treated," is surely not worthy of a place in any collection of medical cases. Take, for example, the following report, as one of the instances of the successful treatment of a chronic, spinal, or cerebral disease!

"The Rev. R. S., aged 37, of a pallid countenance, but strong, short figure, consulted me in February, 1838. He complained of inability to walk, or take any excise, from vertigo and languor; of a fixed pain, and sense of obstruction, in the occiput, and uneasiness and numbness in the loins. His utterance was slow, and very laborious; and I ascertained from his friends that complaints which he also made of growing incapacity for business, were not exaggerated, whatever the cause might be. He was a sensible man, of an even temper. I ascertained that in early youth some evil habits of an enfeebling nature had been indulged in. He was married, without children, and lived in the country.

Sumat Pil. Hydrarg. Sub. C. gr. iij.; Pil. Galbani. C. gr. v., o. n.

B Sp. Ammoniæ Succinat. 3 iss.; Aquæ 3 vj.; 4tam partem ter quotidie. B Ext Colocynth. C. Rhei, äa Dj.; Ext. Hyoscyam. gr. x.; in pil. x. divis. j. vel. ij. p. r. n.

"This course was pursued, with slight modifications, to the beginning of May, and was attended by the greatest relief of all his symptoms. No change was made in the general habits of Mr. R. which could explain his cure, independently of the medical measures. I may add, that I have seen this gentleman since in the enjoyment of good health."-P. 126.

The solitary case of " Meningitis, showing only increased vascularity,' related in the next Chapter is-standing as it does by itself to say the least, very profitless. "Every day's additional experience," remarks our author, "tells us, how little we know, so far as post-mortem appearances are concerned, of the evidence of sthenic inflammation, where only increased vascularity is present, in cerebral disease; and, again, the inexpediency of a depletory system in acute mania rests on good authority."

Can we report more favourably of the contents of the next Chapter, entitled "Albuminous urine-Ascites-Paracentesis Abdominis ?" In truth, we cannot. The narrative of the first case is so slovenly and imperfect that it is impossible to make any thing out of it. The specific gravity of the urine in the first case is stated to have been 10; the author means, we suppose, 1,010. Then, from the mere circumstance that it was slightly albuminous, he takes it for granted the kidneys were affected with granular degeneration; and, finding that his patient appeared to be rather benefited than otherwise by the use of mild mercurials, he hints that these have been needlessly reprobated in Renal Diseases. "The opinions, expressed on high authority against the use of mercury under presumed granular disease, deserve to be reconsidered. The inflammatory process often attendant on that state is such as mercury influences curatively in other instances. The question, no doubt, must be settled by experience; but, as far as analogy is concerned, the burthen of proof rests rather with those who impugn the expediency of mercurials in these cases, than with those who may assert it."

The case of presumed "Cæcal Abscess," opening externally upon the right nates, deserves brief notice only from the strange tone of the remarks with which its history concludes:

1847.]

The Claims of Mesmerism.

393

"Besides the general interestingness of the subject, I am inclined to think that our diagnosis, both in abdominal and thoracic disease, might be helped by farther enquiry into the distinctive cerebral phenomena to which they may give

occasion.

"Whatever interest the above particulars may claim, not the least important fact which they convey is the completeness of the patient's recovery under the agency of the waters of Homburg and Schwalback. And I may here observe, that the patient, whose judgment and clearness of intellect might well be relied on, has affirmed to me with great distinctiveness the benefit which she received from those waters, independently of the general good obtained from air and scene, to which we are, perhaps, disposed to attribute more than the due share which they are entitled to in the recovery of chronic cases."-P. 152.

The case of "Double Consciousness, &c.," occurring in an hysterical girl, related in Chapter XVIII., leads Dr. Mayo into the dubious paths of metaphysical speculation. He shows a kindly feeling to the Mesmerists, and considers that they have been unfairly dealt with by the medical profession. "We allow our nurses," says he, " to rock our infants to sleep. Are we to be told that it is absurd and unjustifiable to produce a form of sleep, during which pain is unfelt, and irritation allayed, by movements of the hands?" He evidently believes in the reality of the mesmeric rapport, and its accompanying marvels:

"Whatever the beneficial effects of mesmerism may turn out to be, it comes before us fraught with liabilities to abuse and mischief in its application to chronic disease, which is likely to be its especial subject, of no common kind. The possession which it gives to the manipulator of the person's mind who is subjected to his agency, is of a nature to justify these fears, and there is reason to suppose that it has been sometimes turned to the worst account by unprincipled persons." P. 157.

