DISTINCTIVE VALUES OF HOMEOPATHY. By CHARLES E. FISHER, M. D. . . . CHICAGO . . . DISTINCTIVE VALUES OF HOMEOPATHY. CHARLES E. FISHER, M. D., CHICAGO. All systems, sects, schools, pathies in medicine have certain values in common. All legalized mem- bers of the medical profession are equally and justly entitled to the title of "regular" physician with all the title implies. As all republicans, demo- crats, populists and mugwumps are still and over and above their political faiths American citizens so we as allopaths, homeopaths, eclectics and what-not are still and always physicians, over and above our distinctive pathies. In all the elementary branches of medicine and surgery we have common knowl- edge. The essential difference between us lies in the department of therapeutics-the application of cura- tive remedies to the sick-and in this only. What- ever of value there is in surgery and midwifery, in the X-ray and electricity, in asepsis and antisepsis in surgery and allied branches, in the microscope and the spectroscope, in biology and histology and path- ology and all other elements the aggregating of which goes to make np the "science and art of medicine," we, the homeopathic profession, are the colleagues of the old school whether they will or no; we study the same books; read the same periodicals; discuss the same questions from the same viewpoints in our medical conventions and at our firesides; their bacteria are our bacteria, our germicides their germi- cides; their protozoa are our protozoa, their fer- ments our ferments; their toxines are our toxines, their palliatives are our palliatives and their surgery is our surgery. Only in therapeutics do we differ. Yet, in spite of the fact that we have so much in common, prejudices and animosities have existed between the two more prominent branches of the medical profession since the founding of the new system. Hand-to-hand conflicts have been waged in more instances than one; forensic contests have been heard in the sick-room, on the street corner, and before the counter of the drug-store; the press, the rostrum, the pulpit have all been drafted into service; suit after suit in court has grown out of the single point of difference between the'schools; and it is safe to say that nine-tenths of the malpractice cases our physicians have been made to defend have been the direct outgrowth of this unreasonable and unjustifiable antagonism over the one question, "How do remedies effect the cure of the sick?" The medical brethren have not always dwelt to- gether in unity; the lion and the lamb have not al- ways snuggled together on the same hearth-rug; the meekness and humility and simplicity of char- acter embodied in the lowly Nazarene, who honored our profession by adopting it as his own in a meas- ure, have not always been reflected in the conduct and temper of the modern physician. There seems almost to have been elected a preference for fiery disputations rather than indulgence in friendly and orderly discussion having in view the ascertainment of the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, for the benefit of suffering humanity and the interests of science. In all things but therapeutics we meet upon the level and part upon the square. Upon this alone do we ruffle our feathers, make wry grimaces, derrick big chips upon our elevated shoulders and plant our- selves for good stiff jabs at each other's solar plexus- es. An otherwise honorable and honored profes- sion thus too often becomes the laughing stock and disgrace of its community-and all because we do not agree upon the single question, "'How do reme- dies best act to effect a cure of the sick?" Therapeutics the Vital Issue. And yet, if we are going to differ at all it is upon this very question that we must differ. It is a vital question-the essential one with the profession and and the people alike. How do remedies act? Upon this knowledge must be based their administration. If we know how they act, what effects they are cap- able of causing, what organs and tissues and fluids of the human frame they affect and how they af- fect them, we are in good measure prepared to ad- minister them with some degree of scientific preci- sion and with at least moderate certainty of success. If. on the other hand, we know only in a general way how they affect the system we know only in a general way how to apply them to human suffering. We may be good diagnosticians, i ray know all about the causes of disease, may be well versed in hygiene and dietetics and allied topics; may be able to carve with the precision of a butler; mechanics may be with us as with the skilled artisan, a 2 pleasure and a never-failing accomplishment; but if we don't know how to apply our remedies scien- tifically, accurately, with precision, to make them go right to the spot and knock the black out at every shot, we fail in the demand of bed-room practice and remain on the outskirts, but skirmishers in the great battle between life and death. To therapeutics, always to therapeutics, must the people look in their hour of suffering; disease must have its remedy ; death is a persistent foe; it lurks in the air