[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
July 6, 1901


JAMA. 1901;XXXVII(1):30-31. doi:10.1001/jama.1901.02470270036005

It seems from an editorial in the Lancet,1 that the members of the medical profession of Great Britain, in their attempt at organization, have the same arguments to meet that we have in this country. One of these, and the most often used, sometimes by physicians themselves, is that we are forming trade-unions. The Lancet very correctly states that while we do not decry trade-unions, there is a decided difference between such and the organization of medical men which is being so slowly accomplished. There is no denying that trade-unions have sometimes been animated by nobler sentiments than the desire to extract from the employer of labor the maximum of pay for a minimum of work. If the tyranny of capital has been replaced by the tyranny of labor, the situation is one that usually adjusts itself. But admitting this, professional union means something more than this; we can