r (jv 1* 
American \ nslituteofljoimvopatluj. 
1881 
MEETING HELD AT BRIGHTON BEACH, JUNE 14th-17th 
ADDRESS 
By the President, 
J. W. DOWLING, M. D. 
OF NEW YORK CITY. 
Printed and distributed in accordance with ihe following resolution : 
“Resolved, That five thousand copies of the President’s Address he printed, 
aside from the proceedings of the Institute, for general distribution.” 
PITTSBURGH; 
Printed by Jos. Eichbaum & Co., 48 Fifth Avenue. 
1881. Abstract from the (Report of the Committee on the 
Tresident’s Address: 
Resolved, “That the President’s definition of the words regular and 
irregular, as applied to schools and practitioners of medicine, be adopted by 
this Institute as correct.” 
Resolved, “ That hereafter this definition be conspicuously printed in all 
published documents and Transactions of the Institute, in order that the 
profession, of all schools, may the sooner be familiarized with and led to 
adopt it.” 
Resolved, “That five thousand copies of the address be printed, aside 
from the proceedings of the Institute, for general distribution.” 
Resolved, “ That the thanks of the American Institute of Homoeopathy 
be, and are hereby extended to J. W. Dowling, M. D., for his able and 
timely address, and that the General Secretary be directed to present 
him with a properly engrossed copy of this resolution.” 
NICHOLAS FEANCIS COOKE, M. D. 
NATHAN E. MOESE, M. D. 
WILLIAM OWENS, M. D. PRESIDENT’S ADDRESS. 
A shoet time since, in glancing over the pages of a reputable 
medical journal, my eye fell upon an article headed “Medical 
Societies Criticised.” Now, this journal was thrust upon me just 
as I was sitting down, pen in hand, with a brain tired by a hard 
winter’s work, to write the President’s annual address for this 
meeting of the American Institute of Homoeopathy. The title of 
the article impressed me, for naturally everything relating to 
medical societies has been of unusual interest to me for the past 
twelve months. I laid down my pen and perused the criticism 
carefully. All taking an active part in the proceedings of the 
meeting described were severely handled, but the poor President, 
it seemed to me, received more than his share of abuse. His ap- 
pearance, his manner, and particularly his annual address, were 
subjects of severe animadversion. As I finished I drew a long 
and deep breath, and said audibly, and wickedly perhaps: I 
hope some day the author of that article will be President of a 
Medical Society; that he will have an annual address to prepare 
and deliver, and that he will be limited for a subject to the 
progress of homoeopathy during the past year. 
This matter of a President’s address is not a voluntary act. The 
by-laws of this Institute say: “The President shall deliver an 
address, at the opening of each session, on the progress of homoe- 
opathy during the past year, and shall make such suggestions as he 
shall deem necessary for the Institute to take action upon during 
the session.” He is not obliged to make suggestions, but an address 
must be delivered, and upon a certain topic. In delivering it he 
is simply performing an imperative duty. He does not invite 
criticism. 2 
The object of the American Institute of Homoeopathy is stated 
in its constitution to be “the improvement of homoeopathic thera- 
peutics and all other departments of medical science.” .It is only 
necessary for us to glance over the pages of the thirty odd volumes 
of Transactions to satisfy ourselves as to how much has been 
accomplished by our national body in this direction. Although it 
is not stated in the constitution—has not this Institute an object 
beyond this? Is there not much benefit derived from the inter- 
change of fraternal feelings between practitioners from all parts of 
the United States, and through our delegates to the International 
Congress, between brother practitioners throughout the civilized 
world ? Is not the freedom from care, the rest from arduous pro- 
fessional labors, the change of scene, the recreation (to many of our 
number the only opportunity throughout the twelve months of 
the year to absolutely free themselves from the tiresome and trying 
daily routine of the physician’s life), enough in itself to more 
than compensate for the expense and loss of time necessary for 
attendance upon its annual meetings? The friendships formed, the 
differences explained and reconciled, the pleasant reflections upon 
the meeting passed, the looking forward to the reunion of the year 
to come, combine to make these gatherings valuable to us collect- 
ively and individually. The days passed with the members of 
this Institute assembled in a body, particularly since it has been 
our custom to sleep, eat and drink beneath one common roof, have 
been among the happiest of my life, and I have reason to believe 
that this is but an expression of the experience of all whose custom 
it is to regularly attend the meetings of this our national medical 
organization. 