we breathe, the food we eat, the water we drink, the clothing we wear. No man is safe from invasion by the emissaries of the grim monster. At all times and in all seasons we are assailed. Innu- merable hordes of agencies are constantly threaten- ing our destruction. No man knows when the Son of Alan shall draw near. And as the spiritual doctor warns his hearers to be ever ready for the hour of departure so may we, as medical doctors, warn the people that it is to their interests to be ever ready with the best there may be in store for them in therapeutics, that when assailed they may be able to ward off the attacks of the enemy and secure safety in that system of medical practice best adapted to the demands made upon them. Therapeutics the Art of Drug=Application. Therapeutics is the art of drug-application. After the cause and nature of an illness are understood it is essential to combat it. Among the agencies which have been found most useful in this direction, in idiopathic, or distinct and separate diseases, are the remedies of the physician. The patient may wish to know what made him sick; it may be important that be form an idea of about how long he will be ill; he may even have some solicitude about the possible outcome of his case; but, after all, the matter of greatest moment to him is the administration of the remedies nature has stored up for the ills of man- kind. Does the doctor know how to administer these? Can he select them with scientific exactness? Is he versed in the pathogenetic effects, their drug- acting possibilities, upon the human body? Does he know how often to repeat his doses, with refer- ence to the duration of action of each? Is he familiar with the incompatibilities and antagonisms of the various drugs entering into his materia medica? Does he understand all that he should know about the cumulative effects of drugs? These are vital questions with the sick man. And Samuel Hahnemann, the founder of homeopathy, opened unto us the means whereby this requisite knowledge may be secured; it is to him more than to all his contemporaries that the people owe a debt of gratitude which can never be paid for having made 3 plain and scientific the application of drug-agencies in the sick-room. Homeopathy, as practiced and taught to-day, pos- sesses all the accomplishments of the modern allo- path. But it possesses far more than all this. Hahne- mann instituted investigations, never before scien- tifically and accurately undertaken, which have shown the careful student of materia medica and therapeutics the range of action of the leading rem- edies and drugs upon the healthy human body. By this means we are able to understand just what or- gans and tissues are the site of attack of a given drug; and not only so, but we are also enabled to un- derstand just how each organ and tissue is affected, how severe or mild the action of the remedy, how long its duration of action, how permanent or how passing its effects, and a plentitude of other informa- tion of certain value to the painstaking prescriber. If a doctor be satisfied with blunderbuss work he need not enter so deeply into the study of drug- action; and if the people are so indifferent to their physical needs that they are willing to accept blun- derbuss prescribing they have no need for home- opathy and its methods of ascertaining accurately the modalities and affinities of each and every drug entering into the storehouse of the careful thera- peutist. The Greater Finesse of Homeopathy. Homeopathy particularizes; allopathy general- izes. If a number of children are ill with a com- mon disease the allopathic doctor will probably give them all the same remedy. Whereas, if the same children are in the hands of the homeopath he will individualize their cases and prescribe for them ac- cording to their individualties, it having been ascer- tained by the homeopath that drugs do not affect all alike, even when afflicted alike. Only in a general way do other systems of medicine than the homeo- pathic take into consideration the temperament of the patient, the times of aggravation and remission of his disease, the hours of greatest activity of the various remedies employed, and the hundred and one little sequences absolutely necessary to the best work in drug-selecting. That German philosopher- doctor who formulated the homeopathic law of cure had had the most thorough training that a university education and long years of careful research in chemistry and literary translating could vouchsafe. With him everything that was done was thoroughly done; nothing of the haphazard in any line of work or study was allowed to pass unchallenged and he carried this experimentation with drugs to an extent unthought of. Not only did he ascertain in a general way the effects of the remedies in common 4 use in those days upon the human system, as ascer- tained by accidental poisonings, by the over-admin- istration of drugs by the physicians of his time, and by his own "provings" of the action of remedies, but he delved deeply into the finer and more lasting shadings of drug-action, recording every immediate and remote effect made upon himself and