'a3AlNlT]\V^ 
 
 LOS-ANGEL/ 
 
 
 .s,V3r-lALirU 
 
 WB^ 
 
 U 
 
 i^>\ § 
 
 if 'Kn 
 
 
 frf* 
 
 ^- y /' ■ 
 
 ^/?AyvH8n-iv 
 
 MEUNIVER^ 
 
 >;lOSANGEL£i: 
 
 r- 
 Ik. -^- 
 
 ^^l■LIBRAR>■fo 
 
 ^ Lie 1 
 
 1 Un 
 
 |i 
 
 RI^H 
 
 § V'^Vv 
 
 Or- 
 
 r-!^ i-^o
 
 H I STORY 
 
 OF 
 
 HOMCEOPATHY: 
 
 Its Origm ; Its Conflicts. 
 
 ^if^ an ^ppen6t-e on f^c present sfafe of 
 ^nit)ersifj? "§iTe6tctne. 
 
 WILHELM AMEKE, M.D. 
 
 (Of Berlin). 
 
 TRANSLATED BY 
 
 ALFRED E. DRYSDALE, M.B. 
 
 (Of Cannes). 
 
 EDITED BY 
 
 R. E. DUDGEON, M.D. 
 
 <4Eon6on : 
 
 PUBLISHED FOR 
 
 THE BRITISH HOMCEOPATHIC SOCIETY, 
 
 BY 
 
 E. GOULD & SON, 59, MOORGATE STREET.
 
 LONDON : 
 
 PRINTED BY JOHN BALE AND SON, 87-S9, GREAT TITCHFIELD STREET, 
 
 MARYLEBONE, W.
 
 Biomedicftl 
 Library 
 
 EDITOR'S PREFACE. 
 
 n^HE history of homoeopathy is the indictment of the 
 -•■ medical profession. A physician distinguished above 
 his fellows for his services to medicine, chemistry and 
 pharmacology, endowed with quite a phenomenal talent 
 for ancient and modern languages, and well read in all 
 the medical lore of past times, after mature thought and 
 at a ripe age, announces to the profession that, as the 
 result of years of arduous experiment, investigation 
 and reflection, he believes he has discovered a therapeutic 
 rule which will enable us to find the remedies for diseases 
 with greater certainty and precision than can be effected 
 by any of the methods hitherto taught. The reception 
 which this announcement met with, and which was given 
 to all Hahnemann's subsequent efforts to give certainty 
 and scientific accuracy to therapeutics, is described in 
 the following pages, and forms one of the most melan- 
 choly and deplorable episodes in the history of medicine. 
 
 Homoeopathy having had its origin in Germany, and 
 its founder having spent his long life chiefly in that 
 country, it is natural to expect that the historical events 
 of homoeopathy have occurred chiefly, at all events 
 primarily, in Germany. Hahnemann's active life was 
 carried on in Germany, and his works were written in 
 German or in Latin, which in his early days was the 
 language often employed by medical and scientific authors. 
 
 7639S5
 
 iv Editor s Preface. 
 
 The main incidents of Hahnemann's life and the chief 
 sphere of his activity being Germany, the history of 
 homoeopathy is practically its history in Germany, and 
 the task of writing it could most appropriately be under- 
 taken by a fellow-countryman of Hahnemann. 
 
 How well Dr. Ameke has performed his self-imposed 
 task, the English reader has now an opportunity of seeing. 
 He has brought into full prominence the labours and 
 industry of his hero before he commenced those investi- 
 gations that led to his discovery of the therapeutic rule 
 which he first enunciated as the general principle of 
 medical practice. He clearly shows that Hahnemann 
 was as far in advance of his chemical contemporaries in 
 their special science, as he afterwards surpassed all his 
 medical contemporaries in their special art. He also 
 brings out the fact that Hahnemann, before his discovery 
 of the homoeopathic rule, had acquired a great reputation for 
 his improvements in the practice of medicine, in pharma- 
 cology, and especially in hygiene, a branch of medicine 
 which he may almost be said to have created. We see 
 in this history the high esteem in which he was held by 
 his contemporaries, and especially by the Nestor of Ger- 
 man physic, Hufeland, who never lost his respect for 
 Hahnemann's genius and services to medicine even when 
 he differed from him in opinion. 
 
 The high esteem in which Hahnemann was held by 
 the most illustrious of his contemporaries contrasts re- 
 markably with the unworthy treatment he received from 
 the next generation of medical men, who knew him only 
 as the propagator of a medical system, which, if it were 
 true or even only partially true, must upset all the teach- 
 ings and traditions of medicine. However we may regret, 
 we cannot wonder at the desperate efforts of the sup- 
 porters of Galenic medicine to discredit the new system 
 which threatened the annihilation of all their most cher- 
 ished doctrines and methods.
 
 Editor's Preface. v 
 
 It must strike every unprejudiced observer as a very 
 hopeless way of suppressing a novel system of therapeutics, 
 to abuse and calumniate its author, to persecute its ad- 
 herents by criminal processes, coroners' inquests, expul- 
 sion from medical societies, deprivation of hospital ap- 
 pointments, exclusion from periodical literature, and social 
 and professional ostracism. One would think that the 
 right way would be to afford them opportunities in hospitals 
 to test its value side by side with traditional methods, 
 to court discussion in societies and periodicals, to make 
 careful experiments with the remedies and the mode of 
 their employment recommended by its partisans, more 
 especially as those partisans were the equals of the others 
 in social and professional status — integral parts of the 
 same professional brotherhood. That the dominant ma- 
 jority preferred the former plan, only shows that they 
 were doubtful of the superiority of their own methods, 
 which, nevertheless, they constantly vaunted as the only 
 " regular," " scientific " and " rational " ones. 
 
 Time has shown that Hahnemann was right at least 
 in his condemnation of the cherished methods of tra- 
 ditional medicine, for we have seen them all abandoned 
 one by one by the champions of orthodoxy, until nothing 
 was left but blank nihilism, euphemistically called " ex- 
 pectancy." After arriving at this zero, the mercury of 
 medical opinion was bound to undergo a reaction, which 
 we now see in the search for specifics (which, for the most 
 part, are sought for and found in the homoeopathic 
 materia medica) ; the physiological experiments on man 
 and beasts — but principally beasts — in order to discover 
 the remedial power of drugs ; the germ-theory with its 
 corollary germicide medicines and methods ; the tentative 
 employment of new and powerful drugs, and the use of ice- 
 cold bathing and other "anti-pyretics" in almost all dis- 
 eases with heightened temperature.
 
 vi Editoi^s Preface. 
 
 As our old-school brethren have approximated so much 
 to the teachings of Hahnemann, chiefly by abandoning- 
 what he disapproved, but also, to some degree, by adopting 
 what he recommended, it might be expected that their 
 hostility towards his professed adherents would have 
 ceased. But this is far from being the case. The more 
 they are indebted to homceopathy, the less do they seem 
 disposed to admit its adherents to the full communion 
 of brotherhood. They have so long abused and calum- 
 niated Hahnemann and his doctrines that they seem 
 unable to give up their long-indulged habit. Not being 
 able now to revile us for our disparagement of the methods 
 they have themselves discarded, nor for our belief in the thera- 
 peutic rule of " similia siviilibiis awentui'l' which they now 
 generally acknowledge to be one of the methods of medi- 
 cine, their sole grievance is that we call ourselves homoe- 
 opathists (which we do not any more than they call them- 
 selves allopathists — we only accept the name for want 
 of a better, to avoid circumlocution, and to indicate that 
 we acknowledge a general therapeutic rule which our op- 
 ponents do not), and thus commit the unpardonable sin 
 of " trading on a name," an accusation which is manifestly 
 absurd, as that is but a poor trade in which all the gains of 
 the profession in the way of emoluments and honours are 
 withheld from those who exercise it. What is considered 
 a sin in us does not seem to be so regarded in their own 
 ranks when used by oculists, aurists, gynecologists, ovarioto- 
 mists, laryngoscopists and other specialists, who trade on a 
 name to all intents and purposes, and are quite right in so 
 doing. The objections to homoeopathy being practically re- 
 duced to this fanciful charge, it is evident that the attitude of 
 the representatives of traditional medicine towards their re- 
 forming brethren must soon change, and they must allow 
 homceopathy to take its proper place in medicine. When 
 that is the case, the history of the origin and the conflicts of
 
 Editor's Preface. vii 
 
 homoeopathy will be read with interest by the school which 
 now presents a hostile front to that of Hahnemann, for it 
 will feel that it has purged itself of the reproach of op- 
 posing the truth by its late acknowledgement of its error. 
 My share in the work is that I have carefully revised Dr. 
 Drysdale's manuscript and have superintended its passage 
 through the press ; I have also added an index and a few 
 notes which serve to complete the history in some places 
 where it seemed defective. 
 
 R. E. DUDGEON. 
 
 London, 
 
 September, i88^.
 
 AUTHOR'S PREFACE. 
 
 '"T^HE subject (homoeopathy) becomes all the more im- 
 ^ portant," so Hufeland declared in 1826,* "if the 
 originator is a man who commands our respect. And 
 no one will be able to deny that this is the case with 
 Hahnemann, and least of all one who is in the position 
 of the author of this essay, whose acquaintance with 
 Hahnemann is of long standing, and who, connected 
 with him for more than thirty years by ties both of friend- 
 ship and of letters, valued him always as one of our most 
 distinguished, intelligent and original medical men." 
 
 The same author writes, four years later -.f '•' The first 
 thing that influenced me was the fact that I held it wrong 
 and unworthy of science to treat the new doctrine with 
 
 ridicule and contempt . Despotism and 
 
 oppression are obnoxious to me, especially in scientific 
 matters ; in science, impartiality, careful investigation, sift- 
 ing of evidence, together with mutual respect and strict 
 adherence to the matter in hand, should prevail, and per- 
 sonalities be strictly excluded. Added to this was the 
 respect I had long felt for the author, which was in- 
 
 * Jour. f. prakt. Arsneik., St. i, p. 7. 
 t L.c, 1830, St. 2, p. 20.
 
 X Authors Preface. 
 
 spired by his earlier writings and the important services 
 he had rendered to medicine ; besides this, the names of 
 many worthy and unprejudiced men who testified to the 
 positive truth there was in the matter could not but carry 
 weight. I will only recall the names of President v. Wolf 
 of Warsaw, Medical Counsellor Rau of Giessen, and 
 Medical Counsellor Widnmann of Munich. 
 
 " I had subsequently the opportunity of observing many 
 instances of good results from the use of homceopathic 
 remedies, which necessarily drew my attention to this 
 subject and convinced me that it ought not to be con- 
 temptuously pushed on one side, but deserves careful in- 
 vestigation." 
 
 This judgment of the impartial Hufeland is in sharp 
 contrast with the utterances of the majority of allopathic 
 authors, who, on innumerable occasions, did not hesitate 
 to speak of homoeopathy as " a delusion " and " a system 
 of deception ;" of Hahnemann, its founder, as the " greatest 
 charlatan," and of homceopathic practitioners as "im- 
 postors" or "deceived deceivers," and who do not shrink 
 from expressing themselves in a similar strain even in our 
 own time. 
 
 There have been numerous replies from the homoeo- 
 pathic side, and it has been shown that much earnestness, 
 study and truth are involved in the matter. Strange to 
 say, no single adherent of Hahnemann has undertaken to 
 describe his pre-homceopathic labours, his studies and 
 achievements at that time, or his intense striving after 
 truth. What position did he previously take among his 
 medical colleagues ? What course of development did he 
 go through before he brought forward his medical prin- 
 ciples ? 
 
 These questions are of importance in forming a judg- 
 ment respecting the founder of homoeopathy. Many of its 
 adversaries have accordingly hastened to answer these
 
 Author'' s Preface. xi 
 
 questions, and that in a hostile sense. Thus a certain Dr. 
 Simon, whose works serve even to the present day as an 
 arsenal from which most of our opponents draw their 
 weapons, writes thus : " Hahnemann is the same unreli- 
 able ignoramus, whether viewed as a man of science or 
 as a physician."* Further : " what we especially miss in 
 him is acumen. The want of the capacity to seize clearly 
 and to pursue a train of thought, appears unpleasantly in 
 everytJiing he ever wrote." 
 
 Another opponent. Professor Sachs — who is termed by 
 the Hanoverian physician, Stieglitz, " an author of great 
 talent," and that in reference to his anti-homoeopathic 
 books — holds the following views : " Hahnemann has 
 ahuays shown himself weak in the region of solid thinking. 
 He is incapable of radically grasping and following out 
 thoroughly even a simple thought."! 
 
 All his opponents seem to be unanimous in the opinion 
 that vanity and avarice were the moving springs of his 
 public career, just as in recent times all agree in the asser- 
 tion that his capacity and knowledge as a physician were of 
 the slenderest description. In the following treatise it is 
 proposed to consider the career of Hahnemann from a non- 
 hostile point of view. After a glimpse at his chemical 
 labours and a short review of his contributions towards 
 the perfecting of the art of pharmacy, we will proceed to a 
 consideration of his medical development, and conclude 
 with a description of Hahnemann as a man. 
 
 The second part is intended to give the reader an idea of 
 the methods used in combating the new doctrine, by means 
 of which a gap in the literature of the subject will be filled. 
 
 * AntiJiouwopathisches Archtv, Vol. I., Pt. 2, p. 25. 
 f Versiich zu cinein Schlitsswort iiber S. HaJuiemami^s Jwvi. Syst.. 
 Leipzig, 1S26, p. 57.
 
 xii Ajtthor's Preface. 
 
 and, in conclusion, a short sketch of the present condition 
 of medicine at the universities will be given. 
 
 AMEKE. 
 
 Berlin, end of iSSj.
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 Editor's Preface . . . . . . ' . . . . . iii 
 
 Author's Preface ix 
 
 PART I. 
 The Origin of Homoeopathy. 
 
 Hahnemann's Services to Chemistry and Pharmacy. 
 
 State of Chemistry in Hahnemann's days ...... i 
 
 Hahnemann's Translations of Demachy . . . . . . .8 
 
 Hahnemann's Arsenka/ Poisoning . . . . . . . -IS 
 
 Hahnemann's Contributions to Crell's Annalen ..... i8 
 
 Hahnemann's Detection of Drug Adulteration . . . . .21 
 
 Hahnemann's "Wine Test" ......... 25 
 
 Hahnemann's " Mercurius SoUibilis " ....... 30 
 
 Hahnemann's Apothekerlexicon . ....... 32 
 
 Hahnemann's Translations of Chemical and Pharmacological Works . 39 
 Acknowledgments of Hahnemann's services to Chemistry and Pharmacy 
 
 by Contemporaries .......... 41 
 
 Hahnemann as a Physician. 
 
 State of Medicine when Hahnemann appeared 42 
 
 Natural Philosophy 46 
 
 Contemporaneous Physiological Chemistry 49 
 
 Chemical Theories and Systems . . . . . . . -5^ 
 
 Contemporaneous Therapeutics ........ 53 
 
 Pathological Anatomy .......... 5^ 
 
 Medical Courtesy 57 
 
 Appeal for State Help .......... 5^ 
 
 What medical instruction did Hahnemann get ? . . . ... 58 
 
 Hahnemann's work on the Treatment of Ulcers ..... 59 
 
 Hahnemann's work on Venereal Diseases ...... 64 
 
 Hahnemann's translation of Cullen 65
 
 xiv Contents. 
 
 PAGE 
 Hahnemann's treatment of Lunatics ....... 67 
 
 Hahnemann's views on Venesection ....... 67 
 
 Contemporary views on Itch ......... 69 
 
 New medicines introduced by Hahnemann ...... 74 
 
 Hahnemann on simple prescriptions ....... 78 
 
 Hahnemann's attacks on the medicine of his day . . . . -87 
 
 Hahnemann's criticism of the treatment of Leopold H. . . . .88 
 
 Proving of medicines on the healthy ....... 99 
 
 Similia Similibus . . . . . . . . . . .103 
 
 Hahnemann's idea of disease . . . . ... . . .112 
 
 Hahnemann's mode of preparing medicines . . . . . .117 
 
 Hahnemann's attitude towards the sciences auxiliary to medicine . .132 
 
 Hahnemann and the Apothecaries . 139 
 
 Hahnemann's writings in chronological order . . . . . .145 
 
 Hahnemann as a JIan. 
 
 Birth and Parentage 150 
 
 Education 151 
 
 Wanderings 152 
 
 First Marriage . I53 
 
 Removal to Coethen . . . . . . . . . • 155 
 
 Personality and Character . , . . . . . . .156 
 
 Second Marriage . . . . . . . . . . .165 
 
 Death 166 
 
 Testimonies of old school physicians to his services to medicine . . 16S 
 
 PART n. 
 
 The Opposition to HomcEopatliy. 
 
 Criticism of Hahnemann's first homoeopathic essay . . . . .172 
 
 Der allgemeine Anzeiger del' Deiitsclien . . . . . . .178 
 
 Criticism of Hahnemann's Oi-ganoii ... .... 180 
 
 Criticism of Hahnemann's Dc Hcllcborisvio Vetcruin . . . .184 
 
 Hahnemann's treatment of Prince Schwarzenberg ..... 186 
 
 Attacks on Hahnemann in Leipzic . . . . . . . .187 
 
 Opinions of various authors on homoeopathy ...... 187 
 
 Opinions of the opponents of homceojjathy in regard to bloodletting, 
 
 emetics and purgatives . . . . . . . . .199 
 
 " Scientific " reasons for bloodletting ....... 218 
 
 Dietl's experiments .......... 220 
 
 Criminal prosecution of homoeopaths for abandoning "scientific" methods 
 
 of treatment 222 
 
 Hahnemann's attack on the blood-letters ...... 228 
 
 Behaviour of allopaths to honiceopaths 233
 
 Contents. xv 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Cholera and its allopathic treatment 235 
 
 The censorship used to suppress homoeopathic writings . . . .251 
 
 Death of the Emperor Francis 1 256 
 
 Treatment of Goethe 258 
 
 Death of Cavour 259 
 
 Kopp on homoeopathy .......... 263 
 
 Allopathic opinions on the proving of medicines 268 
 
 Allopathic opinions on the probable duration of homoeopathy . . . 270 
 
 The spread of homoeopathy 275 
 
 Appeals for State help 278 
 
 Causes of the spread of homoeopathy 282 
 
 An anti-homreopathic periodical 285 
 
 Hahnemann's alleged avarice ......... 287 
 
 " Alkali pneum " ........... 288 
 
 Letter to the father of the epileptic 292 
 
 Hahnemann's alleged denial of the vis mcdicatrix natiircE . . . 297 
 
 Hahnemann's alleged theft of his system from older writers . . . 300 
 
 Trials of homoeopathy by its opponents 308 
 
 Public trials of homoeopathy by its partisans 312 
 
 Recent attacks on homoeopathy . , . . . . . .321 
 
 Retrospect 370 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Modern University Medicine, 
 
 Historical 375 
 
 Virchow's cellular doctrine 379 
 
 Bacteria 3^9 
 
 Symptomatic treatment. .......... 395 
 
 Mixture-giving 39^ 
 
 Frequent change of medicine ......... 39^ 
 
 Medicines at present in vogue ..... .... 398 
 
 Treatment of pneumonia ......... 4^7 
 
 Anti-pyretic treatment 4^9 
 
 Treatment of diphtheria .......... 421 
 
 Conclusion ............ 425
 
 PART I. 
 
 The Origin of Homoeopathy. 
 
 HAHNEMANN'S SERVICES TO CHEMISTRY 
 AND PHARMACY. 
 
 The condition of chemical knowledge at the time of 
 Hahnemann's appearance was briefly the following : — 
 
 Till Lavoisier's discoveries the teachings of John Joachim 
 Becher (1635-1683), and G. E. Stahl (1660- 1734), especially 
 the doctrine of phlogiston were of fundamental importance 
 to chemists. One of their ardent adherents was Neumann, 
 Professor of Chemistry in the Academy ©f Berlin. In 
 his book on medical chemistry, in 1756,* he writes : 
 " That the earth is the elementary principle from which all 
 things were derived and created, is clear from the descrip- 
 tion of the creation in the Bible where it is written : In the 
 beginning God created heaven and earth, and there is no 
 mention of water." Water is nothing else than a kind of 
 transparent earth called ice, made fluid by warmth. It 
 consists of four elements, {lb. ii. 399). There are three 
 kinds of earth, a terra vitrescens (from which with water 
 the principium salinum and acidum universale are derived), 
 a terra mercurialis and a terra sulphurea or inflammabilis. 
 
 * Ziillichau, 1756, 2nd edit., Preface to Vol. II. He died in 1737. 
 I
 
 2 State of Chemistry 
 
 Bcchcr is the first to whom the properties of the principium 
 inflammabile were known. Stahl explained and elucidated 
 Becher's theory, he called the inflammable principle 
 " phlogiston." Without it nothing in the world can burn 
 {ib. II., 979)- Sulphur accordingly consists of sulphuric acid 
 and phlogiston. Phosphorus is composed of phosphoric 
 acid and phlogiston, &c. This work of Neumann's enjoyed 
 a great reputation, was translated into English, and by 
 means of extracts was made accessible to a still larger 
 German public. 
 
 Although Neumann was often cited as an authority even 
 in Hahnemann's times,* some progress had been never- 
 theless made since his day. In 1783, however, Dahlberg, 
 the president of the Academy of Erfurt, still considered it 
 necessary to undertake some careful experiments with the 
 view of discovering whether water can be resolved into 
 earth.-|- 
 
 There were even some alchemists still existing. In 1784J 
 authors could still speak of " the hope of our alchemists, 
 among whom there are many incredibly ignorant persons." 
 The great difficulty in the matter of chemical research con- 
 sisted in the fact that few or even no elementary bodies 
 were known and accepted into which the constituents of 
 compound bodies could be resolved. Now the chemist 
 asks of what known elements is this or that substance com- 
 posed. TJien chemists were still searching for the " funda- 
 mental essence " of bodies, they were inquiring : " what 
 unknown something lies hidden in them ? " A few 
 examples will show the great confusion which then pre- 
 vailed in chemistry. 
 
 The celebrated Scheele, an apothecary at Koping, in 
 Sweden,§ was searching in 1787 for the colouring matter 
 in Prussian blue. The search was still going on in 1796.II 
 
 * E.g.^ in the New Edinburgh Dispensatory^ translated by Hahne- 
 mann in 1797 and 1798. 
 
 t Ncio chemical experitnetits to solve the question: Can water be 
 changed into earth ? Erfurt, 1783-4. 
 
 X Crell's Chcmische Afinalen, I., 236. 
 
 § Crell's Chem. Ann., I., 184 
 
 II lb., I., 45.
 
 in Hahnemann's Time. 3 
 
 Morveau, in 1787, speaks of the " light principle " and of 
 the "illuminating matter" in phosphorus.* In 1789 the 
 excellent chemist Westrumbt " discovered " that acetic acid 
 was the basis of all vegetable acids. De la Metheriej believes 
 that all vegetable acids can be resolved into one single acid. 
 In 1790 Westrumb looked upon phosphoric acid as the 
 final result of the decomposition of vegetable acids and 
 inquired :§ "Does phosphoric acid perhaps lie concealed 
 in nitric acid ? " Two years before|j he had found the same 
 acid in Prussian blue, " I consider inflammable air," so he 
 wrote in 1791,11 "to be very composite and to be com- 
 pounded of phlogiston, caloric, water, phosphoric acid, &c." 
 " It can be theoretically explained, according to Herr Kir- 
 wan's theory," so wrote a chemist in 1789, "that common 
 mnriatic acid consists of the special basis, phlogiston, and 
 a certain amount of carbonic acid."** 
 
 Professor Winterl made known at about the same time 
 certain experiments,!! according to which " copper consists 
 of nickel, plumbago, silica and carbonic acid, and of a 
 certain substance which escapes in boiling which unites 
 plumbago, silica, and carbonic acid in the alkaline ley." 
 The same chemist changed muriatic acid into nitric acid.|| 
 Professor Vogt, even in I795,§§ recognises an earthy, a 
 watery, an aerial, an acid, an alkaline, &c., basic element. 
 Lowiz, the principal apothecary and professor of chemistry 
 in St. Petersburg, discovered in 1793III! " true inflamma- 
 bility in the purest acetic acid, and separated phosphoric 
 acid from it by means of inflammable salt gas." 
 
 We may here insert the following extract from a table 
 of chemical relations by Professor Gren belonging to the 
 year iygi.^% 
 
 * Crell's Chem. Ann.^ II., 243 i| lb., 1788, I., 148. 
 
 and 460. 1" lb., I., 146 
 
 t lb., preface, 1789. ** lb., II., 136. 
 
 X lb., I., 276. ft lb., 221, 
 
 § lb., I., 434. %% lb., I., 319 
 
 §§ Trommsdorff s /<7Z/fr. der Pharmacie, II., st. i, p. 187. 
 nil Crell's Ann., I., 220, 223. J. F. Gmelin, Gcsch. d. Chemie. Got- 
 tingen, 1799, HI., 391. 
 ^^ M.o\\xo^s Materia :]Iedica, translated by Hahnemann, Conclusion.
 
 4 Lavoisier s Overthozv of 
 
 (There were affinities in the wet way and in the drj' way. 
 
 
 FIRE. 
 
 AIR. 
 
 WATER. 
 
 RESIN. 
 
 GUM. 
 
 ALCOHOL. 
 
 Fire . . . 
 
 Accumula- 
 tion. 
 
 Phlogisti- 
 cated air. 
 
 Gaseous 
 steam 
 
 Carbon 
 
 Carbon 
 
 Vapour. 
 
 Air ... 
 
 Combustion 
 
 Accumulation 
 
 Penetrating 
 steam 
 
 Ash 
 
 Ash 
 
 
 Water. 
 
 Gaseous 
 steam 
 
 Water with 
 fixed air 
 (Carbonic 
 acid). 
 
 Accumula- 
 tion 
 
 ' 
 
 Solution 
 
 Brandy. 
 
 According to this fire plus gas = phlogisticated air. Fire 
 plus water = penetration. Fire plus gum = carbon, &c. 
 
 The great Lavoisier was destined to put an end to these 
 vain speculations, but not without the most vehement 
 opposition and long-continued resistance of the upholders 
 of the phlogiston theoiy. 
 
 The struggle with regard to phlogiston took place at the 
 time of Hahnemann's chemical labours. In 1770 Lavoisier 
 showed that water does not change into earth, but that it 
 is composed of hydrogen and oxygen. In 1774 he proved 
 that the increase of weight that takes place when metals are 
 oxydised is caused by the incorporating of air. In 1777, 
 1780 and 1783 he published his experiments, which had 
 been made with an exactness hitherto unknown and with 
 the aid of imposing apparatus, and proved that the increase 
 of weight which takes place when phosphorus and sulphur 
 are burnt, is equal to the loss of weight of the air in which 
 the burning takes place. He concluded that that ingredient 
 of air which was transferred to the burnt substances was the 
 constituent common to all acids — hence he called it 
 " oxygen " — translated by the Germans into " Sauerstoff," 
 and which Priestley and Scheele had discovered a short 
 time before as a peculiar kind of air (dephlogisticated air).* 
 
 The principles of chemistry which had been hitherto 
 accepted were discussed in Crell's Annalen ; in 1874, therefore 
 
 Comp. Gmelin, I.e. III., 279, ct scq.
 
 the Phlogiston Theory. 5 
 
 14 years later (I. 95), we find the statement — " Lavoisier 
 and Landriani are said to have converted inflammable air 
 (hydrogen) and dephlogisticated air (oxygen) into water," 
 and this was confirmed by Cavendish {ib. I. 479). In 1786 
 those celebrated men, Kirwan, Cavendish and Scheele 
 opposed Lavoisier, who disputed the existence of phlo- 
 giston.* 
 
 In 1787 the prize theme of the Academy of Orleans was 
 " Is water a compound substance, or is it simple and an 
 element ? " (I. 288). Professor Hermbstadt of Berlin spoke 
 against Lavoisier's analysis of water, and held oxygen to 
 be the primary originating matter of fire (I. 296). De 
 la Metherie was opposed to Lavoisier's experiments, 
 "which do not destroy the older view."t Kirwan (II. 156) 
 in Dublin and Dollfuss (II, 162) in London took phlogiston 
 under their protection. The latter speaks of " Kirwan's 
 masterly defence of phlogiston against the already fashion- 
 able theory of Lavoisier." The chemists, Morveau, Ber- 
 tholet, Foureroy, Mongez, de la Place, Vandermonde, 
 Cousin, le Gendre, Cadet, and Hassenfratz met during 
 three months three times a week at Lavoisier's house, in 
 order to decide upon new technical terms and new chemical 
 signs, " by means of which, as is the case in geometry, 
 savants of all nations may be able to understand each 
 other." The results were laid before the Royal Academy 
 of Sciences in Paris {ib. II. 58). 
 
