MEDICAL PROGRESS. A REVISION OF THE PAPER READ AT THE SIXTH ANNUAL MEETING OF THE MARYLAND HOMEOPATHIC MEDICAL SOCIETY, NOVEMBER 10th, 1880. BY ELDRIDGE C. PRICE, M.D. Reprinted from the North American Journal oj Homoeopathy, February, 188( PHILADELPHIA: . Globe Printing House, 112 and 114 North Twelfth Street 1881. MEDICAL PROGRESS. A REVISION OF THE PAPER READ AT THE SIXTH ANNUAL MEETING OF THE MARYLAND HOMEOPATHIC MEDICAL SOCIETY, % NOVEMBER 10th, 1880. BY ELDRIDGE C. PRICE, M.D. (Reprinted from the North American Journal of Homoeopathy, February, 1880.) PHILADELPHIA: Globe Printing House, 112 and 114 North Twelfth Street. 1881. PREFACE. Knowing that the allopathic fraternity of Baltimore had in course of preparation a report of the progress of medicine in our city since its incorporation as a city, and also being confi- dent that the progress of homoeopathy would be ignored, or, if noticed, slightingly mentioned, I determined, if I were able, to meet allopathy on its own ground. For which purpose that portion of this paper was written which does not relate imme- diately to the progress of medicine in the past year. Finally, this pamphlet has been published for the-purpose of showing, both the friends and enemies of homceopathy, the inconsistency and harmfulness of practicing medicine without a law. The Author. MEDICAL PROGRESS,* One hundred and fifty years ago was near the noon of the eighteenth century and forty-six years before the birth of the United States. For all important progress in medicine at this period we must look beyond the seas. Here we find, nothing transpiring of very great interest, fur- ther than the occasional introduction of some drug into gen- eral use; a process of accumulation and agglutination that formed the materia medica. This took time, a great deal of time ; progress was so slow that but little advance was notice- able at that period, from the time of Paul of Egina; and the same preemptions were used that were compounded by Fabri- cius ah Aquap>endente two centuries before. One year brought forth on an average, about as much good as another. Occasionally a drug was considered inert and dropped from some compound; or, perhaps, some compound was concocted as a more efficacious substitute for a prescrip- tion grown old-fashioned. The chief improvement was that prescriptions were simpli- fied by using fewer ingredients. The Theriaca Andromachi which originated in the year 1682, and consisted of sixty-one, some say sixty-five, drugs, was less frequently prescribed, though it was occasionally used. There was, therefore, little progress during this time. Theory, bickerings, and uncertainty, mar the medical history of the eighteenth century. At its extreme end Samuel Hahnemann hurled a huge intel- * The annual report of the Historian, read at the Maryland Horn. Med. Soe. Nov. 10th, 1880. 6 lectual boulder into the sea of medical learning. This wrecked many a full rigged theory, and stranded many a small craft heavily laden with unsound hypotheses. “Samuel Hahnemann was horn in 1755, at Misnia, in Upper Saxony.” At forty-one years of age, after having been a pro- found student of medicine, chemistry, and general science, he set the first star of truth in the firmament of professed medi- cine,—the first guide to the law of cure. This appeared in the form of an article published in Ilufeland’s Journal in 1796. Allopathy has said that this great man was a quack. Ur. Hufeland at this time edited one of her leading journals; he was considered an authority and a leader. Well, this renowned man declared Samuel Hahnemann to be “ one of the most dis- tinguished of German physicians.” Did our knowledge of his future life cease here, we would feel convinced of Hahnemann’s sound judgment, lie was no pretender or humhug—his assumption was less than his knowl- edge,—neither was he an ordinary man, but he was “distin- guished.” Samuel Thompson and Samuel Hahnemann were two very different men. Let us therefore hear no more of the falsehoods about the founder of homoeopathy being an uneducated man : why it was when translating Cullen’s Materia Medica into the German language that he caught the first glimmering of the law of cure. Could an uneducated man have translated such a work? From about the year 1800, then, medical progress begins. In this year was born Constantine llering. In 1810 Hahnemann published his “Organon of Homoeo- pathic Medicine.” This publication of ideas so antagonistic to the prevailing views of the times, together with other pro- ductions, and his constantly, increasing practice, excited the old school to such jealousy, indignation and wrath, that in 1820 Hahnemann quitted his native country in disgust at the big- otry, intolerance and persecution of the men upon whom he sought to confer a priceless blessing. In 1826 the first homoeopathic physician, Ur. Graham, landed in Hew York, and at the same time Ur. Quinn settled in Eng- land. 7 According to Dr. Berridge, of England, two hundred and seventy-live regularly graduated homoeopathic physicians