, free agents, and that any Secretary of State who sanctioned the experiment would have to face very serious criticisms in Parliament and in this country.
Sir Patrick Manson suggested that the prisoners might be given the choice of either taking white rice or parboiled rice, leaving it to them to decide; while Sir T. Barlow suggested that the choice might be given with a clear explanation of the danger of white rice, and with a promise of reward to those who chose to run the danger.
Sir C. Lucas expressed the opinion that even Sir T. Barlow's proposal could hardly be accepted as it stood, inasmuch as the principle of the prison was that the prisoners were confined for offences; that they must be required to do hard labour as a punishment; and that they must be fed adequately to maintain them in health and to enable them to carry out the penal labour; but that to experiment with these prisoners was contrary to the whole principle of prison discipline, and he feared that it could not be recommended to the Secretary of State. Sir West Ridgeway confirmed this view; the Government stood in a quasi-paternal relation to the prisoners, and even if they were willing to run risks (and the exact character of willingness might be difficult to determine), the Government was not entitled to induce them by rewards to run such risks.
It was agreed, after further discussion, that Dr. Fraser's proposals should be circulated to the members, and should be further discussed at a meeting to be held on the 27th of January, at 4 p.m. Stress was laid upon the importance of Dr. Fraser endeavouring to suggest some other means of operation, and on the possi- bility that the argument from negative instances, that is, from the non-occurrence of beri-beri in natives eating parboiled rice, might be sufficient to justify the acceptance of the theory in its full extent.
16978
A 2