NERVOUS SHOCK 
AS A 
Therapeutical Agent, 
BY 
ROMAINE J. CURTISS, M. D. 
[Reprinted from the St. Louis Medical and Surgical Journal, Feb., 1882,~\ 
ST. LOUIS: 
MKDICAL JOUltNAL PUBLISHING COMPANY. 
1882. Nervous Shock as a Therapeutical Agent. By Romaine J. 
Curtiss, M. D., of Joliet, Ills. 
It may be true, scientifically, that all remedies addressed to 
the nervous 83'Stem, as drugs and the galvanic current, act by 
producing a shock upon the nerve centers to a greater or less 
extent, and that the beneficial effect of these remedies may be 
independent of the cause of the disease. It is established that 
pain may continue in a nerve or set of nerves from habit after 
the cause which originally produced the disease has been removed 
and that the pain under these conditions may be removed by gal- 
vanism, which may be classed as a mild degree of shock. No veri- 
fication is longer necessary to establish the fact that shock of 
the nervous system, from injury of the sensory nerves, or 
through the higher nerve centres from emotional excitement, is 
a factor of the greatest importance in the etiology of nervous 
diseases. Shock kills a large proportion of wounded persons 
who die from injuries, and the history of mental development is 
filled with instances of endemic and epidemic nervous diseases 
of the convulsive type which were the sequences of superstitious 
and religous emotional excitement. Death, idiocy, insanity and 
convulsions it is well known, result from the terrible shock the 
nervous system sometimes receives through the avenues to the 
brain, of fear or other emotions. 
The imporlance of shock as a cause of nervous disease is 
granted, and it is easy from these data to infer that such phe- 
nomena, properly modified, and used as remedies have a very 
beneficial effect upon nervous diseases. The general induction 
I wish to make from citations of the following cases is: that ner- 
vous shock by drugs, electricity, etc., sometimes cures nervous 
diseases without reference to action on the cause of the disease, 
and that this law holds good in many methods of treatment now 
employed in the management of nervous diseases which are sup- 
posed to be addressed to the cause of the disease. I believe that 2 
this view of certain nervous diseases, the cause of which is 
referred to the sexual organs, and the cure of which is referred to 
the surgical operations of circumcision and dilatation of the 
urethra, can be explained with greater satisfaction in this way, 
than by the induction attempted, and so violently disputed, that 
the nervous diseases in question are caused by preputial irritation 
and contracted meatus and the surgery of circumcision and dilata- 
tion removes the cause. In the cases of this nature already reported 
it must be conceded that the supposition given that the nervous 
disease—generally paralysis—is a sequence of the genital irrita- 
tion is not verified, and if proofs cannot be furnished, it is proba- 
ble that the cure, or apparent cure of the nervous disease, is duo 
to the nervous shock of the operation acting independently of 
the cause of the disease. 
In support of this view, relating to this open question, I will 
cite cases and discussions from medical authors as well as cases 
from my own practice. 
Case I.—Mrs. in 1879 when she became my patient, was 
thirty-two years of age. She had been divorced about four 
years, and while living with her husband six years, had one child 
and three miscarriages. The clinical history showed that since her 
divorce she had been continuously in the care of physicians for 
symptoms referred to the pelvic organs. The first year she was 
subject to weekly applications to the uterus by an eminent gynae- 
cologist of Chicago, for ulceration. I had reason to believe that 
the diagnosis was correct, that the remedy used was nitrate of 
silver, and that the ulceration wras cured, though the patient 
declared she was not benefitted in the least. 
The patient next consulted a medical gentleman who owns a 
homoeopathic sign board, formerly a regular, and who advertises 
that he “ doctors both ways,” yet his treatment of this patient 
was neither way, as he subjected her to the operation for restora- 
tion of a perineum which was never lost; for the most critical 
examination by myself and another physician failed to find any 
evidence of perineal rupture or cicatrix of operation, except two 
round cicatricial marks in the skin, one on each side and just 
posterior to the vulva, which were probably made by inserting 
a wire, drawing the vulva together, and leaving things in situy 
as the patient said, for two weeks. 
