SAMMELSVERONA, Caff
६५
A 575582
H615.53
Bayes
The position of
somoeopathy in the
of
rational practice of
Medicine
B36
University of Michigan.


ANONIMIG.
ARTES
LIBRARY
1837
STRANHOISIAN
VERITAS
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
PLURIBU
Wine
JEBUR
SCIENTIA
OF THE
DALENENATI
QUAERIS PENINSULAM AMOE NAME!
CIRCUMSPICE
WALUMNI JA KOR/AR/AR/AR/AR
CONTIN
MUST BE STORED PERRY MONE
BASAH----------ÕTTI-SKISKESÆ
14
Y
Šveje į petį, tesek,
CE S

tr
B
M
H
.
S
ANA
C
M
que l
1615
R36
**
...
Me
ANSLARARA
W
2

ぶ
​Ca
AY
...
:;.
W
SENA
1.
...

A..
د.
10
pph
roon
14
IT 0 7510S
From Boenake & Runyon Co

THE POSITION
OF
HOMOEOPATHY
IN THE
RATIONAL PRACTICE OF MEDICINE.
BEING THE PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS DELIVERED AT THE
BRITISH HOMEOPATHIC CONGRESS, HELD AT
MANCHESTER ON THE 9TH SEPT., 1875.
SIMILIA
Oat. 9.1960
BY WILLIAM BAYES, M.D.
SIMILINUS
COMOTO
CUBANTUR
TOTAGON
HENRY TURNER AND CO., OF LONDON,
77, FLEET STREET.
NEW YORK: BOERICKE & TAFEL, 145, GRAND STREET.
е
10

N

•
*
T
THE POSITION
OF
HOMOEOPATHY
IN THE
RATIONAL PRACTICE OF MEDICINE.
BEING THE PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS DELIVERED AT THE
BRITISH HOMOEOPATHIC CONGRESS, HELD AT
MANCHESTER ON THE 9TH SEPT., 1875.
SAMILIA
BY WILLIAM BAYES, M.D.
SIM
11215

BUS
CURANTUR
TOLOSTA
TABO
HENRY TURNER AND CO., OF LONDON,
77, FLEET STREET.
NEW YORK: BOERICKE & TAFEL, 145, GRAND STREET.
336
.
1
THE POSITION OF HOMŒOPATHY IN THE
RATIONAL PRACTICE OF MEDICINE.
GENTLEMEN,—The aspect under which I propose to dis-
cuss the science and art of homeopathy on the present
occasion, is that of an examination into its position in
relation to the rational practice of medicine.
We cannot too decidedly or too often impress upon the
profession, that we follow no irrational dogma when we
adopt the practice of homeopathy. We are bound not
only to show a reason for our practice, but to define how
far and in what directions the rule of "similars" and the
art of prescribing minute or infinitesimal doses of medi-
cinal drugs accord with the discoveries of modern science,
and are correlated to other physiological, pathological and
physical facts.
It is in the hope of contributing my small quota to the
elucidation of a rational explanation of the rule of similars
and of the curative action of infinitesimals, that I venture
to read the following pages before you this morning.
Twenty-two years have passed since the homœopathic
practitioners of Great Britain met in Congress in the city
of Manchester. This was in the early days of British
homœopathy, and was the fourth of the Annual Congresses
held by the practitioners of the new system. Dr. Drysdale
occupied the chair. Dr. Sharp read the opening address.
About 35 gentlemen were present. Many have passed
away from among us-Drs. Walker, Edward Phillips,
McLeod, Atkin, Fearon, John Epps, Cameron (of
Huddersfield), Laurie, Ramsbotham, Russell and Blake
(of Taunton). Many others remain-men of note, men
who have won their spurs in the battle, men who have
upheld the banner of truth so chivalrously as to have
wrung a tribute of respect even from their adversaries.
None among these more worthy than our learned and
much-loved colleagues Drs. Black, Drysdale and Sharp.
The first Annual Congress of British Homœopathic
practitioners, was inaugurated at Cheltenham in the year
1850. It occupied two days. On the first day the late
A 2
4
Dr. Sherlock Willis presided; on the second day our
genial friend Dr. (then Mr.) Hering occupied the chair.
Drs. Black and Ker were the secretaries. Dr. Black read
the opening address, and Dr. Madden read a paper on the
second day" On the homeopathic treatment of inflamma-
tion and ulceration of the neck of the uterus," giving the
results of 180 cases. A dinner followed, under the presi-
dency of the late Dr. Chapman, and we are told that this
first British Homœopathic Congress was successful beyond
expectation.
În 1851, the second Congress was held in London,
Dr. Black being president. About 60 practitioners were
present.
In 1852, Edinburgh was the seat of the Congress, the
late Professor Henderson being president.
Then came the fourth Congress, in 1853, in this city
(Manchester), Dr. Drysdale presiding.
In 1854, Leamington was selected, Dr. Quin being
president.
In 1855, London was again the seat of the Congress,
Dr. Madden presiding.
The last of this series of Congresses was again held in
London in 1856, under the presidency of the late Dr.
Atkin.
Then came a hiatus, and no Congress was held till 1870,
in which year Birmingham was selected as its seat; Dr.
Drysdale being president, Dr. Gibbs Blake and Mr. Evan
Frazer acting as secretaries.
The Congress in Oxford followed in 1871, Dr. Madden
having been elected president, and although his sudden
and lamentable illness precluded his own attendance, we
had from his pen one of the most remarkable and admi-
rable addresses ever read before a homœopathic assembly.
In 1872, the ancient city of York received the Con-
gress under Dr. Black's presidency. In 1873, it met in
Leamington, when Dr. Sharp was its president; and last
year (1874) the Congress met in London, under the able
presidency of Dr. Dudgeon.
In thus briefly reviewing the history of our Congresses
(of the former seven, and of the five of our present series),
some may be tempted to ask, in this eminently utilitarian
age, “cui bono ?” Our answer lies in a very small space.
As our genial and learned friend Dr. Black said, in his
opening address in 1850, "Man is eminently social, and
5
it is strongly inherent in his nature to form associations
as tending to his defence, happiness and knowledge. In
meeting here we follow this natural impulse; we desire
to cultivate kindly intercourse, and to discuss various
points bearing on the improvement of therapeutics; and
we feel that such labours cannot be carried on so well
singly and independently, as by hearty co-operation.'
""
The result of these Congresses has fully justified these
words of exordium, and has shown the foresight of those
men who inaugurated these assemblies. Socially and pro-
fessionally they have given a tone and an earnestness to
our body tending much to improve our position and to
increase our usefulness.
Long ago, Channing observed, "The age of individual
action is gone. Truth can hardly be heard unless shouted
by a crowd."
Congresses and meetings of associations testify, from
their universal adoption (as a means of expressing opinions)
by almost all classes of men, to the truth of Channing's
observation. Annual Congresses meet and discuss, and,
after a fashion, "shout" their truths aloud into the world's
ear; and we are only following the demands of a very
practical age in holding these congresses.
The essays which have been read before us by Drysdale,
Madden, Black, Sharp and Dudgeon, have reached the
eyes and the ears of many men who, but for our Con-
gresses, would never have opened eye or have unstopped
ear, to see or to hear any individual exposition of the
cogent and scientific arguments brought to bear on the
varied aspects under which homeopathy may be viewed
in its relations to modern science.
The full influence which these essays may have exerted
in spreading a knowledge of homoeopathy may not be im-
mediately apparent. But the seed which they have sown
cannot fail to bear its fruit. This may not be evidenced
by immediate productiveness; but one thing is certain,
these addresses will have shown the profession that we
possess in our ranks, men of profound judgment, of acute
reasoning powers, of careful research, and of classic attain-
ments. Indirectly, a consideration of these things gives
an antecedent probability as to the value of the theories
and practice which such writers and thinkers believe in,
and are able to vindicate so powerfully.
At the very least, our Congresses and the essays read
6
before them, will tend to remove much of the misunder-
standing as to our principles, practice and motives, which
the present policy of the ruling majority among the pro-
fession has imposed upon its members.
Perhaps one of the heaviest burdens we have to bear in
the active battle of life, is the feeling that our actions are
misunderstood. To have our best motives misconstrued;
our endeavours to act as honest, good citizens disbelieved;
our efforts, actuated by philanthropy, represented as having
none but self-ending, self-aggrandizing aims; our philo-
sophy characterized as folly; our leaders designated as
knaves, our followers as fools. Yet this is the position of
the misunderstood, and must be borne patiently and un-
repiningly. Time alone can change this state of things.
All things come to him who waits," once said a certain
French sage, and, believing in this, we shall do wisely to
adopt as our motto, we bide our time.'
66
""
Strong in the consciousness of the stability of our facts,
and of our power to prove the truthfulness of our deduc-
tions from them (whenever we can get our opponents to
listen), what matter a few years, more or less, during
which we must continue to write ourselves down as 66 mis-
understood." Ready, at all times, to defend the scientific
basis of our philosophy, we can afford to wait till it pleases
the profession to unstop their ears and to listen to our
reasoning, and to open their eyes to look upon our facts.
Upholding, with firm hand and brave heart, a high stan-
dard of philanthropic endeavour to relieve human suffer-
ing, we can afford to smile on the taunts of those who
ignorantly charge us with unworthy motives. That we
are misunderstood by many who, nevertheless, are acting
in honest misconception of our principles, of our practice
and of our motives, should never tempt us to forsake our
posture of dignified awaiting.
The desire to place ourselves right with our professional
brethren of the other school, is a very natural and proper
object of ambition. The removal of the misunderstandings
which unfortunately exist, will tend much to bridge over
the chasm which yawns between the two schools of medi-
cine. Much has been said, of late, upon this subject, both
in discussion before our Societies and in our journals. But
while we acknowledge that a restoration of friendly inter-
course is most desirable, both at the Scientific Societies, at
the Hospitals, and in consultations, we must avoid all
compromise; we must yield nothing of our distinctive
principles. To do so would be to become traitors to the
cause of truth. Fraught with advantage as would be the
restoration of brotherly feeling between the two schools
of medicine, it were wiser and more noble to accept a per-
petual ostracism, rather than that we should ratify a hollow
truce founded on an abandonment of any of the safeguards
with which we surround the interests of the public.
In what can we yield to the demands of our opponents?
Can we abandon our name? In that case, how are the
public to distinguish the physician who has studied and
adopted homœopathy from him who has no knowledge
of this branch of therapeutics?
Can we cease the open practice of the homœopathic
rule of similars? Can we agree to abjure the adminis-
tration of drugs in accordance with the rule of similars?
Can we agree to abandon the use of minute or infini-
tesimal doses of drugs where we believe in their superior
efficacy?
No. Those who believe in the rule of practice handed
down to us by Hahnemann, those who believe in the
homœopathic action of drugs, and those who have adopted
the small or infinitesimal dose, believing it to be the best
mode of curing their patients, cannot, without grave dere-
liction of duty towards the public, abandon their name,
their open avowal of belief, or their practice.
That which we believe in, we must uphold. Timid
counsels are as unwise as they are pusillanimous. As our
late poor friend, Dr. Cochran, used to say with regard to
pains and penalties borne for the cause of truth, "We
must just put on a stiff upper lip and go through with
them."
What we can do conscientiously, towards more friendly
relations with the majority of the profession, we ought to
do. First of all, we ought to define, as accurately as pos-
sible, that which we profess to teach in the practice of
medicine and in the domain of therapeutics. Let this be
done modestly, temperately and scientifically, and the
wall of separation which has been raised by unfortunate
misunderstandings must, sooner or later, break down.
In thus attempting to correct misunderstandings and mis-
representations, we must proceed with the most perfect
courtesy. If we must needs enter into the field of con-
troversy, we must keep the most perfect temper, giving
8
our adversaries credit for the same honesty of purpose,
the same high sense of duty, the same integrity in scien-
tific research which we claim for ourselves.
When we bring forward statements of facts, new to
medical science, opposed to all the former experience of
physicians of the older school, we must expect the oppo-
sition of its adherents. We must be prepared to receive
their outbursts of incredulity and of active opposition,
with a degree of even temper which we have no right to
expect them to extend to us in return. We are attacking
them in their tenderest point of self-esteem. We are
announcing to men who are desiring to do right, that they
have unintentionally been doing wrong. To men who have
been as full, as we are, of a warm philanthropy, we say,
that the means by which they believed they were pro-
longing life were, in reality, shortening life. That while
they believed themselves to be ministering angels, bring-
ing life and health to the suffering, our facts prove that
they were unconsciously assisting the destroying angel on
his errand of death.
Is it to be supposed that men of ordinary passions could
look with even temper and "wreathed smiles" upon a
system which teaches and demonstrates such a truth as
this? It is asking too much of human nature to expect it.
As soon should we have expected the priests of Egypt
to have accepted the teachings of Moses, or the priests of
Greece and Rome to have accepted the truths proclaimed
by St. Paul and the Apostles.
Therefore, we ought to accept calmly from our oppo-
nents such treatment in word and deed as we should
carefully abstain from returning in kind. Our own self-
respect, based on our knowledge of the truth of the
doctrines we follow, should save us from returning evil for
evil. We have but to wait God's own time, and that
truth, of which we are the exponents, will as surely attain
its place, and those errors which it has been and still is
our province to oppose will as surely perish, as have all
other truths triumphed, and all other errors ultimately
sunk into a merited oblivion. It may not be in our day,
for the human mind is very complex in its workings, and
time-honoured errors are hydra-headed and difficult to
slay; but that which has been will be, and light is stronger
than darkness.
The propounders of a new theory are bound to prove