is to- day England’s full complement; while in this interval of fifty- four years the increase in the United States has been from one to six thousand homoeopathic physicians. In 1833 Dr. Hering came to Philadelphia, and shortly after his arrival he assisted in establishing the first homoeopathic school of medicine in America, at Allentown, Pa. Previous to this time there was no homoeopathic work written in the English language; being a scholar of no mean accomplish- ments, it became the task of Constantine Hering to give the first translation of the “Organon.” © Other translations by the same author followed, and also va- rious original works upon homoeopathy. This was less than fifty years ago; now our books number legion. Of various institutions we have: — 1 National Society: The American Institute of Homoeo- pathy. 2 Special Societies: The American Homoeopathic Ophthal- mological and Otological Society, and The Western Academy of Homoeopathy. 23 State Societies. 92 Local Societies, i. e., county and city societies. 7 Homoeopathic Clubs. 1 Library Association. 1 Homoeopathic Insurance Company. 38 Homoeopathic Hospitals. 30 Dispensaries. 11 Colleges. 2 Special Schools: The Ophthalmic School, and The School School of Midwifery and Diseases of Children. 16 Homoeopathic Journals. 7 Homoeopathic Directories. In our own city of Baltimore, the first homoeopathic physi- cian, Dr. F. R. McManus, begun the practice of homoeopathy in 1837. Previous to this a man practiced homoeopathy here for a time, but so little is known of him that to Dr. McManus we accord the distinction of being Baltimore’s first pioneer of 8 homoeopathy. From 1837 the number of practitioners gradu- ally increased; in 1865.the number was 15 or 16; since then the increase has been more rapid and to-day we number 38 regularly graduated homoeopathic physicians. In 1874 a city society was organized. In 1875 our present state society was incorporated, and in 1877 the Baltimore Homoeopathic Free Dispensary was incor- porated. In conjunction with this there exists an auxiliary association of ladies. Now, let us see if the discovery of the law of cure has affected so-called “scientific medicine.” To retrace our steps and describe every concession allopathy has involuntarily made to our law, would be a herculean task, requiring more time than I have at my disposal for writing, and more patience than you have at your command for hear- ing, such a compilation. Newton discovered the law of gravitation and opened a wide field for philosophy ; Columbus discovered America, and opened a new world to agriculture and commerce; Watts applied steam, and gave an impetus to all kinds of commercial and mechanical progress; Morse showed how electricity could be trained to man’s uses; Stanley discovered the course of the river Congo; but more than all this was done for mankind when Samuel Hahnemann discovered and gave to the world the only law of medicinal cure in nature. Like a stone of rare value this law had lain hidden deep down under the accumulated debris of rejected theories and valueless hypotheses, from the dawn of civilization. Here and there we see glimmerings of its reflected light, in announce- ments of various of the Aesculapian following. In 420 B. C., Hippocrates teaches the use of emetics to cure vomiting. Further along in history we have Liston teaching the use of Belladonna in erysipelas. In 1768 a surgeon, Win. Alexander, of Edinboro, made drug provings; then follows Albrecht von Haller, that earnest truth-seeker, who insisted that to obtain true knowledge of a drug it was necessary to test its action upon the healthy, not the diseased body. But not until the advent of the immortal Hahnemann was this gem 9 found. He brought it from obscurity and placed it in its golden setting of mature experience, high above orthodox blunderings, as a light “ for the healing of all nations.” When in our active work-a-day life we are uncertain and feel discouraged, if we look up we see the sparkling of the gem, and we are strengthened and grope less in the dark after the “ flesh pots of Egypt.” But how is it with the old school, do they see the gem? Yes, but its brilliant light of truth blinds their unaccustomed eyes. As with their own allopathic dogma, so they think they can appreciate the beauty of our law at a glance, but the fatal mis- take drives them back to their old gropings and stumblings again. At first the truth-seeker can bear but a glance, and as his mental vision grows stronger more of this light can be borne, until its full strength is sustained without injury. Homoeopathy claims that were its principles thoroughly un- derstood, their application would be a science. We are the students of the science of medicine; allopathy gropes in the night of the dark ages, its light is individual experience, its law the dictum of the text-books. In the last few years England has furnished allopathy two prophets ; I refer to Iiinger and Phillips. The former published a work claiming to be an exponent of progressive allopathic