 1788: Priestley (II. 49, 50) came forward to defend 
 phlogiston and to oppose Lavoisier's analysis of water. 
 
 Lavoisier (II. 51) converted phlogisticated air (nitrogen) 
 and dephlogisticated air (oxygen) into nitric acid by 
 means of the electric current. De la Metherie writes : (II. 
 139) "phlogiston still finds friends in Kirwan and Priestley 
 and in the majority of natural philosophers. The new 
 nomenclature (of Lavoisier and his French adherents) is 
 universally rejected." Lavoisier (II. 262) mentions a 
 method of increasing the effect of fire in chemical opera- 
 
 * Trommsdorf 's y(9z^r. d. Phariii. II., St. 4, p. 2i7- 
 t Crell's Attnalen, I., 552, and II. 332.
 
 6 Opposition of the Chemists 
 
 tions by means of oxygen. He gives tables showing 
 " the quantity of oxygen which combines with various 
 metals when dissolved in acids and when precipitated by 
 one another" {ib. 464). According to the opinion of 
 the court apothecary, RUckert of Ingelfingen, the green in 
 plants is derived from phlogiston (II. 513). A prize theme 
 of the academy at Copenhagen requires the analysis of 
 phlogisticated air (nitrogen) and asks " whether phlogisti- 
 cated air loses phlogiston by detonation " (II. 479). 
 
 1789 : Professor Klaproth says : (I. 1 1) " I reduced some 
 white manganese calx, which I had precipitated from the 
 solution in phlogisticated nitric acid by tartaric alkali 
 in a crucible and obtained a regulus of finely grained 
 structure. Hardly had I freed it from the adhering coal 
 dust and placed it on paper in an open cup, when I 
 became aware of a distinct smell of inflammable air — on 
 the third day I still perceived by the smell the phlogiston 
 which was escaping from it." 
 
 Crell writes : (ib. Vorbei'icht p. 2) " Westrumb made the 
 discovery that nearly all metals ignite with emission of 
 sparks in dephlogisticated chlorine, and thereby give a new 
 and strong proof in favour of phlogiston." 
 
 At a further stage in the controversy the defenders of 
 phlogiston proved that all acids were not compounds of 
 oxygen, and used this as a weapon against Lavoisier. They 
 saw that metallic oxides, if mixed with carbon, could be 
 reconverted into the metals. They had therefore received 
 phlogiston from the carbon which they had lost as oxides. 
 
 Lavoisier : " Those who attempted to delude mankind 
 into believing that what is new is not true and that all that 
 is true is not new, have made too much of the discovery of 
 the germs of my discoveries in an old author" {ib. II. 149) 
 1790. Hahnemann (II. 52) urges that experiments should 
 be made for the purpose of deciding this question. The 
 labours of the French chemists were disturbed by the 
 revolution 
 
 1791 : Crell writes: {ib. Voi'bcricJit) Herr Lowiz has 
 solved the difficulties concerning the dephlogisticating 
 action of carbon, so also Wiegleb in his pamphlet defends
 
 to Lavoisier' s Viezvs. 7 
 
 phlogiston, in which he (II. 387 — 469) attributes false 
 statements to Lavoisier. Kirwan announces {ib. I. 425) 
 that he has given up Stahl's system of phlogiston. 
 
 Professor Gren : (II. 56) " My principal objection to 
 Lavoisier's system is that he opposes obstacles to the 
 progress of natural science." 
 
 1792 : Crell (ib. Vorbericht) says : The doctrine of 
 phlogiston divides chemists into two parties ; he dwells 
 on the difficulty of changing the whole method of thought 
 of chemists. Westrumb (I. i) speaks of the system of the 
 " gasists " to avoid giving offence by using the word 
 phlogiston. Hofrath Herrmann writes: (II. 44) "Inflam- 
 mable gas is for me a compound of phlogiston, fire, air, 
 finely divided aqueous vapour, and, if obtained from a 
 metal, some of the metal in solution." 
 
 Hermbstadt (II. 210 and further) says: " Stahl, that 
 clear-sighted and philosophical physician, would have been, 
 if he had lived, one of the first to recant his opinions 
 
 Wiegleb, Westrumb, Gren, Gmelin, Crell do not 
 
 think so. The desertion of Kirwan and Klaproth, at 
 one time earnest and enthusiastic advocates of phlogis- 
 ton, is significant." Professors Hermbstadt, Klaproth and 
 Karsten instituted experiments relative to oxygen which 
 favoured Lavoisier (II. 387). A prize was offered at the 
 academy of Harlem for the best paper on the " Nature 
 of Fire" (II. 480). 
 
 1793 : Another prize was offered at Gottingen for an essay 
 "On the Composition of Water" (I. 287). Hermbstadt 
 showed A. v. Humboldt experiments in the Royal La- 
 boratory at Berlin, which favoured Lavoisier's views (I. 303). 
 This enthusiastic partizan of Lavoisier in Germany com- 
 plains : " I often advocated the new doctrine at the expense 
 of my honour and good name, for I was more than once 
 saluted as ' a quack, imbecile, propagandist, and antiphlo- 
 gistic town-crier,' as will be seen by a glance at the Salzburg 
 Med. chir. Journal 2lX\(\ other periodicals" (II. 480). 
 
 Professor Gren (I. 31) states that if oxygen can be ob- 
 tained from oxide of mercury, he will never again conduct
 
 8 Hahnemann's Translation of 
 
 an experiment, and consider himself no chemist. Never- 
 theless, he soon adopted the new theory. 
 
 In 1794, as we all know, the meritorious Lavoisier 
 perished miserably. In order to provide the means for his 
 prolonged and expensive experiments, he had accepted the 
 post of farmer-general, he was thereupon called to account 
 by the blood-thirsty Robespierre, and was guillotined on 
 the 8th of May. Nevertheless, the spirit which he had 
 infused into chemistry survived, and continued his work ; 
 the ranks of the " Phlogisticker " thinned from year to year, 
 the number of chemical text-books written on " antiphlo- 
 gistic principles" continually increased, though among others 
 Priestley still contended against Lavoisier's theory in 1796."* 
 
 In 1799 Gmelinf states that Lavoisier's system was 
 accepted by the majority of chemists. 
 
 Hahnemann made his debut as chemist without having 
 had more instruction in the art than other medical men, 
 and without ev^er having been assistant in a laboratory. 
 He was self-taught. 
 
 In the year 1784 he translated Demachy's '■'Art of Manu- 
 facturing Chejuieal Produets^' two volumes. 
 
 Demachy was one of the first chemists of the day, a 
 member of the Berlin and Paris Academies. The French 
 Academy published this work because most of the chemical 
 manufactures mentioned in it had been kept secret by 
 their several manufacturers, particularly the Dutch, and 
 it was now desired to introduce their manufacture into 
 France. This was urgently necessary both for France and 
 for Germany, and it was a great service rendered by 
 Hahnemann that he not only made Demachy's processes 
 accessible to his countrymen, but also enhanced the value 
 of the book by suggestions for their improvement and 
 perfection. After he had completed his translation, a 
 translation appeared by the chemist, Dr. Struve, of Bern, 
 also with additions. Hahnemann added Struve's com- 
 ments to his translation, making his own notes upon them. 
 
 * Crell's Annalcf!, 1798, II. 30S and 376. 
 ■f Gcsch. d. Client.^ III., 278.
 
 Demachy zoitJi Notes. 9 
 
 The nature of chemicals and the notions with regard to 
 their composition were, in many respects, very defective, as 
 appears from this work. We find here, to give a few 
 examples (I. 54), mention made of a very good blue aqua 
 fortis obtained by distilling arsenic and saltpetre with equal 
 portions of water. Every nitric acid turned white, i.e., a 
 white precipitate resulted when a solution of silver was 
 added to it, owing to admixture with hydrochloric acid 
 (I. 62). The purity of the nitric acid was estimated by the 
 amount of this deposit. Demachy considered it impossible 
 to estimate the strength of hydrochloric acid by means 
 of the areometer (I. 15). Such impure nitric acid must 
 indeed have acted as aqua regia, and it is therefore not 
 astonishing that that excellent chemist, Struve, observed 
 a deposit of gold from a "solution of silver" (I. 55). 
 (Hahnemann calls this idea "an alchemistic fancy.") 
 Demachy divided aqua fortis into that which contains 
 hydrochloric acid only and that which also contains sul- 
 phuric acid (I. t6)). 
 
 Lime was added to potash in order to remove its 
 "oiliness" (II. 39, 40), and it also rendered it somewhat 
 caustic. According to Demachy, potash contains all the 
 more vitriolized tartar (sulphate of potash) the older it is ; 
 in that case, carbonic acid must have been converted into 
 sulphuric acid. Salts of wormwood, plantain, gentian and 
 centuary was still sold (II. 39, 40). Glauber salt was 
 prepared with the expensive alum. Hydrochloric acid was 
 dearer than even the costly sulphuric acid (II. 32.) 
 Weathered Epsom salt was sold instead of Rochelle salt 
 (tartrate of soda and potash) (II. 47). According to 
 Hermbstadt, milk-sugar consisted of one portion of chalk 
 and three of saccharic acid (II. 77.) Wiegleb has proved, 
 says Struve, that the beautiful red colour of cinnabar 
 depends upon the fatty acid which it has derived from fire 
 (II. 143). Demachy thinks that in red precipitate the 
 corrosive part of nitric acid is retained (II. 162). To add 
 to this confusion, wholesale adulteration was practised, 
 and a narrow-minded secrecy observed. The Dutch, 
 especially, were accused of this. The ethereal oils were
 
 10 Hahnemann's Corrections 
 
 adulterated with oil of turpentine and balsam of copaiba, 
 &c. (I. 241.242) : lead was mixed with cinnabar, (II. 143) 
 arsenic with corrosive sublimate (II. 146). The prepara- 
 tion of white precipitate was kept secret (II. 165). There 
 were as many secret modes of making lead preparations 
 as there were manufactories. Red lead was adulterated 
 with brickdust and oxide of iron. Dutch white lead was a 
 mixture of one part of pure white lead, and one to three 
 parts of chalk (II. 194). The mode of preparation of 
 verdigris was rigidly kept secret (II. 2Co), as was also the 
 manufacture of vinegar by the Dutch (II. 196). " From 
 time immemorial," says Demachy, " the same family has 
 always refined borax, another prepared corrosive subli- 
 mate, and so on " (II. 217). The Dutch would not com- 
 municate their method of refining borax to his agent. 
 (II. 97) ; he also speaks of antimony works which could 
 not be visited. 
 
 In his remarks Hahnemann displays an astounding 
 knowledge of all the questions connected in any way with 
 the contents of the book. His knowledge of the literature 
 of the various subjects is exhaustive. He cites, e.g., ten 
 authors on the subject of the preparation of antimonials 
 (II. 129), and quotes a number of works on lead (II. 175), 
 quicksilver (II. 172), camphor (I. 254), succinic acid (II. 82), 
 borax (II. 91), &c. Where Demachy remarks that he 
 knows no work on the carbonification of turf, Hahne- 
 mann mentions six (I. jS) \ where Demachy speaks 
 of a rare Italian book, Hahnemann gives further details 
 concerning it (I. 6) ; where Demachy speaks of a French 
 analyst without giving his name ; Hahnemann subjoins 
 the name and the work. Demachy mentions a " celebrated 
 German doctor." Hahnemann is able to give the name, 
 work and passage ; and so on in many other cases.* Where 
 Demachy touches on a discovery, Hahnemann narrates its 
 history fully. -f- In numerous places he gives more precise 
 information in explanation of the text and explains the 
 
 * Comp. II., 41, 66, 186, 199, I., 249, &c. 
 t 11., 44, I-, 143, &c.
 
 of Donachfs Errors. 1 1 
 
 chemical reactions more in detail.* Hahnemann also 
 frequently corrects errors and mistakes.f His notes on 
 nearly every page are almost equal in value to a new 
 work. The following examples show that in addition to 
 botany and zoology he was master of all desirable know- 
 ledge on the subject of physics, and especially of tech- 
 nology which was then beginning to attract attention. 
 
 Under distillation (I. 200) he shows by calculation that 
 the worm then in ordinary use produced less refrigeration 
 than the cap over the receiver. Now the worm is disused 
 in pharmaceutical labaratories, partly on account of the 
 difficulty in cleaning it, to which Hahnemann also calls 
 attention (I. 202). He speaks of the areometer^ with much 
 knowledge of the subject and experience, and shows in 
 this respect his superiority to Demachy and Struve. He 
 describes, too, an improved areometer invented by himself § 
 
 Demachy advised among other things blowing with the 
 mouth to increase a flame where there was not a proper 
 current of air. Thereupon remarks Hahnemann (I. 34), 
 " This can be dispensed with either by removing from the 
 furnace the cause that hinders the draught, or if there is 
 nothing of this sort present, by closing all the openings of 
 the laboratory with the exception of one door, or window, 
 especially, however, by placing a tinned iron pipe 4 to 6 
 feet in height over the smoke hole of the furnace and plas- 
 tering it over with glue, for by this means the ingoing and 
 outgoing currents are at different heights of the column of 
 air, and the draught is increased more than by means of 
 straw, the bellows, or even blowing with the mouth." 
 
 Hahnemann corrects Demachy's mistake in the matter 
 of scarlet dyeing (I. 69 — 70), and also Struve's mistake with 
 regard to copper engraving. He gives numerous directions 
 to the mason, il and the potter, e.g., (I. 11) for special retorts. 
 
 * I., 16, 17, 22, 31, 62, 86, 130, 186, 237, 267, 279, &c. 
 t I., 55, loi, II., 44, 48, &c. 
 X I., 281—282, 288—296. 
 
 § I., plate 4, fig. 6. 
 
 II Im4, 30, 31, 39, 171, 174, 176.
 
 12 Hahnenianiis Improvements and 
 
 Hahnemann gives the measures for these, and he is ac- 
 quainted with the cements necessary for various purposes.* 
 He gives precise directions as to how hearths and grates 
 should be made, whether of iron or earthenware, and of 
 what height they should be and how the fire is to be 
 regulated, whether retorts with long or short necks, or 
 whether receivers or intermediate tubes are to be used. 
 
 He is well acquainted with the manufacture of chemicals 
 in other countries.! Thus he corrects Demachy (I. 21) 
 with regard to alum in Russia, Sweden, Germany, Italy, 
 Sicily and Smyrna. He gives full details (I. 25.26) as to 
 pit coal and coke in England and in the province of 
 Saarbriick. He frequently and with vehemence defends 
 the use of pit coal,| against which there was then a general 
 prejudice, and points out the increasing scarcity of wood. 
 Later, in 1787, he published a special treatise on the 
 Prejudices against tJie Use of Coal as Fnel ; 172>7, Crell's 
 Annalen mentioned as a novelty, (p. 288) that : " at Creusot 
 in Burgundy the smelting and refining of iron is carried on 
 on a large scale by means of coal which has been pre- 
 viously burnt." 
 
 The translator intercalates various improvements and 
 inventions, e.g., "A special mode (p. 49 — 53) of distilling 
 aqua fortis " in a continuous stove, the retorts of which did 
 not burst, while in the ordinary arrangement mentioned 
 by Demachy, five, six, or more retorts are generally spoilt, 
 and the works must be interrupted at heavy cost. He 
 proposes a method (I. 60) of purifying saltpetre from salt 
 before distillation in the preparation of nitric acid to avoid 
 its contamination with muriatic acid. 
 
 Hahnemann introduces a new test for muriatic acid. The 
 ordinary method of using lunar caustic might also indicate 
 sulphuric acid, if this was present in a certain degree of 
 concentration, in which case there would be a precipitate 
 of sulphate of silver. This could of course be avoided by 
 
 * I., 81, 84,99, 154- 
 
 t 11-, 12, 29, 32, 81, 98, 176, 1S3, 184, &c. 
 
 t I., 25, 27, 180, &c.
 
 Discoveries in Cliemistry. 1 3 
 
 the dilution of the fluid. Hahnemann's reagent was a 
 solution of sulphate of silver ; a precipitate of chloride of 
 silver only was thrown down and the sulphuric compounds 
 remained in solution (I. 63). The idea underlying the 
 method is still used in qualitative analysis of employing 
 gypsum water to distinguish lime from baryta and strontia. 
 At the same time Hahnemann gives directions for deter- 
 mining the precipitate quantitatively. 
 
 Hahnemann uses the same idea for a new test for 
 sulphuric acid, viz., a solution of chloride of lead, since 
 that used hitherto (" a few drops of solution of mercury " 
 would also indicate muriatic acid if this were present in 
 any considerable amount. But he adds another test, which 
 had just been discovered by Scheele, viz., baryta (I. 64). 
 
 Further Hahnemann calls attention to the amount of 
 magnesia in the brines of salt works, and indicates a 
 method of separating it. He returns later to this subject* 
 We see from Crell's C/iem. Annallen\ that his idea had 
 attracted the attention of chemists. Magnesia was little 
 known in those days. Professor Neumann's work on 
 medical chemistry in 1756^ declared the discovery of 
 magnesia alba a " delusion," and the substance itself " ex- 
 hausted lime." 
 
 Careful experiments were instituted by Hahnemann§ on 
 the subject of crystallization, on the solubility of salts at 
 different temperatures, and the possibility of separating 
 them by means of crystillization, and he gives many useful 
 hints for the detection of impurities. His remarks on the 
 various preparations of mercury,|| which he had carefully 
 investigated, are especially numerous and suggestive. 
 
 How earnestly Hahnemann strove to secure accuracy 
 and certainty is shown by his careful determination of the 
 quantitative relation of alum and salt in the formation of 
 glauber salt (H. Preface). Professor Gren had given the 
 
 * KennzeicJien der Giite^ Szc, p. 174. 
 
 t 1 79 1, II., 30, note. 
 
 t Ziillichau, 1756, II., 879. 
 
 § II., 13, 31,37. 
 
 li II-, i35> 139— 141, 145) 149—150, 158, 161, 165, 166 168, 171.
 
 14 Criticisms on Hahnemann. 
 
 proportion of alum to salt as 7 to 12, Professor Gottling as 
 2 to I, another chemist as i to 2. Hahnemann found that it 
 was 17 to 6. He had to go carefully to work. First he pre- 
 pared soda from common salt, according to his method; he 
 decomposed alum with this pure carbonate of soda and 
 weighed the glauber salt separated by crystallization. In 
 order to ascertain how much common salt was equivalent 
 to this glauber salt, he decomposed glauber salt by means 
 of chloride of calcium into gypsum and common salt. 
 Wiegleb had represented the proportion of 17 to 6 as the 
 most incorrect. Calculation with our present equivalents 
 gives 17 to 6^ and shows therefore the correctness of 
 Hahnemann's statement. 
 
 He lays great stress on the purity of preparations, since 
 some of the uncertainty in chemistry depended upon im- 
 purity of the chemical preparations. 
 
 We must not omit to mention, though of course it could 
 not have been otherwise, that Hahnemann was incorrect 
 on many points in chemistry. He shares the mistaken 
 notions concerning phlogiston and the current false views 
 of the origin and composition of many bodies. In the 
 case of borax, e.g., he believes (II. 95) that boracic acid 
 (sedative salt) is composed of fluor spar, phosphoric acid and 
 silica, and he thinks (II. 80) that cream of tartar can be al- 
 most converted into sal acetosellae by the addition of a small 
 quantity of sedative salt. In consequence of Gren's asser- 
 tion that sedative salt will only enter into combination with 
 caustic soda, Hahnemann starts the hypothesis (II. 95) that 
 calcination would be very useful in the refining of borax. 
 In the second part of this work we again find his error con- 
 cerning this substance. 
 
 The following criticism of the translation appeared in 
 Crell's Annalen (1785. II. yy') : 
 
 If ever a work was worthy of translation this is one, and fortunately 
 for its readers it has fallen into the hands of a writer who has improved 
 and perfected it. Demachy's original work has long been prized b\' 
 all readers of French. In the second edition, notes were added by Dr. 
 Struve. Dr. Hahnemann translated it with these additions and added 
 a great many notes of his own, by which the scope of this work was 
 increased and its errors corrected. We can affirm that no more com-
 
 Hahnemann's Work on Arsenic. 15 
 
 plete treatise exists on the subject of the manufacture of chemicals 
 than this work. The author (Hahnemann) has described a special 
 distilHng apparatus for aqua fortis, which well merits attention. In 
 the chapter on the preparation of muriatic acid, the notes are greater 
 in amount than the text, and are more important. 
 
 In the review of the second part {ib. II. 277), it is men- 
 tioned that Hahnemann has added a special mode of pre- 
 paring salt of amber (succinic acid) in the purest state. In 
 1 80 1, a new edition appeared. 
 
 In 1786, he published On Poisoning by Arsenic, its 
 Treatment and jfudicial Investigation. 
 
 Before Hahnemann, Neumann, the Professor of Chemistry 
 in Berlin, made investigations with a view to ascertaining 
 the presence of arsenic,* but without obtaining any reliable 
 results. He " hesitated about carrying his investigations 
 further, lest he should be the cause of undetectable poison- 
 ings." The last author mentioned as such in works on the 
 history of chemistry, and designated by Hahnemann as the 
 chief writer on this subject, was Navier.f The conceptions 
 of the chemical constitution of arsenic were very hazy. 
 Haller looked upon it as " an extremely narcotic form of 
 sulphur." Gmelin thought its principal component was 
 muriatic acid ; Neumann thought it consisted of muriatic 
 acid and sulphuric acid, and Porner of muriatic, sul- 
 phuric and silicic acids. Navier considered it proved 
 that " arsenic consisted of a volatile semi-metallic earth 
 combined with muriatic acid." "O, holy chemistry, have 
 mercy upon us!" Hahnemann exclaims. He adduced proofs 
 against all these statements. An example of the method 
 then pursued for detecting arsenic is to be found in Crell's 
 Annalen.\ It could not be recognized by the taste, 
 because at first there was no smell of garlic, it was not 
 mercury. The author thought he might conclude that 
 " the drops are nothing but a so-called fixed arsenic." 
 He does not venture to determine the quantity. Crell's 
 Annalen was the best of the chemical journals. 
 
 * L.c. II., 495 — 501. 
 
 f P. T. Navier, Antidotes to Arsenic, Corrosive Sublimate, Verdigris 
 and Lead, Paris, 1777. Trans, by Weigel, Greifswald, 1782. 
 
 X 1784, II., 128-131
 
 1 6 Tests for Arsenic. 
 
 Hahnemann does not mention any new antidotes in this 
 treatise, but he subjects the large number of those recom- 
 mended to a careful examination, even making physio- 
 logical experiments on dogs, indicates the best remedies, 
 and gives precise directions for their use. 
 
 The most important part of this work is the chapter 
 on the mode of ascertaining chemically the presence of 
 arsenic, because chemistry, and especially juridical chemistry 
 made thereby an important step in advance. After show- 
 ing that the tests of Neumann, Morveau, Haller, Sprogel 
 ordinarily employed, were unreliable, he gives three tests 
 which appear essential to him : Lime-water, water satu- 
 rated with sulphuretted hydrogen, and ammoniaco-muriate 
 of copper (sulphate of copper recommended by Neumann 
 gave no reaction). Water impregnated with sulphuretted 
 hydrogen had already been used by Navier,* but, and this 
 is the point — without any addition of acid, so that the re- 
 action was extremely uncertain. Hahnemann was the first 
 who recognised and laid stress on the necessity of adding , 
 an acid,t a very important discovery to which we shall 
 again return. Further on (p. 246) he states that : 
 " Deliquesced potash makes the precipitate disappear." 
 Even now chemical analysis knows no other means of 
 separating the metals of the arsenic-antimony group from 
 those of mccury — silver — copper, &c., than that of dis- 
 solving the sulphurets of the first group in an alkaline 
 solution as was done in the above way by Hahnemann. 
 Hahnemann went still further. The precipitate of the 
 sulphide could not be quantitatively determined on 
 account of the change that took place in drying. But 
 the copper precipitate remains unchanged, and, accord- 
 ing to Hahnemann's calculations and repeated experiments, 
 267 parts of it were equivalent to 165 parts of arsenic. 
 Together with the well-known smell of garlic, this test ap- 
 pears to him decisive. The limit of the reaction with 
 ammoniaco-muriate of copper he gives as at a dilution of 
 I to 5000. The precipitated arsenious oxide is soluble in 
 
 * L.c, I., 28. t P. 127, 136, 236, 239.
 
 Tests for Arsenic. ly 
 
 2100 parts of lime-water, and is, therefore, a less sensitive 
 test. 
 
 It is characteristic that Hahnemann in his chemical 
 writings always endeavours to determine vv^ith the greatest 
 accuracy the limits of the activity of agents. This he 
 does here also. He discovers that exposed to a tempera- 
 ture of 96° F. {i.e., nearly blood heat), for ten minutes, the 
 solubility of white arsenic is i in 816; the solubility of 
 native arsenic (according to the time of boiling), i in 4000 
 — I in 1 100; of regulus of arsenic i in 5000, of natural 
 orpiment (which, like the two preceding substances, is 
 converted into arsenic by boiling) i in 5000, and so he 
 proceeds with all the chemical bodies mentioned, not with- 
 out drawing conclusions therefrom and estimating their 
 value for his purposes. 
 
 He earnestly opposes those cheap-jacks and hawkers 
 who are allowed to sell arsenic as " a fever powder," and he 
 makes circumstantial proposals respecting prescriptions of 
 poisonous drugs, which have now been carried out exactly 
 as he proposed. He suggests that there should be a locked 
 chamber for poisons in the apothecary's shop, of which only 
 the owner of the shop or his representative should have the 
 key ; he also demands that a special book should be kept 
 for entering the poisons sold, and suggests that special 
 forms of receipt should be attached to it which should 
 specify the receiver, and which should be submitted to 
 the doctors who examine the shop once a year. 
 
 This is not the place to discuss the equally valuable 
 medical part of the book. The book is a model of con- 
 scientious work, wide knowledge, and a devoted love of 
 science ; it is well worth studying even now, after the 
 lapse of a hundred years. The remarkable industry of 
 the author is shown by the fact that he quotes 861 passages 
 from 389 different authors and books in different languages 
 and belonging to different ages, and gives accurately both 
 volume and page. 
 
 The following criticism is taken from Crell's* Aiinalen : — 
 
 * 1788, I., 18:
 
 1 8 CreWs '' Aiinalen" 
 
 " As the author starts from chemical principles, and has 
 confirmed them by his own experiments which are here re- 
 counted, this product of exceptional literary industry deserves 
 to be noticed by us." Hahnemann's investigations are then 
 described. The reviewer does not attempt to decide on 
 the question whether Hahnemann's statement that arsenic 
 does not contain muriatic acid, &c., was correct, and thus 
 shows Hahnemann's superiority. 
 
 In the Neiie lit. Nachrichteji fiir Aerzte, Sic* the work 
 is reviewed at greater length, and the reviewer says, " These 
 last portions (viz., judicial investigation, pathology, chemical 
 tests, determination of lethal doses) give the whole work 
 extreme value." 
 
 The Councillor of Mines, Dr. Bucholtz, of Weimar,-f- who 
 has rendered so many services to pharmacy, calls this book 
 " The very valuable book of my esteemed friend, Dr. 
 Samuel Hahnemann." 
 
 Professor Hencke praises in Horn's ArcJiiv fiir 
 medic. ErfaJiriingenX "the classical work (for that time) of 
 Dr. Samuel Hahnemann on arsenic, by means of which 
 the best modes of analysing arsenic w'ere introduced into 
 medical jurisprudence." We must add that Hahnemann 
 not only introduced the best existing methods of arsenic 
 analysis into medical jurisprudence, but also improved them, 
 and discovered the reaction with ammoniaco-muriate of 
 copper, on which fact stress is laid by the historian 
 Wiegleb.§ 
 
 Hahnemann's Contributions to Crcll's Chemische Annalen. 
 
 Crell was Professor of Medicine and Philosophy in the 
 Brunswick University at Helmstadt. His Annalen possess 
 very great importance for the history of chemistry.|| They 
 appeared monthly from 1784 and were the first regularly 
 
 * Halle in Saxony, 1787, 49, 51. 
 
 t Hufeland'syi9z^r;w/, 1798, Vol. V., p. y]"]. 
 
 X 1S17, 1., 181. 
 
 § J. C. \\' iegleb Gcschichtc dcs VVachsthums und dcr Ei-findungen 
 in der Chcinie, Berlin and Stettin, II., 2)72,- 
 
 II Previously he edited the Chemischcs Journal in six parts since 
 1778, then, since 1781, the Neueste Entdeckungen^ in 12 vols.
 
