Mil (1~ (01 ~4 'V N' * (1 / I j 4 p j A rH A' / tji - A] -II ALL SOME REMARKS ON,,DR 0. W. HOLMES'S // C 6kP I L.E CT U R"EiS ON 1HOM IElOPATIIY AND ITS, KINDRED DELUSIONS; CO1VMMUNICATED TO A FRIEND By ROBERT WESSELFI-EFT, HOBUEOP. PHYSICIAN IN CAMBRIDIGE. Mlany are called but fekv are chosen. MATh~TH. xxii. 14. BOSTON: OTIS CLAPP, SCHOOL STREET: S. COLMAN AND WM!. RADDJ!, NEW YORK; T. D0O3SON AND 1. G. WESSELHCEFT, PHILADELPHIA. 1842. SOME REMARKS *-: *71 L37/ ON DR. O. W. HOLMES'S LECTURES ON HOM(EOPATHY AND ITS KINDRED DELUSIONS; COMMUNICATED TO A FRIENDýi BY ROBERT WESSELH(EFT, HOM(EOP. PHYSICIAN IN CAMBRIDGE. Many are called but few are chosen. MATTH. xxii. 14. BOSTON: OTIS CLAPP, SCHOOL STREET: S. COLMAN AND WMI RADDE, NEW YORK; J. DOBSON AND J. G. WESSELHCEFT, PHILADELPHIA. 1 1842. BOSTON: FREEMAN AND BOLLES, PRINTERS WAsHI*Gror STREET. TO THE BENEVOLENT READER. THE following Letters were commenced on the 18th of April, and finished on the 1st of May. I was doubtful whether I should publish them; for I know too well that my first attempt at English authorship may not find favor in the eyes of the many. I also hoped that one of my graduated friends might precede me. Before I came to a conclusion, my friend, Dr. Okie of Providence, published his reply " Homceopathy, with particular reference to a Lecture by O. W. Holmes, M. D., Boston: Otis Clapp, 1842;" and afterwards I received the "Answer to the Homoeopathic Delusions of Dr. O. W. Holmes," by Dr. Neidhard, of Philadelphia. Both of my friends were in possession of a better library than I am, and the benevolent reader must not omit to examine their able and scientific writings, especially for the purpose of obtaining accurate evidence from France upon these controverted questions relating to Homceopathy. ON HOMCEOPATHY. 11 tical tendency, it"cares very little about the part they are thought to play singly or together, in disease; at least it does not view the hypothesis as the chief thing, as is generally done. It looks to the symptoms as the only possible reflection of the internal disease, knows only forms of disease but no classifications, and no medicines but specific ones, i. e. such as have a direct relation to the disease. In the treatment of various forms of disease it relies in respect to therapeutics, not blindly on an anatomical, physiological or pathological law, but takes the organic alteration into consideration only when there is a real necessity. Therefore it very seldom proceeds to that most disagreeable and often shameless bodily examinations, which Allopathy, with its tendency to cure single symptoms, makes the source - of so much alarm and anxiety to the patient. But should any'one imagine from this that the history and study of medicine, anatomy and physiology, pathology and pathological anatomy, are held of nor account by it, and that it is limited to the mere observation of symptoms, he is entirely mistaken. Such a want of study is as great a want in an Homoeopathist as it is in an Allopathist. Always yours. LETTER IV. I told'you in my last, sir, that Homceopathy cares nothing about theories, and that when a disease is to be treated it regards only the effect of a remedy. It treats all diseases with such remedies, as produce in a healthy person similar symptoms to those which are found in a diseased person. This is its highest principle. The second principle is not the theory of the Psora or the minuteness of the doses, as Dr. Holmes asserts (p. 36), but it is: that all unmixt medicines have a positive efect. By this positive effect it is meant that each of them produces a certain kind of symptoms in healthy persons, and that it is of course a specific medicine against the similar symptoms in diseased persons. This, sir, is the 12 REMARKS ON DR. HOLMES'S LECTURES reason why Peruvian bark cures only such fevers as it might produce; but it is rather amusing when Mr. Double in Paris and Dr. Holmes in Boston (p. 43) believe that it must in all cases produce the fever that it has the power to produce under certain circumstances and in persons susceptible to it. So cow pox and small pox, scarlatina, measles, and hooping cough do not affect every one, because there is no susceptibility in them to the contagious miasma, exanthema, or fever, or it is not there at that time and under the existing circumstances. The third principle is not the minuteness of the doses, but the development of the medical virtue of the drugs. Hahnemann is of opinion that only the smallest dose of medicine is proper, because a greater would.be stronger than the natural cause of the disease and would produce a similar effect to the allopathic doses; that is, a disease by poisoning the organism; for it is a fact that medicines, whether vegetable, animal or mineral, remain in the system striving to assimilate themselves to its different parts, in opposition to the healthy powers of the system that would neutralize and reject them. This fact, now almost acknowledged by science, has received during the last ten years a new aid in the treatment of chronic diseases by cold water. The later school, however, of Homoeopathy which has great-merit as to the scientific foundation of the system, lays less stress on the absolute minuteness of the doses than upon the principle of the possibility of its effects, because a medicine, which is chosen properly to the case confirms by experience always the healing principle in the law: " similia, similibus curantur." The more successful followers of this school, however, use the high and the highest solutions or dilutions so long as they find a satisfactory effect. Only a small number of these disciples use a drop of the primary tincture of a poison, but their practice is far from being followed by the majority, because it is leading back to the materialism in medicihe, which caused so much mischief since two thousand years, that even the best physicians of the last century began to be alarmed by their own profession.