I congratulate the Institute upon the prospect this year of a 
large attendance, a profitable and pleasant meeting. 
Progress has undoubtedly been made during the past year—as 
has been in every year since our illustrious father in medicine first 
expounded our law of cure. But differences of opinion exist among 
our members as to what constitutes progress in homoeopathy. 
Having been chosen to your Presidency by no faction or party but 
by a unanimous vote, it is proper that I should regard, in any 
remarks which I shall make, those differences of opinion. I am 
'debarred, if I have any special views on important matters which 
to a certain extent divide the members of our school, referring to 3 
them. It is not for me to say on this occasion whether I believe 
in the universality or non-universality of our law of cure. If it is 
my custom, in prescribing, to use the very high dilutions, the me- 
dium or the very low, and if my belief is that either one of these 
preparations is the only proper and rational method of prescribing 
when treating disease in accordance with our law—knowing that 
each of these views has its adherents among those who have 
elevated me to this position—a proper delicacy prevents me from 
giving utterance to my own. 
If it is my belief that as a professed follower of Hahnemann, in 
my efforts to relieve suffering and cure disease safely, promptly and 
pleasantly, I am, regardless of diagnosis and pathology, to be 
governed in the selection of my remedy entirely by the totality of 
the symptoms; and perhaps being a non-believer in the theory that 
certain diseases are self-limited (some of these from their onset be- 
ing incurable, while others tend to recovery and are not, so far as 
our present knowledge goes, shortened or greatly changed by med- 
ical treatment), if I hold with those who style themselves pure 
homoeopaths, that provided a remedy can be found which, in its 
action upon the healthy, accurately corresponds with the superficial 
symptoms of a certain case of sickness, and that remedy be ad- 
ministered in a sufficiently infinitesimal quantity, the patient must 
recover—and that if he does recover, my single remedy has cured 
him—I am obliged to refrain from expressing such views as my 
own, for there are in our membership thoughtful and thoroughly 
educated men, successful men, and practitioners of large experience, 
who claim that to relieve suffering and cure disease in the most 
speedy and effectual manner—which all concede is the prime aim 
of the physician’s calling—the homoeopath should be untrammeled ; 
that all that is worth culling from the experience of ages belongs 
to him, if in his judgment necessity compels him to use it; that 
cases arise requiring in their treatment purely mechanical measures, 
others where his knowledge of organic chemistry and the physio- 
logical action of drugs must be resorted to for means of relief, and 
that there are others positively incurable, requiring purely pallia- 
tive treatment; and that physiology and pathology should never 
be lost sight of in the treatment of disease ; that it is not the out- 
ward manifestations alone with which he has to do. And these 
men claim that they too are pure homoeopaths, for they have pro- 4 
claimed their belief in the homoeopathic law of cure, and strictly 
adhere to that law whenever in their judgment it is compatible 
with the best interests of their patients so to do. 
Harmony is always an evidence of progress, and I congratulate 
the members of our Institute on the fact that during the past year 
there has been a remarkable freedom from controversy and disput- 
ing upon matters of difference connected with our efforts as 
homoeopathic practitioners to cure disease. There have been 
fewer unkind criticisms; fewer open letters in our medical jour- 
nals; more respect has been paid to the views of those entertaining 
differences of opinion ; liberalism of thought and action has been 
countenanced and encouraged; and the conclusion seems to have 
become almost general that it would be a misfortune if we, who 
have always been considered liberal, should now depart from our 
time-honored principles, and create dissension and possibly rupture 
by an attempt to restrict the adherents of our school. We are all 
believers in the homoeopathic law of cure, and to the best of our 
individual ability practice in accordance with that law. Some, 
perhaps, are more successful in their prescriptions than others, but 
so far as I have been able to judge, no matter what his special 
views as to the size of the dose, as to the frequency of its repetition, 
as to whether greater reliance is to be placed upon the original 
provings of Hahnemann and his immediate followers, or upon 
those of more recent date—the homoeopathic practitioner is well 
pleased with the results of his efforts. Few believe, fewer are 
ready to acknowledge, that a brother practitioner entertaining dif- 
ferent views from himself is more successful than he. Some 
years since, in an article in one of our Western journals, the 
writer claimed a remarkable degree of success in his prescrip- 
tions for the sick, but he said: “There is a secret to my success, and 
that secret is, that I never use an old remedy where a new one is in- 
dicated.” The following month a brief article appeared from the 
pen of another practitioner, who claimed that he, too, had met 
with remarkable success in his prescriptions, and felt that, with 
the author of the article in the preceding number, he, too, had 
reason to be proud, and that he, too, had a secret which he was 
ready, for the benefit of his fellow practitioners, to divulge—and 
his secret was that he never used a new remedy where an old one 
was indicated. It will not be out of place for me to suggest an 5 
absolute cessation on the part of the members of this Institute and 
the practitioners of our school outside of this organization, of con- 
troversy and dispute upon the matters of dilference to which refer- 
ence has been made, and to urge our medical journals to refuse to 
publish articles of a general or personal nature calculated to breed 
dissension in our ranks. 