 Soda from Connnon Salt. 19 
 
 appearing chemical periodical, at least, in Germany, and 
 they were soon imitated in the French Annales de 
 Chiniie. Crell met the expenses of his undertaking (as 
 was then usual) by subscription ; the list of subscribers 
 contains many names of princes, academics and students in 
 all countries ; apothecaries are especially numerous. The 
 foremost chemists and natural philosophers, such as 
 Scheele, Bergmann, Gmelin, Gren, Hermbstadt, Kars- 
 ten, Klaproth, Rose and A. von Humboldt were con- 
 tributors ; the last mentioned from the year 1792, after 
 his journey through Belgium, Holland, England and 
 France. French chemists also contributed papers. Hahne- 
 mann published a series of interesting and approved ex- 
 periments and discoveries in ih^sc Annalen ; lyZj (H. 387- 
 396) he wrote " On the Difficulty of Preparing Soda front 
 Potash and Common Salt." We should be surprised now- 
 a-days if any one used potash, which is much dearer than 
 soda, in the preparation of the latter. Then potash was 
 obtained from the ashes of a good many plants, and soda 
 only from a few sea-shore plants. The amount obtained 
 from the natron lakes was unimportant, because chemists 
 did not then know how to purify it from admixture with 
 foreign substances. Chemists had made numerous pro- 
 posals for obtaining soda from nitrate of soda, or from 
 muriate of soda, as Scheele did by means of oxyde of lead. 
 One pound of soda prepared in some of these ways cost nine 
 shillings. Hahnemann thought that its preparation from 
 common salt was the only means of obtaining cheap soda. 
 In 1784* he stated that he had obtained soda from com- 
 mon salt by means of potash, by crystallization at different 
 temperatures and different degress of saturation ; he gives 
 the amount of heat and quantity of water required for 
 obtaining soda, but dwells on the difficulty of separating 
 foreign salts in this way. Gmelin mentions this process of 
 Hahnemann's in his History of Chemistry (HI. 497), and 
 in Crell's Annalen (1789, I. 416) there was a paper en- 
 dorsing the whole treatise. 
 
 * Translation of Demachy's Laboraiit^ II., Preface, vii.
 
 20 TJic Gas that causes Fermentation. 
 
 1788 : Hahnemann attempted to ascertain what the gas 
 was which converted alcohol into vinegar, and described 
 his investigations in an essay " On the Influence of certain 
 gases on the fermentation of wine" (p, 141-142). He tried 
 the effect of three gases on wine. I, Dephlogisticated air 
 (oxygen). 2. Phlogisticated air (nitrogen), 3. Chalk gas 
 (carbonic acid), i.e.., those gases which were already known 
 to be constituents of the atmosphere. He introduced these 
 gases into bottles, each with four ounces of wine, closed 
 them hermetically, kept them for two months at the same 
 temperature (that of the room), and shook each thirty times 
 at three periods during the day. The result was that the 
 wine in the oxygen bottle " had become pungent vinegar." 
 
 The method of manufacturing vinegar rapidly by letting 
 alcohol run repeatedly over chips of beech wood was 
 discovered in 1833. Hahnemann discovered in 1788 that 
 it is the oxygen of the air that brings about the change, 
 and that the conversion can be promoted by repeated 
 contact with it. 
 
 Soon after he published his observations on the effect of 
 lunar caustic as a preservative from decomposition.* He 
 found that it was most useful in a dilution of i to lOOO in 
 the case of indolent ulcers, and stated that he had observed 
 antiseptic effects from a solution of i in 100,000, but this 
 was not confirmed by subsequent experiments-f of others. 
 
 On various occasions Hahnemann showed his desire to 
 make chemistry useful to medicine, as, for instance, in a 
 special article, " On bile and gall stonesTX He took the 
 fresh bile from a man who had been shot while in full 
 health, and tried the effect of various salts upon it so as to 
 ascertain their value in various liver complaints and ob- 
 structions of the bile. 
 
 It would not be consonant with the object of this work 
 to discuss all Hahnemann's works ; we shall have occasion 
 subsequently to refer to two other papers of his from this 
 journal. 
 
 1788, II., 485—486. t lb., 1792, I., 213. 
 
 X 17SS, II., 296-299.
 
 Tests for Drugs. 21 
 
 Detection of tJie adulteration of drugs. By J. B. Van den 
 Sande and Samuel Hahnemann, 1787. 
 
 Van den Sande, an apothecary in Brussels, published 
 there in 1784, La falsification dcs incdtcaments devoilce. 
 Hahnemann made use of the correct descriptions of roots, 
 barks, &c., given in this book. He mentions in two 
 different passages of later works that the greater part of 
 this work was his, and in the preface he begs " that the 
 discerning critic will acknowledge my rights." The critic 
 will observe that the chemical part is by Hahnemann, so 
 too is the accurate statement of the component parts of the 
 several drugs ; also that the most important parts are 
 from Hahnemann's pen, may be seen by the accuracy and 
 the conciseness of the style and the direction taken by his 
 investigations. 
 
 The signs for recognising purity and adulteration are 
 given in a masterly manner. 
 
 Hahnemann gives such a concise, exhaustive and excel- 
 lent account of the tests for the drugs that we are re- 
 minded of the pharmacopoeas of to-day as eg., pp. 293-295 
 and various other passages. Among these are the tests 
 which Hahnemann proposed in Demachy's Laborantl'^ for 
 muriatic and sulphuric acid, founded on the different 
 degrees of solubility of precipitates usually considered 
 insoluble. 
 
 The article on ammonia is excellent. He examines 
 (p. 290) it among other things for the carbonic acid it 
 attracts, precipitates this with lime and finds that 240 grains 
 of the precipitate correspond to 103 grains of "fixed air" 
 (carbonic acid). A result which is perfectly correct ac- 
 cording to the calculations of to-day. 
 
 In this work, too, as everywhere else, Hahnemann shows 
 his earnest efforts to determine the limits of the activity of 
 substances and their solubility. Thus he found (p. 243) 
 that the solubility of the precipitate from solutions of 
 nitrate of mercury by salt (both answering the purposes of 
 tests for one another) was i to 86,000 of water ; in the case 
 
 * I., 63 and 64.
 
 22 Hahneinamis extreme accuracy 
 
 of sulphate of lead, i to 87,000 parts of cold water ; in the 
 case of white lead, i grain in 17,000 grains of water of 
 I2|°R, and so on in the case of many other substances 
 (p. 251). 
 
 Accuracy prevails everywhere, he gives the melting point 
 of metals, the specific gravity of them and of their prepara- 
 tions, the solubility of salts at various temperatures ; in the 
 case of important salts, e.g., sal-ammoniac, also their solu- 
 bility in alcohol at different temperatures. The determina- 
 tion of the specific gravity appears to him especially 
 important in the case of acids ; he introduced dilute acids 
 into medical use such as are now used. He even determines 
 their degree of concentration according to their specific 
 gravity and approaches closely to the methods used now- 
 a-days. In the case of vinegar the strength is to be 
 determined by neutralisation with an alkali just as is now 
 done. 
 
 Hahnemann complains in various passages of the un- 
 trustworthiness of pharmaceutical preparations, e.g., p. 317, 
 " which no conscientious doctor could prescribe," or, p. 316, 
 " on what can a doctor rely ? " 
 
 Owing to the extreme care he employed in his labours 
 Hahnemann discovered and published in this work much 
 new matter. White lead was looked upon as a combina- 
 tion of vinegar and lead, because it was prepared by means 
 of vinegar. Hahnemann found that carbonic acid was the 
 essential constituent, and he determined its proportion in 
 100 parts. In 1784, in Demachy's Laborant (II. 198) 
 Hahnemann did not attribute the film formed by carbonic 
 acid in solutions of sugar of lead to its true cause, but it did 
 not escape his notice. In the treatise on arsenic (p. 288) he 
 was already aware of it, in opposition to other chemists, 
 who falsely attributed it to an arsenical reaction, and even 
 then he pronounced sugar of lead to be a good test for car- 
 bonic acid. He was the first to show that the long known 
 white lead was nothing else than the combination of lead 
 and carbonic acid. Later chemists, as Monro* and Pro- 
 
 Translated by Hahnemann, I., p. 214.
 
 ill Chemical researcJi. 23 
 
 fessor Gren,* do not yet know the presence of carbonic acid 
 in white lead. 
 
 Scheele had declared that the black colour of lunar 
 caustic, which at that time was always black when used, 
 depended on the presence of copper.f Hahnemann showed 
 that the blackness of lunar caustic depended on deficiency 
 of acid, which had evaporated with heat. 
 
 On p. 274, Hahnemann gives an incomplete, but, for that 
 time, not unimportant method for the detection of Glauber 
 salt in Epsom salts, an adulteration which was then almost 
 universal. He precipitated the whole of the magnesia by 
 boiling with lime water ; Glauber salt remained in solution, 
 and showed the sulphuric acid reaction. The crystalliza- 
 tion of Glauber salt in such a manner that its crystals 
 were of the same size as those of Epsom salt, was a special 
 industry. Some, e.g., Monro, still considered both salts 
 identical. Hahnemann's method of distinguishing them is 
 especially commended in Crell's AnnalenX 
 
 Further on (p. 283) Hahnemann gives a carefully de- 
 scribed method for refining saltpetre founded on the 
 different solubility of saltpetre and common salt in cold 
 and hot water. This method is still practised. He is 
 opposed to the usual method of preparing tartar emetic, 
 and thinks that it should be obtained by means of crystal- 
 lization, as Bergmann and Lassone had already recom- 
 mended. Tartar emetic used then to be prepared in very 
 different ways, and this difference affected the quality of its 
 preparations. Bergmann's method up to Hahnemann's 
 time lay hidden among a great number of other methods. 
 Monro complained (I. 310) that "three grains of one 
 kind of preparation are often as strong as six or seven 
 of another." Hufeland proposed in 1795 (eight years 
 after the appearance of Hahnemann's book), in Tromms- 
 dorff's Joiwnal der Phavmacie^ that since the prepara- 
 tions of tartar emetic were of such different strength, 
 
 * Ha7idbuch der Pharmacologic. Halle, 1792, II., p. 274. 
 t Crell's Annalen, 1784, II., p. 124. 
 X 1791, II., p. 30, note.. 
 § Vol. III., St. 2, p. 83.
 
 24 Crystallization of Tartar emetic. 
 
 it would be better to obtain it from one source in the 
 capital as had before been done in the case of theriac and 
 mithridate. 
 
 As early as 1784* Hahnemann advocated the crystalli- 
 zation of tartar emetic, " so that we may at last obtain a 
 trustworthy standard of the strength of this remedy for 
 medical use," If his suggestion of crystallizing had been 
 followed in 1784, the subsequent complaints would not 
 have been heard. This remedy is now obtained from 
 algaroth powder by means of crystallization, as Hahne- 
 mann recommended. In other passages he calls attention 
 to the importance of crystallization and advises chemists 
 to buy, if possible, crystallized and not powdered salts, 
 because adulteration can be more easily detected in the 
 former case. Hahnemann advocated the preparation of 
 drugs by the physician himself, in all cases in which the 
 detection of adulteration was not easy. 
 
 This work was thus criticized : " This book does not 
 need any special recommendation ; from the quotations 
 already given every doctor and apothecary will recognise 
 its importance and indispensable character."! Professor 
 Baldingerl earnestly recommends the work : " This book 
 is extremely important and indispensable to every medical 
 practitioner, but still more so to every physicus whose duty 
 
 it is to examine the apothecaries' pharmacies There is 
 
 a great deal of valuable matter in this important and indis- 
 pensable work, and I cannot too strongly recommend it." 
 Eleven years later, in Tromsdorff s Journal der PJiarviacie, 
 the work was recommended to apothecaries who wished for 
 information concerning their wares.§ 
 
 In the same work Hahnemann first explained his so- 
 called " Wine Test'' ; he gave further details about his 
 discovery in Crell's Annalen.\\ 
 
 * Demachy's Laborant, II., pp. 118 and 119. 
 
 + A'eue inedicinsche Litteratiir^ v. Schlegel and Arnemann, Leipzig, 
 1788, Vol. I., St. 3, p. 34. 
 X Medicmisches Journal^ ^7^9: St. 21, p. jj. 
 § 1798, Vol. v., St. 2, p. 272. 
 II 1788, I., St. 4, pp. 291—306.
 
 HaJincnianiis Wine Test. 25 
 
 Wine was not unfrequently sweetened by means of 
 sugar of lead, which was supposed to cause not only colics 
 and cramps, but also emaciation and a languishing death. 
 The feeling was, therefore, very strong against the 
 adulterators and they were severely punished. The 
 ordinary test for the detection of lead used in most 
 countries was the " Wirtemberg Wine Test," known since 
 1707. This was made by boiling or digesting two parts 
 of orpiment (arsenious sulphide), four parts of unslaked 
 lime in twelve parts of water. " Arsenical hepar sulphuris " 
 was thus obtained and added to the wine ; a dark precipi- 
 tate testified against the wine merchant. The lead present 
 caused a turbidity, but so did other metals, e.g., iron. If 
 there was any abnormal amount of iron in the wine as was 
 possible through an iron tool or a piece of chain remaining 
 in the vessel after cleansing, or if the nails projecting in 
 the inside of the cask had been partially dissolved by the 
 acid in the wine, the wine dealer would be unjustly con- 
 demned by this method of investigation. Hahnemann 
 gives an instance in which a certain wine dealer, of 
 the name of Longo, was exposed to a severe exam- 
 ination and heavy costs, and lost his means of livelijiood 
 because there was a precipitate when his wine was tested 
 by the Wirtemberg wine test. Two chemists succeeded 
 after a thorough investigation in proving that there was 
 not a trace of lead, but that there was some iron in the 
 wine. Such errors occurred frequently. A simple test zuas 
 zvmiting by means of which iron might be distinguished from 
 lead in solution, and also all metals in solution from one 
 another. On a subsequent occasion when a large number 
 of wine dealers were to be tried by the Wirtemberg test, 
 Hahnemann determined to make experiments in order to 
 discover a better one. 
 
 Very carefully observing the degrees of temperature and 
 the conditions of quantity and solubility, he instituted a 
 series of investigations with the substances which caused a 
 precipitation of lead from its solutions and the limits of 
 reaction in order to ascertain the most delicate test. Finally 
 he chose " water saturated with sulphuretted hydrogen
 
 26 HaJinemann's Wine Test 
 
 gas," which he already knew from his investigations on 
 arsenic to be the best test for metals. Hahnemann took 
 two ounces of wine in which -^^ of a grain of sugar of lead 
 was dissolved and poured two teaspoonfuls of sulphuretted 
 hydrogen solution into it ; the fluid became of a brownish 
 yellow colour. Four drops of sulphuric acid not only 
 did not remove, but deepened the colour. 
 
 Then he applied the same test to a corresponding solu- 
 tion of sulphate of iron. An " olive green colour with a 
 bluish tinge " was produced, distinctly darker than in the 
 former experiment, but in this case a drop of sulphuric acid 
 removed all the colour immediately, " the wine regains 
 its natural clearness and former appearance." He further 
 ascertained how concentrated the iron solution might be, 
 and yet not interfere with the re-solution of the precipitate 
 of sulphide of iron on the addition of the smallest quantity 
 of sulphuric acid. Other acids had the same effect as 
 sulphuric acid in iron solutions, varying in strength from 
 I in 30,000 to I in lOO. Hahnemann made further investi- 
 gations which we cannot here describe, and arrived at the 
 following important discovery : Acidulated sidpJmretted 
 hydrogen zvater precipitates arsenic, lead, antimony, silver, 
 ■niercury, copper, tin or bismuth, present in a suspected fltiid. 
 (Platina, gold, cadmium, are therefore the only important 
 metals omitted). By the addition of the acid, metals of 
 the iron group in the fluid to be tested remained in solution. 
 This fact was only known by him at first in the case of 
 iron, but it is now well known that nickel, cobalt, chrome, 
 alumina, uranium, manganese and zinc share the same 
 property. 
 
 This is a great chemical discovery, pregnant with im- 
 portant consequences, which has spread Hahnemann's 
 name far and wide. Hahnemann first applied it to the 
 examination of wine in the following terms : " TJie lead test 
 is acidulated i^'ater saturated with stdphuretted hydrogeny 
 He advised the preparation of sulphuretted hydrogen gas 
 from hepar sulphuris calcareum in order that it might always 
 be freshly made without difficulty. " Dry hepar is pre- 
 pared by keeping at a white heat for twelve minutes a
 
 a Test for Metals, 27 
 
 mixture of equal portions of oyster shells and sulphur, 
 both in powder. The whitish grey powder obtained is 
 our hepar which can be kept unaltered for years in a 
 properly closed glass bottle, and does not become damp — 
 an advantage which renders it more useful for our purpose 
 than any other hepars." He took two drachms of this and 
 shook it up in a bottle for ten minutes with a pound of 
 water and added ten drops of muriatic acid for every ounce. 
 This acidulated wine test was freshly prepared each time. 
 Now-a-days the muriatic acid is added to the fluid under 
 investigation, which amounts to the same thing. On the 
 application of this test iron remained in solution in the 
 suspected fluid, while lead fell as a blackish precipitate, 
 and the innocent wine dealers were saved ! 
 
 This is " Hahnemann's Wine Test " — a designation 
 which is too narrow and must give rise to misunder- 
 standings. Our opponents are constantly assuring the 
 public that Hahnemann's test has long fallen into 
 disuse. On the contrary ! It is used every day and is 
 indispensable in every laboratory, though it is no longer 
 necessary in the analysis of wine. It ought not to be called 
 " Hahnemann's wine test," but " Hahnemann's test for 
 metals'' — the analysis with sulphuretted hydrogen water 
 to an acid solution. 
 
 After Hahnemann's discovery, or as Crell* states at most 
 simultaneously with it, sulphuretted hydrogen was re- 
 commended in France as a test for wine by the celebrated 
 chemist Fourcroy. In the following year, 1789!, it is 
 stated in an extract from the y4/^7;,7/^i- <^^ ^'//zV/^zV, that lead 
 could be detected by this new substance in a solution of i 
 to 1,000. Hahnemann had detected it in the proportion 
 I to 30,000, i.e., in a degree of thirty times greater dilution. 
 His addition of an acid, of which the French knew nothing, 
 brought about this result. The advantages of Hahne- 
 mann's discovery could not be placed in a more favourable 
 light than by a contrast with the French test of lead, des- 
 
 * L.c, 1788, I., 301. t n., 549-
 
 28 Hahnemann in Advance of 
 
 cribed in Crcll's Annalen* Three of the foremost French 
 chemists, Thourct, Lavoisier and Fourcroy, propose an 
 arsenicated liver of sulphur, such as had long been found 
 quite inadequate in Germany. The directions for ascer- 
 taining the quantity present are very circumstantial. 
 Forty to sixty pounds of wine are evaporated to dryness ; 
 a furnace is necessary in order to obtain lead in the 
 metallic form ; a part is reduced to ashes, various salts 
 are required, &c. Finally, " in order to be quite sure," this 
 and that must be done. " These experiments must be 
 repeated and comparisons instituted with good wines in 
 order to be able to arrive at trustworthy conclusions." 
 Hahnemann used hardly half a wine glassful of wine and 
 one minute sufficed for a reliable qualitative investigation. 
 He made a quantitative analysis by dropping in sulphuric 
 acid into wine boiled to a fourth to eighth part of its bulk, 
 by which means a sulphate of lead was precipitated. " The 
 dried precipitate is weighed, the amount of sulphate of lead 
 left in solution in the fluid is added, and the calculation is 
 made; 143 grains of this precipitate (sulphate of lead) prove 
 the presence of 100 grains of metallic lead, according to 
 Bergmann. In twenty ounces of fluid one grain of sul- 
 phate of lead remains in solution, which is to be included 
 in the calculation." (The precipitated sulphate was of as 
 little use here as in testing for arsenic, because it is de- 
 composed by drying.) 
 
 Afterwards he used cream of tartar wuth the addition of 
 tartaric acid instead of muriatic acid ; but he soon returned 
 to his original method. 
 
 In 1788, Hahnemann discovered the solubility of such 
 precipitates of metallic sulphates in boiling nitric acid. 
 This process is now employed by chemists in order to dis- 
 tinguish the metallic sulphides which are not soluble by 
 alkaline sulphides (mercury, silver, bismuth, copper, cad- 
 mium) from one another ; it is known that sulphide of 
 mercury is not dissolved by heating with nitric acid, while 
 the others are. 
 
 * 1792, H., 455—461.
 
 Contemporary Chemistry. 29 
 
 Hahnemann soon turned his discovery to practical 
 account. As early as 1787 he recommended this method 
 for the detection of lead in various suspected liquids.* In 
 Crell's Anuak]i-\-h.c says that chemists will find this method 
 indispensable for the analysis of minerals. He thereby 
 shows that he had realised the importance of his discovery. 
 
 Recognition on the part of the chemists was not wanting. 
 In 1789 the court physician, Scherf, of Detmold, states that 
 it was intended to introduce Hahnemann's " wine test " in 
 place of that in general use.:}: Professor Eschenbach, of 
 Leipzig, writes in the same year :§ " Among the many new 
 observations and investigations in chemistry, the test for 
 wine invented by Dr. Hahnemann has especially pleased 
 me. I have tried it, and it has fulfilled my expectations," &c. 
 
 Other authors speak of " Hahnemann's excellent test for 
 wine."]' The volume of Crell's Annalen, with Hahnemann's 
 analysis of metals, was translated into EnglishlF — '' Hahne- 
 mann's infallible test for wine."** " Most of our readers arc 
 acquainted with Hahnemann's excellent test for wine."tt 
 Investigations for the detection of metals by Hahnemann's 
 method of analysis in judicial cases also are to be found in . 
 various places. t| How widely known this was is best shown 
 by the fact that ignorance of Hahnemann's test is quoted in 
 Trommsdorff s Journal derPharmacieW as damning evidence 
 of the incompetence of many apothecaries. " Certainly a 
 proof of true knowledge !" remarks the narrator ironically. 
 
 * Kennzeichen der Giite, &c., pp. 229, 252, 286. 
 
 t 1794, I-, St. 2, p. III. 
 
 X Crell's An?tale?i, 1789, II., p. 222. 
 
 § lb., 1789, II., p. 516. 
 
 II lb., 1792, I., p. 185. 
 
 IF lb., 1793, I-,P- 188. 
 
 ** lb., 1793, I., p. 246. 
 
 ft !(>■, 1793, II., p. 124. 
 
 tt lb., 1794, p- 567. Further: Salzburger Med. Chir. Ztg., 1794, I., 
 p. 103 ; Trommsdorff's yirwr. d. PJiannacie, 1795, H-? St. i, p. 39 ; III.> 
 St. I, p. 115 ; III., St. I, p. 312 ; 1797, v., St. I, p. 82 ; 1798, V., St. 2, 
 p. 129, and in many other places. It was also mentioned in Scherf s 
 Beitr. sum ArcJiiv der Med. Polizei, 1792, III., and in the Iiitelligenz- 
 blatt der Allg. Lit. Ztg., 1793, No. 79. 
 
 §§ 1795, II., St. I, p. 176
 
 30 Hahnenianii's Soluble Mercury. 
 
 Mercurius solubilis Hahncvianni. 
 
 Chemists had long been searching for a preparation of 
 mercury which was less corrosive and " poisonous " than 
 sublimate, i.e., muriate of mercury or turbith mineral, i.e., 
 basic sulphate of mercury.* Hahnemann shared in these 
 endeavours to discover a milder preparation of mercurj^ In 
 Demachy (II. p. 107) he expressed the opinion that a pre- 
 cipitate of mercury from its solution in nitric acid by means 
 of ammonia might be the least " corrosive " form of mercury. 
 The Berlin Professor Neumann! had already dissolved mer- 
 cury in nitric acid and had obtained a precipitate with am- 
 monia, but this preparation had different properties, e.g., 
 it was white, while Hahnemann's mercury was a velvety 
 black. The Edinburgh pharmacopoeia^ contained a mercurius 
 prsEcip. cinereus which was obtained from a solution in 
 nitric acid by means of ammonia ; this, too, had different 
 properties, besides being grey. Hahnemann mentions on 
 the first publication of his mode of preparation,§ that 
 besides Black's mercur. cinereus, Gervaise Ucay had used a 
 precipitate similar to the soluble mercury in 1693. 
 
 Hahnemann first dissolved the mercury in nitric acid in 
 the cold. II The difference of the solubility of mercury in heat 
 and cold was not as yet known to chemists. Professor 
 Hildebrand even wrote in his exhaustive treatise " On the 
 Solution of Mercury in Nitric Acid :"% " A saturated solu- 
 tion can only take place with heat." 
 
 Hahnemann tried to obtain pure metallic mercury from a 
 solution of the sublimate by means of metallic iron. The 
 mere mechanical process of refining by squeezing through 
 leather did not content him. He dissolved mercury thus 
 
 * Comp. Demachy's Laborant, II., p. 168; also Gren's Hattdbuch 
 dcr Pharniakologie. Halle, 1792, II., p. 224. 
 
 t L.c, II., p. 840. 
 
 % Translated by Hahnemann, II., p. 246. 
 
 § Unterricht fiir Wundiirztc abcr die vcncrisclicn Krankheitcn, 1789, 
 Preface. 
 
 II Crell's Atinalen, lygo, II., pp. 22—28 ; he here gives some modi- 
 fications of the former mode of obtaining pure regains of mercury and 
 the precipitant. 
 
 ^ Crell's Annalcn, 1796, II., p. 299.
 
 Its excellence acknoivledged. 3 1 
 
 obtained by nitric acid in the cold, allowed the salt to 
 crystallize, washed the crystals with a very small quantity 
 of water, and dried them on blotting paper. 
 
 He thus obtained a pure nitrate of the oxide of mercury. 
 Here was a salt which is still retained in the German phar- 
 macopoeia. Even Hahnemann's proportions, the constant 
 excess of mercury, solution in the cold, washing the crystals 
 with a very small quantity of water, drying on blotting 
 paper, without heat, is retained, because all these details 
 are recognised as essential. 
 
 He treated these crystals with a certain quantity of 
 water, and precipitated the solution by means of specially- 
 prepared ammonia free from carbonic acid, for which he 
 gives exact directions. The precipitate, after having stood 
 six hours, forms a black paste, which is then dried without 
 heat on a filter of white blotting paper. 
 
 Hahnemann did not neglect to weigh the amount of the 
 mercury obtained by means of sheet iron from the sub- 
 limate. One part of sublimate contains 0.624 of mercury. 
 Hahnemann says 0.634, which, considering the instruments 
 then used, certainly shows the accuracy of his work. 
 
 Professor Gren* wrote of this preparation : " The 
 problem of Herr Macques, to obtain a preparation of mer- 
 cury which is at once very soluble (in the acids present 
 in the body according to the views and intentions of 
 those days, here in acetic acid), and yet free from corro- 
 sive properties, is fully solved by Herr Hahnemann's ' Mer- 
 curius Solubilis.' " " According to my opinion, mere, solub. 
 is to be preferred to mercurius dulcis " {ib. p. 267). He 
 even wished this preparation to be used for making Ugt. 
 Neapolit. {ib. p. 509), And Gren was no blind eulogist, 
 as was shown by his previous attack on Hahnemann 
 in the matter of his test for metals — a contest which 
 was decided by Professor Gottling and others in Hahne- 
 mann's favour.f 
 
 Physicians considered that "science had to thank the well- 
 
 * L.c, II., p. 224. 
 
 t Salzb. Med. Chir. Ztg.^ 1794, I-, p. 103 ; also. Prof. A. N. Scherer 
 in his Jour. d. Chcin., 1799, II., p. 402.
 
 32 HaJuieinaniis ApotJiekerlexicon. 
 
 known, and for this immortal, Hahnemann, for one of the 
 most effectual and mildest preparations of mercury."* 
 
 Kurt Sprengel, the historian : " Hahnemann's mercury,. 
 an excellent and mild preparation, the usefulness of which 
 has been proved."t 
 
 We could fill many pages with the acknowledgments 
 which Hahnemann received on account of his mercur}^ 
 from non-homoeopathic doctors. Chemists, too, and among 
 them the first of their profession, have written a great deal 
 on the subject of this mercury, but have arrived at the con- 
 clusion that chemically it is not an ideal preparation. 
 