* It appears to me, sir, that the three leading principles in the practice of Homceopathy are very intimately connected with each other, for all three have, as a common source, the nature of disease: this nature is a dynamic one, to form a "* See the Appendix. 18 REMARKS ON DR. HOLMES'S LECTURES LETTER VII. DEAR SIR: The preparation of homceopathic medicines is performed nearly in the way that Dr. Holmes describes. It requires the greatest care. There are already very good and complete Pharmacies, or instructions for the preparation of homceopathic drugs for practical use. I am astonished that Dr. Holmes does not mention even the English literature on this subject. Was it that it would, perhaps, weaken his assertion that there are only seven homoeopathic physicians in England? (p. 66.) Since Hahnemann occupied himself with Chemistry and Pharmacodynamics, a great change has been visible in these two branches of natural philosophy. I was a very young man when I was told in lessons on physics, that since Hahnemann's times the method for the division and solution of drugs, or for the dividing of substances physically, chemically and mechanically, has greatly improved. It was known long before, that the mathematical divisibility of matter could be extended indefinitely; the physical and the mechanical divisibility of some metals, of gold or platina, for example, was explained by proper experiments. Thus I saw that a gold-beater divided one grain of gold into 346,000,000 of visible parts, and that under a microscope, even the 720,000,000,000 part of a grain was visible, and I was informed that this experiment could easily be carried on to the billionth part. I saw how one grain of copper dissolved in sal ammoniac colored about 400,000,000 cubic inches of pure rain water, undergoing a solution into 400,000,000 of visible parts! One grain of carmine gave a visible red,color to 60 pints of water; a drop, or about the 60,000th part of this solution, spread over a white paper, made it divisible again into millions, and each of these parts was visible under a good microscope, so that one little grain of carmine was really divided into billions of parts. ~ What may be the reason, sir, that T.Ty-1.6u-th part of common kitchen salt shows itself immediately when mixed with a solution of silver, for changing colors directly appear? A large quantity of assafcetida, notwithstanding its violent smell, loses, when ON HOMOEOPATHY. 23 perature when applied, it never did and never could do the least good to a frozen part, except as a method of applications of what? of heat!" This is a classic passage in the lectures, sir! We must look to the Esquimaux, indeed, to see if snow really never does good to a frozen limb except in a warm room. Always yours. LETTER IX. DEAR SIR, If you examine the Organon of Hahnemann, you will find that he makes use of the example of the effect of snow upon a frozen limb or of fire upon a burn, not as " the first," and as " the second illustration of the homceopathic law," as Dr. Holmes asserts, p. 48, but only as a remark that the " vulgar empiricisni" had already found remedies according to the law: Like cures like. You find this, p. 71 of the' Organon. On p. 73 is first mentioned the cure of`frozen limbs by snow or by frozen sourkrout. Why did Dr. Holmes say (p. 48), that according to Hahnemann " friction with snow or similar means, cures a limb," and attempt to. prove afterwards that curing with snow was curing same with same? Why did he not mention the frozeu nsourkrout, instead of saying means similar to snow? Did that also cure frozen limbs by the principle: same cures same? Let us look at another example of his mode of referring to an author. Hahnemann says, p. 73, " A cook who has sca ded his hand, exposes it to the fire at a certain distance, y Hout heeding the increase of pain which it at first occasions, because experience has taught him that by acting thus, she can in a very short time, perfectly cure the burn, and remove every feeling of pain." This is what Dr. Holmes brings forward (p. 48), as the next illustration of the homceopathic law. Why did he not read the notes of Hahnemann made upon this hint given by nature for treating burns according to the homceopathic. principle? for here, sir, you will find the application of this " vulgar empiricism " to the true homceopathic treatment of burns, in the words of Hahnemann: " I further ON HOM(EOPATHY. 