9
the reasonableness of their belief. The series of brilliant
essays which have been read at the five preceding meetings
of our Congress have each shown a facet in the diamond
of truth; but truth, like a well-cut stone, is many-sided,
and I venture to place homeopathy before you in yet
another aspect.
HAHNEMANN founded his system on the theory that
disease is a derangement of vital force, and that it is best
cured—i.e., most readily, most certainly, and most per-
manently cured-by the administration of such drugs to
the sick as are capable of producing a derangement in the
healthy, similar to that of the natural disease.
I am well aware that it is a matter of dispute among
some of our foremost physiologists of the present day as
to whether there be any vital force at all. I will not here
stop to consider this point, as the settlement of that ques-
tion will in no way affect my argument. Vital force is a
convenient term by which to signify the activity of life,
even if it lack scientific accuracy, which I, for one, doubt.
Hahnemann certainly did not look upon a patient as
CC
a complex congeries of a number of subordinate quasi-
independent living units, whose life is complete in them-
selves." Though, had he done so, his method of symptom-
treatment would have equally suited the ailments of the
quasi-independent units" as of the individual man or
woman they collectively go to compose.
In Hahnemann's day physiologists were more fanciful
and pathologists were more materialistic than we are at
the present day. Hahnemann's propositions in the earlier
part of the Organon, that disease is simply a want of
balance of vital force, shocked the materialistic patho-
logists of the day, who looked on diseases as peccant
matters to be cast out of the body; to be poured out in a
stream of blood from the arm, or to be drawn out of the
skin by a blister; to be purged out of the bowels by
cathartics; to be vomited out of the stomach by emetics;
to be washed out through the kidneys by diuretics; to
be sweated out of the skin by sudorifics, or to be tortured
out of the tissues by setons. His idea that disease is
simply a derangement of vital force, was an immense step
toward that "conservation of life" which is now admitted,
on all sides, to be the true principle of treatment, however
we may differ as to the details of the therapeutic means
by which this indication is to be effected.
66

10
1
In the temple of Esculapius Hahnemann was a great
iconoclast, and he shared the fate of all iconoclasts. He
was abused and execrated by the priests and worshippers
of the false gods whom he overthrew and ground to pieces
beneath the heel of his intellect. Yet the pathology he
rejected is now rejected by the old school as well as by
our own; and the system of treatment in his day, which
was barbarous and empirical for the most part, and always
complex, has been abandoned by all scientific physicians
for a method founded on more exact indications.
Putting aside all the fanciful explanations of disease.
which found favour in his day, he reverted to first prin-
ciples, and became in physic what the pre-Raphaelite is
in art. He drew a severe line, which forbad the physician
to indulge in speculations, telling him to form no hypo-
thetical opinions as to this or that organ or function being
in fault, but advising him to take his indications for treat-
ment from the symptoms, subjective and objective, before
him, such as are patent to the senses of the physician, or
such as are revealed by the sensations of the patient.
We see, then, that Hahnemann believed in a self-
regulating vital force, ruling the whole healthy body,
balancing each function, repairing each organ, tissue or
fluid.