Our school is not in danger from those who, styling themselves 
iC regulars,” have been for nearly seventy-five years, by fair and 
foul means, endeavoring to arrest its progress. Notwithstanding 
this abuse our members have steadily increased and are still con- 
stantly increasing. But little more than half a century has passed 
since Dr. Gram, the pioneer of homoeopathy in America, first 
located in this country. Our system has grown in popularity 
till now six thousand physicians practice in accordance with our 
law—or perhaps, speaking more accurately, to the best of their 
ability in accordance with our law—in the United States alone, 
and we learn from the report of our Bureau of Registration and 
Statistics that we have eleven Homoeopathic Medical Colleges, 
thirty-eight Homoeopathic Hospitals, twenty-nine Dispensaries, 
twenty-three State Societies, ninety-two Local Societies, and some 
sixteen Homoeopathic Medical Journals; and in addition to all this, 
although homoeopathy is not credited with the change, our method 
of treatment is being generally adopted by the advanced members 
of the opposing school. 
If the statement made by your President for the year 1879, and 
received by this Institute, that “ one who only occasionally pre- 
scribes homoeopathically is a homceopathist” is accepted, our number 
would be more than quadrupled. Taking this statement and that 
of the editor of the Medical Record, probably the most popular 
and influential of the old .school medical journals in this country, 
in its issue of May 7th, 1881, in the response to the question, What 
constitutes a regular practitioner ? it is difficult to draw the line be- 
tween the homoeopathic and so-called regular physician. That edi- 
tor says: “ Our correspondent’s inquiry is a little difficult to answer 
in the absence of any distinct and authorized declaration on the part 
of the prominent medical associations of this country. The code 
of ethics is silent on the subject, and so far as we are aware the 
American Medical Association has never given a definition of the 
phrase ‘regular physician.’ The code, however, states that ho 6 
one can be considered a regular practitioner or a fit associate in 
consultation, whose practice is based on an exclusive dogma, to the 
rejection of the accumulated experience of the profession, and of 
the aids actually furnished by anatomy, physiology, pathology or 
organic chemistry.” He says, further : “ This, it will be perceived, 
is a negative declaration, and we believe that as a matter of fact, the 
persons answering this description are now quite few in number. 
It certainly does not strictly apply to a large proportion of the so- 
called homoeopathists of this country. As the homoeopathic colleges 
teach anatomy, physiology, pathology and organic chemistry, it is 
hardly to be supposed that their graduates reject these aids in ac- 
tual practice.” And again, this same editor says in another article 
entitled “Lord Beaconsfield and Homoeopathy,” “a physician should 
not be ostracised because he thinks there are some useful remedies 
in the so-called homoeopathic therapeutics which can be prescribed 
in very small doses with good effect, or even because he thinks that 
the ‘ similia similibus ’ principle is a suggestive guide in the • use 
of remedies.” 
It strikes me there should be no great difficulty in defining the 
word “regular,” as applied to practitioners of medicine. Homoeo- 
paths have always, since the term was introduced, taken exception 
to the exclusive use by the dominant school of medicine, as applied 
to themselves, of the word “regular,” and we have also taken ex- 
ception to the use of the word “irregular,” as applied to ourselves, 
by our professional brethren of the old school, and claimed that 
there was no legal or rational reason for this misapplication of 
these terms; contending most positively that every regularly 
chartered college was a regular medical college, and that every 
graduate of such a college was a regular practitioner of medicine. 