27 upon this subject. The calmest and most honest of the members remained silent, reserving to themselves the right to make use of the new system and treatment, in certain cases in their practice, when they should come to the end of their own science. At the same time, they felt the degrading part they played in condemning a young science, founded on experience, and of which they knew nothing. Three members, Messrs. Husson, Itard, and Parriset, protested, publicly and with earnestness, against the peculiar proceedings of the Academy, in the debate upon this subject. There was no one of the members who knew any thing about homoeopathy, and on this account, the corporation was unable to decide concerning it, but went on their old principle, not to acknowledge any thing new, or in other words, to maintain the conservative principle, by which they might retain their empire over French learning and science. Whoever wishes to satisfy his mind with regard to the scandalous mode of conduct pursued by these "Invalides des sciences," during the three sessions of the Academy, for the purpose of drawing up a report to the king's minister, and that it was in language unworthy of any corporation, may read this report in the "G Qzette Medicale," (sessions of the Academy of Medicine, t 10th, 17th, and 24th March, 1835). I only mention, th t Dr. Andral has not attempted by a word to put an end to the reproaches made against him, of having dishonesty and unfaithfulness in making his homoeopathic experiments, among which, are his allowing his patients to drink wine, that he had only a very superficial knowledge of homceopathic principles and medicines, and that it was the interest of the Academy to present a system of medicine very little known to the " Invalides des sciences," from coming into practice. The consequence was, that in this same year, a very-large number of physicians in Paris formed a homneopathic society, that is now in a flourishing state, and is aided by many friends of homeopathy in the city and throughout the whole country. ^ Always yours. 32 REMARKS ON DR. HOLMES'S LECTURES brother, it was her father whom Maria Porphyrogeneta restored in the presence of her sister, not her Aunt Eudoxia, and then he did not mention that Anna Comnena, the third daughter of Alexius, was also a present witness. But I pray you, sir, to go with me to Germany, where the Alexias, or the history of the Emperor Alexius Comnenus I., written by his daughter Anna Comnena is, by the translation of our great Friedrich Schiller, in the hands of every lover of history; and in which it is shown by this same Byzantine writer that the ladies were often acquainted with medicine. You will, also, find in Germany that every learned man contributes his portion of knowledge for the purpose of finding explanations of what has been misunderstood in the old authors. The place alluded to in the Alexias may be found lib. XV. (p. 397, in the Venetian edition of 1729). Anna Comnena tells us, that her father was deadly sick for some time, that he had fainted a second time, and in such a way that unless help could be given it seemed as if he would have died from this attack, and continues: " na dXa... aCuo drTaWM,'Tvog puyvqov dY Tov i(WI QO(WV OUTaayuTrog, TaQOa ' cTg qpaTXig 7 de-Xpig Maaqtag. The meaning of this passage is: "and for the rest.... he was sprinkled with fresh water out of the drops from roses, by my beloved sister Maria.". 'This fact is related with the observation that rose water had before restored Alexius in the same disease, on his first attack of syncope or faintness. The Latin paraphrase of the Jesuit Petrus Possinus uses for the expression - lpvyQov U TOV ro ov QoYScw o-aCayPaTrog: the false interpretation: " frigidum inspersit vultu eliquatumque e rosis succum in os ut prius instillavit," that is, " she sprinkled cold water in his face, and let fall some drops of the juice extracted from roses into his mouth as she had before done." This was a long and fatal disease, sir, which terminated a short time after the attack here mentioned, with the death of the Emperor, and I rather think that the remedies indicated by Dr. Holmes against, "syncope," which means in the Greek language, and in the terminology of medicine, something more than a common fit of a romantic girl, were all known to the physicians of the Emperor, but useless in this case, the treatment of which, and the quarrels amongst the learned allopathic physicians about both, is accurately described in the Alexias. Whoever is capable of reasoning will see that the fact alluded to is not well related by Dr. Holmes in ON HOM(EOPATHY. 39 5.): and Albers (Contributions to Pathology and Diagnostics of the Diseases of the heart; Archiv. of Horn, 1832, Jan. and Feb.), have held the same opinion before and since Hahnemann. It is not important whether Dr. Holmes is acquainted with these names or not. The history of medicine will keep them in remembrance, while his will, I think, be forgotten. Galenus, whose name I perceive is sufficient authority with allopathists, supposes the itch is produced by saltish and stagnant humors (acrimonia), and considers it not as a merely endemic. He describes it of course "as a contagious miasma. Now you know, sir, that ~o.u. such miasmatic diseases, viz., small-poxymeasles, hping- cough, and scarlatina, attack nearly the whole white race; why not a fifth? But this is of no consequence to him who has an opposite opinion. It is perfectly sure, that no one can prove the contrary, and that a homceopathic treatment of the itch, never does bring on any of the numberless internal and external diseases, so common after the allopathic treatment of this disease. There are a great many homceopathic physicians, who, though they quite agree with the principle, in the doctrine of Hahnemann, disagree with him in his theory of the psora. This