Disease, in his view, is the derangement of this vital
force. "It is the morbidly affected vital force alone,” he
says, "that produces diseases."* The only exceptions
which he allows to this rule, are those diseases which
come under the province of manual surgery. Hahnemann
further says that there is no disease" which does not
make itself known to the accurately observing physician
by means of morbid signs and symptoms."+
To cure a patient, according to Hahnemann's scheme,
the physician has therefore only to
66 remove the whole
of the symptoms" collectively the evidence of the disease,
and these can only be removed by restoring the healthy
balance to the vital force. The "annihilation of disease
is the restoration to health."
When the body is free from pain and from discomfort;
when a man is not conscious of the possession of any part
of his body until he calls it into action, provided it be an
organ of voluntary function, such as the hand, the foot,
or the brain; when he is not conscious of the possession
† Ibid., Proposition XIV.
• Organon, Proposition XII.
Mac

11
}
}
of the heart, lungs, or other organ of the involuntary
functions, then he is well. To be conscious of these
organs, by any sensation, shows them to be either dis-
tressed or diseased.
Hence, Hahnemann considers that the symptoms ob-
served by the physician, or related to him by the patient,
are the true indications of the disease: "The sum of all
the symptoms, in each individual case of disease, must be
the sole indication, the sole guide to direct us in the
choice of a curative remedy."*
These propositions of Hahnemann cannot be accepted
by us in their entirety, since there are many diseases
whose importance and even danger are great, yet whose
symptoms are by no means prominent, or sufficient to
guide us in the selection of a drug analogue. And there
are other large classes of disease whose causes must afford
us the indications for their treatment. We cannot there-
fore claim for symptom-treatment that it is the "sole
indication." Such claim is too absolute and dogmatic.
Pathology and etiology afford us the true indications for
our treatment in a very considerable number of cases; yet
even where we choose our indications from our knowledge
of the pathological state or etiological conditions of a given
case, we shall find that our homœopathic therapeutics
enables us, not unseldom, to meet these indications with
precision, as to choice of remedy, where, without Hah-
nemann's discovery, we should remain in doubt and diffi-
culty.
·
Thus, while we reject them as too absolute and dogmatic
to be our sole guide, we nevertheless may accept Hah-
nemann's propositions, as defining the true sphere of the
system he advocates within the domain of medicine, and
may claim for homeopathic therapeutics that they best
guide us in the cure of all such diseases as arise from a
want of balance between the functional actions of the
various parts and organs of the body, and are charac-
terised by pains and sensations.
The ruling pathology in Hahnemann's day would have
restricted this field for treatment to very narrow limits.
But the researches of modern physiology and pathology
prove that a very large area of disease is covered by that,
which owes its cause to a loss of balance between the
functional activities of the nerves of motion, of sensation,
* Organon, Proposition XVIII.
12
and of organic life; and that the majority of the diseases
of the secretory and excretory organs are produced by the
functional exaltation or depression of one or other of
these sets of nerves.
The views of disease, in its dynamic, adynamic, and
non-materialistic aspects, which have been so extensively
promulgated by physicians of the highest eminence, and
which have been adopted by the majority of the profession
during the last fifteen or twenty years, show how pro-
phetically Hahnemann foreshadowed in his day the coming
theories of our own.
I need but name Dr. Bence Jones and Dr. T. K.
Chambers. Dr. Bence Jones thus wrote (in his Lectures
on Pathology and Therapeutics, p. 276):—“You must
entirely banish from your minds the notion that diseases
are catastrophes or separate entities, to be destroyed
within, or to be ejected, like devils, without, by which a
perfect cure can only be obtained; and you must more
and more be fully possessed by the fact that all diseases
are the increase or diminution or qualitative modification
of the never-resting correlated forces which constitute
life."
It is not safe, in our present state of "never-resting "
scientific thought and imagination, to attempt to lay down
such unconditional explanation of all diseases.
Dr. T. K. Chambers falls into equal error when he
says "Disease, in all cases, is not a positive existence, but
a negative; not a new excess of action, but a deficiency;
not a modification of life, but a partial death.'
""
These physicians have less excuse for their inaccuracy
than had Hahnemann; for the microscope has given us,
in this later age, revelations which were but in the womb
of the future when he dogmatised in his Organon.
Recognising at its full worth, and within its proper
limitations, the value and import of the adynamic theory
of disease, and claiming its recognition as the first step
toward laying a basis for a rational explanation of the
homœopathic rule of therapeutics, I must stay on the
very threshold of the subject, to say a few words on the
necessity for an equally clear admission of the principle,
that large classes of disease also exist, whose whole phe-
nomena are not satisfactorily explained on the dynamic or
adynamic theory alone.
I allude to the infectious, contagious, malarious, mal-
13
aqueous diseases; to those of parasitic origin, and to
morbid growths.
The view that infectious and contagious diseases own
as their cause a "contagium vivum," and are spread by
organisms of extreme minuteness, which float in the air,
or which exist in our drinking water or in our food, and
which, entering through the mouth, nose, or skin, are
propagated within the bodies or upon the bodies of in-
fected patients, has met with able advocates, both in this
country and abroad.
Budd, Tyndall, Beale and others have demonstrated
this theory by many apparently incontrovertible facts.
But it is nowhere set forth with the same precision and
effect as in that admirable work, Ziemssen's Cyclopædia
of the Practice of Medicine. The most recent researches
of German observers seemingly place it beyond con-
troversy that infectious and contagious diseases depend
on a "contagium vivum," or "living organisms," which,
entering into the body, there multiply to an enormous
extent, reproducing themselves with immense rapidity,
each after its own kind, whether it be small-pox or
typhus, relapsing fever or measles, and never propagating
any but their kind. These organisms are extremely
minute: a drop of putrid solution, according to Ehren-
burg, may contain as many as 500 millions of organisms,
each the 40,000th of an inch or less in length.*
Vaccine lymph has been found by Dr. Burdon Sanderson
and others to contain numerous particles, the 20,000th
part of an inch in diameter, floating in serous fluid. A
child may be vaccinated with the fluid without effect; but
if one of these little germs enter the wound, all the phe-
nomena of vaccination follow. The researches of Pro-
fessors Liebermeister, Lebert and others have shown the
presence of equally minute organisms in the secretions of
typhoid, relapsing fever, and other infectious or contagious
diseases, and that these diseases are due to the multipli-
cation of living organisms within the patient. If few
organisms develope, the disease is slight; if their develop-
ment be extensive, the illness is proportionately severe.
Now, if it be proved that these diseases own, as their
cause, the rapid development of living and self-multiplying
organisms within the blood and tissues of the body, their
* See Lectures on Zymotic Poison, by Dr. MACDOUGAL. Reported
in Chemist and Druggist, January 1875,
14
treatment must be conducted on different indications from
those whose causes are wholly dynamic or adynamic; and
I allude to them here, simply to point out that there exist
classes of disease which, from their exceptional character,
are likely to demand specific and exceptional treatment,
since a purely symptomatic treatment of them would be
likely to prove only very partially successful.
At the same time, it is quite possible that further inves-
tigations may greatly modify the value of these micro-
scopical discoveries, and that some explanation may be
found which may show that the rapid development of
these organisms may be due to partial disintegrations of
the body, owing to a temporary suspension of, or to irre-
gular action of the functions of assimilation, secretion,
and formation, and may be due to partial paralyses of
peripheral and minute nerves (not yet demonstrable by
the instrumental means at our command), by which the
bonds which bind the "complex congeries" of "sub-
ordinate quasi-independent units" together is loosened,
and by which, for a time, the component parts of the
body suffer a vital disintegration. But while admitting
this as a possibility, I confess that it appears to me that
the weight of argument is in favour of the "contagium
vivum" theory. We must remember, in discussing this
subject, the powerful bearing which the facts shown by