There is no evil that we ever heard of as likely to result from mesmeric manipulations save that a great and most mischievous one, it must be admitted of their being made the occasion of acting upon the sexual feelings of young females. This, in short, is the secret of almost all the cases of successful mesmeric practice having occurred in unmarried women. Hence, too, its deserved reprobation by the great mass of the medical profession, as well as by the public generally, as a means of therapeutic relief. The guarded and hesitating manner, in which our author handles the subject, betrays a sad want of confidence in his own judgment; for, if we mistake not, Dr. Mayo has been making enquiries into Mesmerism for some years past. With a decided leaning to its claims for in one passage he does not hesitate to recognise the truthfulness of the assertion, that Mesmerism is "a law of nature which is as much a part of the human constitution as the processes of thought and digestion"!—he will not, however, commit himself either one way or the other, but suggests that the Royal Society, or some such public body, should appoint a commission to examine into its merits.

"One would have thought, that the extremely interesting nature of the mental phenomena disclosed by mesmerism, supposing it to be truthful, or to contain truth, would have so strongly disposed philosophical men to the enquiry which I am suggesting, as that no arguments such as I am adducing should be needed. It is to be regretted that there is no royal society for psychological as well as for material phenomena.

"A candid enquiry into what may be termed the more substantial forms of empiricism is expected generally from us by the public; for the most important physical truths must have had an empirical period in their promulgation. At the same time, considerable difficulties are thrown in our way by that same public, in the execution of this duty. The public is, indeed, a severe task-master. It is at once inquisitive and sensitive in regard to so-called quackery; prompt in imputing that contumelious term to regular practitioners, if they afford attention to the class of subjects, and equally prompt in imputing to them an uncandid spirit if they decline to do so.

"Our efforts in this direction will, in truth, be most effective, and at the same time least detrimental to ourselves, if directed from without; the governments of other countries have empowered commissions of enquiry into such matters. There never has been an epoch in the history of medicine at which such a commission has been more expressly indicated than at the present moment."

P. 159.

What good, may we ask, has the double French Commission done? Next to nothing; both parties, mesmerists and their opponents, have appealed to its reports in justification of their opinions.

The transition from one description of empiricism to another is just what might be expected. We were therefore not surprised to find, after Dr. Mayo's bland demeanour towards Mesmerism, that he was nearly equally courteous to the sister science (!) of Homœopathy. He alludes, at first, with expressions of admiration, to the "philosophical investigation" of its claims, which one of our contemporary Journalists has recently instituted, and the result of which has been to convince him (not Dr. M.) that the homoeopathists have the merit of curing nearly as many patients as the regular practitioners! Our author has not a single word to say in the way of contradiction or of protest against this specimen of ignorant credulity. But when he is coolly told by one of this gentleman's correspondentswhose communication is declared to be "of high stamp and admirable tendency," that, "in all cases and on all occasions, Nature is truly the agent in the cure of the disease; and that, as she acts in accordance with fixed and invariable laws, (what, pray, is the meaning of this in reference to diseases?) the aim of the physician ought always to be to facilitate her efforts, by acting in harmony with, and not in opposition to, these laws," he at once detects the fallacy of the assertion, and exposes its absurdity with considerable spirit in the following passage:

"That diseases follow laws and a course imposed by nature is most true; this I presume to be the meaning of Dr. Combe; it is moreover equally true, that in many cases this law, or course, though it is quite compatible with the completion of the disease, is incompatible with the life of the patient. Thus, when pneumonia proceeds from its congestive to its inflammatory stage, then onward into hepatization and purulent infiltration, can any thing be more natural or more fatal than its progression? As a disease in which the so-called natural treatment is applicable, that is, in which most of those resources must be excluded which thought has elicited from the stores of nature, Dr. Combe has most unhappily selected pleurisy; and here, supposing the exciting cause not to have been violent or longcontinued, he recommends the absence of medicinal agents. He even argues in favour of effusion being allowed to take place. The possible slowness of its unassisted absorption, its injurious influence upon the investing membrane of the thoracic cavity, the gradual substitution of a purulent for a serous effusion, where blood-letting and the use of mercury might have forbidden that event, is left un

.1847.]

Recent Medical Heresies.

395

Cheeded. Surely these are contingencies not to be hazarded with a view to follow laws of disease which lead to structural disturbance. The laws and history of ague have been most attentively and wisely studied for many ages; not in order that our practice might be in unison with those laws, but that it might interrupt and break the sequence of phenomena which would take place under them. If the disease be permitted to exhaust itself under this sequence, the patient is probably exhausted pari passu.”—P. 183.

A little farther on, Dr. Mayo makes the following very just observations:

"There is something very attractive at first sight in the prostration of scientific interference before natural laws. But it is not justified by the history of the laws of disease, in the extent to which it is recommended. That history and those laws must in fact be attentively perused and excogitated, as the plans of an enemy are studied, and with the same intention; namely, with a view to obviate them or prevent their development. The doctrines of non-interference may gain a temporary sway through the talents of their supporters, but this truth, habitually familiar to the English mind, will afterwards recur in full force, and 'Young Physic' will rise from a temporary suspension of active measures to a more heroic use than ever of calomel and the lancet."-P. 188.