medicine, containing a large amount of the author’s originality '■> but in reality the cream of the work is extracted from our ma- teria medica. I)r. Phillips was formerly a homoeopathic physician, or claimed to be, and knowing of Ringer’s success became a rene- gade from homoeopathy, and published a materia medica which was drawn from two sources: Ringer’s Therapeutics and his own homoeopathic teachings. In this work the same principles were outlined, and the author even went a step or two farther than his model, Ringer, and showed still more plainly the ori- gin of his knowledge. For his effort he, like Ringer, was also given a lectureship in an allopathic college. Both Ringer’s and Phillips’ work may be found upon the shelves of the allopathic profession, and their teachings are ac- cepted as truth, ex catherda. 10 Later still I. J. M. Goss, M.D., of Marietta, Ga., published a materia medica and numbers of bis drug indications were ab- stracted from homoeopathic sources. Further on we will hear more of him. These are some of the means by which allopathy has made its boasted advances in tbe past century. Ringer and Phillips are simply samples of a large class that exists in the old school, and they are from time to time, as we have seen, and as I will further prove, dragging over into their materia medica indica- tions for remedies and even remedies themselves. Homoeopathy is the sole source from which allopathy has obtained remedies and the art of application of drugs, that will cure disease. This is a sweeping assertion, but it is truth, for there is but one law for the cure of disease. This law, like all of Nature’s laws, was not invented by man, but simply discovered; it lias always existed and its operation has been going on through all time, silently and unseen, and unless drugs are ap- plied according to this law, they will not cure; but they may palliate or suppress disease.* The history of the progress of allopathy for one year illus- trates its progress relatively since the beginning of tbe 19th century. My illustration is a record of facts culled, from vari- ous journals, both homoeopathic and allopathic, since October of last year, 1879. First,-we will expound a little of the wis- dom of 1. J. M. Goss, M. D., viz.: In membranous croup he uses the acetic tincture of sanguinaria. Ilamamelis in 3 to 5 drop doses, three times daily and applied locally, is a remedy for hemorrhoids. Rheumatism following a strain or sprain of a joint, Rhus tox. Hr. Goss states that he carries a pocket-case containing sixty- five remedies; a very suspicious circumstance, but let us read on and see what it contains, viz.: “Aconite is one of our best remedies in most forms of inflam- mation and zymotic fevers.” “In small and repeated doses, Aconite is one of our best antiphlogistic remedies.” .... * This, of course, applies to therapeutics alone; the laws of hygiene act upon a different principle, and are markedly distinct from the great law that governs drug action. 11 In inflammatory rheumatism.” “In croup and tonsilitis, it acts with promptness and certainty.” “ In all fevers when the fibrine of the blood is in excess, while the corpuscles are unpoisoned and the tissue as yet intact, Aconite acts specifically.” “It seems that the condition of the nervous and arterial sys- tems calling for this remedy, is one of tension, manifested by restlessness, anxiety, thirst, and heat.” “It is also of material service in acute congestion and active hemorrhage.” “ In acute erysipelas and puerperal fever it has done me good service in many cases.” Shade of the long departed Biogenes! arise and tell us, is this an honest man ? Hot only are we suspicious of fraud, but we are certain of it. Such a history of Aconite can have but one source. Let us see what else this pocket-case contains: “Belladonna. —Belladonna acts upon the cerebral centres, removing conges- tion of the head, eyes, nose, and throat, hence is valuable in many diseases. I use it in sclerotitis, ophthalmia, typho-mania, delirium, catarrh, scarlet fever, measles, and in small-pox, when there is great tendency to the head, and also in puerperal-ma- nia, sick headache, and neuralgia about the eyes, teeth, face or head. It is indicated always by dullness of the eyes, dilated pupils, and a tendency to sleep, in threatened or existing coma.” One question, my dear sir: if Belladonna is indicated in di- lated pupils, how is it oculists use Atropia to produce this con- dition ? “Rhus toxicodendron.—I use this in erysipelas, where the skin is of a dark red color, and there is constant itching and burning; and also in other inflammations of the skin, with these indications for its use.” “Bryonia.—This article manifests a special affinity for serous tissues. It is applicable in some cases of rheumatism of the heart, chest and other serous membranes. It relieves frontal headache extending to the occiput. It is a good remedy for dry cough and pain in the chest of a dull character.” “Xux vomica.