Lister's antiseptic treatment of wounds has on this theory;
so also has the discovery that trichinosis and some other
hitherto obscure diseases are due to parasitic develop-
ments within the body.
Bearing these exceptions in mind, we may therefore
now revert to a consideration of those diseases which de-
pend on derangements of function and of the applicability
of Hahnemann's method to their cure.
The experiments conducted by Claude Bernard and
other physiologists have shown that perfect health of
function (of circulation, of assimilation, of secretion and of
excretion, &c.) depends on the reciprocal and regular
actions of the three forms of nerve fibres supplying the
organs, the motor, the sensory, the sympathetic-on this
tripod health sits enthroned.
Destroy all the branches of these three sets of nerves
which supply any organ, and its special life ceases in that
organ-it ceases to perform its function.
Destroy any one of the three branches and the balance
of health is overset-disease ensues.
15
A very short quotation from Dr. Meryon's Rational
Therapeutics, in which he tersely relates Claude Bernard's
experiments on certain functions of the sympathetic nerves,
will enable me to illustrate my arguments as to the exact
sphere of homœopathic therapeutics.
Claude Bernard has shown "that section of the sympa-
thetic proper induces increased vascularity and elevation
of temperature in the parts to which the sympathetic are
supplied."
In experiments upon rabbits he found that after section
of the sympathetic on one side of the neck, the temperature
rose 7° Fahrenheit on that side as compared with the
temperature of the uninjured side. This elevation of
temperature was not merely temporary but remained
till the animal was killed, although the whole body ulti-
mately increased in temperature 3°, leaving the injured
side permanently 4° hotter than the other. Dr. Wm. Ogle
related a case (at the Medico-Chirurgical Society) where,
owing to a tumour in the neck, the cervical sympathetic
on one side was injured, and the ear on the injured side
became 2° hotter than the other ear. "Another curious
and instructive phenomenon occurs when (owing to the
division of the sympathetic) the blood is thus transmitted
in a preternatural quantity through the capillaries—the
venous blood immediately becomes brighter in colour.
Claude Bernard observed this fact in the coronary veins
on the left side of the lip of a horse after he had divided
the left cervical sympathetic."
Commenting on these facts (page 41), Dr. Meryon says:
"In some forms of inflammation-and inflammation in
some form or other lies at the root of most diseases-we
have the pathological counterpart of the result induced by
the section of the sympathetic; a state in which, owing to
the loss of the inhibitory influence of the nerve fibres of
Remak, blood corpuscles penetrate into those minute
arterioles through which blood plasma only should be
propelled.
The effect of the division of the sympathetic fibres dis-
tributed to a secretory gland shows the same effect on the
circulation in that gland; firstly, it induces hyperæmia,
and, secondly, it induces increased secretion. These two
* On the Functions of the Sympathetic System of Nerves, as a
Physiological Basis for a Rational System of Therapeutics. By
EDWARD MERYON, M.D. Churchill & Co.
16
results invariably follow the weakening or destruction of
the nerve current of the sympathetic proper, and appear
to be due to a corresponding increase in the action of the
motor nerve of the same part or organ, which immediately
occurs so soon as the controlling or inhibitory influence of
the sympathetic proper is withdrawn or lowered.
"Now the application of a weak electric current to the
peripheric end of the divided sympathetic reverses all
this. The calibre of the distended capillaries is quickly
reduced; the temperature is lowered, and may be de-
pressed below the existing degree in other parts; and se-
cretion is diminished. If the power of the current be
increased the circulation may be entirely arrested; so
that, if examined under a microscope, the capillary vessels
will be seen to be entirely empty. Such is the invariable
result of stimulation of the nerves of Remak on the ca-
pillaries; and MM. Valentin Henle and Budge have
observed that the large blood vessels contract when acted
on by galvanism through the medium of the grey nerve
fibres which are supplied to them.
"It appears, therefore, that all the conditions of healthy
circulation and secretion are fulfilled in the reciprocal
action of the three forms of nerve fibres.
"Make a section of them all, or cut away, say, the renal
plexus, and all secretion of urine is arrested.
"Increase the relative power of the motor nerve fibres
by section of the nerves of Remak, and you establish a
hyperæmia round about the Malpighian ducts and diuresis.
"Increase the relative power of the nerves of Remak
by section of the motor fibres, and you diminish circula-
tion and secretion.
"Increase the relative balance of power of either motor
or inhibitory nerve fibres either by gently exciting the
sensory nerves, or by painfully irritating them, and you
have in the first place increased circulation and secretion,
or in the second case the very reverse."*
It appears, therefore, to be proved by the experiments
of physiologists, that circulation and secretion are balanced
during health between the functional actions of the motor,
the sympathetic, and the sensory nerves; and that dis-
turbance in the functions of any of the three sets of nerves
will result in disturbance of the vessels or parts to which
they are distributed. Over-stimulation of the one set of
C
* Rational Therapeutics, Meryon, p. 29.
17
nerves, or debility of the other set, will induce similar
symptoms. If you over-stimulate the sympathetic branch
you check circulation, and you check secretion, more or
less completely according to the degree of stimulus
applied. In the same way, if you destroy the relative
balance between the motor nerve and the sympathetic by
depressing the motor branch, circulation and secretion are
proportionately diminished. If you stimulate the motor
nerve then, you increase circulation and secretion; and if
you depress the sympathetic nerve, thus destroying the
balance between it and the motor, you also find the cir-
culation and secretion proportionately increased.
When, therefore, we see a case of disease before us in
which there is a deficiency in the circulation and in the
secretion of any part or organ, we know that the fault lies
either in the over-stimulation of the sympathetic nerves,
or in the debility and partial paralysis of the motor nerves
supplying the part or organ.
On the other hand, whenever we see a case of disease
in which there is a hyperæmic or inflammatory condition,
or an excessive secretion, we know that the fault lies
either in depression or partial paralysis of the sympathetic
nerves, or in over-stimulation of the motor nerves dis-
tributed to the part or organ affected.
Two courses are evidently open to us in the selection
of the indication for treatment in such cases; either we
may depress the nerves which are over-stimulated, or we
may stimulate the depressed nerves; we may extend help
to the weakened nerve, or weaken that which is strong.
The true art of healing tends always in the direction of
the conservation of energy and of strength; and acts
always on the indications of strengthening the weaker
nerve and of stimulating the depressed: hence, when
there is inflammation of any tract or organ, knowing this
to arise from a paralysis more or less complete of certain
branches of the sympathetic nerves, and the consequent
uncontrolled action of the corresponding motor branches,
we enjoin rest, either local or general, in order to tran-
quillize the excited motor nerves, and we administer such
means as will tend to restore the weakened sympathetic to
its proper tension or tone.
We have seen that section of the sympathetic branches
of the renal plexus induces hyperæmia round about the
Malpighian ducts and diuresis, but if a gentle galvanic
B
18
current be passed into the divided nerve at its peripheral
end, the diuresis is arrested and the hyperemia disappears.
Therefore, what we have to do in a case of diuresis,
occurring from natural disease, is to find a means of gently
stimulating the sympathetic branch of the renal plexus.
Such a means we have at command through our know-
ledge of the homœopathic action of drugs. We have but to
seek a remedy in such drugs as in their pathogenetic dose
paralyse the sympathetic branches of the renal plexus,
which will induce primarily hyperæmia with greatly in-
creased secretion, such as cantharides or terebinth, &c.,
and we find ourselves in a position to cure the condition
of paralysis.
But it will be said by those who have not acquainted
themselves with our method and our art, this is a paradox.
If there be already paralysis of the nerve more or less
complete, common sense will lead us to give a stimulant
and not a paralyzer.
To answer this objection we must appeal to another
series of facts belonging to the range of pure therapeutics,
which show that each medicinal drug has at least two
apparently opposite actions, according to the dose given.
That in a certain dose each medicinal drug tends to para-
lyze a given tract of nerve, while in a certain other dose
it acts as a stimulant. If the large and pathogenetic