How, in the absence of any distinct and authorized declaration on 
the part of the prominent medical associations of this country as 
to what constitutes a regular practitioner, and as the code of ethics 
of the American Medical Association is silent on the subject, and 
as no medical body has ever given a definition of the phrase, 
“regular physician,” and as the members of this body claim to be 
regular physicians, and as we have the same right to define the 
words regular and irregular, as applied to medical practitioners, as 
has any other organization, and as this is the oldest national medi- 
cal organization, and, as there is much in the right of priority, 7 
would it not be well for this Institute, taking Webster’s Un- 
abridged Dictionary as its guide, to define, for the benefit of the 
medical profession at large, the phrases “ regular physician” and 
“irregular physician?” Webster defines the word regular as— 
conformed to a rule—agreeable to an established rule, law, or 
principle—to a prescribed mode as a regular practice of law or 
medicine—governed by rule or rules—steady or uniform in course 
—not subject to unexplained or irrational variation—instituted or 
initiated according to established forms or discipline as a regular 
physician. Taking the history of medicine for the past fifty years 
as our guide, I would ask to which system does the term regular, 
accepting Webster’s definition, apply? 
I can but consider it an evidence of the progress of homoeopathy 
that there should be in the American Medical Association at this 
day men bold enough to express their views in opposition to at- 
tempted legislation on the subject of so-called irregular practition- 
ers. It is an evidence of the progress of homoeopathy, that the 
editor of the leading medical journal of the dominant school should 
have had the courage, in commenting upon the recent action of that 
association in declaring and making it a section of their code—that 
it is not in accordance with the interest of the public, or the honor 
of the profession, that any physician or medical teacher should ex- 
amine or sign diplomas or certificates of proficiency for, or other- 
wise be specially concerned with, the graduation of persons whom 
they have good reason to believe intend to support and practice any 
exclusive and irregular system of medicine—to say in his leadiug 
editorial: “ We have no hesitation in saying that the action taken 
will not be endorsed by a majority of the profession of the country.” 
“We are forced to acknowledge that the Association has taken a 
step backward in its present course.” “ The Association, by its 
course, has done a stupid thing in voting as it has done.” So far 
I have quoted from the Medical Record. I would myself add, 
that the American Medical Association has stultified itself in 
legislating with regard to irregular practitioners without being 
able from its code to state the meaning of the term irregular as ap- 
plied to practitioners of medicine. It has stultified itself in re- 
fusing to take part in the medical education of those who believe 
in the homoeopathic law of cure, or who propose to practice in ac- 
cordance with that law, for its members well knew that our stu- 8 
dents are no longer dependent upon them for their education in 
medicine. They well knew that we have colleges of our own, 
where every branch of medicine is thoroughly taught by able pro- 
fessors and specialists in every branch. They well knew that these 
colleges have the confidence of our school, and that the number of 
students excluded from their institutions by this anathema, if it 
should be carried into effect, would not in the entire United States 
amount to a baker’s dozen. They well knew that this action would 
not in the least affect the standing of our school, interfere with the 
progress of homoeopathy, or lessen the hold which it has on the con- 
fidence of intelligent communities in all parts of this broad and 
free land. 
The majority who succeeded, notwithstanding powerful opposi- 
tion, in passing that resolution, has stultified itself in the estimation 
of the laity, who have never countenanced the repeated efforts made 
to suppress freedom of honest thought and action in relation to the 
practice of medicine. It has stultified itself in its effort to appear 
above, in point of medical learning, the practitioners of our own 
school. Plutarch said : “ The husbandman is always best pleased 
to see those ears of corn which decline, and by reason of their full' 
ness bend downwards to the earth, but looks upon those as empty, 
deceitful and insignificant which, because they have nothing in 
them, grow bolt upright and appear above the rest.” The future 
of homoeopathy will prove that it had been far better had they 
quietly committed this whole matter to oblivion. 