—This is the remedy for paresis of the spinal centres, and all diseases arising therefrom. In colic, if the 12 tongue is broad and pale, showing inaction of the stomach and liver, then Nux vomica is the remedy.” “Where there is con- stipation from a deficient innervation to the rectum, then Nux vomica will overcome it in a few days.” “In dyspepsia of whiskey and tobacco users.” “Ipecac.—Ipecac, has an elective affinity for mucous tissues; it is a valuable remedy in nausea and vomiting, where the tongue is elongated, contracted and pointed; it is a remedy in diarrhoea and dysentery. With Aconite I use it in pneumonia of infants, especially if nausea is present.” “Phytolacca.—This is a polycrest, having an affinity for sev- eral tissues, and acting upon the glandular system.” (Query: where did he get the term, polychrest? this is the first time I have ever known allopathy to use it; with us it is a current expression.) “It is a specific in mammary irritation and in- flammation.” “It has been used with success in diphtheria and nurses sore mouth. It is indicated by the leaden colored tongue, with slick glutinous coating on it. It is a remedy for some cases of acute rheumatism.” “Macrotis Racemosa.—Cimicifuga has special affinity for the uterus and the serous and fibrous tissues. In rheumatism it may he given successfully, especially where the muscles are in- volved. In small doses J frequently give it to prevent the false pains prior to confinement in pregnant females.” “Gelsemium.—To allay spasms it has no superior.” “It is indicated by flushed face.” These are some of the remedies found in the pocket-case of a man who claims to practice allopathy, and these are some of the symptomatic indications for their use. Symptomatic indications! what right has he to talk of symp- toms? Allopathy claims to generalize, and laughs at homoeo- pathic symptomatology. Have a care, my friends; the pillar of cloud is not reversed, but you are getting among the Israelites. Our truth-seeker, of whom we have just been speaking, also uses Iodide of Arsenic in hay fever, “if the discharge from the nose is acrid.” And in strangury lie gives Cantharides, Can- nabis sativa, and Apis inellifica. These examples of “originality” were taken from the Medi- 13 cal Brief, an allopathic periodical, claiming the largest circula- tion of any similar publication. Such productions are not criti- cised, but eagerly read and adopted by the subscribers to this journal. Here are some additional examples of allopathic homoeopathy, from various sources:—Gelsemium is given in cerebro-spinal meningitis and in trigeminal neuralgia. Cannabis sat. for gon- orrhoea. Terebinthina is used in miasmatic hsematuria. Ber- beris vulgaris for biliary calculi. Willow charcoal—Carbo veg.—recommended for dyspepsia; coffee proscribed while using. Guarana or Paullinia sorbillis for sick headache. Can- nabis indica in epilepsy. “The Medical Record, Extra,” June 14th, 1880, says of our Hepar sulphuris calcarea:—“Calcium Sulphide is very valuable in skin lesions attended with suppuration. In acne of a pustu- lar form, in hordeolum and boils it is useful; it not only re- lieves the symptoms, but prevents further crops of boils.” The dose recommended is the tenth of a grain, i. e., our first deci- mal potency. Arsenic; cardiac disease:—An English physician, Dr. Lockie, after speaking of other troubles for which arsenic is used, says: “it seems to be of greater value even in fatty degeneration, and this in spite of the fact that recent experiments tend to show that fatty degeneration of the heart is one of the results of feed- ing animals with arsenical preparations.” Arsenic is also highly recommended in the treatment of asthma. Why is it that these gentlemen fight under the standard: “contraria contrariis curantur,” instead of “similia similibus curantur?” Why ignore the theory of the law of cure, and apply it in actual practice? Is this consistent with truth- seeking? But the above is no more inconsistent than the following from the Medical Brief:—“There is nothing more absurd and disastrous in its results than to treat all cases of puerperal fever upon one and the same principle.” In substance, specific treat- ment is wrong; very good; but hear his contradiction: “If any of the readers of the Brief have a specific treatment (the italics are mine) for this much dreaded malady, I would be glad to hear from them.” 14 Caulophyllum is recommended in arresting threatened, pre- mature labor, and also “in controlling abdominal pain during the last months of pregnancy.” A doctor uses nitrite of amyl in congestive chills, a sthenic condition, and a colleague uses it in faintness, which is pre-eminently asthenic. How apply con- traria to this? The two conditions are irreconcilable. Ipecac, is used in uterine hemorrhage, and Aconite is endorsed in pneumonia. The latter remedy is also administered for fa- cial neuralgia, tic douloureux, “the dose is of a grain of aconitin.” Belladonna.