I am convinced, from my own examination and opinion of 3 
the physician who examined the ease with me, as well as the 
statement of the patient herself, who, when questioned, said she 
could perceive no change in the anatomy of the parts, that the 
patient never had any degree of perineal rupture, and T con- 
cluded that the accomplished physician* who made the operation, 
did so with the intelligent design of producing a nervous shock 
on the patient. The effect was good, as a therapeutical measure, 
for the patient declared that her subjective sensations of distress 
were removed, though they were not the symptoms belonging to 
a rupture of the perineum, and that for several months after- 
wards she thought herself cured. 
However, when the patient consulted -me, she was as “ bad as 
ever.” Her symptoms were: A burning pain in the pelvis, 
extending to the hips, and up the spine and abdomen, 
some rectal tenesmus, or rather as she described, a feeling of 
something pressing upon the rectum. This distress was not con- 
stant, but described a rhythm of about three weeks duration. 
During the paroxysmal periods, or when the pain was on, the 
abdomen would become greatly distended, and in addition to the 
burning pain and tenesmus, there would be a throbbing sensa- 
tion throughout the pelvis. An examination of the uterus with 
sound showed a depth of three and a quarter inches. There was 
no marked tenderness of the uterus or ovaries, nor visible dis- 
charge from the uterus. This was the condition when the pain 
was off. During the paroxysm there was general hyperaesthesia 
of vulva, vagina, uterus and ovaries and abdomen, and pressure 
in direction of cellular regions of the pelvis gave her great pain. 
At this time, also, blood vessels apparently enlarged, could be 
felt pulsating notably behind the uterus. 
About this time I read a description, I think in Emmet’s 
work, of a case somewhat similar in which a gentle elevation of 
the uterus would stop the pulsation, and the case was cured by a 
pessary, which held the uterus in just the right position. I now 
thought I had the key to the situation, and used temporarily a 
cotton pessary with very happy effect. I followed this up by 
the trial of nearly all pessaries of all sizes. When the patient 
had no pain or hypersethesia she was contented with any pes- 
sary; but on accession of her paroxysm, any pessary had to be 
removed, and I finally gave up this view of the case, also, the 
pessaries. I then thought the disease might be due to the effects 
of malaria, and gave large quantities of quinine, also applying 4 
quinine locally to the uterus, and gave rectal injections of twenty- 
five grains at a dose. For a few months this method promised a 
cure, but finally had to be given up. I noticed at this time a 
theory put out by a Baltimore physician which was, in substance, 
that most uterine diseases, if not all, were caused by a condition 
of venous congestion of the uterus by obstruction of the circu- 
lation due to stricture of the cervix, and that dilation of the 
cervical canal by bougies was the sovereign “balm in Gilead" 
for suffering woman. I thoroughly dilated the cervical canal by 
bougies, and other dilators without effect of permanent charac- 
ter. The next new light on uterine disease which attracted my 
attention, was a statement in some journal, that many obscure 
diseases of this nature were due to endometritis and the diagno- 
sis could be made by applying a cotton tampon saturated with a 
solution of tannin over the cervix and examining the discharge 
collected with the microscope when, if endometritis was present, 
pus cells would be seen. I tried the method and on examining 
the discharge with Tolies very best microscope, sure enough the 
pus cells were there. 1 now proceeded to treat the endometritis 
with comp. tr. Iodine, as recommended. I made all applications 
to the uterine cavity by means of a syringe having a long, slen- 
der, flexible nozzle, the distal inch of which is perforated with 
fine boles, and which I wrap with cotton, and which combines 
syringe and swab. The applications were always more or less 
painful and were made every fifth day for about two months. At 
this time, for the first time since using this instrument, the cotton 
on one occasion became displaced in passing the cervical canal, 
some of the holes were uncovered, and I met with the calamity 
of producing a terrific uterine colic in my patient by injecting a 
drachm of the medicine into the uterine cavity. I need not 
describe the scene which followed, and which lasted for two hours, 
the patient refusing to take morphia. It is sufficient to say, that 
the patient received a nervous shock, the first since the homoeo- 
pathic restoration of her perineum, and the second of the series. 