 Samuel Hahnenianiis ApotJiekerlexicon, published 
 1793—1799- 
 
 " I have in this work endeavoured to describe all the 
 simple remedies " — so he says in the introduction — " which 
 have been in use from the beginning of this expiring 
 century up to the most recent times, either ofificinally 
 or otherwise, also those used only by a few physicians 
 and some which have gained considerable repute as do- 
 mestic remedies." 
 
 He not only mentions the most efficacious and approved 
 drugs — this is what ought to be done in every good pharma- 
 copceia. In an "Apothecaries' Lexicon," the disused, the un- 
 fashionable, and the little used remedies, as well as those that, 
 are inactive, disgusting and superstitious must be included 
 because a great deal may depend even upon these. " And 
 is there not often a great deal of merit in the so-called 
 antiquated remedies, some of which might certainly dispute 
 the palm with many of our fashionable remedies ? From 
 time to time these old remedies emerge from their obscurity. 
 In such cases it is important both for the doctor and the 
 apothecary to know what the ancients knew concerning 
 these drugs. All this must be found in an Apothecaries' 
 Dictionary." 
 
 * Recepte ttnd Ktt?-artc/i dcr besicii Acrz/c allcr Zcitcn. Leipzig,. 
 1814, 2nd edit., IV., p. 24. 
 t Geschichte der Arz}2cik. Halle, 1828, Part V., p. 591.
 
 Its originality and Excellence. 33 
 
 So much as to the scope of this great work. The 
 subjects are arranged alphabetically and it treats of every- 
 thing which could be of use to the apothecary in his work. 
 The style is concise, lively and attractive. A careful 
 description is given of the proper arrangement of a phar- 
 macy and its various parts under the words " Apotheke" 
 " Keller" " Trockenbodenl' " Laboratoriiun" &c. The neces- 
 sary utensils too, are carefully described with full know- 
 ledge of the subject. It is only necessary to read the 
 articles on Evaporating Saucers {Abdanipfschalen) or 
 Vessels {Gefdsse) or Oils {Dehle) to perceive the numerous 
 suggestions derived from his great practical experience. 
 Each of these articles shows how thoroughly well ac- 
 quainted Hahnemann was with the subject, but every 
 other article shows this in no less degree. He often describes 
 new apparatus improved or invented by himself, illus- 
 trating them by diagrams. The apothecary's business of 
 making up prescriptions and his laboratory work are 
 accurately and clearly described. Take for instance what 
 is said under the head " Rc.'^epi.'" Here Hahnemann gives 
 many directions which have now become legal enact- 
 ments. How complete are the articles under the head- 
 ings : Abdampfen (evaporation), Abgiessen (decantation), 
 Abklaren (clarification), Auflosen (solution), Auslaugen 
 (elixiviation), Auspressen (expression), and others in letter 
 A alone. In the matters treated of, detailed instructions 
 for the apothecary are given ; when we read under " Emul- 
 sion," the various modes of making it from seeds, fats, 
 resins and camphor, with gum Arabic, tragacanth, eggs, 
 &c., or turn up " Distillation " or " Crystallization " we see 
 the zeal with which Hahnemann must have worked, and 
 the intelligent use to which he put his experience. 
 
 The interest too that he displays in seemingly insig- 
 nificant matters that can be of importance only to a 
 man who has worked himself, shows how completely he 
 was master of the subject. This is the case in his remarks 
 on the lining with cement of furnaces (I. iii) on distilla- 
 tion, in the directions for making apparatus that cannot 
 be bought ; in his observations on the various kinds of fuel
 
 34 Hahnemann's iuiprovements in 
 
 for different purposes (I. 294), on reducing all sorts of 
 substances to powder (II. i, 246), on the construction of 
 the special crucibles required for different purposes 
 (II. 2, 161) and various kinds of furnaces (II. i, 145, 150), 
 &c. A number of Hahnemann's recommendations with 
 regard to the supervision of apothecaries, have now been 
 generally adopted, so too have his proposals regarding 
 the regulation of the sale of poisons, distillation in vapour 
 baths, the construction of tin vessels from pure tin, the 
 inspissation by evaporation of extracts over water baths 
 (I. 223), the distillation of ethereal oils in the steam bath 
 (II. I, 152), the preservation of odoriferous substances, of 
 plants, e.g., valerian, hemlock, &c., in tinned boxes (I. 338 
 and 411); the necessity of a herbarium in every chemist's 
 shop for instruction and for the purpose of aiding their 
 proper collection (II. 2.1 15). 
 
 In the case of remedies belonging to the vegetable 
 kingdom, he gives not only their botanical description, 
 but their habitat (II. 2. 115, 119), their time of flowering, 
 the time for collecting the parts useful medicinally, and 
 refers to works containing plates — this he does too with 
 regard to the animals mentioned. The literature here 
 referred to proves how thoroughly Hahnemann had studied 
 the subject. Among the works mentioned are those of the 
 first botanists and zoologists, such as Buffon, Pallas, 
 Dryander, Regnault, Scopoli, Jussieu, Linnaeus, Slaone, 
 Gleditisch, Haller, Bauhin, Rumpf, Kampf, Tabernae- 
 montanus, Tournefort, &c., &c., more than lOO works in 
 different languages, including the most recent books of 
 travel. 
 
 By his recommendation not to boil the extracts of 
 narcotic plants, but to evaporate them over water baths, 
 he deserves the credit of having contributed largely to the 
 introduction of these important medicines. The advice of 
 Professor Neumann* had been followed only two generally 
 " to boil freely in making extracts, since boiling for a 
 <:onsiderable time with a large amount of water, is the best 
 
 * Medic. Chciiiii\ I., 661.
 
 PJiaymaccHtical Preparations. 35 
 
 corrective of too powerful medicaments." Professor Hecker 
 admitted that " the directions given by Herr Hahnemann 
 for the preparation of narcotic plants are the best that we 
 have."* 
 
 Wc should here remind our readers of Hahnemann's 
 mode of preparing tinctures from fresh plants, which was 
 justly considered to have enriched our therapeutic thesaurus 
 medicaminum.t 
 
 The chemical part is treated in the same spirit. There 
 is everywhere thoroughness without diffuseness; compare 
 for example the articles on mercury, antimony, phos- 
 phorus, potash, ammonia, sulphur, &c. He gives the 
 history of many important preparations, e.g., sulphuric 
 acid, tartar emetic, phosphorus, sal-ammoniac, &c., at the 
 same time without overlooking the latest achievements of 
 chemistry. 
 
 In order that medicines should be of a definite 
 character, he insisted upon them being of a fixed specific 
 gravity if they were fluids, as in the case of ammonia, of 
 diluted acids (H. 2.363) and of alcohol. 
 
 In order to be able to obtain good preparations, the 
 apothecary is to pay attention to the habitat of the plants, 
 if possible to collect them himself and to make the more 
 delicate chemical preparations himself, since this trouble 
 will be compensated for by the good quality of the articles. 
 
 In the case of a good many medicines he briefly 
 describes their medicinal use. On this subject he writes 
 in the preface : " By mentioning in the case of simple 
 drugs their principal uses and their medicinal properties, 
 I am departing from the practice of many recent authors 
 who omit this as though such information were useless or 
 even injurious to the apothecary, because it favours the 
 practice of counter-prescribing. A short notice of the 
 uses of drugs could not be the means of causing apothe- 
 caries who had a proper sense of the dignity of the calling 
 
 * Hufeland'syi£?«^'«., 1800, Vol IX., St. 2, p. 83. 
 
 t Buchholz, Tasckenbtich fur ScJicidekunstler imd ApoiJicker, 1815, 
 p. 57. J. R. Bischoff, Ansichten ixbcr das bisJier. Heilverfahren., &c. 
 Prague, 1819, p. 121.
 
 36 Laudatory reviews of 
 
 to indulge in unauthorized practice ; they have it in their 
 power to earn far greater renown by faithfully performing 
 their duty. They would not degrade the position of the 
 apothecary upon whose integrity depends life and health, 
 and by whose knowledge should be formed the weapons by 
 means of which the shattered machinery of the human 
 body is restored, to that of an ignorant quack who is as 
 much beneath him as a pestilent bog is beneath the 
 beneficent sun. 
 
 " Such a short indication of the uses of drugs cannot 
 give rise to dabbling in medicine. If they read that 
 powdered oyster-shells relieves acidity of the stomach, 
 this does not tell them when such acidity of the stomach is 
 present, or by what morbid symptoms it is manifested. 
 
 " But a short notice of the use of a drug is useful to the 
 apothecary, since he will be much more likely to remem- 
 ber the dry description of the remedy if it be impressed 
 on his memory through its medical properties, whereby it 
 ceases to be indifferent to him, but on the contrary, becomes 
 more interesting and worthy of his attention. Things, the 
 use of which we do not know are indifferent to us, they 
 interest us as little as the mere letters of a word, the sense 
 of which we have forgotten. Only an indication of their 
 utility, whether real or imaginary, gives us an interest in 
 the otherwise useless knowledge of their history, which 
 now acquires life, substance and interest," 
 
 The Apothekerlexicon appeared in numbers and was 
 thus noticed by the Medicimsch-cliirurgiscJie Journal* " The 
 author has written a work which is of great use to the 
 practical apothecary, and even to the physician. It com- 
 pares favourably with other similar works and enables 
 us to dispense entirely with Fiedler's ApotJiekei'lcxicon. 
 
 This work is not a mere compilation, but it contains 
 
 many new ideas, hints and valuable improvements. Some 
 articles are especially good (examples are given). If all 
 apothecaries would attend to what the author says \\ith 
 regard to the extracts (especially of the narcotic plants), 
 
 * 179.3, HI,, i;!"!
 
 Hahnemann' s Pharmaceutical methods. 37 
 
 many practitioners would obtain successful results from their 
 employment and would no longer doubt the efficacy of 
 these remedies. The reviewer ardently desires the continua- 
 tion of this work." A distilling apparatus invented by 
 Hahnemann is then spoken of 
 
 With regard to the next number, complaint* is made 
 that Hahnemann had introduced many disused drugs, and 
 that some articles were inferior. Hahnemann completely 
 refutes these criticisms in a reply he made,-f " Neverthe- 
 less some of the articles are very well done, and the 
 reviewer would pronounce the whole work excellent if they 
 were all equally so. Everything the author says on the 
 subject of fermentation and poisons is to the purpose and 
 convincing." 
 
 Apropos oi 'CiXQ next number the reviewer writes (i799) 
 n. 411) : "A work of this kind by a man who has made 
 himself a name in Germany, both as a chemist and as a 
 practitioner, deserves especial recommendation. Especially 
 excellent articles in this number are those on the laboratory, 
 precipitation, furnaces, oils, pills, modes of preparation. 
 In the article on phosphoric acid, the author gives a new 
 method, peculiar to himself, of obtaining phosphoric acid 
 and from it phosphorus. Every article gives evidence of 
 having been written with the greatest care." 
 
 Trommsdorff, Professor in the University of Erfurt, thus 
 criticises the work in his Journal der Pharinacie : ^ " An ex- 
 cellent work which every apothecary ought to procure. 
 Brevity, lucidity, decision and yet completeness, seem as far 
 as we can judge from this first part to distinguish this work 
 from all others of a similar character. (Certain articles are 
 then discussed.) We see from these few extracts that 
 this work is not a compilation of an ordinary character. 
 In examining the work more closely we can find very much 
 new and important matter, and every page shows that the 
 well informed author speaks from experience. We refer 
 our readers to the articles : evaporation, evaporating 
 
 1796, I., p. 393. t Z'^., IV., p. 15- 
 
 X 1794, H-, St. I., p. 185.
 
 38 Hahnemann's services to 
 
 vessels, clarification, separation glasses, decoction, phar- 
 macies, elixiviation, tartar emetic, distillation, extracts. 
 We only hope that what is said by the author in these 
 articles will be laid to heart. We recommend this work to 
 our readers, and we wish the author leisure and continued 
 health for the completing of this important work, which 
 will be of great service to pharmacy." 
 
 The critic writes thus of its continuation : * " We present 
 with sincere pleasure to our readers the continuation of this 
 useful work which every apothecary ought to obtain. 
 Some of the articles are extremely well written." As an 
 example, the reviewer quotes the article on " poisons " ver- 
 batim. " Some of the other articles are equally good, and 
 we may, therefore, expect that this work will diffuse much 
 useful information." 
 
 We hope that this account of some of Hahnemann's 
 works will suffice to give at least a superficial view of his 
 services. Those who wish to understand his mental atti- 
 tude must make themselves acquainted with the litera- 
 ture of the day on the subjects, and then read and study 
 Hahnemann's works ; no one will put them down dis- 
 satisfied and without paying a tribute to his brilliant 
 intellect. He shares with the rest of mankind the fault of 
 having been occasionally in error. All who strive to achieve 
 great things are liable to occasional error. 
 
 In judging his powers of observation and his accomplish- 
 ments we must not forget that he — a busy practitioner and 
 a private man — had to contend with the foremost apothe- 
 caries, whose calling made a laboratory and chemical 
 investigations a necessity, and with the professors of chem- 
 istry, who obtained pecuniary assistance from the State ; 
 and that he not only showed himself equal to these pro- 
 fessionals, but surpassed most of them in knowledge of 
 the subjects as in the services he rendered. 
 
 * 1796 III. 2.359
 
 the Manufacture of Chemicals. 39 
 
 Finally we quote some more of the reviews of some of 
 his works, and we will also cite the recognition he received 
 from professionals (further on we give a list of all Hahne- 
 mann's works). 
 
 His translation of Demachy's Liqiieiitfabr leant was inci- 
 dentally mentioned by Westrumb* in an essay on the 
 distillation of brandy. " Few manufacturers have listened to 
 my suggestions to arrange their retorts as Demachy and 
 Hahnemann describe. These writers increased the height 
 of the distillery vessel, gave to the helmet the form of a 
 sugar loaf, provided it with a tube and surrounded it with 
 a Turk's head. They thus saved half the time that would 
 have otherwise been expended, a third of the materials and 
 obtained considerably more brandy (spirit). Distillers 
 should entirely reject the old distillery apparatus and should 
 use the French arrangement clearly described by Hahne- 
 mann." Government should insist on the use of pit coal, 
 "against which there is a deeply rooted prejudice." 
 
 Hahnemann translated Demachy's Art of manufac- 
 tnring vinegar., in 1787. The Neue MedieiniscJie Literatur\ 
 says : " Compared with the many wretched descriptions of 
 the way to construct vinegar manufactories, Demachy's 
 essay deserves commendation, and is worth being trans- 
 lated into German, especially as Herr Hahnemann has set 
 his author right in many points, flahnemann has taken 
 the opportunity to correct the mistakes in instructive notes. 
 Herr Hahnemann's appendix on the manufacture of vinegar, 
 particularly that from grain is both thorough and clear." 
 
 The Economic Association of Florence, in 1785, pro- 
 posed as a prize question, " the discovery of the theory 
 of vinous fermentation, as also the description of a 
 method adapted to the capacity of country folks of 
 examining must, in order to treat it in a rational manner 
 by the light of this examination." Fabbroni won the prize 
 and Hahnemann translated the essay, The art of making- 
 wine in accordance zvitJi rational principles, which had 
 
 * Crell's A}tJiale?t, 1792, I., 490. 
 
 t Of Schlegel and Arnemann, Leipzig, 17S8, pp. 56 — 59.
 
 40 His translations of Monro and 
 
 been warmly received in Italy in 1790. In Crell's Annalen 
 (1790 I. 562) is mentioned "the well merited applause," 
 which this work had received on account of its lucid 
 investigation of the process of fermentation. " A trans- 
 lation was all the more desirable, and for this we are 
 indebted to a man who has conferred so many benefits 
 on science, both by his own works and by his valuable 
 translations. Besides the fact that this translation is 
 faithful and successful, Herr Hahnemann has added 
 precious notes which expand and elucidate Fabbroni's 
 principles ; he has thus enhanced the value of the work." 
 
 Hahnemann's translation of De La Metherie On Pure 
 Air was thus announced by Professor Crell : " All German 
 physicists have cause to anticipate eagerly the translation 
 which we may shortly expect from such a chemist as 
 Hahnemann, a translation which he has enriched with his 
 own notes."* 
 
 The appearance of the translation was thus welcomed :t 
 " No one will doubt that this wish is realised when we 
 name the translator, who will certainly allow us to do so 
 though he has not given his name himself. It is Dr. 
 Hahnemann, a man who has rendered many services to 
 science both by his own writings on chemistry and by his 
 excellent translations of important foreign works. His 
 services have been already recognised, but deserve to be 
 still more so." 
 
 The translation of Monro's ]\Iateria JMedica, was thus 
 reviewed in Crell's CJiemiscJie Annalen (1792, 11. 183) : "A 
 
 translation of this work was very much wanted Herr 
 
 Hahnemann has added a great many explanatory and sup- 
 plementary remarks which give the translation a great ad- 
 vantage over the original Hahnemann's excellent wine 
 
 test his excellent soluble mercury his suggestion of 
 
 obtaining tartar emetic by crystallization, etc., etc. By the 
 thoroughness of his emendations Herr Hahnemann has 
 deserved anew the gratitude of the class who will read this 
 book." 
 
 * Chcm. Annal., 1790, I., p. 85. f //'. 1792, I., p. 475.
 
 tJie Edinburgh Dispensatory. 41 
 
 After the appearance of the translation of the Ediii- 
 burgh Dispensatory, the Medicin. cJiir. Journal wrote (1799, 
 I. 154): "Hahnemann has displayed much industry in 
 editing this work and translating it into our language. 
 His notes are short and not numerous, but they serve to 
 explain the text from a chemical, pharmaceutical and 
 practical point of view." 
 
 In ll\xie.\din<Xs Journal* we read : " The usefulness of this 
 work has been recognised, and it is enhanced by the 
 translator's notes," 
 
 The Berlinische Jahrbuch der Pharuiacie (1799, p. 141) 
 remarked : " The thorough pharmaceutical knowledge and 
 the industry of Dr. Hahnemann may be recognised in this 
 translation." 
 
 Trommsdorff's Journal der PJiarniacie^ thus criticised it : 
 " Although there is no lack of treatises of this kind in 
 Germany, yet the present work is welcome, especially as 
 the translation is an improvement on the English original 
 on account of the notes by the learned Dr. Hahnemann." 
 
 In 1792 Hahnemann is alluded to in Crell's Annalen 
 (I. 200) as " this celebrated chemist ;" in another place, 
 1793 (11. 124), "this meritorious physician;" reference is 
 also made to his services to materia medica (1793, I. 93). 
 
 Professor Gottling, in the Medic. cJiir. Journal (1794, 
 I. Ill), calls Hahnemann and Gren two men " whom 
 chemistry has to thank for many important discoveries." 
 
 Professor Scherer speaks, in his Journal der CJieniie 
 (1799, II., p. 462), of the " meritorious Hahnemann." 
 
 Professor Gmelin, in a review of the progress of 
 chemistry in the i8th Century,^ mentions (besides those 
 services of Hahnemann to which we have already alluded) 
 his improvements of the apparatus and process for distilling 
 brandy, as well as for the production of soda. 
 
 In reviewing a longer article by Hahnemann on the 
 chemical examination of wine, Trommsdorff calls him the 
 
 * 1798, Vol. v., p. 469. 
 
 t 1799, Vol. v., St. I, p. 227. 
 
 X In Crell's Annalen, i8or, I., pp. 16, 17.
 
 42 Testimonies to his cJiemical knoivledge. 
 
 "esteemed author."* In another place,t when describing 
 the then condition of pharmacy, he writes : " It is un- 
 doubtedly true that pharmacy has made great progress. 
 The efforts of Grcn, Gotthng, Hagen, Hahnemann, Hermb- 
 stadt, Heyer, Westrumb, Wiegleb and others have not 
 failed to bear fruit but, notwithstanding this, its pro- 
 gress is by no means general, but only partial." 
 
 Kraus says, in his MediciniscJies Lexicon, 1826 ;|:: " Hahne- 
 mann is recognised as a good pharmaceutist, and has won 
 for himself unfading laurels by his preparation of mer- 
 curius solubilis and by his treatise on arsenical poisoning, 
 although our knowledge of this subject has since his time 
 been considerably advanced by others." 
 
 Hahnemann's spirit of research and his indefatigable 
 industry also largely contributed both directly and in- 
 directly to the improvement of medicinal agents, which are 
 the foundation of the art of medicine. But all these services 
 fade into insignificance when compared with the everlasting 
 fame he has won in the narrower field of medical science. 
 
 HAHNEMANN, AS A THYSICIAN. 
 State of medicine wJien he commenced practice. 
 
 In order to judge of Hahnemann's achievements in the 
 field of medicine, it is necessary to glance at the condition 
 of medicine at the commencement of his career, when no 
 such method of investigation, founded on natural laws, as 
 we have to-day, was as yet in existence. The conceptions 
 of the phenomena presented by the healthy and the sick, 
 were forced into systems, deduced from scanty observations 
 by individual authors, and altered from time to time to 
 suit the views of the period and new discoveries by them. 
 
 Thus, L.Hoffmann (172 i-i 807), found that most diseases 
 were produced by impure and acid humours which were to 
 be expelled from the body, or ameliorated by " antiseptic " 
 or "dulcifying" remedies. 
 
 * Jour, der Pharinacie, 1794, II., 48. 
 
 t lb., 1795, II., St. 2, p. 25. 
 
 % Gottingen, 1826, 2nd edit., p. 404.
 
 Medical theories of the period. 43 
 
 Stoll (1742-1788) taught that diseases arose from the in- 
 fluence of a predominant constitution which was deter- 
 mined " by the prevaiHng weather and epidemic fevers." 
 In all diseases the physician had to pay the greatest atten- 
 tion to the condition of the " primje viae "; most illnesses 
 resulted from gastric impurities, especially bile. The re- 
 moval of these matters by emetics and purgatives was 
 the principal means resorted to. If signs of bile were 
 absent in the evacuations, in the appearance, and in the 
 taste of the patient, it was a case of latent bile " bilis 
 latens." Purgatives and emetics demonstrated the truth of 
 these theories. At the same time, " latent inflammations " 
 had to be contended against, wherein lay a great danger in 
 many diseases. According to the- testimony of A. F. 
 Hecker,* this doctrine was regarded as one of the most 
 brilliant advances in the medical art, and doctors betook 
 themselves to Vienna from all parts of Europe to learn 
 " the successful Stoll method." 
 
 Another physician writes : -|- " Stoll is the greatest living 
 physician. He stands, as he deserves, in a position of great 
 repute, and all intelligent persons in Vienna are attended 
 by him." 
 
 Kampf (1726-1789) alleged that most diseases have their 
 seat in the abdomen, and are due to " infarcts." " B)- 
 infarctus, I understand an unnatural condition of the 
 bloodvessels, especially of the portal veins and larger 
 bloodvessels, in which they are plugged and distended in 
 various places by ill-concocted, variously degenerated, fluid- 
 bereft, inspissated, viscid, bilious, polypous and coagulated 
 blood, tarrying and eventually sticking in the circulation, 
 or in which the inspissated serum in the blood, in the 
 glands, in the cellular tissue, together with the above- 
 mentioned blood-dregs, collects, corrupts, dries, and takes 
 on various forms of degeneration in the digestive pas- 
 sages " 
 
 * Die Heilkunde aitf iJwen Wegeji, Erfurt and Gotha, 18 19. 
 t Median. Lite7-at. f. prakt. Aerzte, von Schlegel. Leipzig, 178/ 
 XII., p. 99.
 
 44 StolPs Infarctiis. 
 
 " These infarctus spare no age, sex, or temperament ; 
 even infants are not free from them. I can think of very 
 few diseases or accidents which do not arise originally 
 from infarctus." He gives as instances, epilepsy, grey and 
 black cataract, deafness, consumption, abdominal diseases, 
 bladder affections, all kinds of exanthemata, cancer, scurvy, 
 fever, tympanites, dropsy, jaundice, &c." 
 
 Clysters consisting of taraxicum, rad. graminis, saponaria, 
 card, bened., fumaria, marrub. alb., millefol., chamomill., ver- 
 basc, rye- and wheat-bran; to which various "appro- 
 priate " drugs were added, all being made into extracts by 
 means of rain or lime-water, were employed to disperse 
 these infarctus. 
 
 " Without detriment to the health, two to three clysters 
 
 can be taken daily for as many years Often the 
 
 labours of a Hercules are required to cleanse such an 
 astoundingly laden, old, intractable bog, and to overcome 
 the stony, and as it were wedged-in degeneration of the 
 blood."* 
 
 A physician wrote : f " I have treated many sick persons 
 who have taken more than five thousand clysters before 
 they entirely got rid of the infarctus." 
 
 Kampf also recommends his method for prolonging life. 
 He found a great number of followers among physi- 
 cians, who expressed their approbation and gratitude for 
 this discovery. " Here again is an achievement of which 
 
 Germans maybe proud let me offer my heartfelt 
 
 thanks to the author. "| Another§ says : " Kampf s method 
 has too many generally acknowledged advantages ever to 
 lose, at all events, with sensible people, its well-earned re- 
 putation This universally- read book." At the same 
 
 * Joh. Kiimpf, Oberhofrath, erster. Leibarzt, S^z.^fur Acrzte und 
 Kranke bestimmte Abhandlung von einer neuen Methode, die hart- 
 ndckigstcn Kra?ikhcifen, &c., 2nd Aufl., Leipzig, 1786, p. 576. 
 
 t Bei G. W. C. Miiller, Job. Kampf, Abhandl. &c., Leipzig, 1788, 
 p. 86. 
 
 J Median. Literat. von Schlegel. Leipzig, 1785, p. 34. 
 
 § Neiie liio'ar. Nachrichten lilr Aerztc, &c. Halle, 1787, p. 319.
 
 Kdvipf's Clysters. 45- 
 
 time, the number of its mutilated reprints and spurious 
 editions was complained of.* 
 
 Hecker, /. c, testifies that many patients used thousands 
 of such clysters, and the method of treatment by clysters 
 was in much vogue among physicians, patients and even 
 healthy persons, for many years. 
 
 " Stases, stoppages and obstructions " in all manner of 
 organs figured as the chief cause of many diseases, so that 
 a homoeopath could write, many years later, perhaps with a 
 little exaggeration -.f " By the belief in the existence of 
 stoppages, obstructions, &c., we can understand why among 
 ten prescriptions nine contain senna, spirits of wine, dande- 
 lion, rhubarb, sal-ammoniac, mercury, dog's grass and anti- 
 mony ; for these drugs were originally suggested because 
 they were supposed to cleanse the tubes and passages of 
 the human body from their foul accumulations like brooms, 
 scrubbing brushes and clearing rods. Whether the patient 
 be red or pale, fat or thin, consumptive or dropsical, whether 
 he have lost his appetite or suffer from ravenous hunger, 
 be constipated or have diarrhoea, it is all one ; he has obstruc- 
 tions and stoppages, and must be sweated and purged, 
 puked, bled and salivated. If you see a physician 
 pausing in meditation, believe me, if he is not thinking of 
 * inflammation,' he is thinking of ' stasis.' " To illustrate 
 this a well-known writer, Scheidemantel,| is quoted. 
 He says that a student was cured of melancholy through 
 being greatly frightened during a sea voyage by a col- 
 lision between two ships. Explanation : " Perhaps the 
 melancholy student had obstruction of the bowels which 
 was removed when his ship struck against the other, and 
 thereby shook him severely." 
 
 Towards the end of 1790, the system of the Scotchman, 
 John Brown (1736 — 1788), began to spread over Germany. 
 Brown was possessed of great assurance. In his own 
 opinion he first raised medicine to the position of a true 
 
 * Medic. J021J'., von Baldinger, 1787, XL, p. 25. 
 
 t Die AUdopathie, 1834, No. 19. 
 
 X Die Leidenschaftcn ah Heilinittcl bctrachtef., Hildburghausen, 17S7.
 