his experi- menters, thus giving to us an accuracy of knowl- edge hardly to be dreamed of. We all know that belladonna and strychnine and potash and aconite and other well-known drugs will cause certain easily recognizable effects if given, accidentally or inten- tionally, to the human subject. But until Hahne- mann instituted his scientific provings we did not know many of the finer shadings and remote effects of these agents, consequently were able to admin- ister them for the crude or general effects only. And even to-day, homeopathy is the one of all the sys- tems of modern medicine to recognize and make use of the knowledge thus acquired, and which all thinking minds must agree should be very valuable to the physician individualizing his cases in daily practice. The Homeopathic Law of Cure. The usual burden of the homeopath's song is his law of cure. All through nature the law of natural selection is known to prevail. Like begets like; likes are drawn unto likes; likes love likes; a smile begets a smile; a frown begets a frown; sunshine makes light and good cheer; darkness and becloudedness beget despondency and despair; the cords of a mu- sical instrument will reverberate as like cords are struck upon another; harmony and not discord brings sweetness of temper, good digestion and health. Hahnemann's law of "Similia Similibus Curentur," "Likes are cured by likes," or "Let likes be cured by likes," is perfectly in harmony with the law of affini- ties, or the law of natural selection. There is noth- ing unreasonable cr exaggerated about it. The ig- norant or prejudiced may attempt to confuse it with "idem"-the same. "The hair of the dog cures the bite" is a common quotation in referring to the law which the homeopath recognizes as his compass and chart; that the ignorant man should see in this max- im an approximation to the "like cure like" rule of the homeopath is not altogether surprising; but when we hear an educated man proclaiming the dog's hair saw as the correct interpretation of Hahnemann's Latin principle there is nothing left us but to classify him with the knaves of our ac- quaintance. "Similia similibus curentur" means that drugs ad- ministered to healthy human beings in appreciable doses cause a counterpart of those symptoms they 5 are most certain to remove in a sick person who has not already taken such drug or remedy to that ex- tent that the symptoms and conditions from which he is suffering have been set up. Hahnemann never taught, nor have any of his followers taught, that if a man be poisoned by strychnine he must be given more strychnine; that if a man be poisoned by opium he must be given more opium; that if he be poisoned by belladonna he must be given more of the deadly nightshade. Hahnemann did teach, however, and his followers proclaim, that if a man has symptoms similar to those which strychnine will cause, with- out having taken this drug, it will, given in atten- uated doses, remove those symptoms; that if a man be suffering symptoms like unto those caused by opium, and not by opium, this drug, in attenuated doses, will remove those symptoms; that if a man be suffering symptoms like those which belladonna will produce, without having taken belladonna, this rem- edy in attenuated doses will remove those symp- toms. The proposition is plain. It is remarkably easy of exemplification. Even the most perverse mind in the allopathic profession or the most skeptical mor- tal among doubting laymen can easily demonstrate the truth or falsity of the homeopathic law by insti- tuting experiments which are absolutely safe and equally convincing, under the direction of any com- petent homeopath. If the law be true, if it be true that drugs, like everything in nature, have affinities, and that they are capable of expressing those affini- ties when given to human beings, for their weal or their woe, then it is perfectly proper to assert with emphasis that the distinctive difference between ho- meopathy and other systems of medical practice makes it far and away the most valuable, accurate and scientific of them all, it being the only one to follow a guiding maxim in the selecting of its rem- edies. Hahnemann enunciated nothing new when he proclaimed the homeopathic law. Hippocrates, the ''Father of Medicine," had before him asserted that remedies are capable of removing symptoms and conditions like unto those which they are capable of causing. That some cures are effected by oppo- site drug action, some by like or similar drug action, he had proclaimed centuries before the time of Hahnemann. The latter simply developed the scope of the law. He elaborated upon Hippocrates' views, qualifying much that the latter had written and spoken in relation to other rules or guides in the selecting of drugs for the sick. Hahnemann ascer- tained by a carefully conducted series of experiments upon well and sick individuals that the law is prac- 6 tically universal in its application, and that to be safely effective the smallest quantities of medicine which will have the effect to start nature on her way toward a restoration to health must be admin- istered if the best results are to be