After the accident the patient was free from her pain, tym- 
panites and tenesmus for several months; but had during this 
time an attack of sciatica, and short session of tic douloureaux. At 
the end of about six months she returned and stated the feeling 
of pressure on the rectum had returned, though she had no fur- 
ther burning pain in back and abdomen, and her bloating from 
tympanites was as bad as ever. During this rest from labors, I 5 
had read two articles by I)r. Sutton of Pittsburg, on fissure of 
the anus in male and female, describing the symptoms which 
fitted my patient as well as anything else did. The cases of cure 
were so graphically given, so convincing and so successfully 
treated by anal stretching, that I was confident my patient had 
an anal fissure, and that I had overlooked it. Dr. Sutton, when 
commenting on the benefits resulting from stretching the sphinc- 
ter, remarked that equal benefit had occurred by the procedure 
even if there were all the pelvic symptoms of fissure, and the 
fissure not there. I made a very careful examination of my 
patient’s rectum, turning it out by my finger from the vagina, 
and the fissure was not there. I nevertheless determined to make 
the operation, and gradually getting both thumbs through the 
sphincter I eked with all my might, and my patient received her 
third nervous shock, which, up to date, has proved to be sufficient. 
At the time of this operation the abdomen was enlarged equal to 
the full term of pregnancy by tympanites, which disappeared in 
a few days, and has not returned. 
I am positive that the criticis > of this case cannot be that it 
was one of hysteria, or “speculum mania.” I regard the affec- 
tion as having been vaso-tnotor in character, probably originating 
from irritation of uterine organs following child-birth and mis- 
carriages, and I think there was some, and had been more, pelvic 
cellutitis, and I also believe, now, that the series of nervous 
shocks she received by fraud, accident and design, cured her. 
Case II.—Master Jaged six years, has for a year been 
unable to retain his urine when awake, more than half an hour. 
In fact, his mother states that he is continually making water. 
He is habitually pulling at the prepuce, which has become 
unnaturally elongated by this habit. The prepuce is not tight, 
but is retracted over the glans, and there is no lack of cleanli- 
ness. The urine was examined for deposits and proofs of cys- 
titis, and bladder sounded for stone—all giving negative results. 
After sounding for stone the symptoms were relieved for a time, 
but returning it was deemed best to cut off the prepuce which 
was done, and was followed by recovery. To get at the chain 
of antecedents and sequence in this case, I made much persistent 
enquiry, and became satisfied that the first phenomenon of this 
series was the habit formed by the boy of pulling on the pre- 
puce, which was followed by a discharge of urine because of the 6 
pull, and not because of the length of the prepuce. I think the 
shock of the operation, as well as diminished length of prepuce, 
broke up the habit and the disease. 
Case III.—Master W., aged nine years; when I was called to 
see him this patient had been ill about three months with hystero- 
epilepsy. At time of my visit, the left arm was rigid, hand 
flexed, with almost the appearance of the contracture of paraly- 
sis. The left lower extremity was rigid as a stick. During the 
three months of his illness he had several convulsions or rather 
series of convulsions, and had taken a great deal of worm medi- 
cine. He was taking at the time of visit, ergot and bromide of 
potassium, the diagnosis being spinal meningitis. 1 had justread 
Sayre’s report of nervous disease depending on phimosis and 
cured by circumcision ; his theory being that the retained and 
dried secretions—smegma—above the glans was the source of 
irritation which originated the nervous disease, and the removal 
of which by circumcision cured the disorder of the nerves. I 
naturally examined the penis in this case and found the charac- 
teristic long prepuce, phimosis, and I thought I could feel the 
smegma, the very corpus delictu in the case. I recommended 
circumcision which was declined by the physicians in council, 
and the parents, pending further consideration. 
In the meantime I wrote to Dr. Sayre and to Dr. Hammond, 
relating tu the ease. As I expected, 1 received, very kindly, a 
letter from Dr. Sayre stating his belief that phimosis was the 
cause, and circumcision the cure; hut Dr. Hammond stated that 
nobody but Dr. Sayre believed that phimosis ever caused such 
diseases, or that circumcision ever cured them, that some of 
Sayre’s reported cases were actually Jews; and recommended 
bromide of zinc. Soon after this the case was turned over to 
me and I prescribed the bromide of zinc, but could not dismiss 
the brilliant results of Sayre’s operations from my mind. I still 
felt the smegma, noted the long prepuce, and the phimosis, and 
discovered further that whenever the penis was touched, 
however slightly, an instant erection would follow, of only 
momentary duration, which could be repeated several limes a 
minute. I was perplexed to know on which end of this cart the 
horse could be bitched, and “tendon reflex” not then having 
been invented or discovered as a symptom relating to spinal dis- 
ease, I was the more unsettled in decision, but decided to make 7 
the operation, an 1 remove the so iree of irritation. On cutting 
off the prepuce and drawing the slump over the gluns I found no 
smegma as expected. The parts were, in fact, clean. 1 thought 
the operation a vexation of spirit, but almost immediately the 
patient began to improve and in ten daj’S was apparently on the 
high road to recovery, when he was attacked by lacial erysipelas 
and died. 