It is an evidence of progress, that when in this American Medi- 
cal Association it was proposed to indefinitely postpone action on 
this amendment to the code, out of the two hundred and six 
members present, one hundred and two voted in favor of so dis- 
posing of it. Three more affirmative votes and the National Old 
School Association would have been saved the mortification in the 
future of having the follies of the past brought to their recollec- 
tion by being obliged, in order to retain their self-respect, to rescind 
this unwise addition to their code. That time in this age of pro- 
gress will surely come. But for the notable absence of many of 
their representative men this amendment would never have been 
entertained. 
I consider it an evidence of progress that we are paying more 
attention to, and endeavoring to perfect ourselves and our students 9 
more thoroughly in pathology, pathological anatomy and diagnosis. 
Whatever our views may be as to the “universality of our law of 
cure/’ as scientific men having the best interests of our patients at 
heart, we can but acknowledge the importance of a correct and 
early diagnosis in every case we are called upon to treat, the im- 
portance of a knowledge of the pathology of every case, that we 
may be able early to detect the remote cause of certain conditions 
and symptoms. The physician’s duty does not commence and end 
with the selection of the most accurately indicated remedy for a 
given train of symptoms. Who of us cannot bring to mind in- 
stances of lives sacrificed to the want of an early and correct 
diagnosis; of patients who, from a lack of proper knowledge on 
the part of their physician, have been permitted to follow certain 
pursuits in life, to continue in the gratification of certain indul- 
gences, which were the primary and only causes of the fatal 
diseases for which we have been called upon to prescribe—diseases 
in their early stages, and under proper hygienic measures curable ? 
As a school we have been charged with neglect in the study of the 
etiology of disease, of pathological anatomy and of diagnosis. It 
is true that, owing to the time devoted to researches into the action 
of drugs on the healthy, and to therapeutics, we have not in the 
past given the attention to pathological investigations that has 
been given by our brethren of the old school. Until very recently 
we have been debarred the advantages of hospital experience, and 
without it these investigations cannot be properly made. Possibly, 
too, the crude idea entertained at the present time by but few, very 
few of our adherents, that pathology is of little or no service in 
therapeutics, may have had something to do with the comparative 
neglect of this most important branch of the homoeopathic physi- 
cian’s education and researches. But, if we in our studies have 
paid perhaps too much attention to therapeutics to the neglect of 
pathology, have not our old school physicians paid too much 
attention to pathology to the neglect of therapeutics ? Rhule says 
that all the trouble of the pathological anatomist has accomplished 
nothing, for it is no more consoling to die now-a-days of chronic 
pneumonia or amaloyd degeneration with dropsy, than it was in 
times past to perish by tuberculosis or consumption. But this 
branch is no longer slighted by homoeopathic physicians; the 
graduates from our colleges will compare favorably with those of 10 
old school institutions in their knowledge of this as well as every 
department of medicine; hospitals have been thrown open to us, 
and the advantages derived from them have been eagerly grasped 
by our colleges in the education of their students. Although from 
the force of circumstances we, as a school, have been obliged to 
learn pathology from the researches of our old school brethren, 
in another decade they will be forced to acknowledge that a large 
portion of their therapeutics have been learned from the investi- 
gations of Hahnemann and his followers. They are learning now 
in spite of their prejudices, not by investigation, but by the evi- 
dence in their very midst—before their very eyes—the virtues of 
certain remedies in small doses heretofore used exclusively by us. 
Some among them are bold enough and honest enough to pub- 
licly acknowledge this. Our therapeutics are in advance of those 
of the old school. 