obtained. The similiarity of action of drug-remedies and disease- producing causes makes it requisite that small doses shall be administered; and the experience of an hun- dred years in epidemics of all the severe diseases to which man is heir goes to show the correctness of Hahnemann's reasoning and the truthfulness of his law. Homeopathy's Real Values. The real values, the distinctive values, of homeop- athy, therefore, lie (a) in its therapeutic law, (b) the ascertaining by careful experimentation upon the healthy of the range of action of the remedies mak- ing up its materia medica, and (c) the administration of those remedies in such doses that the harmful drugyeffects so common to crude dosing are alto- gether obviated. In his efforts at heroic practice the allopath attacks his foe with armfuls of javelins; he hurls them with force at disease, administering several remedies at a time, trusting rather to their drug-force than to their finesse of action for results; he hopes one of his javelins will hit the mark and the rest will do no harm. How often he fails to make proper reckoning for the effects of the un- necessary ones the graveyard records will testify. The homeopath, on the other hand, avoids the crude and unscientific method of poly-pharmacy, or drug mixing, relying upon the well-directed effort of the proven homeopathic remedy, whose dynamic force is spent against the force creating the disease-dis- turbance in the human system, the one neutralizing the other in prompt, efficient and seductive fashion, without demolishment of any of nature's forces and without violent disturbances of the equilibrium of the vital energy. Did time permit I might go more extensively and painstakingly into a discussion of the value of ho- meopathy to the people, and sustain its position by inductive reasoning, philosophical deductions and the recording of vast arrays of statistics going to show the superior results attained by it in various great epidemics of disease and in various hospitals in this and other countries. But it must be plain to any unprejudiced observer that it is a rational law that Hahnemann has given us to guide us in the selection of the remedy for the sick. It must be equally plain that in no better manner can the profession ascer- tain the possibilities of drugs in diseases than by as- certaining their range of action upon the healthy. It must be equally apparent to the thinking mind 7 that since drugs are foreign to our natural wants and necessities, and poisonous, the less of them that are taken into the system when we are already bur dened with disease the better off we will be. Ho- meopathy encompasses these essentials. No other system of medicine even essays to do so. The dom- inant sect scoffs at the suggestion of there being a law or rule to guide in the prescribing of remedial agents. All is haphazard, nothing scientifically ac- curate, according to their practices and precepts. With us it is the exception that we are not able to select the suited remedy for a given cause, if we but intelligently apply the knowledge vouchsafed to us, and the people whose physicians we are, by Hahnemann and his disciples of the century now closing. The Test in Battle. In 1878 it was my good or bad fortune, as the reader wills, to be a volunteer physician in the dread epidemic of yellow fever which so sorely devastated the South. More than forty thousand cases of this violentandfatal disease were recorded by the various boards of health of the Southern cities. In no in- stance did homeopathy have a majority representa- tion on those boards; in only two instances did we have representation at all, and then of only one member each. Of that forty thousand cases reported to those boards of health above thirty-five thousand were reported by allopathic physicians and above four thousand by homeopaths. All were alike com- pelled to record their cases, under penalty of heavy fines and professional disgrace. The boards of health and the relief committees immediately took charge of every case for its general management, leaving the medical management undisturbed. Under these circumstancesthere was no possibility of error creep- ing into the records. They told a truthful story, no matter who might be the gainer or the loser. And this is their tale: Of the authenticated cases reported by the ho- meopathic profession, 3,914, there were 261 deaths, the mortality being six and six-tenths (6.6) per cent. The allopathic returns show that of the 36,000 cases, in round numbers, treated by them the death record was eighteen and six-tenths (18.6) per cent., or with- in a fraction of three times that of the homeopathic profession. In no instance did the old-school ap- proximate our results in the handling of this dread epidemic. In 1878 Dr. Chopin, president of the Louisiana State Board of Health, sent out an appeal by the as- sociated press requesting the medical profession in various communities to divide into classes and con- duct experiments in treating the disease then, and 8 how, prevailing, yellow fever. It was suggested that some should try the orange-leaf tea treatment, others the capsicum treatment, others