I do not think now from the further experience I have had 
in these cases, that the nervous disease affecting the muscles was 
reflex from genital irritation, but was a centric nervous disease ; 
nor can 1 account for the rapid improvement following the 
operation in any other way than that the shock to the nervous 
system acted therapeutically. 
Case IV.—The causes of dysmenorrhcea are doubtless as com- 
plex as the physiology of the function itself, with the added com- 
plexities of other incidental diseases. The affection is described 
as obstructive, or painful from mechanical reasons as flexion, 
prolapse, and procidentia, from stricture of the cervix, uterine 
varicose veins, constricted os tineas) congestive, from engorge- 
ment of uterus, ovaries or cellular tissue; inflammatory, from 
various forms of pelvic inflammations; and without doubt many 
cases of dysmenorrhcea are purely nervous in origin. Much sur- 
gery has been performed on the conoidal cervix with contracted 
os, and much good has been accomplished in relation to dysmen 
orrhcea even when the result of the operation has been a further 
contraction of the cervix by cicatricial tissue and a still more 
elongated pointed cervix, which certainly ought to result in still 
more dysmenorrhcea if the theory of the cause was correct. 
These facts are so generally known that argument and cases 
are not required for proof. Instances are numerously reported 
in which bilateral section of the cervix uteri for sterility and 
dysmenorrhcea has been made, the object being to manufacture a 
wide patulous os tincie, and the result has been a cicatricial con- 
traction of the os, making it smaller than before, while the dys- 
monorrhcea has been cured. A theory to account for these 
results is that an inflammatory condition existed previous to the 
operation which was relieved by the loss of blood, and that the 
reconstruction so to speak, of the uterus following the opera- 
tion caused the cure of painful menstruation and sterility. There 
may be some truth in this theory, though it is not very evident 8 
that one such bleeding could cure an inflammation, even if pres- 
ent, nor is there known to be any reconstruction of the uterus 
following such operation except the cicatrix. In my opinion the 
gen era lit}" of these cases so operated on, were of nervous origin, 
and the operation resulted in a cure by reason of the therapeusis 
of nervous shock, as in the case of Mrs. Bv aged 34 years, mar- 
ried nine years, was sterile, hysterical and had dysmenorrhoea. 
An examination revealed the conoidal cervix, a small virgin os, 
no abrasion, no mucus of any account in the cervical canal, and 
no displacement. Bilateral section of the cervix was the fashion 
and was made , and, as is the case in all such operations I have 
ever seen or made, the cervix contracted to such an extent (cica- 
trices always contract), that I could only with great perseverance 
and difficulty introduce a small silver probe through the canal. 
This lady’s next menstruation was painless, and in three months 
she became pregnant, and now has six children. I attended her 
in three confinements. I believed at the time that the contracted 
cervical canal was the cause of her troubles, but I think now, 
other things equal, that spermatozoa could crawl through the 
cervical canal equally as well before I cut it as afterwards, if the 
size of it was a factor in the case, nor can I understand even yet 
why a cicatricial pathway is more attractive to a spermatozoa 
than the soft mucous road provided by nature. I believe now 
that in this case, and twelve similar ones which have occurred in 
my practice, that the reconstruction of organic tissues resulting 
from these operations and in cases of sterility and dj’smenorr- 
hoea, were not owing to the cicatrix formed but were brought 
about through changes in the nutritive powers of the nervous 
system induced by the shock of surgery. 