There is a certain satisfaction—we have all felt it—in confirming 
a diagnosis by a post mortem, but there is an inexpressible joy, 
and every homoeopathic physician has experienced it, associated 
with seeing the surprising results of the properly selected homoeo- 
pathic remedy. I heard a prominent physician of our school say, 
not long since: No practitioner of medicine who has not carefully 
gathered the symptoms of an obscure disease and selected the 
remedy in accordance with our law of cure, has yet experienced 
the inestimable pleasure and pride associated with the practice of 
medicine. It is gratifying to make a correct diagnosis, even if 
powerless to cure, but how much more gratifying to effect a cure, 
even if unable, as we often are, to make a diagnosis! If the sick 
patient were consulted in the choice of a physician, we believe he 
would, in by far the greater majority of cases, select from the 
latter class. The medical practitioner in his enthusiasm is often 
surprised at the lack of appreciation of pathological knowledge 
and diagnostic skill on the part of the patient and his friends; sur- 
prised that the interest of his patient should centre solely on the 
results of treatment; but does he not sometimes forget, in the study 
of these fascinating branches, that the main object of the physi- 
cian’s calling is the prevention and cure of disease? But that they 
may decide accurately as to the nature of disease in its early—its 
curable—stages, it hardly seems possible for us to dwell too forcibly 
upon the importance of urging on our students the study of 
pathology, whether available at the sick bed or not. 11 
It is an evidence of progress that at the present day the course 
of instruction at our homoeopathic colleges comprises all that is 
necessary for a complete and thorough medical education,—and we 
are safe in adding, it comprises all that the average medical student 
can acquire in the short period usually given to study prior to his 
final examination for the degree of Doctor of Medicine. The views 
of the Institute on the subject of medical education are well known. 
An entrance examination has been recommended—a more thorough 
course of instruction—a lengthened period of study—and a rigid 
final examination by a board of examiners, in no other way con- 
nected with the colleges—and what is very important, it has been 
advised that preceptors discourage students deficient in general 
education from entering on the study of medicine. It undoubtedly 
seems to many of the members of this Institute an easy matter to 
conform to these suggestions made to our colleges. If by national 
law it were possible to regulate the course of instruction, the term 
of study, and the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Medi- 
cine, the task would be an easy one. But from correspondence 
had with some of the ablest legal authorities in the land, I am led 
to believe that a doubt exists as to the power of the national gov- 
ernment to pass laws regulating admissions to our profession. 
Unfortunately, few medical colleges are endowed ; and those en- 
dowed are not sufficiently so to enable them to be entirely inde- 
pendent. They cannot exist without students ; and so long as a 
degree is more easily obtained at one college than another, a 
large majority of students will go to that college. Any attempt at 
reformation in these respects has had the effect of diminishing the 
size of classes; but, notwithstanding this fact, many of our medical 
colleges have profited by the suggestions of the Institute, and have 
made their course of instruction all that could be desired. Some 
have made three college terms compulsory; some have inaugurated 
an entrance examination, and some have an independent board of 
examiners; but there is a lack of uniformity. Our standard is 
certainly equal to that of the old school colleges of this country, 
as is also our course of instruction; and if there was a prospect of 
the newly-added clause in the code of the American Medical Asso- 
ciation, excluding homoeopathic students from their instruction, 
being enforced instead of being a dead letter, our colleges could 
in matters of medical education establish rules which would be 12 
rigidly followed by all. From the date of his matriculation the 
student of medicine begins to look forward with feelings akin to 
dread to that final examination. To be placed back a year is 
magnified into a calamity, a disgrace, which will follow him 
through life. Is it any wonder then, that there should be a dispo- 
sition on the part of the students, except by the few having con- 
fidence in their own abilities, to avoid colleges holding a reputation 
for thoroughness as regards these examinations ? 
One of the most popular of the old school colleges in the city of 
New York, in its announcement of one year ago, stated that in 
future three terms of study would be required, and that no student 
would be permitted to enter until he had passed a satisfactory pre- 
liminary examination on subjects pertaining to general education. 
Glowing editorials in all the medical journals followed the an- 
nouncement, a large class was anticipated, but instead of the two 
or three hundred new matriculates which had in former years con- 
gregated within its walls, but fifty presented themselves for 
entrance examination. The final result was an announcement from 
the faculty that the attempt had proved a failure, and that they 
would return to their old method. There would be no entrance 
examination in future, and but two courses of lectures would be 
required for graduation. The seats of this heretofore popular 
institution had been comparatively empty, while those of the 
eollege on the opposite side of the street had all been filled, and 
many students had been unable to obtain comfortable admission to 
its lecture rooms. A prominent medical journal, referring to this 
matter, says : “ There are very few who will learn of this relapse 
of Bellevue College without feelings of keen regret, and perhaps some 
contempt at the performance; for it is certainly a discouraging 
check to the cause of educational reform. Toll the bell, then, for 
another good intention gone, for another lofty purpose shriveled in 
an unthrifty soil. Write as its epitaph that Bellevue tried to be 
better than its neighbors, but it lacked the stamina, and returned 
from a moral to a commercial basis, leaving behind its high 
resolves. Learn from its action that money seemed better than 
educational elevation, and students than medical reform.” The 
editor of a New York daily paper says : “ Physicians must register 
in order that we may be protected from quacks, but in the light of 
what we now know, is it not quite possible that a quack of ten 13 
years’ experience is more worthy of confidence than a graduate of 
Bellevue ?” 