the quinine and calomel treatment, others the hot pack and still others the Higbee cold-bed treatment, and so on through the category; that the profession was at sea, and through this series of experiments they might be better able to cope with their foe in future years. Meanwhile, the homeopathic physicians who were in the field and combatting as best they might the dreadful enemy whose deadly work was making a great mourning ground of many of the fairest cities of the South, were faithfully adhering to the natural law of cure which guides them in the treatment of less destructive diseases, with a success which as- tonished the people and made for homeopathy a name and fame which will never die. When the committee of the American Institute of Homeopa- thy appointed to gather the facts and figures of that epidemic got their reports from almost every physi- cian engaged in the contest it was found that the un- erring certainty of "Similia similibus curentur" had led them in almost every instance into like treatment, almost to routinism, at the very time that the old school profession were crying out through the asso- ciated press for experimentation upon the sick in the delusive hope that in future years they might be able to do better for the afflicted people of their sec- tion. Can anything more strongly attest the value of a medical compass and chart in time of an epi- demic? And surely a law that proves reliable here is also reliable in individual practice. Comparative Results in Hospital Practice. We have recently had an acknowledgment of the value of the homeopathic system of medication, as compared with the results of other methods in my home city, Chicago, which is worthy of recital. Cook County operates the largest county hospital in the United States. More than fifteen hundred patients are constantly receiving its charities. More than a dozen years ago the homeopathic profession se- cured the admission of its members upon the hos- pital staff to the extent of one-fourth of the member- ship. Subsequently the eclectic school secured ad- mission, also, and a readjustment was made. The allopathic staff is assigned nineteen admissions, from all causes, in the order in which they come, then the homeopaths get the next six, and the eclectics follow with the next five, and so on for each thirty admis- sions, day after day and week after week through- out the year. About a year ago the allopaths be- came dissatisfied and petitioned the management to give them a larger share of patients. To this the eclectics took exception, in the fear that they were 9 likely to be reduced in percentage of admissions, and they went over the hospital records for a num- ber of years, showing the per cent, of patients each school had had, the per cent, of recoveries and the per cent, of deaths, as, also, the relative cost to the county of the care of those assigned each system. These figures, not gathered by us, remember, but by the eclectics, showed that the relative ratio of mortality was decidedly in our favor, next best in favor of the eclectic system, and least favorable for the allopaths. The latter lost nearly twice as many patients as the homeopaths, and thirty per cent, more than the eclectics; their patients were ill nearly twice as long as ours, and the cost per capita was nearly twice as great. The result of this agitation and the statistics the hospital records produced is that the agitators got a set-back; homeopathy is ac- credited on the official records of this great institu- tion with results far superior to those of the allo- pathic profession and considerably better than those of the eclectics, while the latter, in turn, fared better than did their antagonists, the dominant profession. The difference in results is so great that if the entire hospital 'had been under 'homeopathic man- agement there would have been a saving of three hundred lives per annum. Melbourne, Australia, had a prolonged epidemic of typhoid fever a few years ago. That city has three hospitals under public patronage. In the City Hos- pital nearly thirty per centum of the admissions of typhoid cases died; in the Alfred Hospital, also allo- pathic, above fifteen per centum died; while in the Homeopathic Hospital but nine and a fraction per centum died. This comparison of results brought about an increase of the Homeopathic Hospital fund of above fifteen thousand dollars. Better than Antitoxine in Diphtheria. We have heard a great deal in later years about the treatment of diphtheria by antitoxine. Beyond question the allopathic statistics have been bettered by the discontinuance of former exceedingly harsh and more disastrous treatments by its introduction. But how do the results of antitoxine compare with the results of homeopathic treatment? Let us see. The 'Medical Counsellor, published at Detroit, sent out a few months since a series of requests to home- opathic physicians with a view to ascertaining their results in this dread disease. The figures tell a tale of superiority which should set not only the people but the old-school profession to thinking. Replies to inquiries were received from all over the United