shows clearly, that this theory is not a part of the homceopathic doctrine, as Dr. Holmes asserts, (page 36 of his " Lectures,") but rather a hypothesis, the truth of which is questionable to one, but satisfactory to another. Yet I have found, that some homceopathic physicians of my acquaintance, although not devoted to the psora theory, yet, in chronic diseases, which were very stubborn, have met with immediate success when they treated them according to this theory. Thus there are very few honmeopathic physicians, who do not consider the theory of great importance, perhaps even greater than they confess. It is an unfortunate thing, that German literature is so inaccessible to other nations, on account of their ignorance of the German language. I am quite sure that quackery would not have so wide a field to play its part in, but for this ignorance; nor would the French materialism prevail so much, which originates in a want of rational views of physiology, and which leads to a preference of anatomy and surgery in treating chronic and acute diseases, and to a classification of diseases that is for the benefit of the materia medica, and favors prescriptions of a great many 40 REMARKS ON DR. HOLMES'S LECTURES drugs mixed up together. It is an easy thing to use the lancet to extirpate a scirrhus, or a fungus, or a gland, even the tonsils, &c., without asking what the consequences may be: it is far more difficult to treat the whole of the symptoms together, and by this means remove the causes of the disease, which can very seldom be cut away with a lancet. This requires study, it is true, but there is a great pleasure in seeing proofs, that homceopathic diligence is so often successful in its efforts to improve and restore general health. Always yours. LETTER XVI. It has not been my intention, sir, to obtrude on you my knowledge as " useful" knowledge. I have always been afraid of ridiculing science before the public. I have never sympathized with gentlemen, who censure all scientific tasks and learned men whom they cannot or will not understand. I have only tried to show that Dr. Holmes has not, and will not "till doomsday," manifest learning enough to entitle him to censure the Organon of Hahnemann, and I have only appealed to some of the facts which he mentioned, showing that he misrepresented them -not from want of honesty, but from want of learning and study. And so I have been able to show that there is scarcely one fact alluded to, that has been rightly represented by Dr. Holmes in the Lectures by which he has endeavored to annihilate homoeopathy. Let me open his pages as often as I will I find new misrepresentations. Look at (p. 54,) for example, sir, where he speaks of jaundice and its homceopathic treatment. Is it possible that he never saw a jaundice of that kind which is called in Europe, and even in France icterus apyretos (vulgaris, chronicus)-and that he mistakes it for the Icterus acutus, (febrilis, spasticus,) the former lasting from six to eight weeks to as many months, the latter from a week to a fortnight? Is he ignorant that the treatment of the former is always regarded as difficult by allopathy? I 56 APPENDIX. PUCHELT. Often the treatment even of the best physician sinks into a mere empirical imitation; more frequently still the art is limited in its operation; not all the sick can be saved, many die or remain uncured of diseases whose absolute incurableness cannot be admitted; and in almost every case the attainment of the object is uncertain. KIESER. In many cases the old saying is made true, that the medicine is worse than the disease, and the physician worse than the sickness. THE SAME. A great many diseases are healed only by nature, and in the greatest part of acute diseases, all that the physician has to do is to remove and prevent pernicious influences, and set aside the abnormous over-action of some of the organs. When he does more, either to satisfy the patient's longing for medicine, his own dogmatic theories, or his eagerness of gain, mischief ensues. By this means, frequently, artificial diseases are produced, and in many cases of medical treatment we can truly assert, that chronic diseases that have followed them have been caused by the physician. In the present state of the practice of medicine, then, both in Germany and the neighboring lands, the sick man should be warned against the physician as against the most dangerous poison. The history of medicine, especially, teaches this, for it shows that every separate and thence one-sided theory of medicine has required a number of victims greater than the most destructive plagues or the longest war. MISES (FECHNER.) That therefore till now nothing has been done in our art must not make us believe that nothing will ever be done in it. There are indications, at least, that some time something may come from it. It can, indeed, be asked, if now the work has been going on for centuries in the laboratory, and nothing has been done which can give a notion of the possibility of our art, can it be expected that ways will ever be found to perfect it? But such an objection is unfounded. Compare the discoveries which centuries have made in medicine, with those which have come to light within only the last fifty years. What an immeasurable difference! THE SAME. Every one has observed, after years of experience, that this Allopathy, licked by a hundred tongues, curried by &hundred