In the Boston Medical and Surgical Journal for November, 
occurs a report of the Neurological Society of New York, for 
Nov. 1, 1881. At this meeting Dr. Langdon Gray read a paper 
on the subject of the effect of genital irritation in the produc- 
tion of nervous disorders. lie gave a resume of the history of 
th s subject, stating that the first paper attracting the attention 
of the public to the subject, was by Mr. Stanley in 1833, who 
found that in many cases of nervous disorder there were marked 
legions of the genito-urinary apparatus, while none could be 
discerned in the spinal cord, and concluded therefore, that the 
trouble was reflex. This dictum was accepted by the profession 9 
until in 1856, when the now Sir William Gull declared that 
Stanley’s eases were utterly worthless as proofs. 
It may be observed here that Stanley’s reports do not stale 
that the verification afforded by cure of the lesions was give : 
as were Dr. Sayres. S. W. Mitchell in 1861 coincided with Stan- 
le}7’s critics, and said the lesion of the spinal cord in his cases 
must have been microscopic, and further that the genito-urinary 
lesions might have been due to the diseases of the nervous sys- 
tem. Brown Sequard, however, said Dr. Gray, had lately 
appeared as champion for Stanley, but the opinion of the pro- 
fession had taken a turn against Stanley until the reports of 
Dr. Sayre on want of co-ordination and paresis had appeared, 
when another reaction of the professional mind had set in, and 
one physician bad gone so far as to report the cure of cases of 
cerebral softening and insane paralysis by circumcision. Dr. 
Gray then went on to criticise Dr. Sayre’s cases singly”; in part 
of them denying that there was any lack of co-ordination, and 
in others, that there was actual organic disease as myelitis of 
the anterior horns, while others were cases of meningeal haem- 
orrhage with softening, and were not cases of reflex disorder as 
supposed by Dr. Sayre. 
To account for the benefits of circumcision in these cases, a 
fact which cannot be disputed, Dr. Gray believed that the rest 
afforded to patients by the removal of a source of irritation from 
an exquisitely sensitive organ was really the source of benefit. 
Obviously this theory can prove nothing but the theory of reflex 
nervous disease. But Dr. Gray goes on to say that the tearing 
and cutting in these cases, when circumcision is performed, makes 
a decided impression upon the nervous sytem, acting in the same 
way in which a fit of intoxication has been known to do in break- 
ing up an attack of tic doloureaux. Dr. Gray is very near the true 
theory of the therapeutics of these cases when he cites a case of 
epilepsy and kleptomania which was cured by removal of some 
old cicatricial tissue from the scalp. Certainly in this case the 
cure would not be accepted as a verification that the kleptomania 
and epilepsj7 depended upon co-existent cicatricial tissue of the 
scalp. 
Dr. Gray, while denying the theory of reflex paralysis in 
these cases, advocated the operation by circumcision when it 
existed, or whatever other operation might be required to remedy 10 
disease or deformity of the genital organs, which was co existent 
with nervous disease. 
Dr. Sayre replied to the paper of Dr. Gray, stating that he 
had thought before hearing the paper that he was the first in the 
profession to call attention to this matter. He read a number of 
extracts from letters of physicians written to him in which suc- 
cessful cases were reported in the treatment of nervous disease 
by circumcision. Ho declared that his observations were so 
large in cases of this kind that he was unprepared to believe that 
organic disease was present in at least but very few. He cited 
a case in which paral}Tsis was caused by tying a string around 
the penis, and which disappeared when the string was removed. 
And a case sent to him by Dr. Knapp with atrophy of the optic 
nerve, who had phimosis and was perfectly cured by circumcision. 
Obviously atrophy of the optic nerve is not simply a result of a 
reflex irritation without organic change, nor do the two reports 
of Dr. Sayre pretend to limit the nervous disease, produced by 
reflex genital irritation to functional disorders. 
Dr. Otis next states his belief that there was something more 
in the relations of genital irritation and nervous disease than 
coincidence, and that the same fact held good in relations 
between a removal of genital irritation,- and the disappearance 
of the nervous disease. Dr. Otis cited a case of epilepsy cured 
by dilatation of the meatus urinarius, a case of melancholia in a 
gentleman which was benefited by a series of such dilatations 
and cured entirely by a cutting operation ; a case of apparent 
hip joint disease with atrophy of the limb which was cured b}T 
circumcision and dilatation of a contracted meatus. Dr. Sturgis 
thought the verdict of not proven would apply to Dr. Gray’s 
cases, as well as Dr. Sayre’s, and that in Dr. Gray’s paper, the 
point made was, that in such cases as reported by Dr. Sayre, the 
disease would return. 
