I mention this because it differs from the explanation which Mr. Fenwick gave in his speech concerning my method of examination at the meeting of the Medical Society of London on Jan. 23, 1888. I must also strongly contradict Mr. Fenwick's statements concerning the share which he attributed to the Vienna instrument maker in the construction of the instrument. Leiter's connection with our instrument will be best explained when I say that he had to buy the patent[10] from me first in order to be allowed to make the instrument. Leiter has had no share in those peculiarities which characterize it as new. The introduction of the source of light into the organ had been practically brought about, the optical apparatus enlarging the view designed, the whole construction perfected, the instrument had proved itself useful in examining patients, and had been demonstrated by me in the Saechsisches Landes Medicinal Collegium before Leiter had any idea of the new invention! Also the eventual replacement of the first source of light (platinum wire) had been provided for.[11] Leiter has only made a few technical modifications on the finished instrument. I protest most emphatically against the incorrect explanations given by Mr. Fenwick, and against every connection of Leiter's name with my instruments. I hope to obtain in England the same generous recognition of my labors in this field that has been accorded to me in Germany.--_Lancet._ [10] Deutsche Patentschrifte, No. 6, 853. [11] Ibid. PAPILLOMATOUS TUMOR OF THE BLADDER, DEMONSTRATED BY MEANS OF LISTER'S ELECTRO-CYSTOSCOPE. By F. N. Otis, M.D., Clinical Professor, College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York. A. G----, aged twenty-three, United States; single; barber.