dose of cantharides or terebinth paralyse the sympathetic
branch of the renal plexus, we know, from carefully re-
corded experiments, that the minute or infinitesimal dose
will stimulate the same nervous tract. And by Hahne-
mann's method we are able to adjust the degree of
stimulant applied with an exactitude hitherto unattainable.
The degree of paralysis is shown by the intensity or
prominence of the symptoms. The frequency and the
size of the dose should be regulated by the frequency and
the urgency of the functional distresses.
But, it will be asked, what right have we to assume
that medicinal drugs possess these opposite powers? What
right have we to assert that the same drug which para-
lyzes in the large dose will stimulate in the minute or in-
finitesimal dose? Or, to reverse the proposition, that the
same drug which is a stimulant in a small dose will be a
narcotic or a paralyzer in a large dose?
No better example can be given, in illustration of these
points, than that of alcohol. Its stimulating action is so
19
1
well known by the fatigued in mind or body, that its
power to paralyse is apt to be overlooked or forgotten.
Let us devote a short time to a consideration of these two
actions of alcohol.
Dr. Anstie, in his article on Alcoholism in Russell
Reynold's System of Medicine, says (p. 65):
"If the
dose" of alcohol "be moderate, and the administration
well timed, the effect upon the nervous system is simply
that of a restorative stimulant. Sensations of fatigue are
dispelled, the mind works more freely, a healthy sense of
warmth is diffused through the body, and the arterial
system acquires an increased tonicity if it were hitherto
deficient in that quality. The latter fact, which is due to
the influence of the remedy upon the sympathetic nerves,
is capable of being demonstrated in a very interesting and
convincing manner.
"The sphygmograph of M. Marey has the power of
accurately representing, by its registration of the pulse-
wave, the degree of arterial tonicity present; and by this
unfailing test it appears that the small vessels, when re-
laxed in a condition of fatigue, are brought by a moderate
dose of alcohol to a proper tension, from which they suffer
no recoil.
66
If, on the contrary, the dose has been immoderate, or
administered at a time when it was not required, the pulse-
waves give a precisely opposite indication, that, namely,
which proves that arterial relaxation has occurred, and
simultaneously with this the pulse becomes abnormally
quick. At the same time other symptoms of a paralytic
nature are observed, confined in the first instance to the
spinal nerves of the fifth cranial nerve. The former show
their weakness by the occurrence of slight feelings of
numbness, and an impairment of muscular sense in the
extremities. The latter indicates its affection by slight
numbness of the lips. The vaso-motor fibres of the fifth
nerve discover their partially-paralysed condition by flush-
ing of the face, congestion of the conjunctivæ and lach-
rymation.
"The cerebral hemispheres next give notice of the alco-
holic influence by the occurrence of intellectual confusion;
and the hypo-glossi becoming simultaneously affected, the
muscular movements of the tongue become difficult, and
articulation is impeded.
"The further stages of drunkenness consist of more or
B 2
20
;
less noisy or sentimental delirium, passing gradually into
coma; palsy, more and more complete, of voluntary
motion and sensation; the medulla oblongata is palsied,
and breathing ceases; and, last of all, the organic nerves
of the heart become incapable of performing their func-
tions, and cardiac life ceases.'
Here, then, we have clear demonstration of the fact,
shown not only by the symptoms but recorded by the
sphygmograph, that the small dose of alcohol has power
to restore arterial tonicity when it is administered to a
patient in whom there is a want of this tonicity, caused by
fatigue (in fact where there is a partial paralysis of the
sympathetic), by which the blood-vessels have become
relaxed.
But if alcohol be given in an immoderate dose, pre-
cisely the opposite effect results, and the paralysis is
increased.
Still more important is the fact that, when even a
moderate dose is given to a patient in health, where the
pulse-wave shows no want of tonicity, then arterial re-
laxation, with a quick pulse, is induced, and other symp-
toms of a paralytic character ensue.
Alcohol, then, causes paralysis of the sympathetic nerves
more or less complete according to the dose administered,
when it is given to a man in perfect health. On the other
hand it cures temporary paralysis of the sympathetic
nerves when this condition of debility pre-exists. It
increases the paralysis if the dose given be immoderate
(What is this but the "medicinal aggravation" of Hahne-
mann). It causes death by paralysis if the dose be carried
to its extreme of poisonous power.
It is difficult to conceive how any truly scientific
physician, having these facts before him, can logically
infer from them any other conclusion than that of the
general truth of the homeopathic rule of "Similia.” And
once admitting this, it is impossible not also to concede
the necessity for the administration of small doses, such as
shall effect a cure by bringing the relaxed nerves, which
are causing functional disease and disorder, to such a state
of tension as shall exactly restore the balance of health,
and from which they shall suffer no "recoil." For such
a recoil means a relapse and, over-dosing inducing relapse,
a continued round of wrong must ensue from its practice.
It would take us far beyond the limits of the time.
21
afforded to this address were we to proceed, as could
easily be done, to show that the same phenomena of
stimulation and paralyzing certain tracts follow the ad-
ministration of all other substances which are capable of
pathogenetic action.
Opium, ipecacuanha, nux comica, cantharides, colocynth,
in fact every drug in the Materia Medica, follows the
same law in its medicinal effects. Every medicinal drug
has power, in its large or pathogenetic dose, to paralyse or
to narcotize a certain nervous tract or tracts, each accord-
ing to its affinities; and it has the power to stimulate the
same tract or tracts when given in a small dose to a
patient suffering from depressed vitality or partial pa-
ralysis of this nerve tract or tracts. Even a moderate
dose of the drug, such as might prove curative in disease,
will derange the health of a sensitive patient if given
"when it is not required." A moderate dose of opium
will narcotize a healthy man, but given to a man preter-
naturally drowsy from threatened apoplexy, a small dose
will bring the hyperæmic vessels of the brain back to a
proper state of tension by its gently-stimulating effect on
the sympathetic (inhibitory) nerves supplying and con-
trolling those vessels.
An immoderate dose, on the other hand, will increase
the disease, just as an immoderate dose of alcohol will
tend to induce further paralysis of the threatened sympa-
thetic generally. The question of the dose is one, there-
fore, of the utmost importance, it cannot be lightly passed
over, or guessed at hap hazard. As with alcohol and
opium, so it will be found with ipecacuanha and with
every other drug. The large dose of ipecacuanha vomits;
the small dose cures vomiting when caused by weakened
action of the same set of nerves which the action of ipeca-
cuanha affects. Ipecacuanha would not cure vomiting
arising from concussion of the brain-nor from tubercular
meningitis. Hence, accurate diagnosis is as needful to
the physician practising homœopathy as to him who prac-
tises as an allopath.
It will be seen from the foregoing remarks that a study
of the paralyzing power of each drug, as affecting certain
parts, tracts, or organs (whose general pathogenetic power
was first insisted upon by Hahnemann, and latterly further
precisionized by many of his followers, and particularly
insisted upon by our learned and excellent colleague, Dr.
•
22
Sharp, in the series of papers from his pen, many of which
have been read before these Congresses) enables us to pre-
dicate the power of these same drugs to cure certain
definite conditions of disease in the same tracts, parts, or
organs, by the use of minute or infinitesimal doses of these
same drugs.
Can anything be more accurate, or more scientific, or
more in accord with the present advanced state of patho-
logical and physiological science than a system of thera-
peutics founded on this basis? And it is on this basis
that the science of homoeopathic therapeutics is destined.
to rest, for none other explanation fits all these facts
together. There is one objection which I anticipate will
arise in certain minds. It is this. If stimulation be the
key to the whole treatment of functional diseases, why not
give alcohol as their cure? Ought it not to be an universal
panacea? Some such idea has from time to time come
before the public and even the professional mind. Witness
the treatment so strongly insisted upon by the late Dr.
Todd. Witness also the brandy and salt treatment that at
one time spread like an epidemic over the country.
The objections to this apparently simple method are
two-fold. Firstly, it wants fineness of aim; secondly, a
large number of diseases arise from disorders of the
motor or sensory nerves, as well as from disorders of the
sympathetic.