Dr. Seguin remarked that he had never seen a case of paraly- 
sis from genital irritation; yet did not deny the possibility, and 
stated that Dr. Jacobi had never met with such a case. Dr. Geo. M. 
Beard remarked that he had drawn two conclusions, viz.: that in 
the vast majority of cases the presence of phimosis and contracted 
meatus, bore no relation to the general health, or nervous dis- 
eases; and that only in a few cases could the brilliant results 
achieved b}' Drs. Sayre and Otis be obtained and that these 
operations often did harm. 11 
The most striking feature of this discussion is the entire 
disagreement of the participants. The question is raised 
relating to the difference and likeness of functional and or- 
ganic disease. And this difference is asserted to be so great, 
of course in kind, that it is made the ground upon which the 
conclusions of one gentleman are refuted by another. It is 
remarkable that any two physicians engaged in the same 
line of practice and study should observe such different results 
in the same methods of treatment, and in studies of the etiology 
of disease. It is undoubtedly true that in a discussion of this 
sort, on a scientific question not yet proven to be true or untrue, 
that no positive agreements could be arrived at, and more 
especially when the personal equation is taken into account. It 
is safe to conclude, from indications based upon all such cases 
given in this discussion, that nervous disease may result in geni- 
tal deformities, and that genital deformities may result in devel- 
opment of nervous diseases; that the cure of nervous diseases 
may cure the genital irritation, and removal of genital irritations 
may cure nervous diseases; that the physician who treats all ner- 
vous diseases, with. co existent genital irritation, by the usual 
methods, may do good to both, and possibly harm to either, and 
the physician who treats genital irritation with co-existing ner- 
vous disease by surgery, may do good and possibly harm. It is 
to be expected that when a scientific question lacks the essential 
varification required to make it a science those observations from 
only one side of it, and of different sides by different observers, 
can only give corresponding results. 
At present, there is probably no more evidence that a con- 
traction of the meatus will cause epilepsy, than that the nervous 
disease, of which epilepsy is a symptom, can cause a contracted 
meatus. It may be as scientific to infer that a diseased trophic 
nerve, even embryonic, may cause a phimosis, as that a phimosis 
may cause atrophy of the optic nerve, and the same I think will 
hold good in that other remarkable case cited, and we may well 
question whether a contracted meatus caused apparent hip joint 
disease with atrophy of a limb, or whether a nervous disease 
caused them both, or a real hip joint disease produced a con- 
traction of the meatus, and an atrophied limb. From the fact 
that clinical reports and the discussion quoted do not establish 
scientifically the real relations of genital irritation and nervous 
diseases, and from the fact they also do not as a consequence, 12 
establish the philosophy of the therapeutical effect of surgical 
operations upon the genitals as related to nervous diseases, it 
becomes necessary to seek some other explanation than these 
disputed ones, and I think the likeness of this effect to other 
established therapeutical facts will warrant the conclusion that 
in such cases the benefit to the nervous disease is produced by 
nervous shock ! 
A nervous shock, to be therapeutical, must differ from nervous 
stimulation onty in degree, and this treatment in these cases, 
bears a very close analogy to the established fact that stimula- 
tion of the nerves in organs which receive their termination, as 
the muscles for instance, by the electric current, exert a bene- 
ficial effect—a curative effect—upon diseased nerves, and their 
centres. In my opinion the cases cited, of cure of atrophy of 
the optic nerve by circumcision, and of melancholia by dilatation 
of the meatus, are instances in point, and to further illustrate this 
law deductively, I will cite: 
Case V.—Mrs. aged 74 years, when she was 71 years old, 
now four years ago, had an attack of right liemiplagia. From the 
history I concluded the cause was not haemorrhage. Sensation 
and motion were entirely abolished in the arm, and the hand was 
contractu red. There was some sensation in right side, and lower 
limb, and she had power to flex and extend the limb from the 
hip joint to a limited degree. The foot was inverted upon the 
ankle joint. She had never attempted to stand since her attack 
three years before. During past two years her mind had become 
impaired—the manifestation being amnesic aphasia. She first 
gradually lost the power of making herself understood, and then 
of understanding what was said to her as well. This was par- 
ticularly noticeable from the fact that she was much given to read- 
ing, especially the newspapers, which practice she ceased from 
evident inability to gather ideas from language. She would pick 
up the paper and try to read, and in a short time shake her head 
sadly and give up the effort. 