States, within a very short time, covering 1,030 cases. These embraced a mortality record of 76, giving a death rate from diphtheria of 7.38 per cent. 10 Against this return on the part of homeopathy we may array the result of antitoxine treatment in a recent Boston experience, which has been heralded as having secured for the new remedy honors here- tofore undreamed of. This report covers 1,972 cases, with a death rate of 13.4 per cent., or nearly twice the mortality under homeopathic treatment. These figures are supported also from Chicago. Two years ago, when the antitoxine craze was at its highest, a well-known homeopathic physician col- lated the results of homeopathic treatment in that city, finding them to be, in several hundred cases, a trifle over seven per cent.; practically the same re- sults that are reported in the Counsellor's figures from all over the country. At the same moment the allopathic mortality at the Willard Parker hospital, New York, was twenty-seven per cent. It has since been somewhat reduced, but not enough to lower the standard raised by homeopathy in this most dread of all the diseases of child-life, the one that strikes terror to the mother's heart, that crushes die hopes and confidences of the father, and that gives the physician more concern than any other disease he is called upon to treat. Surely if the homeopathic system of medicine can reduce the death rate of diphtheria to one-half that of the old school, under their boasted modern and highly vaunted "scientific" methods, it is a system worthy the full confidence and patronage of the people and a trial at the hands of its old-school foes, if they are in earnest and are honest in their battle with disease and death. Comparative Records in Great Cities. Another series of figures which I shall offer in support of the claim that homeopathy is the safest and best of all medical practices, and the last which I shall here present, is an authoritative array com- piled under the auspices of the American Institute of Homeopathy by its committee on life insurance. This committee gathered statistics from the records of the boards of health of seventeen large cities, cov- ering the entire lists of deaths and such other vital statistics as were obtainable. These show that the typhoid fever mortality of the allopaths is 36.14 per cent, in thirteen cities report- ing this disease, the homeopathic ratio of mortality, in proportion to the entire number reported, being 15.18 per cent.-bad enough, at best, but less than half that of the old-school, who decry homeopathy as a delusion and a snare. The scarlet fever ratios are also at variance. The allopaths are shown to lose 8.88 per cent., while the homeopathic loss in this disease is but a trifle more 11 than half as much, or, to be exact, but an even 5 per cent. In measles the old-school death-rate is found to be 3.89 per cent, of all cases reported, while the homeopathic rate is but eight-tenths of one per cent. In diphtheria, again, already spoken of as the most dreaded of all the diseases of child-life, seven of the cities referred to, those showing records of all cases existing and records of death thereamong, testify to the superior results of the homeopathic treatment. The allopathic mortality in these cities is 27.3 per cent., while the homeopathic death-rate is but t 5.5 per cent. In gastro-intestinal troubles the ratio stands against the allopathic system to the tune of 13.64 per cent, to one; but the number of physicians re- porting is 6.64 to our one, therefore, the death rec- ord stands about two to one, net, against them. In diseases of the respiratory organs the ratio is practically the same, the figures showing 13.46 deaths reported by them to one by us, the relative ratio of physicians reporting being the same as in gastro-intestinal troubles. In the lying-in chamber, also, homeopathy stands approved as the superior system. The old-school report exactly seven times as many cases as we do, but their membership is exactly 6.64 times as great as ours. These ratios are practically the same; therefore the results should be approximate. In- stead of this, however, eighteen cities show their death rate from puerperal septicemia, child-bed fever, to be twenty-nine times that of the home- opaths of those cities; from puerperal convulsions exactly nine times; from uterine hemorrhage eight times, and from dystocia, difficult labors of all classes, their death-roll numbers nearly twenty-two times that of the homeopathic profession. This is an exceedingly serious matter for the peo- ple to ponder. It goes to show that not only does the homeopathic profession have a safer and better system of medication in all departments of ther- apeutics, but also that their colleges and hospitals are to-day giving better training in the manage- ment of the lying-in room; and that this, coupled with their better therapeusis, makes it far safer and more profitable for the parturient woman to submit herself to the general management and more scien- tific treatment of that physician of her community who has shown himself to be a painstaking and con- scientious student of the system of medicine left us as a priceless legacy by our immortal founder, Samual Hahnemann, one of the profoundest phil- osophers, most analytical thinkers and successful therapeutists of the world's long history. 