No sooner, however, has our author given expression to these remarks, than straightway he speaks of a report of cases treated on Homœopathic principles as "a very valuable contribution," an "excellent detail!" As a specimen, he relates from the said report a case of Pneumonia, where the patient's life was evidently sacrificed to the plan of treatment by infinitesmal doses of Aconite and Phosphorus! Yet such is the system, by the adoption of which we have been told of late, by some who have put themselves forward as would-be regenerators of the science of Medicine, "homoeopathists cure nearly as many patients as the regular practitioners."

On the strength of the very mischievously mismanaged case just alluded to, Dr. Mayo screws himself up to declare homoeopathy a "heresy ;" but the tenderness of his spirit seems at once to rebuke him for the harshness of such an expression, "which may seem inappropriate to the labours of the very respectable practitioners, by whom it has occasionally been carried out!" and he closes his remarks by predicting "that the theory of Hahnemann, and his school, is destined to melt away and disappear, or to be consolidated in a fragmentary state with the general mass of medical knowledge, so far as any portions of it can survive the test of time and experience."

Now we must frankly tell him, that it is not by such weak and washy means as he employs that the progress of rank empiricism is to be resisted, and the scientific character of our profession is to be defended against either the open assaults of mendacious quacks, or the covert underminings of false or ignorant friends within the camp. We want bolder and stouter men than him to expose and denounce the "heresy" that he alludes to. Dr. Mayo, indeed, is not likely to apostatise from the true faith; but it would not do to rely upon his strenuous assistance in defence of it. He is one of those who are neither hot nor cold; but his lukewarmness seems to proceed rather from distrust of his own judgment than from any vacillation of principle. He evidently perceives the folly of the attempt that has lately been made to bring the niassaries of a do-nothing practice into favour, and yet he lacks courage to condemn it with energy and decision.

He gently taps the delinquents upon the back, expressing his regret that they have gone so far. He will not join with them; but he is not quite prepared to set himself against them. It is this weak and uncertain conduct, this half halting between two opinions, this vain seeking to reconcile the claims of science with the pretensions of quackery, that we cannot abide. It is high time for men to speak out their minds with unmistakeable decision. For any one, who has had the opportunity of studying diseases not in the closet or from books alone, but by the bedside of the sick, to try and make us believe that recovery from an acute malady like Pneumonia is quite as likely to take place in the hands of an Homœopathic doctor as in those of a regular Physician, is a piece of effrontery that we were certainly not prepared to expect in the present day. But the foolish attempt will not do. There may be much to correct alike in the science and in the art of medicine in the present day, both in this country and abroad. But it is assuredly not by preaching down either the over-active practice of some physicians, or by preaching up the do-nothing silliness of empirics; it is not either by denouncing polypharmacy on the one hand, or by eulogising homoeopathy on the other; it is not by suggesting the trial of every new remedy, or by giving currency to the assertions of such men as Fleischmann or Henderson-alas! the disgrace to that uni

*

*The last suggestion, that has been made by one of the disciples of the "Young Physic" school, is the use of the cold-water sheet in the treatment of Fever! Some of the cases, treated according to the Preisnitzian plan, were cured within forty-eight hours! Morrison's Pills, we doubt not, could do the same. At least, an Hygeist would tell you so. But a much more offensive communication, than even that of the surgeon of the Leicester Dispensary, is the account given by a medical officer of one of H. M. ships of the practice which he has been pursuing, of late years, in the treatment of the crew that were committed to his professional care. This person-he wisely withholds his name, and that of the vessel to which he is attached-informs us that, upon a recent outbreak of Fever (the remittent of the Mediterranean, we believe) on board his vessel, he selected twelve cases for experiment. Of these, four were treated by him with Blood-letting and the use of vigorous antiphlogistic remedies; two with large doses (a scruple) of Quinine, from the very commencement of the attack; two with liberal doses of Mercurials; two with a draught-containing 90 drops (!) of Laudanum, as many of tincture of Digitalis, and of antimonial and ipecacuan wines to be given at once, and to be repeated in six hours; and two with mere sponging of the surface with vinegar, and the unrestrained use of water to drink. Of the first four, two died; of the next two, one died; and of the following two, one died the others recovered. "Need I add," says this reckless promulgator of his own shame," that, since that period, the patient labouring under Fever, who has been solely under my charge [his colleagues, we suppose, would never go along with him], has never been bled, or that but very little medicine, in the treatment of either the Mediterranean or the W. Indian Fever, has been expended in my practice." This wiseacre goes on to tell us that, for some years past, he has never used the lancet but once, on board his ship; and he closes his communication with cases of Gastrodynia, obstinate Constipation, and of Dysentery accompanied with Tape-worm, in which a cure was effected with bread-pills, after the ordinary remedies had failed! All this is certainly very creditable to the naval medical service, in the present day; and not less so to the character of professional journalism, in the 19th century!