1 treated this lady for sixteen months using no remedy but 
electricity to the paralyzed muscles, and a club foot apparatus for 
her foot. After six months treatment she began to walk, the 
muscular power and sensibility of the right side, except the arm, 
continued to improve while she was under treatment until the 
action of the lower extremity was remarkably good : the arm 13 
remained Ihe same. But the surprising results of this long con- 
tinued stimulation of nerve ends and muscles was the almost 
entire cure of the aphasia. She began first to read the newspa- 
pers, and the first idea she got from this source known to her 
friends, was that Grant was in Egypt. From this time she 
gained confidence and began to talk again, and her aphasia was 
removed to a greater extent even than was the paralysis. 
In the treatment of this case the partial relief of the paraly- 
sis, and the cure of whatever lesion caused the aphasia, there was 
no remedy used but the indirect current of electricity which was 
applied only to the affected muscles. The result proves the 
proposition, as well as anything in medical treatment can be 
proven, that nerve stimulation and shock are very valuable thera- 
peutical factors in the treatment of nervous diseases. 
It may in time be observed that the operations of iridect- 
omy, or that for pterygium, will have as beneficial an effect upon 
atrophy of the optic nerve, when eye deformities and atrophy 
co-exist, as the operation of circumcision has been known to 
have, when phimosis was co-existent with such atrophy; and I 
believe that the theory of cure by nerve shock in these cases, 
acting independently of cause and sequence, will be established 
by verification to be the true therapeutical philosphy. PUBLISHED MONTHLY. 
1843. THE 1882. 
St. Louis Medical & Surgical Journal 
Tiios. F. Rumbold, M. D., Editor and Proprietor. 
Two Volumes each Year at $4.00 per Annum. 
The Largest and Cheapest Medical Periodical in the United States. 
It is tlie Oldest Medical monthly in this Country and the Pioneer 
medical Journal of the West 
It is the Official Organ of the St. Louis Medical Society. 
This Journal is the only medical periodical in the West that keeps a Stenographic 
Reporter constantly employed to take discussions of the St Louis Medical Society (the oldest, 
largest and ablest society in the West) and of the various large medical societies in the Western 
States. Its Stenographic Reporter is now taking Prof. Ilodgeu’s lectures on “Fractures”, and 
he will soon commence taking the lectures of Profs. Maughs, Gregory and Prewitt. 
A Specimen Copy will be sent oil receipt of 35 cents, in stamps. 
Subscriptions and all Communications should he addressed to 
I»r. Thos. F. Rumbold, 1225 Washington Ave., St. Louis, mo. 
CATARRH, 
ITS HYGIENE AND TREATMENT. 
WITH 46 ILLUSTRATIONS, 12 M0. BY TH0S. F. RUMB0LD, M. D. 
Part I. Hygienic & Sanative Measures (pp. 174), Price, cloth, $1. 50 (1st. Edition 
exhausted, 2nd Edition in preparation, will be ready in February, 1882.) 
Part II. Therapeutic & Operative Measures (pp. 20j), Price, cloth, $2. 50 
Pakts I and II combined in one book (pp. 473), Price, cloth, $4. 00. 
Spray Producers Nos. 1,6, & 7, for Fauces 
and Larynx. 
Spray Producers Nos. 2, 3, 4, & 5, for the Pharyngo-nasal 
and Nasal Cavities. 
St, Louis Med. and Surg, Jour, one year $4.00S 
Hygiene and Treatment of Catarrh ($4.00) for $7.00 
Treatment of Catarrh ($2.50) for $6.00 
Hygiene of Catarrh ($1.50) for $5.00 
Yellow Fever, Ford’s (2.50) for $4.50 
Treatment of Catarrh ($2 50) anrl Yeilow Feve.% Ford's ($2.50) for $3.00