 46 BrozviCs System of Medicine. 
 
 science to which the name of " the Science of Nature " 
 was soon given. According to this every human being 
 possesses a greater or less degree of irritability. Health 
 depends upon the possession of just the right amount of 
 irritation. Disease is produced either by two much irritation 
 (sthenia) or want of irritation (asthenia). The task of the 
 physician was simply to moderate the excess of irrita- 
 tion, or to strengthen the too weak irritation. Thus 
 all diseases were divided into two classes and also all 
 remedies, these were " sthenic " and " asthenic." In affec- 
 tions depending upon too much strength, " irritation 
 diminishing " drugs were employed, which in the order of 
 their efficiency, were bleeding, cold, emetics, purgatives, 
 diaphoretics. In the asthenic forms of disease, sthenic 
 remedies were employed, which, in the order of their 
 efficiency, were meat, heat, prevention of vomiting, purg- 
 ing and sweating, by meat diet, spices, wine, exercise ; 
 in the more severe cases of disease, volatile stimulants: 
 musk, ammonia, camphor, ether and opium.* Cinchona was 
 first added by the followers of Brown. Knowledge of the 
 structure and functions of the organism was only of minor 
 importance, for everything depended on the irritants and 
 the degree of irritability. " So great," says Brown, " is 
 the simplicity to which medicine can be reduced, that a 
 physician when he comes to the sick-bed will only have 
 to elicit three things. First, whether the disease is 
 general or local ; secondly, if general, whether sthenic or 
 asthenic ; thirdly, in what stage of irritation it is. When 
 he has satisfied himself on these three points, nothing 
 remains but to settle his indications and plan of treat- 
 ment, and carry it out by means of the corresponding 
 I'emedies."! The diagnosis was only of minor importance. 
 Contemporaneously with Brown, the natural philosophy 
 founded by Schelling} made its appearance and quickly 
 
 * Comp. B. ll\rsc\'y&\.,GcsL/iiLhtc dcs Bi-cnai'schcji Systems. Dresden 
 
 and Leipzig, 1846, p. 2>7- 
 f K. .Sprengel, Geschichtc dcr Hcilkundc. Halle, 1828, V. I., p. 455 
 X First edition of his System dcr A'niurphilosop/iie., Jena u. Leipzig- 
 
 1799.
 
 ScJielling and Steffens. 47 
 
 distanced all inferior conceptions. It grappled with and 
 explained all phenomena by the absolute. We may 
 form some conception of its influence on medicine by read- 
 ing the following sentences : " The mouth masticates and 
 the stomach digests by the same process of vegetation ; 
 the difference of these phenomena is only the result of 
 their different mechanism." " Living matter is a print or 
 picture of absolute nature ; and, again, absolute nature her- 
 self is absolute life, and the prototype of the organism." 
 " Life is cause ; phenomenon and existence are its results. 
 Life as cause is immortal, for immortal cause is life." 
 " Life is the infinite, disease the finite, and the cure is to 
 be considered as the synthesis of both (the third power)." 
 " Contagion is the magnetic moment of the dynamic pro- 
 cess reigning in the organism." After the statement that 
 the essence lay in the conception of the magnet, " which 
 is connected with the identical pole," it is further said : 
 " Only in this way do we get a true idea of contagion, 
 and come to a true explanation of this long misunder- 
 stood process."''* 
 
 One of the most prominent natural philosophers was 
 Henrich Steffens, " a deep and scientific thinker."-f- \\\ 
 Oken's periodical, his (1822, p. 123), he is put on a 
 level with Aristotle, Humboldt, Goethe, Treviranus, Oken, 
 and others. He wrote a book, Elements of Natural 
 Philosophy, Berlin, 1806. This work was "a spring- 
 out of which arose a series of philosophical works," and 
 gave the following information, pages 189- 191 : " Feeling is 
 the identity of external oscillation and internal being, con- 
 sequently, identity of the nervous and muscular systems. 
 Unity of the internal factor and difference of the external 
 gives sensation ; difference of the internal and unity of the 
 external sensation of warmth. 
 
 " Hearing is the identity of the relative anorganic of the 
 organization and its internal being ; consequently, identit}- 
 of the nervous and osseous systems. 
 
 " Hunger is internal tension of the assimilation under 
 
 Comp. Hecker, Lc. f Hecker's Annalen, II., p. y-^-^.
 
 48 Influence of Natural PJiilosopJiy. 
 
 the influence of the mass opposed to external, hence the 
 feehng of hunger at the cardiac orifice of the stomach." 
 
 And further, page i86 : " Animahzation is identical with 
 the internal becoming objectiv'e. The manifestation of the 
 internal is sensation. There is no animahzation without 
 sensation. Sensation under the influence of the universal 
 is feeling ; sensation under the influence of individuality is 
 consciousness." 
 
 Steffens dedicated his work to the " Delphic Temple of 
 Higher Poetry," and in fact most of these persons moved 
 almost entirely in the higher regions of the clouds, and the 
 human being with whom their investigations had to do 
 remained on the earth, but they up there enjoyed a 
 heavenly existence. They were far above all controversy. 
 "True natural philosophy," says Steffens, "puts an end to all 
 contradiction and all controversy of opinions and hypothe- 
 ses with other opinions and hypotheses, and can, therefore, 
 have no opponent." " A true saying," remarks a critic* 
 True natural philosophy knew everything and explained 
 everything. "Natural philosophy has the priority of know- 
 ledge, for it is the knowledge of knowledge, and must be 
 regarded as potentized knowledge."! 
 
 It is astonishing the assurance with which every pheno- 
 menon was explained without hesitation, " Magnetism is 
 the conversion of oxygen and hydrogen into carbon and 
 nitrogen," says Steffens, page 91, and Schelling knew| that 
 oxygen is the principle of electricity. 
 
 The whirligig of Natural Philosophy took possession of 
 the heads of the majority of German savants and the most 
 prominent physicians. Very few escaped it, as Hufeland, 
 A. V. Humboldt, Blumenbach, Treviranus, Sommering, We- 
 dekind. There was, however, no system which could be 
 generally followed. There were, indeed, men who knew the 
 direction the medical accessory sciences should take, but 
 they could not obtain a hearing because they were suffering 
 from the spirit of the age. 
 
 * Heckers Amialen^ II., p. 444. f Steffens, /.r., p. 16. 
 
 % L.c, p. 24S.
 
 spontaneous Covibustion. 49 
 
 Rei], in his doctrine of fevers and in his Archiv fiir 
 Physiologie, brought prominently forward the doctrine that 
 disease was not to be conceived as a foreign thing, but 
 depended upon the altered form and composition of the 
 animal substance ; health also depended upon certain rules 
 of form and composition. Disease was departure from 
 normal form and composition, that is, anatomical and 
 chemical change. 
 
 In what condition was physiological chemistry in those 
 days ? To what conclusions did its appreciation lead ? 
 Let us take an instance from the advanced year 1810 : 
 About this time a book which had newly appeared entitled 
 The Complete Description and Exaininaiiofi of Sponta- 
 neous Combustion was reviewed in Hecker's Annalen.^ 
 "This disease manifests itself," so it says, "by the sudden 
 ignition of the human organism and its combustion with 
 the appearance of flames, so that only ashes or coal, in one 
 case only a spot of grease remained of the whole body.""f 
 We are chiefly interested in the chemical explanation of 
 this phenomenon as given in the work quoted : 
 
 1. "The whole body of the consumed persons was pene- 
 trated through all its cells by hydrogen gas, at least in 
 sufficient quantities to suffice for its first ignition and the 
 maintenance of the fire." 
 
 2. " An excess of other inflammable matters, as sulphur 
 and phosphorus, was simultaneously present." 
 
 3. " The body, thus in a high degree inflammable, was 
 not ignited by external fire, but by an electric explosion 
 in its interior ; the electric spark quickly permeated the 
 body filled with inflammable matter." 
 
 On this Hecker remarks : " This theory of spontaneous 
 combustion is certainly as satisfactory a one as can be 
 given in the present state of our knowledge and with the 
 imperfectly observed facts." 
 
 * n., p. 547. 
 
 t Comp. Justus Liebig 07t the Spo7ttaneous Combustion of the Humaji 
 Body, Heidelberg, 1850, p. 31. By this work the ghosts of forty-eight 
 spontaneous combustions were laid.
 
 50 Views about the Blood. 
 
 A. von Humboldt with others opposed the " disease- 
 matter " theory. " Disease-matter is really the whole living 
 matter itself, so far as its form and composition are changed 
 and the balance of its elements is disturbed."* Medical 
 men were too impatient to utilise this theory, they w^anted 
 to reap when they had barely finished sowing. The im- 
 mense progress made by chemistry through the discoveries 
 of Lavoisier, especially the newly discovered knowledge of 
 the significance of oxygen, caused researchers to utilise this 
 advance also for medicine. So, according to Humboldt 
 (/.c), want or excess of oxygen is the proximate cause 
 of disease, " because oxygen combines with phosphorus, 
 sulphur, nitrogen, carbon and hydrogen, and produces 
 acids which diminish the energy of the nerves, thereby 
 deranging the functions of the secreting organs." In Hum- 
 boldt's famous work, which was abreast of the knowledge 
 of the day, we read that hydrogen is contained in plumbago 
 and similar views. Although Humboldt opposed the 
 " disease-matter " and " acid-acridities " theories, he never- 
 theless held that " an acid is at work in the production of 
 scrofula," and with Haller discussed the question " whether 
 in convulsions alkaline or acid acridities w^ere irritating the 
 spinal marrow."-f- 
 
 It was indeed very tempting to utilise the great chemical 
 discoveries in the treatment of disease. About the middle 
 of the eighteenth century Haller thus described the blood : 
 " The blood consists of equal parts, is coagulable and all 
 the redder the better the animal is nourished ; in a weak 
 hungry animal it is yellowish. The white sometimes mixed 
 with it generally comes from the chyle." 
 
 In 1789, about thirty years later, J. F. Blumenbach, the 
 famous Gottingen professor, teaches : ^ " Blood is a peculiar 
 fluid of a well-known colour, sometimes lighter, sometimes 
 darker, viscid to the touch and warm, and as it cannot be 
 
 * Versuche uber die gereizte Miiskel und NcrZ'C7ifaser 7icbst Vermu- 
 thungen ilber dc7t chcin. Process dcs Lebens. Posen and Berlin, 1797, 
 n., p. 359- 
 
 t lb., II., pp. 360 and 379. 
 
 X Anfangsgiimde der Physiologic Vienna, 1789, § 6.
 
 CJieniical treatment of Disease. 5 1 
 
 imitated by art, it must be considered as one of the secrets 
 of nature." In all this time no progress seemed to have 
 been made. In 1803 this was taught:* "Blood consists of 
 nine ingredients : odoriferous matter,fibrinous parts, albumen, 
 
 sulphur, gelatine, iron, potash, soda, and lastly water 
 
 the elements of the blood are : hydrogen, carbon, potas- 
 sium, chlorine, phosphorus, sulphur, oxygen, calcium and 
 iron." 
 
 Thus physiological chemistry had made great progress, 
 and this excited so much admiration that an attempt was 
 made to utilise these discoveries. Garnett recommended 
 sulphuret of potash, sulphate of lime and wood charcoal, in 
 consumption. The sulphuret of potash produced sul- 
 phuretted hydrogen, the hydrogen of this combined with 
 the oxygen of the blood and the inflammatory action of 
 the latter was paralysed. J. J. Busch recommends sul- 
 phur and hepar sulphuris in pulmonary consumption ; this 
 produced " a mephitic vapour " in the ulcerated lung, and 
 thereby impeded the destructive action of the oxygen. 
 Girtanner, of Gottingen, followed in the wake of the Eng- 
 lishman Beddoes, in whose method of treatment various 
 gases, nitrogen, hydrogen, &c., were inhaled by means of 
 a special apparatus (an improvement of Menzies's) as a 
 remedy for phthisis, the process being minutely described 
 and illustrated in Hufeland's Journal, 1795, I., p. 199. 
 Others prescribed chlorate of potash in scurvy, syphilis and 
 nervous fever, in order that the oxygen of this salt might 
 be liberated in the body. Alkalies were recommended in 
 dysentery to extinguish the " septic acids ;" carbonate of 
 potash was indicated in puerperal fever to neutralise the 
 " excessive acidity " which was the cause of this complaint. 
 In diabetes, oxygen preponderated ; " all the fluids of the 
 body were saturated with oxygen." Hence the good effects 
 of an animal diet, of milk, of meat, of sulphuretted hy- 
 drogen and of limewater. 
 
 * F. Kapp, System. Darstellung dcr dierch die neuere Cheinie in der 
 Heilkunde beiuirkten Vcrdnderungeti und Verbesserungen. Hof, 1805, 
 P- 31-
 
 52 Nature of Electricity. 
 
 Reich considered oxygen the only sure remedy for the 
 febrile state, which he considered dependent upon the un- 
 due development and accumulation of nitrogen, carbon, 
 hydrogen, sulphur, and phosphorus. He was professor of 
 medicine in Erlangen and Berlin ; in various journals, and 
 in a special work,* he recommended a secret remedy for 
 fever which he would only reveal for a large sum of money. 
 This remedy would in a short time, or even at once, cut 
 short a fever. A committee of four doctors instituted ex- 
 periments in the Berlin Charite Hospital, and considered 
 its action proved in a number of cases. After the report of 
 this commission the professor was decreed " an annual 
 pension of 500 thalers, free of tax and stamp duty" by the 
 King of Prussia for the publication of his secret ; in case of 
 his death half of it went to his widow.! This became 
 known before the great remedy against fever was revealed 
 and it was eagerly awaited. Curiosity was at length 
 gratified in the autumn of 1800, It consisted of sulphuric 
 and muriatic acid ; nitric acid was also good in certain 
 conditions.! 
 
 Baumes, Girtanner and other others founded a system. 
 Most diseases were explained and cured in a chemical 
 way. They arose from excess or want of oxygen, hy- 
 drogen, nitrogen and phosphorus. Accordingly there were 
 " oxygenous " remedies : — antimony, mercury, iron, lead, 
 gold, silver, cinchona, acids, camphor, ether, alcohol, nar- 
 cotics — " hydrogenous " remedies : oleagineous bodies, se- 
 dentary habits, fat meat, fish — " nitrogenous " remedies : 
 meat, and " deoxidizing " agents ; lastly, " phosphoric " re- 
 medies : fish, phosphates of lime and soda, phosphoric acid. 
 
 Electricity was treated in a similar manner. According 
 to Schelling, as has been said, oxygen was " the principle of 
 electricity." Juch was quite certain that oxygen played the 
 chief role in electricity, while Erxleben considered it to con- 
 
 * G. C. Reich, Beschreibitng der Diit set7ien 7ieuen Mittd behandelten 
 Krcmkheitsfdlle. Niirnberg, 1800. 
 
 t Med. Chir. Ztg. Salzburg, 1800, III., 315. 
 X lb., 1799, IV., 189 ; 1800, I., 25, and IV. 292.J
 
 Instability of Medical TJieoTies. 53 
 
 sist of oxygen, hydrogen and heat. Lciner beHcved it to 
 be composed of hydrogen and oxygen.* 
 
 These various views and systems, and other ones besides, 
 reigned almost simultaneously in Germany at the end 
 of the last and the beginning of this century. And even 
 if one theory was superseded by another, still something of 
 each stuck in people's heads. Each tried to discover what 
 best suited his views. Many went over from one theory to 
 another. Wedekind,t ex-professor of clinical medicine at 
 Mainz, thus pictures a doctor of that period : " I know a 
 physician who at one time adopted the heating and 
 sweating method. How much essentia alexipharmica, mis- 
 tura simplex and composita Stahlii did he not daily pre- 
 scribe ! He was also a great partisan of bleeding, and I do 
 not doubt that he often by it counteracted the baneful 
 effects of his heating remedies and vice versa. But the 
 triumvirate of Boerhaave, Stahl and Fr. Hoffmann was 
 drawing to an end. Tissot had become the leading autho- 
 rity. Our practitioner now advocated the cooling method. 
 Tamarinds, cream of tartar, saltpetre, oxymel, and barley- 
 water were his favourite remedies. He forbade healthy 
 people to smoke, because Tissot had asserted that all to- 
 bacco-smokers must die in tJieir prime of apoplexy. 
 
 " When Stoll became the leading authority among physi- 
 cians, we find tartar emetic and ipecac, in most of their pre- 
 scriptions. They were, of course, devoted to the administra- 
 tion of clysters when Kampf wasin vogue. C. L. Hoffmann 
 was called to occupy the place that had been held by this 
 physician. Accustomed to follow the spirit of the age, they 
 now exaggerated what this great thinker taught concerning 
 antiseptic remedies. How can fashionable practitioners 
 understand the meaning of an author ? Enough, our phy- 
 sicians did not observe how the functions of their patients 
 were carried on, in order to ascertain how far these were in- 
 jurious or advantageous to the maintenance of the body, 
 but they proceeded forthwith to cure every disease by means 
 of antiseptics. A few years later Brown became dictator 
 
 * Comp. Kapp. I.e. 
 
 t Ueber den Werth dcr Heilkimde. Darmstadt, 18 12, p. 212.
 
 54 Remedies made to fit Theories. 
 
 in medicine, and ' Methodism ' ruled the fashion. Our 
 practitioners now called those physicians who devoted them- 
 selves to remedy vices in the fluids of the body, or to 
 procure evacuation of depraved humors, murderers ; for 
 to believe in such vices showed the greatest ignorance. 
 Their practice was summed up in four words — sthenia, as- 
 thenia, sthenic influence, asthenic vices. Very few of their 
 prescriptions were without naptha, laudanum, ether, musk, 
 or sal-ammoniac. They were now as much in favour of wine, 
 brandy, and meat diet, as they had been against them at 
 the time when Tissot was the ruling deity. Now they re- 
 turned to purging in order to cure local affections, and tried 
 to unite all these different modes of treatment. Therefore, 
 they now refused to be called Brownians, and insisted upon 
 being called eclectics." 
 
 The therapeutic text-books for students and physicians 
 were as variously coloured as maps. " Ontology," the idea 
 that a disease is a foreign thing carrying on its evil ends 
 in the system, has met with wide acceptance from the days 
 of Galen. Hence the evacuant method was supreme. 
 Further, there was a stimulating, a strengthening, a weaken- 
 ing, a softening, an antagonistic, a restorative (not to be 
 confounded with the strengthening), an astringent which 
 increased the cohesion, a relaxing which diminished the 
 cohesion, a derivative and a resolving method, and also a 
 specific, antimiasmatic, antiseptic and antigastric method.* 
 
 The various remedies were fitted on to these methods ; 
 thus there were demulcent, diluent, dissolving, inspissat- 
 ing, blood-cleansing, cooling, evacuating and expectorant, 
 &c., drugs. To order a simple remedy was not the custom. 
 We still find the idea that it is necessary that a prescription 
 should contain a basis, a constituens, an adjuvans, a 
 corrigens and a dirigens. Complex prescriptions contain- 
 ing 8, lo, or more drugs were in daily use. There were so- 
 called " magistral-formulas," complex mixtures composed 
 by " authorities " as remedies for certain diseases, and 
 
 * See Hufeland, System der prakt. Heilkunde. Jena, iSiS, and 
 others.
 
 Antiphlogistic Treatment. 55 
 
 sanctioned by " experience." They were kept ready made 
 by the apothecaries, and no one dared to alter them. 
 
 These prescriptions were changed every day in acute 
 diseases, in chronic every two or three days, as the cases 
 reported in the medical journals show ; and what incredible 
 quantities of drugs were poured into the sick man's body ! 
 All the various systems out-did one another in this 
 practice. 
 
 The Brownians, e.g., gave in typhus fever, together with 
 other remedies, 10 — 12 drops of opium every quarter of 
 an hour till sleep was induced, when the dose was to be 
 doubled, and was then to be gradually increased " till the 
 health of the patient could be maintained by less powerful 
 stimulants." In "indirect debility," 150 drops of laudanum, 
 which means 0.70 grammes of pure opium, were to be given 
 at once, and in the sequel the necessary doses gradually 
 diminished till the desired result was attained. In difficult 
 labours, the ordinary cause of which was recognised to be 
 "weakness," the parturient woman, according to Brown, 
 was to be supported with wine, and if the labour was 
 tedious and difficult, with opium. Opium (later also 
 cinchona) was with this school the best remedy in all 
 diseases depending on weakness. There were physicians 
 who, according to their own statement, prescribed several 
 pounds of pure opium in the year, " Thousands of 
 sick persons, and among them the most hopeful young 
 subjects, were sacrificed to the rage for opium," as Hufeland 
 said later.* 
 
 Similar results were produced by the " antiphlogistic 
 method," which was employed by many physicians in 
 inflammations and inflammatory fevers. Bleeding, salt- 
 petre, calomel in large doses till the teeth were loosened, 
 and energetic salivation were the " matadors " of the anti- 
 phlogistic school, supplemented often by evacuating agents, 
 such as emetics and purgatives. Many physicians troubled 
 themselves little about the local affection in " general de- 
 bility;" for this they prescribed simply iron, cinchona, and 
 
 * Hufeland's/tf?,tr«., XXXII., St. 2, p. 16.
 
 56 Thcrapaitic Confusion. 
 
 a number of other bitter drugs. There are few diseases in the 
 treatment of which one can say that the physicians of that 
 day did no harm. 
 
 Pathological anatomy was little cultivated in Germany. 
 The Brownians did not require it for their therapeutics. 
 Those among the remainder who relied upon the results of 
 post mortem examinations allowed themselves to be misled 
 by crude conceptions. If they found congestion of blood 
 in the organs, or even mortification, this confirmed the in- 
 dication for bleeding and the other antiphlogistic means of 
 treatment. Accumulations of bile, depraved humours and 
 mucus, indicated the employment of evacuating agents. 
 Exudations required derivatives, &c. 
 
 Did physicians feel satisfied wath such a condition of 
 the healing art? Most seemed satisfied with themselves. 
 There were, however, severe critics who were not much 
 better hands at treatment than the others. Marcus Herz, 
 for instance, 1795 (in Hufeland's Jotinml); Girtanner, 
 1798;* Wedekind, 1812 (I.e.); Kieser, 1819,! and others. 
 Girtanner, who helped to complete the confusion by spread- 
 ing the Brownian and chemical theories, exclaims : "As the 
 healing art has no fixed principles, as nothing is demon- 
 strated clearly in it, as there is little certain and reliable 
 experience in it, every physician has the right to follow 
 his own opinion. When there is no question of real know- 
 ledge, where everyone is only guessing, one opinion is as 
 good as another. In the dense Egyptian darkness of 
 ignorance in which physicians are groping their way, 
 not even the faintest ray of light has penetrated by 
 means of which they can steer their course, I don't care 
 if anyone feels offended by what I say. My object is 
 not to give offence, but to maintain the truth. If any 
 practitioner is not satisfied with my opinions, let him 
 examine his own conscience and ascertain of how many 
 medical truths he is certain. He who can point out to me 
 certainty in medicine may throw the first stone at me." 
 
 * Ausfiihrliche Darstelliing des Browiischen Systems. Gottingen, 
 1798, II., pp. 608 — 610. 
 t System der Mediciii. 1819.
 
 Professional Courtesies. 57 
 
 These critics, however, did not themselves see the deeper 
 lying causes of this confusion. Physicians did not know 
 how to observe. Instead of collecting only facts and draw- 
 ing no further inferences from them than they warranted, 
 they fastened upon single observations, made comparisons, 
 created theories, and cooked the facts so as to suit these 
 theories. The science of natural philosophy lent these 
 speculations wings, and they were raised completely out of 
 the regions of actuality into the blue ether. 
 
 At the same time with the majority of physicians, the 
 desire for knowledge was very limited. Many complaints 
 were made of this. Professor Baldinger lamented that 
 not only many physicians, but even many professors 
 showed little zeal for study. " I know one professor of 
 medicine, who will not admit more then nineteen books 
 into his library. If a twentieth volume were dedicated to 
 him, and sent to him carriage paid, bound in morocco, 
 he at once sells it to the library of his university."* 
 Of universities, indeed, there was no dearth ; at the end of 
 the last and in the first decade of the present century 
 there were not less than 40 universities where German was 
 the language spoken, among which, however, only a part 
 were able to provide their medical courses with clinical 
 instruction. 
 
 The state of professional amenity corresponded to the con- 
 dition of medical knowledge. "A savage partisan spirit," 
 writes Professor Roose, in i8o3,t "has taken possession 
 of many minds and seems to be spreading universally. 
 Physicians split into sects, every one of which embitters the 
 others by violent and often unfounded contradiction, and so 
 prevents all possibility of doing good. Dogmatism and a 
 persecuting spirit are becoming commoner and commoner 
 among physicians, and they are only distinguished from the 
 dogmatism and persecution of enraged religious sects of 
 former times by being fortunately powerless to arm the 
 secular authorities with fire and sword arainst their adver- 
 
 * Medic. Journ. v. Baldinger, 1790, St. 23, p. 16. 
 t Horn's Arckiv f. med. Erf., III., p. i.
 
 58 QiLar ill's influence on Hahnemann. 
 
 sarics. If the spirit of the age permitted the establishment 
 of a revealed medical art with us as with the Asiatics, 
 there would undoubtedly be a Catholic and a Protestant 
 confession, and there would not be wanting either a pope for 
 the one or a chief pastor for the other." 
 
 The more uncertain a physician feels of his own skill the 
 more loudly he calls to the State for assistance against the 
 quack and charlatan. It was so in those days. Wedekind 
 {I.e., p. 38) describes a debate among physicians who es- 
 poused the reigning opinions ; one of them shouted out : 
 " The scientific physician will be ruined unless he is 
 favoured in every way by the Government." 
 
 A sad condition for the said " science " to be in, but 
 which accounts for the embittered disputes related in the 
 course of this work. 
 
 HaJineinanrCs Services to Medicine. 
 
 What instruction had Hahnemann in the art of medicine? 
 It cannot be proved that any physician exercised a special 
 influence over him and gave him a particular bent. He 
 himself indeed speaks with great reverence of Quarin. He 
 writes, in 1791, "I owe to him whatever there is of physi- 
 cian in me." It nevertheless seems as if the feeling of a 
 debt of gratitude to Quarin for favours received (see below) 
 was not without influence in inducing him to make this 
 statement. Freiherr von Quarin, born in 1733, was body 
 physician to Maria Theresa and the Emperor Joseph ; he 
 filled six times the post of rector of the university of 
 Vienna, He died in 1812 of "debility." His medical works 
 did not meet with general acceptance among the pro- 
 fession.* Several of his worksf exist, which will well repay 
 
 * " Under other auspices the General Hospital of Vienna would 
 gain more," was said of Quarin in the Medic. Litteratiir fiir prakt. 
 Aerzte, von Schlegel. Leipzig, 1787, XII., p. 99. 
 
 f Heibnetliodc der Entzilndiingen. Aus d. Lat. von J. Zadig de 
 Metza, Copenhagen, 1776. Hcilmethodc der Fiebe?: Aus d. Lat. vom 
 Vorigen, Copenhagen, 1777. Aiiiniadversioncs practices in diversos 
 vio7'bos^ II. vols., Vienna, 17S6. Praktische Bemerkimgenueberversch. 
 Krankheiten. Aus d. Lat., Vienna. Dc curandis febribus et injlam-
 
 Hahnemann's first Medical Work. 59 
 
 careful study if we wish to decide how far Ouarin's influence 
 over Hahnemann extended. That Ouarin was an advocate 
 of bleeding till the day of his death (1812) appears certain. 
 
 The first considerable medical work of Hahnemann ap- 
 peared in 1784, Guide to the Radical Ctire of Old Sores 
 and Fold UlcersT* Old ulcers of the leg and fistula; were 
 specially meant. In the preface he says : — 
 
 The majority of physicians would have nothing to do with them, 
 but left them to the bath man, the shepherd and the hangman, more 
 from ignorance than disgust. The fame of practising such heroic 
 treatment smells much worse than the foetid discharge. 
 
 The mode of treatment of ordinary physicians and 
 surgeons consisted in " purification of the blood," bleeding, 
 cupping, sweating and purging. The chief external 
 remedies used were the lead preparations, especially lead 
 ointments and plasters. Hahnemann even when a young 
 physician seems to have been unaffected by the prevalent 
 belief in authority. 
 
 The finishing stroke to the treatment of such cases is generally 
 given by old wives, the hangman, the farrier, the shepherd and death. 
 For all that I am not too proud to confess that horse and cow doctors 
 are frequently more successful, that is to say, more skilful in curing 
 old sores than the most learned professor and member of all the 
 academies. Let this not be denounced as mere empiricism ; I would 
 like to possess their workmanlike expedients which are founded on 
 experience, often, it is true, gained in the treatment of animals, but 
 which I would willingly exchange for many medical folios, if they 
 were to be had at that price. But, on the other hand, far be it from 
 me to draw from them general rules for my treatment or to prefer 
 irrational quackery to the well-considered medical theories deduced 
 from the observations and experience of illustrious and honest men. 
 I know the limits of both. 
 
 The want of any principle for the discovery of the 
 curative powers of drugs was even then a cause of com- 
 plaint with him. 
 
 Thus much, however, is true, and it may make us more modest, 
 that almost all our knowledge of the curative powers of simple and 
 
 inationibus^ Vienna, 1786. Ueber den Nutzen und Schadcn der In- 
 secten. Ueber die VerscJiiedenheit der Salzeit.iJirenGebraucJi. Versuche 
 tceber die Ciciita virosa. 
 
 * Translated in Brit. Jour, of Hom.^ XLII., p. loi, et seq.
 