—Useful for spasms of involuntary muscles, and also fcfr dilating the os uteri. In Braitlnvaite’s Retrospect the (so-called) treatment of syphilis without mercury is recommended; hut homoeopathy is not denied the privilege of forming an opinion whether mer- cury did or did not, at least, assist in the cure. The writer says: “Hot baths were the order of the. day for all cases of syphilis.” “Such local applications as black wash, calomel, red precipitate, or citrine ointment, do not in the least degree, in my opinion, diminish the value of the cases, cured without the specific ac- tion of mercury. In my cases the actual amount of mercury imbibed by the system must have been very small, indeed; the remedies were not at all pushed, quite the contrary; and any one who could attribute to their use the good results which followed, must be a believer in the Hahnemannian doctrine of infinitesimal doses.” Allopathy must accept this man’s dictum or be stigmatized; fortunately we do not mind such a stigma; we are proud of the distinction. Aloes in J grain doses is recommended for hemorrhoids, and in a subsequent number of the journal containing this sugges- tion, another gentleman advises the remedy in smaller doses, viz.: “He will obtain speedier curative results, without aggra- vating the disease, if he gives one-tenth or one-twentieth of a grain at a time.” This is progress unmistakably; these gentle- men are certainly trenching upon our ground. Ferruginous salts when given to cure a case of hemorrhage, only increased the flow. Possibly homceopathy can explain this strange phenomenon (?) better than allopathy. 15 Here is a sample of orthodox treatment:—“As for the treat- ment, I think Dr. Barclay and friends did all that could be done; their treatment was most excellent; they gave the child calomel, Dover’s powder, potassii bromide, rhubarb, santonine, bromidia, castor oil, turpentine, quinia, cold to the head, and finally veratrum. But despite all, it died in two days. Now the question is, could anything more have been done ? I think not. The doctor says: ‘Now what was the cause of the condition in which I found my patient Sunday morning?’ The ques- tion, ‘what was the cause of its condition?’ is of great impor- tance. Now, I hardly know what to say was the cause, unless it was that the poor little three-year-old child hardly got enough medicine in the forty-eight hours of its illness to relieve the great prostration caused by the cerebral condition and convul- sions.” This is a specimen of orthodox routine treatment, in the year 1879. Once more I quote from I. J. M. Goss, M. D.: “The tormina and tenesmus were severe, and the child much reduced, as it had been sick for some time, I.put it on Ringer’s preparation of corrosive sublimate, one grain to one pint of water, only re- duced the dose to suit the age of the child.” This is between the third and fourth decimal dilution. Further on he remarks : “I have used it now for two seasons, whenever it was indicated, which is in all discharges resembling the washings of flesh, etc. All remedies have their place, and each one has the effect when indicated.” The llahnemannian for Feb. 1880, says: “Dr. Murrell of the Westminster Hospital reports in the Western Lancet having used Dover’s powder in fifty-five cases of nightsweating in phthisis, with relief in all cases hut five. This report excites the Medical Tribune to the profound remark that ‘the use of a sudorific to check sweating may seem paradoxical.’ If the Tribune and the Lancet could only recognize the existence of a principle in nature under which all disordered actions can be similarly relieved, their patients would have cause to sing a paradology.” Rulsatilla is used in dysmenorrhoea and in headache from 16 mental application, and the author of this assertion states that “no such power is attributed to it in books to which I have access.” This then, is another “original discovery.” What? nonsense! why does he not come out with the manly acknow- ledgement that this was stolen from homoeopathy?—how else came allopathy by it? We have known and applied such facts for years. Belladonna and Drosera are administered in whooping-cough. Salicylic acid has served its term, is getting “old fashioned,” and a new remedy is supplanting it: Manaca, so our friends say,“is as much a specific for rheumatism as quinine for mala- rial poisoning.” So they said of Salicylic acid; hut it seems, tlie bubble burst. Another specific, for chronic rheumatism, has been discovered: Senecio aureus. “If administered” it “will give relief.” But, to make more certain, it is combined with phy- tolacca decandra, it then becomes, so say our friends, “the king of restoratives in rheumatic affections.” Baptisia tinctoria.