12 I might multiply comparative results for many other sources; but it is not necessary. In every vil- lage and town and city in all this country in which homeopathy is intelligently practiced examination will show that one of two things is true; either that the homeopathic physicians are better generals in the sick room and better managers of their cases or that they possess a better system of practice, a more scien- tific principle to guide them in the selection of their remedies, more rational methods of drug-adminis- tration, less destructive doses and less fatal pallia- tives. The people can choose whichever horn of the dilemma they prefer; as for us and our house we believe, aye, we know, that the tripartite phil- osophies, those which form the distinctive values of the homeopathic system, are directly responsible for the better results and, therefore, they should be given the credit by us and should be accorded the confidence and patronage of the people who look to medical help for relief from suffering and restora- tion to health. Homeopathy Saves-Does Not Destroy. The essential thing in medical science and art is the therapeutic department. "They that are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick." Ho- meopathy offers to the world a scientific thera- peusis. No other system of medical practice does this. We possess in common with them all that they pos- sess that is valuable, plus our more accurate appli- cation of drug-force to disease-force. The rifle-shot of the painstaking homeopath is superior as a dis- ease-destroyer and conserver of the forces of nature that are not yet disturbed than is the buckshot charge of the polypharmacist. The disease-curing force of the homeopathic dynamis is preferable, al- ways, to the palliation of the self-styled "regular" doctor with his hypodermic and other narcotics. Disease-curing and removing is always better than disease-suppressing. Homeopathy fills no insane asylums with drug wrecks; she populates no alms- houses with mercurial sufferers; she inhabits no dens with morphine fiends; she infests no human frame with the awful disasters of the hundreds of drugs that might be named; she vagarizes no brain with the fanciful visions and vicious tremens of co- caine and alcohol. She comes to save, not to de- stroy. She comes to cure, not to palliate. Her pre- cepts are a scientific law of drug-application; a scien- tific knowledge of drug-producing effects, and a scientific administration of the selected agent, with all the possibilities of good and evil constantly be- fore the conscientious man or woman who essays to bring her benefits to those who need the attention of the physician whose art is the relieving of suffer- 13 ing, the curing of the sick and the prolonging of life. A Matter of Supremest Moment. Who can estimate the value of a human life? And yet, do we, as a people, exercise sufficient care in the selection of the family physician? Are we not too often governed in our choice by the merest whim or accidental circumstance, such as would not be al- lowed to weigh for a minute in any important busi- ness transaction? Alas, alack, all too often is this true. Did the people manifest the same care in this important matter that they do in nearly all things else the increased patronage the homeopathic sys- tem would surely receive, because of its ability to demonstrate its better results at the bedside and in the office and hospital, would bring even greater reforms in old-school practice than have been yet secured through the coming of Hahnemann and the system he and his followers have builded upon the foundations of truth and scientific principles. Every parent, every brother and sister, every son and daughter, every friend, in all this land of free- dom, where science is not throttled by government edict and where all systems of medical practice have equal chance to demonstrate their right to existence, should give heed to the claims made by homeopathy as enunciated in her declaration of principles, the elaboration of her arguments and her arrays of in- disputable statistics. They tell a combined story which means the saving of many a human life. If these things be true-and no one can gainsay them by simple denial or justly set them aside without careful examination without doing violence to his own interests-then of all the systems of medical practice which should be received in our homes, at our firesides, in our nurseries and in our daily walks in life Homeopathy, the system of Hahnemann, should have first consideration and be our reliance in time of need. Her principles withstand the test of philosophic inquiry ; her methods bear the critical investigations of science; her results stand out boldly as the best that are yet obtainable with reme- dies, and her practices are the simplest, surest and safest known to medical science and art to-day. Address Before Western New York Homeopathic Medical Society, Lockport, October 15, 1897. 14