Several of the States have during the past year legislated upon 
the subject of the practice of medicine within their boundaries, the 
object being the suppression of quackery, but there is that same 
lack of uniformity, and in many of these States the law is not 
enforced. In the great city of New York, notwithstanding the 
stringent State law passed since the last meeting of the Institute, 
hundreds are engaged in the practice of medicine in direct violation 
of that law. It is the opinion of your President that a law could 
be drafted which would be acceptable to all the States and to the 
various schools of medicine, which would, if passed and enforced, 
not only regulate the practice of medicine throughout the Union, 
but would establish a uniform standard of medical education and a 
like standard of qualifications for graduation ; and I would respect- 
fully suggest that the Bureau of Organization, Registration and 
Statistics of this Institute be requested to consider this matter and 
draft a law which in their opinion would cover the whole ground, 
and present the same to the Institute for its approval. It is 
unfortunate that a doubt exists as to the power of our national 
Congress to legislate upon so important a matter, a matter which 
undoubtedly concerns the welfare*of the whole people. A national 
Board of Health was established, the avowed object being the pre- 
vention of the extension of contagious diseases. How could the 
extension of contagious diseases, as well as diseases of all characters, 
be better prevented than by a national law excluding from the 
medical profession unqualified practitioners and pretenders ? 
We congratulate our school on the completion during the past 
year of the Encyclopedia of pure Materia Medica. As we gaze 
on those ten massive volumes—and the index—as we take down 
number after number, and pour over its closely printed pages—as 
we all do—we are struck with feelings of wonder that the editor 
has found time, aside from the labors associated with a professor- 
ship and an extensive practice, to gather together and present to us 
for our guidance in prescribing this extensive, and to the close stu- 
dent of the materia medica invaluable, collection of provings ; and 
if we are awe stricken at the labors of the compiler, what must be 
our feelings in reference to the self-sacrificing ones who have fur- 
nished the material for this encyclopedia ? As the editor says in 14 
his more recent writings : “ Cries of fraud, of trash, of superflu- 
ity, have become quite common of late,” referring, of course, to 
criticisms on his contribution to the literature of homoeopathy. It 
would indeed be strange, considering the enthusiasm of some of 
our provers, if in this almost complete history of all that has been 
learned with regard to the action of medicinal substances on 
healthy human beings, some material had not crept in which was 
possibly unworthy of our confidence. Over fifty years ago John 
Forbes, in discussing the merits of auscultation, said : “ In science 
as well as in religion and politics, over-zealous and injudicious 
friends are often more injurious to the cause they advocate than its 
most determined enemies; and in regard to auscultation I am 
convinced that the most certain mode of preventing its general 
adoption is to attempt to extend it beyond its just limits.” And 
in later years the great German pathologist, Liebermeister, in dis- 
cussing the theory of a Contagium Vivum, says : “As in former 
times, so now, it is not so much its opponents as its imprudent ad- 
herents who threaten to bring the theory into discredit. The 
utter lack of critical discernment and method which have charac- 
terized some of the works in this field, and on the other hand the 
recklessness with which facts of uncertain significance have been 
proclaimed certain proofs, have also in our time driven away many 
an earnest investigator.” So with certain of our published prov- 
ings. Is not the general adoption of our method of practice inter- 
fered with by claiming for substances that are called drugs medic- 
inal action which it is not by any means certain they possess ? But 
of the ability, the honesty of purpose, the untiring labor of the 
editor of the Encyclopedia there can be no doubt; of the self-sacri- 
fice and honesty of purpose of the individual provers there can be no 
doubt; and of the value of the book to practitioners of medicine of 
all schools there can be no doubt. It is true it is not a pocket 
manual, to be carried around and consulted at the bedside, but it is 
what the editor claims, a compilation of all available material on 
the subject, presented to the profession for use and critical exam- 
ination. Let us in our criticisms suspend judgment until we have 
followed the editor through his studies—his critical and impartial 
examinations of the pathogenesis presented to us in that work. 