Alcohol is a stimulant or paralyser to the whole sym-
pathetic system, but a very large number of diseases are
caused by derangements of only a very small portion of
the sympathetic system of nerves; and another large
number of diseases arise from debility or partial paralysis
of the motor and of the sensory tracts. To give alcohol
in either case would be worse than useless. We want to
stimulate the depressed nerves and these alone. The
healthy branches of the nerves require no interference.
To give a general stimulant where local debility alone
exists would be to derange one portion of the body in
attempting to restore its balance to the other.
Hence we have to seek other agents, such as will
enable us to stimulate the motor and the sensory tract,
and such as will enable us to carry force to any weakened
branch of either of the three sets of nerves which may
require aid, leaving the tract which is already healthy
and in proper tone untouched. Here our homœopathic
23
therapeutics find their appropriate sphere; they shew us
that certain drugs can be employed to carry force to this
or the other depressed nerve, or branch of a nerve, and
that the rest of the body will be left untouched, and Hah-
nemann's method of the administration of drugs enables
us to adjust the dose exactly to the requirements of the
case, so that we can stimulate the weakened nerve back
to its healthy standard of tonicity, so gradually and so
gently that there shall be no fear of subsequent recoil.
I have said in the earlier part of my address that the
promulgators of a new system are bound to prove its
scientific basis, in order to overcome the opposition of
candid objectors. If the views I have indicated possess
the truth and the stability which I venture to claim for
them, we shall have placed the Homœopathic system in a
position to shew its accord with the developments of
modern science. If the system we advocate does shew
its correlation to every real advance in pathology and
physiology, then the antecedent probability of its truth
must become apparent, and much of the opposition we
have hitherto met with will melt away.
It will be said that the task still remains of reconciling
the practice of the administration of infinitesimal doses of
medicinal drugs with the rational art of medicine. This
practice, we are told by our opponents, and even by some
of our friends, is contrary to common sense. I allow that
it is contrary to common sense founded on past allopathic
experience, just as the locomotive power of steam was
theoretically opposed to the common sense of the old stage
coachman, or as the electric telegraph was contrary to the
common sense of the workers of the old semaphore, but
in no other way is it more contrary to common sense than
is any other new discovery. Still I accept the proposition
that before we can overcome the opposition of physicians
of the old school to this new practice we must be prepared
to shew, firstly, that an antecedent probability exists as to
the reasonableness of our belief that they will act; and
secondly, we must be able, by proofs of a practical kind,
to shew that they do act.
As to antecedent probability, are we acquainted with
any facts which prove to us that infinitesimally small
agents possess the power to attack a healthy or apparently
healthy man and prostrate him with disease?
The microscope, which introduces a difficulty in the
24
1
way of the universal acceptance of our rule of "similars,"
as the sole indication for the cure of disease, clears away
much of our difficulty as to the acceptance of the proba-
bilities of the active powers of agents themselves of infini-
tesimal minuteness. Organisms of extreme minuteness,
far exceeding in littleness the particles of our third dilu-
tion, are proved to be capable of inducing disease, and
even of destroying the lives of thousands of human beings.
We have seen, but as it were yesterday, whole communi-
ties swept off by measles in the Fiji islands. In like
manner former epidemics of small-pox, scarlatina, cholera,
&c., have, both in Europe and other countries, swept off
thousands and even hundreds of thousands of lives. Yet
the organisms which induce these diseases are invisible to
the naked eye, and, in no way, can be recognized by the
unaided senses, till they have entered into and have over-
come the body by their malign and powerful influence.
In vacine lymph, we have seen it asserted that the
organisms what reproduce it are but the 20,000th of an
inch in diameter. Other of these living and prolific
organisms are said to be smaller still. But, whatever their
absolute size may be, the organisims which produce in-
fectious diseases probably are relatively infinitely more
minute than the blood globules of the creatures they
invade. Possibly this is the law of infection. It is not
yet proved to be so, but the facts at present recorded
point in this direction, and the attention of many com-
petent observers being directed to this subject, we may
expect, ere long, new enlightenment upon it.
This is one of the series of examples of the power of
infinitesimal organisms to induce disease. A second
series, and one that comes still nearer in kind to the class.
of action we desire to illustrate, is to be found in the
toxic power of infinitesimal agents, upon certain individuals
whose idiosyncracy renders them, more than usually, sensi-
tive to the special influence of the particular drug. The
pathogenetic effects of ipecacuanha, in the minutest atoms,
on the mucous surfaces of certain persons, is well known.
So is the influence of arsenical wall-papering, which has
exerted toxical effects on a large number of patients.
Other individuals are so sensitive to mercury, that I have
known an instance where even the 12th dilution (i.e. the
quadrillionth part of a grain) could not be given without
inducing mild salivation and great discomfort. So also,
""
25
the sensitiveness of some patients to the action of arnica
is most instructive. I have mentioned some instances of
this susceptibility in my article on arnica in my work on
Applied Homœopathy;* but two still more extraordinary
cases have also occurred in my experience. In one, the
patient (a banker advanced in years), was threatened with
cerebral congestion, for which I prescribed arnica. He
warned me that arnica always caused erysipelas with him.
"In that case," I said, "I will give you such a dose as
cannot possibly produce such an accident;" and I ordered
him the 18th dilution. Next day he had decided swelling
and erysipelatoid rash round the mouth and affecting spe-
cially the upper lip. I have also another patient, a lady of
high rank, whose sensitiveness goes even beyond this. Her
husband and children, fond of field sports, and, of course,
consequently liable to troubles both from fatigue and from
accidents, use, by my advice, a small quantity of arnica in
their bath after an unusually tiring day; or an arnica
lotion or compress for bruises or strains. But, under those
circumstances, if they go into the same room where Lady
is, either after their bath or after using the lotion,
she invariably has slight erysipelas of the face, with puffi-
ness of both eyelids and great irritation of the skin. Her
last attack of the kind was induced by her having, thought-
lessly, mixed a dose of a dilution of arnica for her husband,
one drop of which fell on her finger, and although she
immediately washed it off, she had erysipelas in the face
next day.t
-
A consideration of these two classes of facts-firstly,
the pathogenetic power of the infinitesimal organisms of
* Applied Homeopathy; or, Specific Restorative Medicine. By
WILLIAM BAYES, M.D. London: H. Turner & Co., 77, Fleet-street.
† Although I have named but two drugs as examples, yet we have
ample evidence that a similar sensitiveness to the action of all other
powerful drugs exists in certain individuals; each such drug acting
with special power over those who possess certain constitutional
idiosyncracies. Hence we may easily understand the terrible catas-
trophes which are common in the practices of those men who indis-
criminately, or even habitually, prescribe gross or large doses of drugs.
These catastrophes (or accidents, as they are called) are certainly less
common among the patients of those men who use small and infini-
tesimal doses. Sudden exacerbations of symptoms, or the occurrence
of new siezures during an illness, appear to be relatively the more
frequent, the larger the doses which are given in the treatment of the
In my own practice catastrophes have been markedly less
frequent since I have adopted the homœopathic therapeutics.
case.
Uor M
26
:
infectious and contagious diseases; secondly, the patho-
genetic power of toxic infinitesimal influences-shows, at
the least, a strong antecedent probability that minute and
infinitesimally small doses of medicinal drugs ought also
to possess beneficent powers.
Those agents which induce disease in a previously
strong man, which have power to break down the usual
functional habits of the healthy organization, are acting
against the self-conservative powers of life. Those agents,
on the other hand, by which we endeavour to restore the
healthy balance and to give back regularity to the func-
tional habits, have the self-conservative powers of the
living body all on their side. Therefore, we do not require
to use, as remedial agents, means possessing so great
material force as we should need to use in order to induce