— “In typhoid, when the diarrhoea supervenes and the discharges are peculiarly offensive, and their color resembling prune juice, then baptisia plays a part to be remembered by the practitioner.” This seems to he another new discovery; so the sphere of baptisia is typhoid fever? Verily, if we do not see to it our house will be tumbling about our ears; another prop gone, another illusion proved; we were re&lly presumptuous enough to think we originated the scientific application of baptisia. Lillium tigrinum “is one of our best remedies in cervical leucorrhoea.” Pulsatilla is also recommended for leueorrhcea. Allopathy repudiates dynamization; potentized drugs are to it a myth. Allopathy and materialism are therefore, neces- sarily convertible terms. Here at least we expect to find con- sistency, hut it is not so. In a system without a law, inconsis- tencies and contradictions abound. To illustrate my point I have culled the following:—“I used the Kidder battery two years; it failed me, and finally I came to the conclusion that the current was too crude, the discharge was too coarse. It was given off in too large molecules; needed to be attenuated. ’ (The italics are mine). Then, if this be true, how about crude drugs? 17 Which is the cruder, molecules of electricity from a Kidder battery, or molecules of a drug tincture? If it is necessary to attenuate electricity, why give drugs crude? The Homoeopathic Times quotes the following from the Medi- cal Record: “jSTo one can fail to have noticed the increased therapeutic range which has of late been given to many stand- ard drugs by simply varying their dosage. We have, indeed, had our Materia Medica enlarged almost as much in this way as by the actual addition of new remedies. The extension has been made both by increasing and diminishing the ordinary dosage, and in each case new effects have been produced. It is perhaps in calomel, strychnine, and Potash salts that a different, or greater power in very large doses, is best illustrated. The employment of minute doses on the other hand, has been more extended and has produced more striking results. Thus the use of Podophyllin, in infantile diarrhoea, of Arsenic in gastric irritation, of Ipecac, as an anti-emetic, of Pilocarpin and Dover’s powder and Turkish baths, in nightsvveats, of Cantharides in urethral irritations and hematuria, are all notable extensions of the therapeutic range of the particular drug. Of course such examples as these are eagerly held up by en- thusiasts as proofs of a grand therapeutic law. It hardly needs argument, however, to show that they do not indicate either a law or a uniform series of facts. There are but few drugs that have even this peculiar range which we have described, and those do not, as a rule, show their best results in their mini- mum dose. We doubt if Arsenic ever became popular in gas- tritis, or Pilocarpin in nightsvveats, while Ipecac, is a most un- reliable anti-emetic. We need not look for any great thera- peutic triumphs, therefore, in the similia sirnilibus action of the drop posology. There is a physiological law that substances which at first irritate inhibitory centres, when more energeti- cally given will paralyze them; or, what at first constringes a tissue, may later relax and destroy it. There is nothing very new in this law; the only novelty is that we are learning of more agents, which when given in a certain way illustrate it. These new facts in regard to minute dosage are suggestive and often useful, but they indicate no mysterious nor unusual law.” 18 This line of reasoning, I presume, satisfactorily disposes this theory of ours, this old physiological law that we have clothed in a new garb and revamped as a newly discovered law; com- pletely demolishes homoeopathy in the eyes of allopathy. But we think not; our hydra’s heads are all of them still intact. Generalization is the bane of allopathy. Why not be more definite? There are all kinds of nausea; emesis results from a variety of causes. Arsenic will only cure its own peculiar gastritis, and so on through the whole materia medica. A specific, as our friends use the term, will never be found for any one disease; this they have yet to learn. They reason as far as materialism allows, here they stop; they can go no farther. Like Moses they behold the “promised land” afar off, hut they can not enter. They have irrevently struck the rock of truth and this is their reward. The land of milk and honey is for their children, the blessing is not theirs. An allopath, while attending a case of obstetrics, gave the patient through mistake 20 drops of the fluid extract of digita- lis, intending to give that amount of ergot. Finding his pa- tient improve and recover without any had results, he experi- mented with digitalis, and concluded that in inertia uteri especially, does it act as an ocytocic. lie ends by saying he has no theory to advance. Why not? Simply because there is no law governing, and no principle in the application of drugs in such a manner. Such is a system without a law, a therapeia founded on experimentation. In pathology, in physiology, in religion, in astronomy, the visa tergo that governs, is one of nature’s laws; but medicine alone is governed by the laws of chance. Is it not rational to suppose that if in nature there is a law governing the universe, and each combination of circumstances that form a system or science, that a principle, a law should govern the action of dru