He says he is no longer editor but student, and we congratulate 
the Institute that the first sixty-four pages of his individual re- 15 
searches have, within the past month, been presented to the pro- 
fession. I feel that I am but expressing the sentiments of a 
large number of the members of this Institute when I say : It 
would be a source of gratification to us if the editor’s researches 
should convince him of the necessity of a compendium of his im- 
mense work, and being so convinced, he should present a volume 
to the profession and students of medicine less terrifying in its 
proportions, and which might be a stepping stone to the careful 
study of the Encyclopedia. 
(At the banquet given by the publishers to Prof. Allen on the 
compilation of the index, a professor of materia medica in one of 
our most popular colleges, in his after-dinner speech, thought that 
notwithstanding the dimensions of the work just completed, we 
had not as yet enough written on the subject of materia medica— 
we needed more. It was late in the evening, and it is not neces- 
sary for me to repeat, the remark was made in an after-dinner 
speech.) 
I consider it an evidence of the progress of homoeopathy during 
the past few years that members of our school, having the ability 
and the time, have devoted it to the writing and translation of 
books on medical topics other than symptomatology and therapeu- 
tics. It seems to me wise, now that we have so much written on 
these subjects; now that we have every specialty in medicine 
ably represented by practitioners of homoeopathy ; now that we 
have within our ranks microscopists able to detect quite small 
pieces of gold in our triturations of that metal—giving in ten 
thousandths of an inch the length, breadth and thickness of these 
particles, and now that we have hospitals under our control where 
investigations can be made, that some of the talent of our school 
should be employed in histological and pathological investigations 
and in investigations into the natural history of disease. 
It is a source of pleasure to us all that the Transactions of this 
Institute for the session of 1880 have appeared within the time 
prescribed by our by-laws, and in such handsome form; and I feel 
that the thanks of the Institute are due our General Secretary for 
the able manner in which he has performed the duties pertaining 
to his position. I congratulate the Institute also on the final ap- 
pearance of the Transactions of the World’s Convention, and feel 
that the thanks of this body are also due the committee having this 16 
matter in charge. The size of the volumes will convey some idea 
of the enormity of the work, which has been virtually a labor of 
love, for the small amount paid the editor is no compensation for 
the labor required in resurrecting, arranging and correcting these 
manuscripts, and I can but feel in the performance of the arduous 
labor connected with the production of these three volumes he has 
honestly striven to do justice to all. 
It is a cause for congratulation that the International Congress, 
of which these transactions are a record, is to be followed this year 
by a like convention on the other side of the water, and that so 
many of our members will go as delegates from this body. But I 
heard a clergyman say not long since, at the close of quite a lengthy 
sermon, “There is a limit to the endurance of an audience in listen- 
ing to an address.” I feel that your endurance has been taxed on 
this occasion. Yet I cannot close without reference to the great loss 
the entire homoeopathic profession throughout the world has met 
with in the death, since we last met, of Dr. Constantine Hering, 
President of the Convention which originated the organization of 
the American Institute of Homoeopathy. In the midst of labors 
from which for over fifty years he had never rested, he quietly 
fell asleep. I could hardly feel that this was an occasion for 
mourning, for he had been with us more than half a score of years 
beyond the allotted time of man. And this long, this spotless 
life had been one of usefulness and unremitting labor in the cause 
he loved to the very end. The results of the labor of his later 
years are living, and will live to aid us and those who come 
after us in the work to which our lives are being devoted. We 
should rejoice that through all his long and active life not a 
truthful word had ever been uttered that could reflect on his char- 
acter as a man, as a Christian, and that at the last his death was 
peaceful, calm, and free from protracted suffering. We should 
rejoice that his troubles, for he had sorrows—sorrows hard to bear, 
too—are at an end, and that there is before him an eternity of 
happiness, for I believe of such as he is the Kingdom of Heaven. 
Others of us, noble men and true, dear to their families, friends 
and clientage, have died since we last met together, but this pioneer 
was dear to us all, honored by us all, and he will be remembered 
by us all, and our children will be taught to honor his memory.