toxic or pathogenetic results. To believe otherwise, would
be to set aside altogether a consideration of that tendency
toward healthy action and self-repair which we know to
exist in the living body.
Therefore, a curative power should always be found in
such a dose of the medicinal drug as is materially smaller
than the agent which induced the disease.
If, then, the cause of a disease has been imponderable,
invisible, infinitely minute, there exists not only an ante-
cedent probability, but a scientific certainty, that the true
cure such a cure as shall leave no recoil-will be found
in a dose of the correlated medicinal drug, which shall be
also imponderable, invisible, and infinitesimal.
And once more, in those diseases whose cause is due to
living organisms, how are these to be so readily destroyed
as by employing medicinal drugs in such a state of atomic
division that their particles shall be smaller than the
creatures they are destined to slay? Who would not
laugh at a man who fired a Krupp's cannon at a monad?
Yet, in point of fact, he would be no more a just object
of ridicule than the man who gives ounces or grains of
crude drugs either to destroy infinitesimal organisms, or
to restore the balance of nerve-force which had been upset
by quadrillionths of a grain of disturbing force.
The facts relating to infection and to the special sus-
ceptibility to certain drug influences induced by idiosyn-
crasy, correspond in the most perfect manner to the facts
we witness in our daily practice of drug-giving, in com-
paratively small or in infinitesimal doses.
Maou
S
S
27
Every one who is exposed to infectious influences does
not contract the disease.
Every one exposed to arnica, to ipecacuanha dust, or to
arsenical wall-paperings, does not yield to their toxic
influences.
There must be some peculiar state of health which pre-
disposes the patient to receive their noxious influence.
It is not every one, even, who is bitten by a mad dog,
who becomes hydrophobic, probably not one patient in
four is so influenced.
Receptivity is an important condition in the production
of these phenomena. In the same way we have no ex-
pectation that an infinitesimal or minute dose of a drug
will affect a patient unless some special receptivity to its
action exists. But we hold that the presence of disease,
in a patient, renders him specially sensitive to the curative
action of that drug which has a special affinity for the
part, tract, or organ. In other words, that the depressed
nerve will readily appropriate and shew, by its restoration
to healthy balance of function, the action of that medicinal
stimulus which is needed, although the quantity needed
is so small that were it added to the healthy body, no sen-
sation of stimulation or the reverse would be felt.
As to the actual size of the dose to be given, it would
appear to be most in accordance with antecedent probabi-
lities that it should be correlated to the pathogenetic force
which has induced the disease. If the cause have been
material, then the curative dose may also be required to
be material. It is not, for example, pretended that the
disease caused by a material dose of arsenic or other
poison is to be met by an infinitesimal dose of an antidote.
But a disease caused by an infinitesimal dose of arsenic,
such as from wall-papering, should be met by corres-
pondingly small or infinitesimal doses of the appropriate
antidote.
We should carry our "similia," not only to kind, but
also to degree-our medicinal drug must be similar to the
causes in their material size, in their force, and in the
sequence of their incidence. We cannot balance a pound
by a grain, nor can we balance the millionth of a grain by
grains.
But when we come to treat diseases which have been
caused by derangements of force, diseases of an adynamic
character, materialism seems to be specially out of place.
28
Let us revert once more to the example of the hyperæ-
mia and subsequent diuresis which follow the division of
the sympathetic branch of the renal plexus. Both hy-
peræmia and diuresis are arrested, and the healthy balance
of function and of circulation are restored to the kidney
by the gentle stimulation of the peripheral end of the
nerve, by means of a mild galvanic current. But when
the galvanic current is increased, an opposite condition of
disease is induced, and a total arrest of both circulation
and secretion ensue. It is evident, therefore, that an ac-
curate adjustment of the amount of stimulus to a depressed
nerve, is essential to true and permanent cure. Although
it is needful to stimulate the depressed nerve up to the
standard of health, we must be careful to induce only
that amount of nerve tension which is sufficient to restore
the balance of function and circulation, and no more.
More than this, so far from doing more good and giving
more tone to the general system, does actual harm. In
that class of disease which arises from an adynamic state.
of certain nerves, it is a dynamic and not a material in-
fluence from which we can expect really curative results.
In carrying force to the nerves we must carefully avoid
over-supplying the demand.
Hahnemann's method of subdivision of medicinal sub-
stances enables us to administer the medicinal doses with
a degree of nicety which has not been attempted even by
the other school. Those physicians, opposed to our me-
thod, and who yet have acknowledged the necessity for
giving medicines in a more finely divided state than
ordinary pharmacy attempts, have fallen into the most
ludicrous and often cumbrous and uncertain methods, in
the hope of accomplishing this purpose, without com-
promising themselves by Hahnemannism. To use the
simple centesimal scale of division recommended by Hah-
nemann, or the decimal division now so largely adopted
by his followers, would bring them within the range of
possible ostracism. These hyper-scientific but timid allo-
paths therefore hit upon the notable expedient of dosing
cows and goats with drugs and giving their patients the
medicated milk. The expense of the method as well as
its uncertainty proved its doom. Who could afford to
keep a cow or even a she-goat for each drug needed?
We possess about 400 medicines; can we afford 400
medicated cows, each labelled according to her supposed
29
medicinal properties-the mercurius cow, the arsenical
cow, the phosphorus cow? &c.
Next came the pulverized medicinal sprays by which
the drugs were to be given by inhalation; and in other
cases powerful medicines were to be given chemically
combined or pharmaceutically mixed with some drug or
drugs calculated to neutralize all but an infinitesimal or
minute part of their active principle.*
Can the profession long continue to ostracize us for
scientifically, and with precision, preparing drugs in such
form as to make their administration safe and exact, while
they not only retain among their body, but even honour
men who resort to such uncertain, inexact and indefinite
methods for the accomplishment of the same purpose? If
they acknowledge the necessity for the administration of
small and even minute doses of drugs when given on the
above rational indications, why should they shrink from
adopting a scale of decimal or centesimal subdivision?
There have been signs, notably in the recent discussions
in Birmingham, that nobler counsels than have hitherto
actuated the majority of the medical profession in their
conduct towards us begin to prevail in the allopathic body
at large. Whether this awakening of the medical con-
science will immediately result in their re-admitting us to
the position we claim in the medical polity it is impossible
to predicate. But, whether it does or no, our duty towards
ourselves and the profession is clear, and was well ex-
pressed by our worthy colleague, Dr. Black, from this
chair in 1872, when he said: "It is our duty, boldly and
perseveringly, to claim the liberty of free opinion and the
right of choice, which are the heritage of all members of
a scientific profession. We claim admission to all the
rights and honours of our profession; and as the condition
of such rights we invite the strictest scrutiny-we demand
a fair field and no favour."
But our real difficulty lies in this, there is no "fair
field" in the whole realm of modern British medicine in
the which we may enter the lists and do battle with our
adversaries. There is no tournament ground open to us
* I am not here alluding, in condemnation, to the use of medicated
sprays where topical action of medicinal substances directly to the
surface diseased is desired, but simply to the using pulverized sprays
as a means of giving minute doses of medicines, which is an uncertain
and a bungling way of accomplishing the indication of "minute dose.”
30
(C
where we can measure our strength face to face with the
allopath. The age of chivalry is past, especially in the
British allopathic heart, and in its place reigns the narrow
policy of excluding from the lists all who are too strong
for them in the field of argument. Where shall we find,
in the whole realm of medicine, a fair field," or even a
noble arbiter to judge between us and our adversaries?
Is there a single hospital whose staff dares try conclusions
with us? None. Or whose governing body dare allow
us to show our prowess against disease side by side with,
or in contrast to, the other system? Is there an university