 6o His love of Air and Exercise. 
 
 natural as well as artificial substances is mainly derived from the rude 
 and automatic procedures of the common people, and that the wise 
 physician often draws conclusions from the effects of the so-called 
 domestic remedies which are of inestimable importance to him, and 
 their value leads him to adopt simple natural means to the great ad- 
 vantage of his patients. I will spare my readers proofs of this. 
 
 In pages 43 and 180, he alludes to several shepherds 
 and quacks who were thoroughly rational and obtained 
 good results. If we read this work we shall in many 
 cases see Hahnemann's independent mode of excogitat- 
 ing medical subjects. Naturally he still adhered to the 
 old treatment. In women about the climacteric he still 
 recommended bleeding, as he did in fever under certain 
 circumstances and with caution (p. 79); he, however, blames 
 the usual excessive blood-letting, and commends the action 
 of cinchona in fever "even in severe cases" (p. 69). He was 
 a great enemy to coffee (p. ']%^, but a great advocate of 
 exercise and open air, and also of the beneficial action of 
 change of climate and residence at the seaside, all things 
 which were then little spoken of in medical works. 
 
 Next to nourishment, exercise is what is most important for the 
 animal machine, by it the clockwork is wound up. These delicate 
 creatures should not be confined to needlework, nor allowed to loiter 
 over the toilet table, to play cards, to pay tedious visits or to read 
 enervating books, whereby they would be reduced to the condition of 
 colourless plants grown in a cellar. Exercise and wholesome air alone 
 suffice to determine all the juices of our body to their proper place, 
 compel the excretory organs to throw off their accumulated moisture, 
 give strength to the muscles, communicate to the blood its highest 
 degree of redness, attenuate the humours so that they can readily 
 penetrate the remotest capillary vessels, strengthen the heart's beats, 
 establish healthy digestion, and are the best means for obtaining 
 repose and sleep, whereby refreshment and renewal of the vital spirits 
 are secured (p. 76). 
 
 Strengthening diet, wholesome air and exercise, together with 
 amusement to the mind, are indispensable, and everyone knows their 
 power and can employ them. Nourishment suited to the body in 
 appropriate quantity is the only thing required to ensure healthy 
 digestion and to eliminate the bad juices from the primie viae ; exercise 
 promotes the appetite, strengthens the digestion, and better than all 
 purgatives expels the excess of evil humours by the natural outlets of 
 the body every movement of the limbs conduces to the strengthening 
 of the circulation of the blood and to the completeness of the assimi- 
 lation of the nutritive fluids — there can be no health without exercise.
 
 The first teacher of Hygiene. 6l 
 
 Where is the remedy that can more agreeably and more certainly 
 remove the decomposing ferment in our blood-vessels that always 
 tends to destroy our machine than pure air ? With every breath we 
 draw a quantity of it into our lungs, its purest etherial part, the source 
 of our corporeal heat, penetrates by means of the exhalent vessels of 
 the innumerable arteries of these organs into the mass of the blood 
 and expels the unwholesome spoilt air, the air we expire. It is only 
 in the pure open air that we feel refreshed by breathing ; in cellars 
 and close rooms full of living creatures we become weak, faint and 
 die, often in a few hours if the air is much spoilt by the breath of 
 many persons. These different effects of the air we breathe convince 
 us that life and health are not to be expected without pure air (p. 94). 
 
 Further on he discusses the habits of life, the occupation, 
 the division of the day and the conditions of the dwellings 
 in a short, concise and convincing manner. How seldom 
 was hygiene considered in a therapeutic work in those 
 days ? How many books on therapeutics were written 
 which contained no mention of hygiene ! We do not even 
 meet with the zvord hygiene in its present sense. There 
 were as yet no precautions taken for preserving health. If 
 we consult Hufeland's Journal, which was founded 1 1 years 
 later, and in which the most eminent practitioners wrote, we 
 shall have to search through all its numbers till the year 
 1830 to be able to extract as much concerning hygiene in 
 several decennia of this much later period as Hahnemann has 
 scattered through his work of 192 small octavo pages on a 
 surgical complaint. Even in the year 1828, the allopaths 
 were reproached by an opponent of Hahnemann's for the 
 small amount of trouble they gave themselves about these 
 important matters compared with him. There were very 
 few exceptions, as, for instance, Hufeland, as his Macro- 
 hiotik, which appeared 12 years later (1796), shows, though 
 we see from his neglect of diet and hygienic measures in 
 his Journal that he had not grasped their importance. 
 Hahnemann prescribes exactly what should be the diet and 
 occupation, the position of the sitting and bedrooms, and 
 frequency of the renewal of their air (p. 98, et seq.). 
 
 Amusement is necessary; I do not approve of solitary forced 
 labour and exercise. Consequently, I always endeavour, whenever 
 possible, to bring my patients into a state of disposition free from care 
 and worry, whereby alone, as I believe, the wearing friction which the
 
 62 Advocacy of cold-water Treatment. 
 
 mind and body exercise on one another in our organism may be 
 lessened. 
 
 Varied, agreeable society, with occasional music, is the best thing 
 for cheering the human soul that is not depressed to the condition of 
 an insensible lump, and even should we meet with persons sunk so 
 low among our patients, they must at first be forced to go into society, 
 just as we force the child to swallow the healing draught. They 
 should even accustom themselves to social converse at the sacrifice of 
 more remunerative occupations, until they acquire a taste for it, espe- 
 cially when morality, temperance, and exercise can be combined with 
 it. How else can we get rid of care or acquire a hopeful view of life 
 except amid a happy throng of our like-minded fellow creatures, 
 amongst whom we can cast off the burdens of life, and mutually 
 bestrew our paths with flowers ? 
 
 The strictest cleanliness in dress and in the whole mode of life 
 must be maintained, along with exercise, open air, and recreation. 
 Cleanliness is the spice of all the operations of life, and without it the 
 most costly dainties and the finest clothes excite only disgust. 
 
 Upon the employment of cold water, which, in spite of 
 the efforts of Hahn (died 1773), was greatly neglected, and 
 for the systematic employment of which there was no 
 enthusiasm, Hahnemann writes at length (pages 108 to 
 126), and gives exact instructions. 
 
 If there is such a thing as a universal remedy, it is undoubtedly 
 water. [The temperature, duration, and time of day of its employment 
 are given in detail.] I can never cease to marvel how our most 
 eminent physicians, when prescribing a strengthening treatment, have 
 been so remiss in laying down precise directions for the use of the cold 
 bath. They content themselves with telling the patient to take a half 
 or a whole bath in the morning and sometimes also in the afternoon. 
 No word respecting the degree of temperature of the water, the exact 
 duration of the bath, and the other particulars concerning it so neces- 
 sary for the patient to know. We cease to wonder that injury to the 
 health is often caused by cold baths, when we consider how very im- 
 properly the cold water may often be used when the physician gives 
 such meagre, maimed and laconic directions respecting its use. 
 
 If a weak, delicate patient remain for hours in snow-water, in order 
 to comply heroically with the loose directions of his eminent physi- 
 cian, it is probable that he will be taken out of it in a fainting state, 
 doubled up with convulsions, struck down by apoplexy, or chilled into 
 a low fever, or perhaps stiff and stark dead. Can we find fault with 
 the useful knife with which the infant wounded itself ; should we not 
 rather blame the negligence of its nurse ? In our directions for the 
 use of powerful remedies we cannot be too precise and explicit :
 
 His treatment of Caries. 63 
 
 patients are only too apt to err on the side of doing less rather than 
 more than we prescribe. 
 
 This want of precision on the part of physicians is the cause of the 
 great prejudice against cold water ; we meet great numbers of people 
 who regard the cold bath as the most pernicious weapon in the 
 medical armamentarium, who dread it more than death. But the rank 
 and file of medical practitioners who slavishly imitate their betters 
 have brought the cold bath into disrepute by their senseless ways of 
 carrying out the careless prescriptions of our Hippocrateses. 
 
 He then proceeds to tell us what unintelligible instruc- 
 tions were usually given by physicians. Hahnemann 
 writes exact directions concerning the conditions of the 
 bath and the frictions, ^c, in and after it. 
 
 When Hahnemann was once convinced of a thing, he 
 enunciated it with the greatest precision, and did not easily 
 allow himself to be turned from it. " I am," he says at the 
 end of this chapter, " borne out by the most extensive ex- 
 perience, and I claim unlimited confidence on this point." 
 
 His medical treatment of ulcers was as follows : — In- 
 ternally he gave in suitable cases decoctions of woods, 
 therefore compound medicines (p. 86), but he also gave the 
 medicines singly, though in large doses. He completely 
 banished the customary lead plaster and ointment. As 
 the local application he used alcohol (p. 44), solution of 
 corrosive sublimate (p. 40, 44, 153, r/i), lunar caustic 
 (p. 148), solution of arsenic — the latter in the proportion of 
 I to 30,000* (p. 149, 181), and balsam of Peruf (p. 149), 
 each remedy singly and in accurately indicated cases. 
 
 Where necessary, he recommends energetic treatment. 
 At page 44 he relates a case of caries of the metatarsal 
 bone of the great toe, with burrowing fistuke and unhealthy 
 pus. " I was called in. I enlarged the wound, dressed it 
 a few days with digestive (a mixture of Peruvian balsam, 
 or balsam of copaiba, with two to three parts of the yolk 
 of eggs), I scraped the carious bone clean out, and removed 
 all the dead part, dressed it with alcohol, and watched the 
 result." Later he applied alternately dressings of corrosive 
 
 * Comp. Kennzeichen der Gufe, &c., p 223. 
 
 t This he repeatedly recommends, 1791. Trans, of Monro, II., p. 
 123.
 
 64 Reception of Jus novel methods. 
 
 sublimate and digestive. Internally he gave tonics, and 
 the patient gradually began to mend. The scraping out of 
 the carious bone is looked upon now-a-days as an achieve- 
 ment of modern surgery. Thus Hahnemann, in his treat- 
 ment of wounds and ulcers, proved himself an excellent 
 surgeon, and was far in advance of his contemporaries. 
 He was not wrong in saying of himself at the conclusion 
 of his book : — 
 
 I cannot be blamed for insisting on such a generally applicable 
 treatment of old malignant ulcers, and in preferring it with certain 
 limitations to all others ; the most careful and extensive experience is 
 on my side. Anyone who has had the opportunity to make so many 
 observations in such cases as I have made, who is actuated by such a 
 desire to do good to his fellow creatures as I feel that I am, who so 
 thoroughly hates the prejudices and prepossessions in favour of the 
 old over the new, who has as little respect for the authority of a great 
 name as I have, and who as zealously endeavours to think and act for 
 himself as I do, will, I imagine, not easily hit on another and better 
 treatment of old ulcers, he will consequently be able to obtain the 
 same excellent results of his efforts as I have obtained, which is the 
 highest reward that a conscientious physician can expect, results 
 which have hardly ever disappointed me, whereas the different treat- 
 ment of others has almost always belied their expectations. 
 
 Baldinger, professor in Jena, Gottingen and Marburg, 
 the instructor of Blumenbach, the }"Ounger Meckel, Reil, 
 &c., thus criticises Hahnemann's book : * " The author has 
 treated his subject very thoroughly and well. He shows 
 how mistaken the previous and most usual treatment has 
 been — and teaches a better. The book is written in such 
 a thoroughly practical manner that we cannot sufficiently 
 hope that it will be widely read." 
 
 The ^^•ork Instructiofis to Surgeons conceTuing the Treat- 
 ment of Venereal Diseases ^''\ which appeared in 1789, re- 
 ceived an equally favourable reception. 
 
 Baldinger writes : ± " This work is profound and clear." 
 Immediately after a work on the same subject by Professor 
 Fritze, of Berlin, is criticised: "This book, like the other 
 one, also contains much that is good. Both authors have 
 
 * Medic. Joiirn. von Baldinger. Gottingen, 1785, p. 23. 
 
 t Translated in Hahnemann's Lesser Writings., pp. i to 187. 
 
 X Med. u. Phys. Joiirn., 1790, St. 14, p. 76.
 
 Appreciation of HaJincinaniis labojirs. 65 
 
 thought for themselves, and written not only profoundl}% 
 but also comprehensively and clearly." 
 
 Kurt Sprengel writes the following criticism : * — 
 
 Hunter's ideas are the foundation of the theoretical part of a very 
 good book by Samuel Hahnemann. He here recommends his mer- 
 curius solubilis, a mild and excellent preparation whose admirable 
 effects have since been verified. The first important writer, who 
 highly commended this remedy, was Joh. Fr. Fritze, Prof in Berlin, in 
 a workf which is good, though it contains little that is new, neverthe- 
 less it has been approved of in foreign countries in its translations. 
 
 Another critic writes : + — 
 
 Our readers will see from the extracts given that this is no ordinary 
 work, but is written with an unusual degree of knowledge, reflection 
 and original thought. The special methods of treatment recom- 
 mended and the maxims laid down deserve trial and attention. 
 
 In the Aledic. cJiir. Zcitimg,\ we read : — 
 
 The book is, however, not merelj' the work of a man of intelligence 
 and learning, but is written with an aphoristic brevity to which the 
 learned medical reader will only find a parallel in Hunter, Swediaur, 
 Andre, &c. It is a book that will be of great use for academical 
 lectures, though the author did not design it for that purpose, &c. 
 
 Soon after A. R. Vetter's book on syphilis appeared : A 
 Nezu Method of Treatment of all Venereal Diseases after 
 Hunter, Girtanner and Hahnemann^ 
 
 The Medic, cliir. Zeitung^i writes concerning his trans- 
 lation of Cullen's Materia Medica : — 
 
 HeiT Hahnemann has made this translation most carefully, in 
 
 spite of the obscurity of the original The comments of the 
 
 translator are generally very learned, and he has also enhanced the 
 value of this important work by his numerous corrections of the 
 author's errors. 
 
 The way in which mental diseases were formerly treated 
 
 * Geschichte der Arziieikimdc. Halle, 1828, V., Part 2, p. 591. 
 
 t Handb. iiber die vener. Krankh. Berlin, 1790. 
 
 X Neue Litterar. Nach7'ic1iten f. Aerste, &c. Halle, 1789, p. 785. 
 
 § Edited by Prof Hartenkeil. Salzburg, 1790, III., p. 345. 
 
 II Vienna, 1793. 
 
 1 1 791, I., pp. 117 and 231.
 
 65 OrtJiodox treat nieni of the Insane. 
 
 (one need not go so far back as Hahnemann's time) is 
 known to every physician. Physicians treated excitable 
 and refractory maniacal patients like wild animals ; it was 
 thought necessary to cow and terrify them. Corporal 
 chastisement and nauseating medicines were ordinary means 
 used. Furious maniacs were strapped down on a hori- 
 zontal board which could be quickly turned on an axis to 
 a vertical position, or put in the so-called rotating chair. 
 " A well fitted up madhouse was, in certain respects, not 
 unlike a torture-chamber," says Westphal* This method 
 of treatment was adopted by Ernest Horn in 1806 in the 
 insane department of the Berlin Charite, then the largest 
 madhouse in Prussia. He also invented the " closed sack," 
 in which maniacs were tied up, and which compelled them, 
 according to Westphal,to remain lying wherever they were 
 placed. " It is shameful to have to confess," says Westphal 
 in 1 8S0, " what a short time has elapsed since the insane 
 were shown to the Sunday visitors of hospitals and work- 
 houses as a kind of sport, and teased in order to amuse the 
 visitors." 
 
 As the treatment of the insane depends upon the state 
 of culture, we shall here quote as an illustration of the 
 degree of refinement of the physicians of that day, some 
 remarks from the Medicinische Bibliothek of the celebrated 
 Gottingen professor, J. Fr. Blumenbach. He is speaking of 
 a work on medical jurisprudence of repute in which it is 
 stated that in Baden a parricide could not be brought to 
 confess because torture had been abolished. 
 
 The critic thereupon remarks! (in the year 17S9) : — 
 The most innocuous and at the same time the most efficacious 
 mode of torture which can be retained without hesitation is, in our 
 opinion, to apply only such a degree of torture to the accused as will 
 set up a slight traumatic fever, and, after this has been set up, to 
 threaten him with it again. The depression of mind, the loss of self- 
 control, produced by the traumatic fever, will bring even the most 
 hardened ruffian to confess. We have more than once found in 
 dealings with criminals, that men who are able to support a severe 
 first application of torture, if they are again tortured after a few days 
 
 * Psychiatrie ujid psychiatrischcr Unicrricht. Berlin, 1880, 
 t Vol. III., St. 2, p. 282.
 
 HaJineniann's treaiment of the Insane. 6"/ 
 
 when suffering from traumatic fever, become quite faint-hearted and 
 spiritless and they confess everything. 
 
 Hahnemann's principle in his treatment of insanity was 
 this : "I never allow an insane person to be punished either 
 by blows or any other kind of corporal chastisement, be- 
 cause there is no punishment where there is no responsi- 
 bility, and because these sufferers deserve only pity and are 
 always rendered worse by such rough treatment and never 
 improved."* Retreated and cured in this way in 1792, the 
 Chancellery Secretary Klockenbring of Hanover, a man well 
 known to literature, who had become deranged. After his 
 complete cure from madness this sufferer showed his de- 
 liverer, " often with tears in his eyes, the marks of the blows 
 and stripes his former keepers had employed to keep him 
 in order." 
 
 Hahnemann, therefore, was a long way ahead of his con- 
 temporaries in the treatment of the insane. That he at first 
 employed bleeding is natural enough, but we alwaj^s see him 
 apply it cautiously, and even as early as 1784 he contended, 
 as has been shown, against excessive bleeding. In 1832, 
 Hahnemann writes, in a letter to M. Muller,-f- that he had 
 given up bleeding, emetics and purging more than thirty 
 years ago. He still bled in 1797, as appears from a paper 
 in Hufeland's JournalX and in 1800 he was not an absolute 
 opponent of it. " In acute sthenic maladies, bleeding and 
 the removal of all kinds of irritants do more good than 
 watery drinks." § 
 
 Some indications of the treatment resorted to in typhus 
 or nervous fever in those days have already been given. Let 
 us hear one of the greatest physicians of the time, J. P. Frank, 
 on the subject, in his work De Ciirandis Homimuii Morbis, 
 which was completed in 1821 :|| "We should be cautious 
 about blood-letting, but ' an inflammatory nervous fever ' 
 
 * Deutsche Monatschrift^YQhr\\axy,i7()6. Lesser fF;7Vz>7^i',p.293,note. 
 
 t M. Miiller, Zur Geschichte der Homdopathie. Leipzig, 1837, p. 31- 
 
 X Lesser Writings^ p. y]^,. 
 
 § Arzneiscliatz^ aus dem Engl, tibers. von Hahnemann. Leipzig, 
 1800, p. 171. 
 
 II Translated in 1832 by Sobernheim, with commendatory preface 
 by Hufeland.
 
 68 Halinemann's early tjxatment of TypJioid Fever. 
 
 is a very different matter." " When by venesection we have 
 once succeeded in reducing the complaint to a simple 
 nervous fever." " In gastric nervous fever we must give 
 emetics, because otherwise obstinate diarrhoea is apt to set 
 
 in towards the end of the illness." "Indeed, sometimes 
 
 an emetic given even at a later stage is of service." Then 
 comes a chapter on " the treatment of symptoms." For 
 each single symptom there is a different remedy. For 
 diarrhoea : " China, canella, red wine, calumba, contrayerva, 
 catechu, alum, fresh milk, theriac (a brew containing 40 to 
 60 drugs and 0.25 parts of opium to every 30 parts of fluid), 
 and diascordium, introduced by the mouth or the anus." 
 " For violent abdominal pains following true inflammation, 
 general or local bleeding," besides blisters, baths, " fomenta- 
 tions, anodynes and repeated enemata." In " putrefying 
 crudities" in the bowels: tamarinds, rhubarb and cinchona. 
 In "spastic" affections of the brain : wine and opium; but for 
 congestive cerebral affections : " leeches and cupping in the 
 region of the temples and occiput or behind the ears." " In 
 profuse, purely symptomatic hcemorrhages : cinchona and 
 alum, externally and internall}-, mineral acids with cold 
 water, fomentations of snow or ice, and also sometimes wine 
 and opium." Imagine a medical man sitting with the book 
 of this great authority before him, a book which was trans- 
 lated in 1832 with a commendatory preface by Hufeland, 
 as though it were something ver}- excellent. What pre- 
 scriptions would result from such instruction ? 
 
 Concerning Hahnemann's treatment of typhoid fever we 
 learn the following in the year 1790 — that is thirty or forty 
 years earlier :* " In nervous fever (the symptoms of which 
 Hahnemann describes minutely), antiphlogistic remedies — 
 refrigerating and laxative salts, water}- drinks, and bleeding 
 act as poisons. Emetics and blisters do harm. Bark and 
 strong wine in large quantities, I have seldom found to 
 fail if I have been called in early enough." 
 
 Besides repose of body and mind, he orders more espe- 
 ciall}- fresh air. At page 126, he repeats that in nervous 
 
 * Translation of Cullen, II., pp. 125, 267.
 
 Hahnemann's early viezvs on Itch. 6g 
 
 fever cinchona and wine are " the only good remedies," and 
 on page 267 he again speaks of the benefit of bark in large 
 doses with wine, and against the highly commended and 
 usually employed opium. 
 
 Brown and his treatment, which reminds one of Hahne- 
 mann's, were at that time not known in Germany. Hufe- 
 land* is of opinion that in 1792 " neither he nor anyone else 
 in Germany had seen any of Brown's writings." 
 
 With regard to the itch, Hahnemann took a very 
 " advanced " view, which he, however, completely changed 
 thirty years later. With the exception of some hints by 
 older authors, Bonomo, of Leghorn, was the first who cor- 
 rectly described the itch-insect in 1683, on which account 
 Wichmannf justly styles him the founder of the itch theory. 
 Bonomo admits that he received his knowledge from poor 
 women and slaves in Leghorn, who were in the habit of 
 mutually removing each other's itch-insects with needles. 
 The parasitic doctrine was, nevertheless, little ' regarded till 
 Linnseus, in 1757 {ExantJieniata viva), and the above-men- 
 tioned Wichmann, in 1786, drew attention to it. Wich- 
 mann, in his work, held the views of to-day. In England 
 itch was already generally treated as a " living eruption ;" 
 in France the medical faculty still warned people against the 
 external remedies there used by the common people for 
 this malady.t It was much the same in Germany. Wich- 
 mann was disregarded, and the view prevailed that the 
 itch-insect was the result and not the cause of the affection. 
 Thus Joh. Jak. Bernhard§ did not consider the itch-insect 
 and " the microscopic animalcules in other contagious dis- 
 eases " the contagium itself He, however, considered them 
 as important constituents of the infecting material, " like the 
 
 * Hufeland's/^//r«. V., Intclligenzblaif, No. i, p. i. 
 
 t Actiologic der Kriitze^ von J. E. Wichmann, Kgl. Grossbritt. 
 Hofmedicus zu Hannover. Hannover, 17S6, with four plates of the 
 itch acarus copied from Bonomo, 2nd edition, 1791. 
 
 X Wichmann, I.e., p. 118. 
 
 § Handbiich der allgem. tend bcsond. Contagienlehre. Erfurt bei 
 Henning, 181 5, also under the title Ueber die Natiir Sr'c. des Spital- 
 iyphiis lend der ansteckenden Krankheiten iiberhaiipt.
 
 70 Supposed Seqiielcn of Itch 
 
 animalcules in semen and vaccine-lymph." Also, similar 
 animalcules might be produced without being capable of 
 conveying contagion, as, for example, the louse disease 
 [phthiriasis]. 
 
 Friedrich Jahn, 1817, vehemently disputed the truth of 
 the parasitic theory of the itch."* He asserts on the con- 
 trary the " undeniable truth of itch-metastases," and he 
 finally pronounces: "We may, therefore, consider the whole 
 of this theory as unfounded." 
 
 J. P. Frank entered the lists as a most determined advo- 
 cate of the causa viva in his book, De Ciirandis Honiimtm 
 itfbri^w, completed in 1821. He recommended killing the 
 itch-insect at the commencement of the infection, but after 
 the itch had existed some time he thought " reckless sup- 
 pression " very dangerous. He distinguishes 13 kinds of 
 " symptomatic itch," as, for instance, a scorbutic, a hypo- 
 chondriacal, a critical, a plethoric, &c. ;" also a "psora neoga- 
 morum," a variety which affected newly married persons. 
 
 Ferdinand Jahn, a talented disciple of Heusinger and 
 Schdnlein, a partisan of the natural historical school, held 
 the following views in 1828:! "Chronic eruptions are 
 usually the outward manifestations of dyscrasias which are 
 
 deeply rooted in the interior of the organism Itch 
 
 deprived of its cutaneous blossoms develops its roots that 
 are present in the interior of the organism more strongly, 
 so that those manifestations which are known under the 
 name of itch-metastases ensue." In judging such views, we 
 must remember that in those days itch eruptions with 
 numerous pustules all over the body and extensive cuta- 
 neous ulcerations were no rarity. 
 
 Autenrieth, known to be a pupil of J, P. Frank, writes 
 under the title. Sequela; which folloio the suppression of 
 Itch, in 1808 :j 
 
 * Klinik der chron. Krankheiten. Erfurt, 181 7, II., p. 614. 
 
 \ Ahmmge7i eincr allgem. NaturgescJiichte der Krankheiten. Eise- 
 nach, 1828, p. 201. 
 
 % Versuche fur die prakf. Heilkitndc aiis dc7i kiln. Annalcn V07t 
 Tiilnn<^en, 1808. Griesselich, Klelnc Fresca^emLildc. Carlsruhe, 
 1836, i., p. 88.
 
 consequent on its Suppression. 71 
 
 The most terrible and the most frequent sources of chronic diseases of 
 adults in our neighbourhood are the psoric or itch eruptions which have 
 been wrongly treated with sulphur ointment and fatty outward applica- 
 tions. I have so frecjuently seen the evil results among the lower 
 classes and those who lead a sedentary life that arise from the sup- 
 pression of the itch, and see them still every day in such a variety of 
 sad forms, that I do not hesitate a moment to assert that it is a subject 
 that deserves the attention of every physician, and of even every em- 
 ployer of labour who has the welfare of those under him at heart. 
 
 According to Autenrlcth, the sequeLns of " suppressed 
 itch " are : ulcers of the leg, pulmonary consumption, a kind 
 of hysterical chlorosis, white swelling of the knee, effusion 
 into the joints, amaurosis with obscuration of the cornea, 
 glaucoma with amaurosis, mental alienation, paralysis, 
 apoplexy, wry neck, &c. 
 
 In spite of all this, Autenrieth held the parasitic theory 
 to an extent which was uncommon for his time. He 
 even maintained that the itch-insect was the vehicle of a 
 poison which must not be driven by ointments from the 
 surface of the body into the interior, and that, on the other 
 hand, the itch might be the product of an internal disease 
 driven outwards on to the skin. 
 
 Hufeland shows that he held this view :* 
 
 But the itch may also appear as a product and symptom of internal 
 diseases — scabies spuria. Here, indeed, it is only a form of another 
 disease, but here also a contagium may develop, and so it may become 
 infectious. To this variety belongs the syphilitic, scrofulous, arthritic, 
 and scorbutic itch, and also the critical, an itch-like eruption by which 
 
 the critical resolution of both acute and chronic maladies is effected 
 
 The mites found in pustules are not the cause but the effect — parasites of 
 
 the itch But in connexion with this (that is to say the treatment) 
 
 many difficulties and important considerations come into play. Thus 
 we can suppress the diseased action of the skin by a mere local appli- 
 cation of the specific, but the contagium itself, which has already pene- 
 trated deeper, is not thereby destroyed, and the result is either that the 
 itch always re-appears or, what is worse, is thrown on internal parts, 
 and often produces very dangerous and obstinate metastases. Consump- 
 tion, lung-itch, dropsy, cramps of the stomach, stomach-itch, epilepsy, 
 and all kinds of nervous diseases may ensue. The result is still more 
 serious if the itch is complicated with another disease or is a product 
 or crisis of another disease. 
 
 * Enchiridion Mcdicinn, Vcrnidchtniss eincr 50 jd.Jir. Praxis. St. 
 Gallen, 1839, 2nd edit, p. 293, et seq.
 
 72 HaJuieiiianiis early acquaintance 
 
 In 1835 the learned Rau* wrote as follows: — 
 
 The assertion a well-known writer (Kriiger Hansen ?) has recently 
 made, that no evil results are to be feared from quickly suppressing 
 the itch, is confuted by such numerous observations that it is unneces- 
 sary to argue against it. 
 
 We must at the same time bear in mind that in those days 
 the diagnosis of skin diseases was very faulty, that scabies, 
 eczema, impetigo, prurigo, &c., were not yet distinguished 
 from one another, and were thought various degrees of in- 
 tensity of the same disease. 
 
 Did Hahnemann know the existence of the itch-insect? 
 and at what period did he become acquainted with it? In 
 his translation of Monro's Materia Medica, 1791, Hahne- 
 mann says in a foot-note (11. 49): — 
 
 If, in a recent case of itch, we make the patient wash himself several 
 times daily with a saturated solution of sulphuretted hydrogen, and 
 get his linen dipped in the same solution, the affection disappears in a 
 few days, and does not return except with re-infection. But would 
 not it return if it was caused by acridity of the humours ? I have 
 often observed this, and agree with those who attribute the dis- 
 ease to a living cause. All insects [among which the itch-mite was at 
 that time included] and worms are killed by sulphuretted hydrogen. 
 
 Further on in the same work, in another note (II. 441), 
 he maintains that itch is a " living eruption." 
 
 In 1795 a treatise by Hahnemann, On Crusta Lactea, 
 appeared in J. N. Blumenbach's MediciniscJie Bibliothek.-\ 
 This periodical did not appear in any regular order. 
 Articles which had been written as early as 1793 are 
 found in this volume. Hahnemann has put no date to his 
 essay, so that we cannot exactly determine the date at 
 which it was written. He, however, remarks in it that he 
 was in the country when it was written. From 1794 to 
 1796 he lived at Pyrmont and Brunswick; from 1792 to 1794 
 in Gotha. To the last-named period, therefore, belong the 
 following remarks. In the village (probably Molschlebcn), 
 
 * Ueber deii Wcrth dcs Itoin. Hcilvc7-fa]ircns^ 2nd edit. Heidelberg 
 and Leipzig, p. ■^1. 
 
 fill. St. 4, Gcittingen, 1795. Translated in B. Jour, of Horn., 
 XLII., p. 2og.
 
 zuith the A can is scabiei, 73 
 
 " where my children enjoyed perfect health," there were a 
 great many children affected with so-called milk-crust, and 
 to an unusual degree. As Hahnemann thought he had 
 seen instances of this complaint being communicated, he 
 attempted to prevent intercourse between his own and the 
 infected children belonging to the village. One of the boys 
 thus affected, however, succeeded in gaining access to them. 
 " I saw him playing in close contact with them, I sent him 
 away, but the infection had already taken place." The boy 
 had kissed Hahnemann's children. The complaint began 
 hrst in the child kissed, and then spread to the other three 
 children. 
 
 "I poured warm water over dry hepar sulphuris (powdered 
 oyster shells mixed with equal parts of sulphur and kept 
 for ten m.inutes at a white heat), and thus made a weak 
 solution. I painted the faces of the two who had the erup- 
 tion worst with this every hour for two consecutive days. 
 After the first application the complaint was arrested 
 and gradually got well." He pursued the same course 
 with the other children with the same success. 
 
 The remedy when appHed to the skin becomes gradually decom- 
 posed by the action of the air, and sulphuretted hydrogen is 
 developed with a fetid smell, which, as we know, is rapidly fatal to 
 most insects. 
 
 Is not crusta lactea a cutaneous disease caused solely by infection ? 
 does not the infecting matter contain very small animalcules as a 
 miasm ? I hardly expect to meet in practice with such another oppor- 
 tunity of answering these questions positively in the affirmative as 
 this, which was so completely within my cognisance. My children 
 got no purgatives nor any other medicine, as they were otherwise 
 quite well and well they remained. 
 
 In a note he says : — 
 
 I relate here the following case because of its similarity. A servant 
 girl (infected by a servant newly arrived), had had the itch for six 
 days ; one arm and hand were covered with it, and the eruption made 
 its appearance on the other hand between the fingers. I made her 
 wash both arms thrice daily for two days with the above-mentioned 
 solution ; she got well without sequelte ; the girl who communicated 
 it was treated in the same manner, and was cured in eight days. If 
 this complaint is produced by insects in the skin, what harm can it do 
 to kill them provided we do so with medicines that possess no power
 
 74 Appj'eciation of ElectJ'icity. 
 
 in themselves to do harm to the body ? Physicians have been all too 
 ready to ascribe to the suppression of certain skin diseases effects 
 which were the result of some cachexia, &c., which was coexistent, 
 and which remained uncured ! 
 
 From what follows it appears that he v/as not free from 
 the opinion that a virus penetrates the whole organism 
 from the itch-insect. " An old case of bone-disease began 
 to heal quickly as soon as I had ascertained that it was 
 complicated with itch. I dressed the sore as usual, but 
 washed the whole body with the above-mentioned lotion." 
 
 In 1 79 1, he narrates (Monro I. 'j6) that he had cured 
 itch by internal remedies only, which shows that in those 
 days the term '' itch " had a much wider signification than 
 now. 
 
 He treats the subject of the therapeutic employment of 
 electricity, clearly and intelligently, and he could not 
 conceive how the Academy of Rouen could adjudge a 
 prize to a work of Marat which denied to electricity alm.ost 
 all remedial power (^Arzenikvergiftnng, p. 163). 
 
 He taught the proper use of many drugs whose actions 
 were little or imperfectly known, and described accurately 
 their sphere of action, which he was better able to ascertain 
 than others, because he always gave only one remedy at 
 a time, and carefully watched its effects. We shall here 
 only mention aconite, belladonna, hyoscyamus, stramonium, 
 conium maculatum, ipecacuanha, Peruvian balsam and 
 arsenic. His numerous articles in Hufeland's Journal, his 
 terse and frequent annotations in his translations of 
 Cullen, Monro, the PZdinburgh Dispensatory and the 
 TJiesaiiriis viedicaniimun, as well as casual 'observations 
 in the Apothekerlexicon, prove what we have said. 
 
 With regard to Hahnemann's reputation as a practical 
 physician of his day, let us hear his contemporaries. 
 Brunnow relates :* " In fact, even in the beginning of his 
 career as a physician, he succeeded in achieving many 
 splendid cures by his simple method of treatment, and 
 wherever he went he carried with him the reputation of a 
 
 * Em Blick aiif Halmcmann^ Leipzig, 1844, p. 6. Translated by 
 Norton.
 
 Laudatory notices of Hahnanami. 75 
 
 careful and successful practitioner." The Medic. cJiir. 
 Zeituiig {lygg, II. 411) writes: "Hahnemann has made 
 himself a name in Germany as a capable physician." 
 
 In the same periodical* he is described as a physician 
 " to whom we are indebted for many good contributions to 
 the perfection of our science." In the Allg. vied. Annalen 
 des ig Jahrh.xw the number for November, 18 10, Hahne- 
 mann is called a man, " who has been known as a thinking 
 physician and good observer for more than twenty years, 
 and at the same time has continually increased his repu- 
 tation as a clever and successful practitioner." 
 
 Hufeland, in 1798,! calls him a man "whose services to 
 our art are sufficiently important," and further^: " one of the 
 most distinguished physicians of Germany" "a physi- 
 cian of matured experience and reflection." 
 
 In 1800 Daniels§ speaks of " Hahnemann, a man ren- 
 dered famous by his writings." 
 
 In the same year Bernstein writes in the Pract. Hand- 
 hiichfiir Wimddrzte : "Samuel Hahnemann, a very merito- 
 rious physician, is known for his excellent preparation of 
 mercury, namely, mercurius solubilis, and also for his wine 
 test and his chemical and pharmaceutical writings. He 
 has also deserved the gratitude of surgeons. He published 
 for them Guide to the cure of old sores and ulcers, 1784, 
 and Instruction to Surgeons for the treatment of venereal 
 diseases. Leipzig, 1786." 
 
 In the year 1791, the Leipzic Economic Society elected 
 him a member, hewas next elected a member of the Elec- 
 toral Academy of Sciences of Mainz, and later of the 
 Physical and Medical Society of Erlangen. 
 
 In 1798 we read this notice in the Medic, chir. Zeitung 
 (IV. 192). "Mietau : it is intended to erect a temporary 
 university here. It is said that it is intended that the 
 medical faculty shall consist of Dr. Samuel Hahnemann of 
 
 * Ergiinziingsheft^ VII., p. 307. 
 t Huf.>z/r., VI., St. 2. Note. 
 t lb. v., St. 2, p. 52. 
 § /^. IX., St. 4, p. 153-
 
 76 Hahnemann as a Medical Reformer. 
 
 Konigsluttcr, Dr. Samuel Naumbcrg of Erfurt, and Dr. 
 Frank of Muhlhausen." 
 
 Let us now pass from Hahnemann's capacity and ac- 
 quirements in medicine to his achievements in the way of 
 medical reform. 
 
 He was not fashioned out of soft wood, hence his words 
 often seem hard and harsh, and even bitter. We shall 
 see how, with penetrating glance and great store of know- 
 ledge, he saw more and more clearly the utter worthless- 
 ness of the therapeutics of the day, and the disastrous 
 methods of procedure of physicians. Amidst the confusion 
 of hypotheses and speculations, a weak voice would not 
 have been listened to. He had a strong, sturdy and healthy 
 body and a lively temperament. Such natures do not 
 creep about in felt slippers when they have to combat the 
 widely spread follies of their time ; the question whether 
 Hahnemann would have been more prudent if he had written 
 in a more conciliatory tone, does not concern us here. 
 
 As early as 1784, as we have seen, he speaks con- 
 temptuously of "fashionable physicians." In 1786 he 
 inveighs in his book on Arsenic against the wretched state 
 of medicine at that time, against " that most fruitful 
 cause of death, the bungling of physicians," who, among 
 other things, powdered ulcers over with arsenic, thus often 
 causing the death of the patients, and who gave this drug 
 in poisonous doses in intermittent fever. In 1791, in his 
 translation of Monro, he came across the statement that 
 cantharides eliminated morbid humours ; Hahnemann there- 
 upon remarks (II. 248), "this is the common delusion that 
 the sores produced by vesicating agents only remove the 
 morbid fluids. When we consider that the mass of the 
 blood during its circulation is of uniform composition 
 throughout, that the exhalents of the blood-vessels give off 
 no great variety of matter under otherwise identical con- 
 ditions ; no rational physiologist will be able to conceive 
 how a vesicating agent can select, collect and remove only 
 the injurious part of the humours. In fact the blister under
 
 His estiviate of the Practice of his days. "jj 
 
 the plaster is only filled with a part of the common blood 
 serum, just like that which separates from the blood when 
 it is drawn from a vein. But, according to the insane idea 
 of these short-sighted doctors, venesection, too, draws off 
 the bad blood only, and continued purging evacuates only 
 the depraved humours! It is terrible to contemplate the 
 mischief which such universally-held foolish ideas have 
 caused." 
 
 In another place (Monro, I. 265) Monro speaks of corrosive 
 sublimate as an " alterative." Hahnemann thereupon re- 
 marks : — " I do not know what our author means thereb}-, 
 though he uses the language of his and my contemporaries. 
 If an alterative is something which does good here, why 
 does he not say so ? But no, an alterative seems to be only 
 a half-and-half sort of remedy. Such a remedy is not re- 
 quired in the whole range of medicine." Further (I. 246). 
 "Alterative is a scholastic term ; it is unpardonable in a 
 medical author to use such a vague expression." In the 
 same way, Hahnemann in many places takes occasion to 
 direct the attention of his fellow-practitioners to the many 
 absurdities of the day, from which he used the most earnest 
 efforts gradually to emancipate himself. In 1790, he 
 attacked the teachers of materia medica of the day 
 (Cullen, I. 58). " The old teachers of materia medica with 
 their puerilities, vagaries, old wives' tales and falsities, 
 arc venerated as authorities, even in the most recent times 
 — with a few exceptions — and neither the originators nor 
 their weak disciples deserve to be spared. We must 
 forcibly sever ourselves from these deified oracles if we 
 wish to shake off the yoke of ignorance and credulit}' in 
 the most important department of practical medicine. 
 It is high time to do so." 
 
 To ascertain the truth in the wilderness of " observa- 
 tions " and " experiences," he soon hit upon the plan 
 which all great physicians have followed ; he ceased from 
 the fussy interference practised at the sick-bed by his 
 contemporaries, and urged his mixture-loving fellow practi- 
 tioners to adopt instead : —
 
 78 His deminciations of Polypharmacy. 
 
 Simple Prescriptions, 
 
 Worthily to appreciate this, we must remember that in 
 those days it was taught that a properly constructed 
 prescription should consist of several parts. Hahnemann 
 was of course taught this, and later he admits that the 
 method of treatment by mixtures " clung to him more 
 obstinately than the miasma of any disease.'' If then we 
 see him in the first few years of his practice, sometimes 
 giving mixtures, generally containing only two drugs, we 
 see on the other hand, that he was gradually emancipat- 
 ing himself from this bad system. As early as 1784,* he 
 advocates a simple method of treatment " instead of the 
 farrago of contradictory prescriptions." In 1791, he 
 asks, when Munro has been recommending a complicated 
 mode of treatment for sclerosis of the liver (]\Iunro, II. 288): 
 
 "What was it that really did good ? As long as we do 
 
 not accustom ourselves to use simple remedies throughout 
 and carefully to consider in each case the accompanying 
 circumstances, habits of life, &:c., our therapeutics will 
 remain a combination of guess-work, truth and poetry." 
 
 In the year 1796, Hahnemann writes in Hufeland's 
 Jciirnal :^, 
 
 The strangest circumstance connected with this specification 
 of the virtues of single drugs is, that in the days of these men the 
 habit that still prevails in medicine, of mixing together several 
 different medicines in one prescription, was carried to such an extent 
 that I defy Qidipus himself to tell what was the exact action of a 
 single ingredient of the hotch-potch. The prescription of a single 
 remedy at a time was in those days almost rarer than it is now-a-days. 
 How was it possible in such a complicated practice to differentiate the 
 powers of individual medicines .'' 
 
 Hahnemann, in his treatise Are the obstacles to certainty 
 and simplicity in practical medicine insiirmonntable ? which 
 appeared in the year i797,t pronounces "simplicity the 
 first law of the physician," and further on : 
 
 * Anleitiing alte Schddctt, &c.. p. 165. B. J. of H. XLII., p. 165. 
 f Versuch iiber cin 7ieues Principe &c., II., St. 3. Hahnemann's 
 Lesser Wriiztigs, p. 310, note. 
 
 X HnitXimd^s foiirnal IV., St. 4. Lesser U'riiuigs, p. 358.
 
 His scorn of complex prescriptions. yg 
 
 How near was this great man (Hippocrates) to the philosopher's 
 stone of physicians — simpHcity ! and to think that after more than 2,000 
 years we should not have advanced one single step nearer the mark, 
 on the contrary, have rather receded from it ! 
 
 Did he only write books ? or did he write much less than he actually 
 cured ? Did he do this as circuitously as we ? 
 
 It was owing to the simplicity of his treatment of diseases alone, that 
 he saw all that he did see, and whereat we marvel Here the ques- 
 tion arises : Is it well to mix various drugs in a single prescription, 
 to administer baths, clysters, bleeding, blistering, fomentations and 
 inunctions all at once or in rapid succession, if we wish to raise 
 therapeutics to perfection, effect cures, and know with certainty in 
 every case what the remedy has done in order to be able to employ it 
 in similar cases with still greater, or at least with equal success ? 
 
 The mind can only grasp one thing at a time and can rarely 
 assign to each of two powers acting at the same time on one object 
 its due proportion of influence in bringing about the result ; how can 
 we attain to greater certainty in therapeutics if we deliberately set a 
 large number of different forces to act against a morbid condition of the 
 system, while we are often ill-acquainted with the nature of the latter, 
 and are but indifferently conversant with the separate action of the 
 component parts of the former, much less with their combined 
 action ? 
 
 Who knows whether the adjuvans or the corrigens may not act as basis 
 in the complex prescription, or whether the excipiens does not give 
 an entirely different action to the whole ? Does the chief ingredient 
 if it be the right one require an adjuvans ? Does not the idea that it 
 requires assistance reflect severely on its suitability ? or should a 
 dirigens also be necessary? I thought I would complete the motley 
 list, and thereby satisfy the requirements of the schools. 
 
 I think I may venture to assert that a mixture of two drugs almost 
 never produces the effects of each in the human body, but an effect 
 almost always different from the action of both separately — an inter- 
 mediate action, a neutralisation, if I may borrow an expression from 
 chemistry. 
 
 The more complex our prescriptions are, the darker is the condition 
 of therapeutics. 
 
 That our prescriptions contain fewer ingredients than those of the 
 Portuguese Amatus will help us just as little as the fact that Andro- 
 machus wrote still bulkier prescriptions will help him. Are our pre- 
 scriptions simple because both these wrote more complicated ones ? 
 
 How can we complain of the obscurity and intricacy of our art, 
 when we ourselves render it obscure and intricate ? I, too, at one 
 time suffered from this infirmity ; the schools had infected me. This 
 miasma, clung to me before it came to a crisis, more obstinately than 
 the miasma of any other mental malady.
 
 8o His pica foi' siviplc prescriptions. 
 
 Are we in earnest in our art ? Very well then ! What would be 
 more like Coliunbics's egg than to make a brotherly compact to give 
 only one simple remedy at a time in every single malady, without 
 making any important change in the surrounding's of the patient, and 
 then let us see with our own eyes what the drug does, how far it 
 helps and how far it does not help ? 
 
 Would it really be more learned to prescribe from the apothecary's 
 shop numerous and variously mixed medicines for one disease (often in 
 one day), than, like Hippocrates, to treat the whole course of a disease 
 with one or two enemata, and perhaps a little oxymel and nothing 
 else ? I thought it was the masterpiece of art to give the right 
 medicine, not the most complex. 
 
 Hippocrates chose the simplest out of a class of diseases ; these he 
 watched closely and described minutely. In these simplest maladies 
 he gave single simple remedies out of the store of existing drugs 
 which was then small. Thus it was possible for him to see what he 
 saw and to do what he did. 
 
 It will I hope not be contrary to good taste, to proceed as simply 
 in the treatment of diseases as this great man did. 
 
 If any one sees me give one remedy one day, another the next and 
 so on, he may conclude that I am wavering in my treatment (for I too 
 am a weak mortal) ; but if he sees me mix two or three drugs in the 
 same prescription (and ere now this has sometimes been done), he 
 would at once say : " The man is at a loss, he does not rightly know 
 what he would be at, he is bungling ; if he were certain that one was 
 the right remedy he would not give a second, and still less a third I " 
 
 What could I answer? I could only hold my tongue. If I were 
 asked what is the mode of action of bark in all known diseases .'' I 
 would confess that I know little about it, though I have so often given 
 it alone and uncombined. But if I were asked what cinchona would do 
 if administered along with saltpetre, or still more with a third 
 substance, I should have to confess my benighted ignorance and 
 would worship any one who could tell me. Uare I confess that for 
 many years I have never given anything but a single remedy at a time, 
 and have never repeated it till the first dose had exhausted its action, 
 bleeding alone, an emetic or purgative alone — and always a simple 
 never a complex medicine — and never a second till I was quite clear 
 as to the effect of the first? Dare I confess that in this manner I 
 have been very successful and satisfactorily cured my patients, and 
 seen things which otherwise I never would have seen ? 
 
 If I did not know that there are around me several of the best men 
 who in simple earnestness are striving after the noblest of aims, who 
 by a similar method of treatment have corroborated my maxims, I 
 should indeed not have dared to avow this heresy. Who knows that 
 I should not in (wililco's circumstances have denied that the earth 
 Avent round the sun. But the day is beginning to dawn I
 
 His ridicule of complex pvescidptions. 8 1 
 
 In the year 1798, in his translation of the Edinburgh 
 Dispensatory, he inveighs against " the physicians who love 
 prescriptions containing many ingredients" (II. 340). 
 " What god could decide what good effects would result 
 from the admixture of three strong things very unlike in 
 their actions (castor oil and preparations of lead and mer- 
 cury externally applied in cancer) The height of empiri- 
 cism is the employment of mixtures of strong medicines " 
 (II. 605). Further on (p. 606), where compounds are again 
 recommended, he observes : " We cannot a priori say what 
 are the powers of a compound remedy. Every drug has 
 its peculiar action. Which way would several balls of 
 different sizes, thrown in different directions and with 
 different degrees of force and striking together, go ? 
 Who could tell beforehand ? " 
 
 The less successful he was in converting his contem- 
 poraries to the employment of simple medical treatment, 
 the more loudly he raised his voice. In 1800, he translated 
 TJiesmiriis Medicaviinum, a neiv collection of medical pre- 
 scriptions, from the English. The translation was published 
 anonymously, the notes being signed " Y." He wished to 
 prove by his criticisms how the complicated formulas 
 acted in a manner directly opposed to the attainment of 
 the cure desired and of instruction. In the preface* we 
 find the following emphatic words: — 
 
 Even the best formulas (I should like to convince my countrymen 
 of it) are unsatisfactory and unnatural and act conflictingly and contrary 
 to the object intended ; a truth, which in our time when formulas are so 
 much in vogue, we should preach from the housetops. When shall I 
 see this folly extirpated ? When will it be recognised that the cure of 
 diseases is better effected by simpler but properly selected remedies 1 
 Must we always have to endure the ridicule of Arcesilases ? Shall we 
 never cease to mix a number of drugs in the same prescriptions, the 
 effect of each of which is only half known or not known at all by even 
 the greatest physicians ? Though Jones, of London, used 300 pounds 
 of bark every year, what do we know of the actual, individual action 
 of this drug ? Little ! What dp we know of the pure and specific 
 action of that powerful drug Mercury, the immense use of which by 
 physicians would seem to imply an accurate knowledge of its effects on 
 
 * Translated in Lesser Writings, p. 398.
 
 82 He shozus the absurdity of the complex 
 
 our body? If so great an obscurity reigns with regard to these single 
 
 drugs, how useless must be the phenomena which appear after the indis- 
 criminate administration of several such unknown drugs together. It 
 seems to me like throwing together a number of various shaped 
 balls with one's eyes shut on to a billiard table of unknown form and 
 many cushions, and attempting to prophesy what effect they will have 
 together, what position each ball will take, and where it will eventually 
 come to a standstill after repeated rebounds and unforseen collisions ! 
 
 Further, he describes sarcastically the statements which 
 the prescription writers of the day made as to the effects 
 of their basis, their adjuvans, their constituens, dirigens 
 and corrigens. Unfortunately it is not possible to quote 
 all the characteristic passages of Hahnemann's writings. 
 Further on he says : " Nature works according to eternal 
 laws, without asking anyone's permission ; she loves sim- 
 plicity, and effects a great deal with one remedy ; you 
 effect little with many remedies. Imitate nature! To 
 prescribe many drugs mixed, and sometimes even several 
 prescriptions daily, is the height of empiricism ; to give 
 single remedies and not to change them till the time of their 
 action has expired, this is to take the straight road towards 
 the inner holy place of art." 
 
 In the 412 pages of this work he proves by numerous 
 examples how irrational it is to mix drugs. Here are a 
 few examples: — 
 
 Page 33: — If the remedy already consists of five ingredients, each of 
 considerable strength, \\'hy should not the whole materia medica be 
 included ? That would be better still. O, how little is the true action 
 of each one of these ingredients known ! What action do we expect 
 from them when they act simultaneously on the body? How shall we 
 attain the knowledge of simple drugs when we only give them mixed ? 
 It seems to me that we are ashamed to know accurately the action 
 of each drug, and that we mix several up together in order, in the 
 resulting confusion, to keep before our eyes the fog we love so dearly. 
 
 Page 39 : — A qualified doctor is, of course, at liberty to give any- 
 thing he likes, Nature must submit out of respect for his diploma. 
 
 Page 66 : — Is it not wise to mix a substance like aloes which only 
 acts after twelve or sixteen hours, and then only produces a small, 
 soft stool (given in large doses as a purgative, it produces few stools 
 but causes a great deal of griping) with another substance, such for 
 instance as colocynth which acts in a couple of hours ! It is quite un- 
 known what time scammony takes to purge, and what are the pecu-
 
 fornmlcB of high medical authorities. 83 
 
 liarities of its action. But all the better ! the more unknown the drugs 
 are, the more scientific is the mixture ! 
 
 Page 74 : — A formula suffering from an unwholesome mixture of in- 
 gredients! Heating, cooling, purging and other remedies all mixed 
 together. Now we shall know the effects of oxymel of colchicum 
 which we have not been able to ascertain from its use by itself since 
 the days of Dioscorides ! Alas ! 
 
 Page 81 : — In true dysentery we should avoid such things (senna 
 boiled with rhubarb and tamarinds), and in other cases we can easily 
 find less disgusting compounds, if the evil spirit of mixing will no 
 leave us in peace. 
 
 Page 86 : — I have observed in all these secundem artem formula 
 that the authors jealously omit to explain why they mix rhubarb with 
 saffron, gentian, serpentary and aloes, why senna leaves with jalap 
 root.'' Did they know that each of all these things had a different ef- 
 fect? Did they think that their combination would produce an inter- 
 mediate action when we only imperfectly know the effects of each 
 singly, and still less in combination 1 Or did all their wisdom event- 
 uate in the itch for compounding, which is an epidemic disease among 
 our physicians ? But sometimes I almost think that higher consider- 
 ations have influenced them in making these mixtures, for they mix 
 rhubarb and aloes with liquorice. A splendid idea ! they will thus be 
 sweetened, and the bitter taste taken away. Difficile est satyram non 
 scribere. 
 
 Page 91 : — We cannot believe the formula writers when they say, for 
 instance, that the more numerous the diuretics in a mixture the more 
 efficacious is it for the elimination of urine ! The fools ! Usually it 
 is just the opposite, one often hinders the other. Why do they, then, 
 mix so many ingredients ? Because they look upon treatment like in- 
 vesting in a lottery. If I place my money on enough numbers, thinks 
 the weak-minded gambler, I must win ! Too dear a way, my friend, 
 of attaining your object. If you were right, Zacutus Lusitanus, with 
 his fifty ingredients in one prescription, must have been a matador 
 among physicians. 
 
 Page 97 :— Obstructions of the liver are more easily guessed at than 
 diagnosed, and there are kinds of jaundice which disappear of them- 
 selves in a few days. This explains how such an indigestible brew 
 could have obtained its reputation in such diseases. Of what use was 
 sulphate of potash if dandelion alone would have effected the object 
 desired ? or would the first have been sufficient alone ? or must we give 
 both.'' and why both.-' If it is the result of experience that both must 
 be used in order to do good, then give us the details of your experience 
 where there was no doubt as to the nature of the disease or the good 
 effects of the mixture. An intelligent man must have a reason for each 
 step of his procedure. 
 
 Page 100. — To the ordinary practitioner, a simple prescription is 
 like a thorn in the eye ! Hippocrates, with his simple drugs, must
 
 84 No useful experience of medicinal action 
 
 have been a bungler who should ha\-e bought a modern book on the 
 art of prescribing. 
 
 Page io6 : — In these seven consecutive formute, we shall see squills 
 united with eight different drugs. Was squills alone not sufficient ? 
 What assistance did it receive from its fellow-ingredients? If the 
 added ingredients were all useful in an equal degree, why so many 
 changes ? If they were not, why are we not told which were the 
 useful ones and which the useless and in what cases ? This should be 
 done if we are not to think that changing about is recommended 
 merely for the sake of changing, or even coeco instinctu. But no ! we 
 find many famous physicians recommending prescriptions containing 
 an immense number of ingredients in dropsy, with the excuse : that 
 many substances only excite their full power if mixed together in 
 certain proportions. Then what is the full power ? Occasionally the 
 water is removed, but in what cases 1 They cannot tell us this any 
 more than they can tell us when cream of tartar, when potash, prepar- 
 ations of squills, colchicum, juniper, parsley and foxglove are especi- 
 ally indicated. If they cannot even determine the right cases in which 
 to give simple remedies, all of which in certain cases pro^•e useful singly 
 and remove the water, why do they recommend mixtures and com- 
 plicated mixtures which, if each simple drug is good for its special 
 kind of disease, must have a still narrrower sphere of action and must 
 be suitable in a still more individual case of disease on account of the 
 complicated character of the mixture, in which each ingredient has a 
 new direction and limit 
 
 The physician who is intimately acquainted with drugs, knows how 
 difficult it is to get only fifty simple drugs in equally good condition ; 
 the condition of the leaves, roots and barks is so much influenced 
 by the habitat of the plant, the time of gathering, the maturity of 
 growth, removal of the damaged parts, the period of drj'ing which 
 varies from a few hours to several weeks, the restricted or unre- 
 stricted access of air, and the warmth or dampness of the places 
 where they are kept. What differences are produced by even the modes 
 of preparation, the infusion in hot or cold water, strong or weak 
 alcohol, for a few minutes or for several weeks ! 
 