which dares to follow the good example of former ages and
allow us to propound and defend our theses within its
academic walls? None. Is there a single college to
whose senate and council we can apply with a chance of
our being heard, and who dare, in the interests of science,
permit a thorough investigation of the facts we are pre-
pared to lay before them? Nay, is there a single medical
Society (save our own Homœopathic Societies) where
those acquainted with the system are allowed to discuss
its merits?
How, then, are we to attain that which we desire," a
fair field and no favour?" The last is easy enough, the
"no favour" is granted readily enough; but where is the
“fair field?” It is only by continued knocking at the
gates, and demanding our rights, that we can expect to
attain them. This is the legitimate means of attaining
our ends in religion and in politics, and it is not otherwise
in medicine. It is of little use to demand our individual
rights in detail; our voice is not heard. Societies must
be met by societies; and perhaps the most practical way
of forwarding the cause of scientific liberty within the
realm of medicine, would be that the members of each
university or college should form societies, whose object
should be to bring before their respective universities or
colleges the result of their own investigations into the
new system of therapeutics. How could any university
or college well refuse to listen to testimony given by its
own members?-men, of whose competence to practise
they themselves have certified, after a test-examination.
A well drawn up statement of the experience of a number
of the members of universities or colleges should be pre-
pared, and formally brought under the notice of each
university or college by its own members, and a com-
31
mission of enquiry and investigation should be asked for.
If this proposal be accepted (and I do not see how it
could be refused without a grave dereliction of public
duty), then the medical societies could no longer close
their doors to those men whose practical knowledge of the
subject alone enables them to discuss it scientifically.
Further, I would suggest combinations of the men of
each separate medical school. Let the former students of
each school form societies, to bring before their alma
mater the result of their subsequent investigations; and
let each society ask of its own hospital authorities, that a
practical investigation into the facts they are able to
adduce should be conducted within the walls of the hos-
pital to which they owed their first insight into medical
practice. The members of each university, college, medi-
cal school and hospital have a right to claim a hearing
from the bodies of which they are members, and the time
has come for us to claim these rights, in the cause of our
common humanity. If these bodies refuse to listen, we
must then, relying on our still wider rights as English
citizens, appeal to the Fourth Estate-the Press; and a
free discussion before the public cannot fail, in the end,
to obtain us that which we seek solely in the interests of
the public weal. But let us first proceed cautiously,
patiently, but firmly, each dealing with his own college.
I believe I am right in stating that sixteen of the members
of the Royal College of Physicians of London, having
experimented into the practice of homœopathic thera-
peutics, have openly adopted this system into their prac-
tice. I cannot but think that, if these sixteen men were
to draw up the results of their investigations, and to bring
them before their college, that such a course would be
fraught with much advantage to their own college and to
the public; and would tend, more than any mere in-
dividual protests, to end the unprofessional conduct of
certain other members of the college who refuse to meet
any physician who has added a knowledge of homœopathic
therapeutics to his practice. It is their ignorance of ho-
mœopathy and of its teachings, it is their misunderstanding
as to its principles and practice which underly half, if not
the whole of the unprofessional and unjustifiable attitude
which the majority of the allopaths hold toward those
physicians who, having in all other respects equally high
qualifications with themselves, have proceeded further than
they have themselves gone in therapeutic investigation.
!
32
Lent
It is not to be credited of a body of English gentlemen
(and the majority of the medical profession justly claim
a right to that title) that they would willingly continue to
practise an injustice or a meanness toward an opponent,
and still less toward their brethren, men of equal attain-
ments, holding similar degrees, of as high a sense of
honour and probity as themselves. We are therefore
bound to assume that the present attitude of the allopaths
towards those physicians who have gone a little further
into the field of therapeutic research than themselves is
founded on misunderstanding, and we ought, if possible,
to remove this misunderstanding, not only for our own
sakes, but to save the profession from impalement on the
horns of a dilemma, prejudice being the one horn and
injustice the other.
Before concluding, I ought to say a few words on our
efforts to establish courses of lectures in London, which,
if supported, as we hope they will be, may lay the founda-
tion for a school of homoeopathy in England. At present
we confine ourselves to courses of lectures on Clinical
Medicine, by the physicians and surgeons to the London
Homœopathic Hospital, and to lectures on Homœopathic
Therapeutics and Materia Medica. During our first ses-
sion Dr. Hale delivered a course of four most interesting
lectures on Clinical Medicine, Dr. Dudgeon gave two
lectures on the History and Principles of Homœopathy,
and Dr. Richard Hughes gave a long and very instructive
course of lectures on Materia Medica and Therapeutics.
These lectures will be published in due course, and the
medical profession will have a further opportunity afforded
it of correcting its misconceptions and of studying the
science of homœopathy in its varied aspects. It is pro-
posed to recommence these courses of lectures next
October, on the first Thursday (the 7th), and to continue
them on each succeeding Thursday, at 5 p.m.
These
lectures are designed wholly for the profession, and are
open gratuitously to all members of the medical profession
and to medical students, but are not open to the public,
and are not "popular" in the ordinary sense of the word.
The demand on the part of the public for homœopathic
practitioners is so far in excess of our power to supply it,
that it is to be hoped that the knowledge of homœopathy,
which these lectures are calculated to spread, will provoke
such spirit of enquiry as may lead to a further practical
33
examination of the subject by many fully qualified men.
Our experience hitherto has led us to the conclusion that
to "enquire into" the practice of homeopathy is "to
adopt it." It is those who deny it such practical test who
oppose it.
To this and to all other efforts tending to remove the
misunderstanding which leads to the opposition of the
majority of the medical profession to homœopathy, and to
diminish human suffering, we must all give our heartiest
support; remembering reverently that, in so doing, we
are humbly following in the footsteps of Him who "Him-
self took our infirmities and bare our sicknesses;" who,
in the beneficence of His care for the bodies as well as
the souls of men, caused the blind to see, the lame to
walk, the lepers to be cleansed, the deaf to hear, and
who even raised the dead to life; charging His disciples
also in nothing more strongly than that they should con-
tinue and complete this physical regeneration of mankind.
The full meaning of this carefulness to heal the sick
-to cure the diseased-is by none more thoroughly
appreciated than by those thoughtful physicians who
know how many mental and moral aberrations are the
natural sequence of bodily derangements; and thus, in
religiously following out our Lord's injunction to "heal
the sick," our piety and our devotion to His cause binds
us with all the firmer bonds to do so to the best of our
ability, following that system which we believe to be true,
undeterred and unswerving from the strict line of in-
tegrity, whatever may be the immediate consequences to
ourselves. How infinitely small does the ostracism of a
prejudiced majority of the profession appear to the man
who is but following the strict and single line of his duty
to his God and to his neighbour. Time-serving is never
even good policy. "For what is a man profited if he
shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul? or what
shall a man give in exchange for his soul!" Therefore
let the physician practising homoeopathy, while ever cour-
teous and ready to communicate, yield no single foot of
the ground of truth whereon he stands; and where it is
his duty to do battle against error, let him enter into no
compromise, but fight on manfully, keeping ever stead-
fastly before his eyes that admirable maxim of the wisest
of Hebrews: "Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it
with thy might."
4, Granville Place, Portman Square, W.
1
•
:.
¦
7
;


A
2
....
S
my d
Py
K
ز به رفت
Kodek.
249
K
:...
C
17
CYTOPA
V
Ka
2.
20%
B

*.*..

BOUND IN CITRARY
JUN 25 1902
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
3 9015 02005 3560
Filmed by Preservation 1990
··
1.