 He further points out the mistakes made in preparing 
 extracts (by boiling) and the negh'gent mode in which 
 they are kept in apothecaries' shops. 
 
 If we have always such difficulty in getting from, them simple drugs 
 and preparations in equally good condition — if, in one word, it is so 
 unusual to get for our patients simple drugs of uniform quality, what 
 madness is it to expect to have the most improbable of imaginable 
 things, viz. : — medicines consisting of many ingredients alwaj-s iden- 
 tical in character, many of which have undergone complicated pro- 
 cesses (subject to defects and accidents) in their preparation !
 
 can be obtained from medicinal mixtures. 85 
 
 Who will consider an uncertain, never uniform mixture of 7, 8, 10 
 or 1 5 ingredients a reliable remedy ? Only one who knows nothing 
 about the subject. If you send the prescription to ten different res- 
 pectable apothecaries you will get ten preparations differing in taste, 
 appearance and smell (to say nothing of medicinal properties !). But 
 if you have a single remedy you can judge of its ciuality and increase 
 the dose if it is weak. What will you do, if in a complicated mixture 
 one ingredient is 100 times stronger, another 10 times weaker than you 
 have been accustomed to, without your being able to detect it ? 
 
 Page 112: So one contradicts another, and neither knows how 
 far he is right and the other wrong. They do not sufficiently distinguish 
 their cases and they seek their remedy in mixtures, thus converting 
 even the little light they had into utter darkness. Is this the royal 
 road to the temple of truth ? 
 
 Page 118 : This mixture can hardly be compounded without the 
 precipitation of part of the saltpetre, but what does our hero care for 
 chemistry in compounding his mixtures.-^ If only grotesque enough 
 things are heaped together so as to seem learned, only the stomach 
 of the patient will suffer. 
 
 Page 142 : In what kinds of intermittent fevers? and how are they 
 distinguished from those which are cured by bark ? What part was 
 taken by the antimony, what by the potash, and what by the chamo- 
 mile flowers ? Behold ! " The earth was without form and void, and 
 darkness was upon the face of the deep." 
 
 Page 352 : I call that a satcce au deriiier gout made out of thirteen 
 piquant ingredients which partly neutralise each other's action. This 
 is now (since the banishment of common sense) the highest fashion ! 
 Poor Hippocrates ! with his simple remedies, how ignorant he appears 
 in comparison. We are now in possession of the true savoir fairc^ of 
 the highest culture. God have mercy on the poor souls driven out 
 of their methodically treated bodies ! 
 
 With similar remarks Hahnemann accompanies the author 
 on every page through the whole book, proving thereby 
 how earnest was his striving after truth and how great his 
 anxiety for the improvement of therapeutics, and how far 
 he surpassed his mixture-loving contemporaries in the gifts 
 of observation and investigation. 
 
 A year after, in 1 801, he writes in Treatment of Scarlet 
 Fever, page 12 : * " Here we often see the ne plus idtra of 
 the grossest empiricism ; for each separate symptom a par- 
 ticular drug in the complicated formula ; a sight that cannot 
 
 * Lesser Writings, p. 431.
 
 S6 HaJineniann the first advocate of 
 
 fail to inspire the unprejudiced observer with feelings at 
 once of pity and indignation !" 
 
 At the same time he attacked Brown on this question in 
 Hufeland's Journal* Brown recommended the employ- 
 ment of several drugs at once, never of one at a time. 
 On this Hahnemann remarks : " This is the true sign of 
 charlatanism. Quackery always goes hand in hand with 
 complicated mixtures, and any one who can recommend 
 (not merely tolerate) them is far removed from the simple 
 ways and laws of nature." 
 
 In the following years he was never weary of urging on 
 his mixture-loving colleagues that the " chief law for the 
 physician " was simplicity of treatment. 
 
 In 1805 in Medicine of Experience^ he again writes: 
 " A single simple remedy is always calculated to produce 
 the most beneficial effects, without any additional means, 
 provided it be the best selected, the most appropriate and 
 in the proper dose. It is never necessary to give two at 
 
 once." " If we wish to perceive clearly what the remedy 
 
 effects in a disease and what still remains to be done, we 
 must only give one single simple substance at a time. 
 Every addition of a second or a third only deranges the 
 object we have in view." 
 
 In the same year he writes in j^sculapins in the balance: % 
 
 This is the general, but most unjustifiable procedure of our phy- 
 sicians : to prescribe nothing by itself- — no ! always in coinbinatio7i 
 •with seva-al other things in one artistic prescription. "No prescription 
 can properly be termed such," says Hofrath Gruner in his Art of 
 Prescribing, "which does not contain several ingredients at once." 
 You might as well put out your eyes in order to see more clearly. 
 
 In 1808 we read in The Value of the Specidative Systems 
 of Medicine : § 
 
 But the case is worse still and the proceeding more reprehensible (the 
 prescription of mixtures) when we consider that the action of each or 
 at any rate of most of the ingredients thus huddled together is indi- 
 vidually great and yet unascertained. 
 
 * Vol. II., St. 4, p. 3 and 4. Lesser Writings, p. 618. 
 
 f Lesser Writings, p. 534. 
 
 X Lesser Writings, p. 488, note. 
 
 § Lesser Writings, p. 567.
 
 Simplicity in TJier'apeiitics. 87 
 
 Now, to mix in a prescription a number of such strong disordering 
 substances, whose separate action is often unknown and only guessed 
 and arbitrarily assumed, and then, forthwith, at a venture, to admin- 
 ister this mixture, and many more besides without letting a single 
 one do its work out on the patient, whose complaint and abnormal 
 state of body has only been viewed through illusive theories and 
 through the spectacles of manufactured systems — if this is medical 
 art, if this is not hurtful irrationality, I do not know what we are to 
 
 understand by an art, nor what is hurtful or irrational This 
 
 motley mixing system is nothing but a convenient shift for one, who 
 having but a slender acquaintance with the properties of a single sub- 
 stance, flatters himself, though he cannot find any one simple suitable 
 remedy to remove the complaint, that by heaping a great many 
 together there may be one amongst them that by a happy chance 
 shall hit the mark. 
 
 Towards the end of the above-named essay he again 
 breaks out : " Further, let us reflect how extremely pre- 
 carious and, I might say, blind, such a system of ad- 
 ministering drugs must be which fights against diseases, 
 themselves misunderstood from being viewed through 
 glasses tinged ■ with ideal systems, with almost unknown 
 drugs assembled in one or several such formulae ! " 
 
 No physician has preached this important truth with 
 such energy and such conviction as Hahnemann. No 
 physician has so consistently employed simple prescrip- 
 tions, and he could with truth assert in 1805 that : " No 
 physician on the face of the earth, neither the founders of 
 systems nor their disciples, is accustomed to give in diseases 
 only one single simple drug at a time and to wait till its 
 action is exhausted before giving another." 
 
 The Organon appeared in 18 10, and it is scarcely necessary 
 to mention that in it he advocates simplicity of treatment, 
 as did also later his followers in numerous periodicals and 
 other works. 
 
 Hahnemami s attacks on the Therapeutics of his time. 
 
 We have already shown how Hahnemann attacked 
 deference to authority in therapeutics, as early as 1786 
 and 1790. He had already pronounced against bleed-
 
 88 HaJincuiann's criticism of tJie medical 
 
 ing in nervous fever. In the same work (Cullen, II. 
 1 8) in 1790 he complains, "Bleeding, antiphlogistics, tepid 
 baths, diluent drinks, low diet, blood purifiers and ever- 
 lasting purgatives and enemata are the vicious circle 
 in which the ordinary run of German physicians are 
 always revolving." According to Hahnemann there are 
 few exceptions. He even took occasion to attack his 
 blood-thirsty colleagues in a case which attracted great at- 
 tention. 
 
 Two years later the Emperor Leopold II., of Austria, died 
 unexpectedly (early in the year 1792J.* The post-mortemf 
 revealed among other things a " semi-purulent " exudation 
 about a pound in weight in the left pleura. In No. 78 
 (J.c. 31 March, 1792), Hahnemann thus criticises the treat- 
 ment of the physicians : " The report states ' his physician, 
 Lagusius, observed high fever and swelling of the abdomen 
 early on February 28 ' ; he combated the malady by 
 venesection, and as this produced no amelioration, three 
 more venesections were performed without relief Science 
 must ask why a second venesection was ordered when the 
 first had produced no amelioration ? How could he order 
 a third, and good Heavens ! how a fourth when there had 
 been no amelioration after the preceding ones ? How 
 could he tap the vital fluid four times in twenty-four 
 
 * It was a time of political fermentation. Much anxiety was felt 
 respecting France, which threatened Germany with invasion to punish 
 the emigres. Leopold, in the short period of his reign from 1790 as 
 German Emperor, warded off apparently inevitable war by his pru- 
 dence and love of peace. All hopes were centred in him ; consequently 
 the news of his sudden unexpected death came like a thunder-clap, 
 and filled all hearts with apprehension. Hahnemann at that time 
 resided in Gotha, where Dcr Anzeiger, a newspaper often used for 
 discussions among physicians and for communications from physicians 
 to one another, was published. It appeared afterwards under the title 
 Allgcmcincr Anzciger dcr Deutschen. Hahnemann was acquainted 
 with the editor. Dr. Becker, to whom he had most likely communi- 
 cated his views, and was probably invited by him to take this step in 
 order to clear up matters. The sudden death had already given rise 
 to all sorts of curious rumours. 
 
 t Dcr Anzciga\ 1792, No. 137 and 138.
 
 treatment of the Emperor Leopold. 89 
 
 hours, always without reHef, from a debilitated man who 
 had been worn out by anxiety of mind and long continued 
 diarrhoea ? Science is aghast ! " Lagusius (alias Hasenohrl) 
 had called Professors Storck and Schreiber in consultation. 
 
 "The clinical record of the physician in ordinary 
 
 Lagusius says : — 
 
 ' The monarch was on the 28th February attacked with rheumatic 
 fever [what symptoms of a rheumatic character had he ?] and a chest 
 affection [which of the numerous chest affections, very few of which 
 are able to stand bleeding ? let us note that he does not say it was 
 pleurisy, which he would have done to excuse the copious venesections 
 if he had been convinced that it was this affection] and we imme- 
 diately tried to mitigate the violence of the malady by bleeding and 
 other needful remedies [Germany — Europe — has aright to ask: which?] 
 On the 29th the fever increased [after the bleeding ! and yet] tliree 
 more venesections were effected, whereupon some [other reports say 
 distinctly — no] improvement followed, but the ensuing night was very 
 restless and weakened the monarch [just think ! it was the night and 
 not the four bleedings which so weakened the monarch, and Herr 
 Lagusius was able to assert this positively], who on the ist of March 
 began to vomit with violent retching and threw up all he took [never- 
 theless his doctors left him, so that no one was present at his death, 
 and indeed after this one of them pronounced him out of danger]. At 
 3.30 in the afternoon he expired, while vomiting, in presence of the 
 empress.' " 
 
 Hahnemann challenged the physicians to justify them- 
 selves. This attack of Hahnemann's was certainly a 
 violent one. On the other hand, if a case with such 
 important issues depending upon it, were to occur now-a- 
 days, how the physicians would be blamed ! Hahnemann 
 plainly saw the perniciousness of the medical treatment. 
 Why should he not do what now-a-days many would do ? 
 Fear was unknown to him, and he was not wanting in 
 knowledge of all branches of science. Moreover, he in this 
 case expressed the general opinion. 
 
 Before the emperor's physicians answered Hahnemann's 
 challenge, a discussion arose among other physicians in 
 the same journal. The physician to the Court of Saxony, 
 Dr. Stoller,* pronounced Hahnemann's attack improper, 
 unfair and useless, perhaps written for the purpose 
 of making himself known, and stated that he had been 
 
 * L.c, No. 103, 30th April
 
 go Opinions of contemporary physicians 
 
 convinced by optical evidence of the weakness and ailing 
 condition of the emperor during his sojourn at Pillnitz and 
 had said so. He exclaims : " Good Herr Hahnemann, it 
 was just because the first and second bleeding did not do 
 what was intended that it was repeated ! " He maintains 
 that the doctors left the patient at the command of the 
 empress, which explains their absence at the time of his 
 death. In conclusion, he asserts his impartiality, for he 
 knows Herr Lagusius " by his writings under the name of 
 Hasenohrl," and Herr Hahnemann " also only by his ex- 
 cellent works, especially that on arsenical poisoning, and 
 from what he heard of him in Dresden." 
 
 A physician who in thirty years' practice " had never had 
 a quarrel with a colleague either at the bed-side or else- 
 where," gives his opinion.* He deprecates this dispute 
 between two physicians, " who are both to be highly 
 
 honoured for their literary reputation " " It is difficult to 
 
 believe that Herr Hahnemann had the intention of making 
 himself more famous than he already is. Herr Hahnemann 
 is already so much respected and renowned for his valuable 
 services that he certainly does not require to make himself 
 more popular with the German public by getting up a 
 quarrel with Herr Lagusius, who is himself not better 
 known." He blames the personal character of Hahne- 
 mann's attack, but not its publicity, which only serves 
 to further the cause of truth. " That court physicians 
 are fallible, is sufficiently proved by those of Louis XIV., 
 who slaughtered half his family by bleeding in influenza." 
 He defends the venesections, but would rather have seen 
 them limited to two. Further it was to be remarked that 
 physicians of the older Vienna school " think fevers in 
 the highest degree inflammatory which were perhaps only 
 gastric, as was evidently the case with the emperor," 
 although many patients recovered without bleeding. The 
 author mentions a pertinent article by Dr. Lenhardt, 
 which had been noticed shortly before in the Anzeiger^ to 
 whose therapeutic views he inclined. These were that the 
 
 L.c, No. 119, i8th May. f No. 112, loth May.
 
 on Hahnemann's criticism. 91 
 
 emperor was suffering from "inflammatory matters," "im- 
 pure fermenting substances," "acridities" and "degenerated 
 bile " in the primes via;, which substances should have 
 been energetically evacuated, and thereby his life would 
 have been saved. This having been neglected, the in- 
 flammation so quickly got the upper hand that it turned 
 to gangrene. From this article we also learn that two 
 and-a-half hours before his death the doctors gave such 
 a reassuring prognosis that his son Francis II., left the bed- 
 side. Lagusius, according to Lenhardt, was quietly sitting 
 at a gentleman's dinner table, when he received the news 
 of the emperor's death, which must have shocked him not a 
 little. 
 
 The author then returns to Hahnemann's article and 
 says : — 
 
 Nevertheless I do not maintain with Herr Stoller that Herr 
 Hahnemann's article is unfair, improper and useless. 
 
 Not unfair, because in the domain of science every thinking man 
 has a right to judge openly and fearlessly all subjects relating to his 
 science. Herr Hahnemann is ' doctor' and what is more a learned 
 man and may, in this character, just as well take the imperial 
 physicians to task as of yore Dr. Luther, relying on his diploma of 
 doctor, did the Roman curia. 
 
 Not improper, for every intelligent man may speak his mind on every 
 subject of human knowledge unless he thinks it more politic to hold 
 his tongue. Posterity, however will not do so, and if all contem- 
 porary physicians are silent, it will certainly ask the question, why 
 the emperor Leopold died so quickly ? What was the cause of 
 his death.'' How was his malady treated? Why should a learned 
 man who found himself in a position to speak freely not do so ? 
 Is not every intelligent, unprejudiced, cool and impartial observer 
 a representative or, if you prefer it, a precursor of posterity as the 
 morning star is of the sun? 
 
 Not useless, if the opinion — 
 
 1. That a too energetic mode of treatment is a common cause of 
 
 serious metastases, and also 
 
 2. That the highest criterion of practical skill and prudence — the 
 
 ability to foresee and avert metastases — can be thereby made 
 to penetrate the minds of physicians more than hitherto. 
 
 Not useless, 
 
 3. If from this incident the difference between true and inflam- 
 
 matory-like fevers can be more plainly distinguished, and the
 
 "92 Post-mortem examination of the 
 
 latter treated more by attending to the prima: vice than by 
 bleeding- and resolvents, and thereby many valuable lives may 
 be saved. 
 
 "Attention to the primes vies" was a euphuism for 
 emetics and purgatives. 
 
 Meanwhile on the nth of June* the emperor's physicians 
 explain : " That the morbid condition was quite different 
 from that which Hahnemann had represented on the re- 
 port of ignorant journalists." (Hahnemann had founded 
 his attack on the report of Dr. Lagusius himself.) Further, 
 we must have a poor idea of Hahnemann's medical know- 
 ledge " if he maintains that a second bleeding should never 
 be undertaken if the first has not given relief" " His 
 majesty when he was taken ill, was not the least in an 
 exhausted condition," (Stoller and also Lenhardt m.aintained 
 the contrary), " but was very strong, and thus was in a con- 
 dition to be attacked by violent inflammation in both the 
 pleural and peritoneal cavities, and this was best combated 
 by venesection. It was not thought to be pleurisy, because 
 no cough was present, but a rheumatic inflammatory fever 
 which was then very prevalent in Vienna. Vomiting came 
 on only at the last because neither flatus nor anything 
 else could be removed by clysters from the distended 
 abdomen." They subjoined the following report of the 
 autopsy 
 
 Nee thoracis cavitates vitio immunes erant, quippe pulmo dexter 
 nimis flaccidus erat, et cavum pectoris sinistrum continuit serum ex- 
 travasatum, semipurulentum ad lb. i. Superior pulmonis lobus in- 
 flammatus. Pleura eo in loco, ubi dolor acutissimus sentiebatur, spondee 
 membrana obtecta erat. Cor transversim sectum sanum erat attamen 
 
 nimis flaccidum Ex quibus descriptis pronum est concludere, 
 
 acutissimam inflammationem optimum Monarchum inter paucos dies 
 e medio sustulisse. 
 
 So the emperor died from an attack of inflammation of 
 the chest with sero-purulent exudation, and the foremost 
 physicians of Vienna diagnosed "rheumatic inflammatory 
 fever." Even the autopsy did not put them on the right 
 track, the diagnosis remained " a very violent inflamma- 
 
 * L.c, No. 137.
 
 Emperor Leopold. 95 
 
 tion " of the peritoneal and pleural cavities. The " signs 
 of inflammation " which they found in the abdominal 
 viscera are omitted for the sake of brevity. The bowel 
 seems not have been opened, of .the condition of its mucous 
 membrane we are told nothing in spite of the chronic 
 diarrhoea which was present. The article concludes : " The 
 medicines which the inquisitive doctor wishes to know 
 consisted of antiphlogistic nitrous remedies and enemata. 
 They were given to arrest the violent inflammation which 
 was clearly shown to have existed by the autopsy, as is 
 shown in the report." 
 
 Lastly, a minute report was promised by the physi- 
 cian in ordinary Lagusius. Hahnemann on June 14th 
 (No. 140) declared : — 
 
 1. That the reply of the emperor's physicians was made 
 with less calmness than the occasion required and that it 
 answered nothing. 
 
 2. That Herr von Lagusius should produce the full 
 report of " this remarkable disease " which had been ex- 
 pected for ten weeks. " He will not refuse our request and 
 will tell his ignorant contemporaries the weighty authorities 
 according to whom a patient should be bled a second, third 
 and fourth time, if the previous bleedings produce no 
 amelioration. He will present us with a history of the case 
 which in pragmatic exactitude, lucid description and 
 veracious fidelity will breathe the spirit of the Asclepiades 
 of Cos." 
 
 Kurt Sprengel* calls this attack of Hahnemann's" fanat- 
 ical," without finding any further fault with it. The 
 defence of the emperor's physicians he calls " very unsatis- 
 factory" and informs us that the promised full history 
 of the case did not appear. 
 
 That it was not Hahnemann's intention to be-little his 
 adversaries is shown by his defending Storck in 1791 
 against other physicians,-f- and pronouncing him one of the 
 greatest physicians; though his true should be carefully 
 
 * Kritische Uebersiclit dcs Ztistandcs der Arziieykitnde ini lctztc7t 
 Jahrzchc?id, Halle, 1801, p. 139. 
 t Translation of Monro II., p. 324.
 
 94 His reductio ad absurdum of the 
 
 separated from his false opinions; also in Hufeland's 
 Journal {\2>o6, 3, p. 49) he declares him worthy of a statue. 
 
 In the year 180$ Hahnemann gave utterance to the 
 following sally : * 
 
 With the exception of what a few distinguished men, to wit, 
 Conrad Gesner, Storck, Cullen, Alexander, Coste and Willemet have 
 done, by administering simple medicines alone and uncombined 
 in certain diseases, or to persons in health, the rest is nothing but 
 opinion, illusion, deception. 
 
 In 1808 he sharply and truly criticises the actual condi- 
 tion of therapeutics,! and at the same time enumerates the 
 modes of treatment employed by the older and younger 
 practitioners of the time : 
 
 The method of treating most diseases by scouring out the stomach 
 and bowels : — the method of treatment which aims its medicinal darts 
 at imaginary acridities and impurities in the blood and other humours, 
 at cancerous, rachitic, scrofulous, gouty, herpetic and scorbutic acridi- 
 ties — the method of treatment that presupposes in most diseases a 
 species of fundamental morbid action, such as dentition or derange- 
 ments of the biliary system, or haemorrhoids, or infarctus, or obs- 
 tructions in the mesenteric glands, or worms, and directs the 
 treatment against these — the method which imagines it has always 
 to do with debility, and conceives it is bound to stimulate, and re- 
 stimulate (which they call strengthen) — the method which regards 
 the diseased body as a mere chemically decomposed mass which 
 must be restored to the proper chemical condition by chemical 
 (nitrogenous, oxygenous, hydrogenous) antidotes : — another method 
 that supposes diseases to have no other originating cause but mucosities 
 — another that sees only inspissation of the juices— another that sees 
 nought but acids — and yet another that thinks it has only to combat 
 putridity, iS:c. 
 
 Imagine the embarrassment in which a physician must be placed, 
 when he comes to the sick-bed, as to whether he should follow this 
 method or the other, in what perplexity he must be when neither 
 the one nor the other mode of treatment avails him : how he, misled 
 now by this, now by that view, feels himself constrained to prescribe 
 now one, now another medicinal formula, again to abandon them 
 and administer something totally different and, finding that none will 
 suit the case, he thinks to effect, by the strength of the doses of 
 most powerful and costly medicines, that cure which he knows not 
 
 * Aesculapius in the Balance. Lesser Writings, p. 488. 
 t On the present want of foreign medicines, Allg. Anz. d. Dcutscheii 
 No. 207. Lesser Writings, 553.
 
 TJierapeiLtics of his time. 95 
 
 (nor any of his colleagues either) how to bring about mildly by means 
 of small, rare doses of the simple but appropriate medicine. 
 
 In the same year 1808 he says in his treatise, On the 
 value of the speculative systems of medicine : * 
 
 I pass on to patJiology, a science in which that same love of system, 
 which has crazed the brains of the metaphysical physiologists, has 
 caused a like misapplication of intellect in the attempt to seaixh into 
 the internal essence of diseases, in order to discover what it is that 
 causes diseases of the organism to become diseases. This they called 
 the proximate internal caicse 
 
 After humoral pathology (that conceit, which took especially with 
 the vulgar, of considering the diseased body as a vessel full of im- 
 purities of all sorts, and of acridities with Greek names which were 
 supposed to cause the obstruction and vitiation of the fluids and solids, 
 putrefaction, fever, everything, in short, whereof the patient complained, 
 and which they fancied they could overcome by sweetening, diluting, 
 purifying, loosening, thickening, cooling and evacuating measures) 
 had, now under a gross, now under a more refined form, lasted through 
 many ages, with occasional interludes of many lesser and greater systems 
 — (to wit, the mechanical origin of diseases, the doctrine which derives 
 diseases from the original form of the parts, that which ascribes them to 
 spasms and paralysis, the solid and the nerve patholog}',t the chemical 
 pathology, &c.) the seer Brown appeared, who, as though he had 
 explored the pent secrets of Nature, stepped forward with amazing 
 assurance, assumed one primaiy principle of life (irritability), would 
 have it to be quantatively increased and diminished, accumulated 
 and exhausted in diseases, and made no account of any other source 
 of disease, but ascribed all diseases to want or excess of strength. 
 He gained the adherence of the whole German medical world, 
 a sure proof that their previous medical notions had never con- 
 vinced and satisfied their minds, and had only floated before them 
 in dim and flickering forms. They caught eagerly at this one- 
 sidedness, which they persuaded themselves into believing was 
 genuine simplicity And what was, after all, his one-sided irrita- 
 bility .'' Could he attach any definite and intelligible idea to it .''"Did 
 he not mystify us with a flood of words destitute of meaning ? 
 Did he not draw us into a treatment of disease, which, while it 
 answers in but few instances, and then imperfectly, could not but in the 
 preponderating remainder give rise to an aggravation or speedy death. 
 
 Nevertheless Hahnemann was not bhnd to the services 
 of others. He shows this with regard to Brown in his 
 
 * Allg. Anz. d. D. Lesser Writings^ p. 561. 
 
 t Nerve pathology was the doctrine that attributed disease to a 
 reaction of the nerves against unusual irritations.
 
 g6 His appreciation of Brown's system. 
 
 excellent essay : Observations on the three current modes of 
 treatment* 
 
 But let us do him justice ! whilst we see that the glory which was 
 to constitute the apotheosis of his original head vanishes, whilst the 
 Titan who sought aimlessly to heap Pelion on Ossa, quietly descends 
 from the rank of heroes — whilst we see that his colossal plan to turn 
 everj'thing topsy-turx'y in the domain of /Esculapius is dashed to 
 pieces, and that the myriads of special diseases cannot be referred by 
 him to one or two causes, or what is the same thing, be decreed by 
 him to consist of two or three identical diseases differing from one 
 another only in degree, nor their infinite varieties be cured by two or 
 three stimulants or non-stimulants — whilst we consign all these 
 arabesque eccentricities to the domain of fable, let us not forget 
 to do him the justice to acknowledge that with a powerful arm he 
 routed the whole gang of humoral, acridity and saburral physicians 
 who, with lancet, tepid drinks, miserable diet, emetics, purgatives 
 and all the nameless varieties of resolvents, threatened to destroy 
 our generation, or at least to deteriorate it radically and reduce 
 it to the lowest possible condition ; that he reduced the number 
 of diseases requiring antiphlogistic treatment to three per cent, of 
 their former amount ; that he determined more accurately the influ- 
 ence of the six so-called non-natural things on our health ; that he 
 refuted the imaginary advantage of vegetable over animal diet to 
 the advantage of mankind ; that he restored to the rank of a 
 remedial agent a judicious regimen, and that he reintroduced the old 
 distinction between diseases from defect of stimulus and those from 
 excess of stimulus, and taught with some degree of truth the differ- 
 ence of their treatment in a general way. This may reconcile us with 
 his manes! 
 
 Very few physicians — perhaps none — saw as clearly as 
 Hahnemann in those days ; it was his strong hand which 
 first succeeded in putting down the mob of bleeding and 
 purging doctors. 
 
 Our author continues his criticism :t 
 
 The transcendental school repudiated the idea of having but one 
 fundamental vital force. The reign of dualism commenced. Now 
 we were fooled by the natural philosophers. For of such seers 
 there was no lack, each devised a new view of things, each wove a 
 different system, having nothing in common but the morbid propensity 
 not only to evolve from their inner consciousness an exact a priori 
 account of the nature and universal constitution of things, but 
 actually to look on themselves as the creators of the whole, and 
 to construct it out of their heads each according to his own fashion. 
 
 * Hufeland's/(92/r;7a/XI., St. 4, 1S09. Lesser Writings, p. 623. 
 t Lesser Writings, p. 562.
 
 Criticism of Contemporary Materia Medica. 97 
 
 All the utterances they maundered forth respecting life in the ab- 
 stract and the essential nature of man were — like their whole con- 
 ception — so unintelligible, so hollow and unmeaning, that no clear 
 sense could be drawn from them. Human speech, which is only fitted 
 to convey the impressions of sense and the ideas immediately flowing 
 
 from them refused to express their conceits, their extravagant 
 
 fantastic visions ; and, therefore, they had to babble them forth in 
 new-fangled, high-sounding words, superlunary locutions, eccentric 
 rhapsodies and unheard of phrases without any sense, and get 
 involved in such gossamer subtleties, that one felt at a loss to know 
 which was the most appropriate — a satire on such a misdirection of 
 mental energy or an elegy on its ill success. We have to thank 
 natural philosophy for the disorder and dislocation of many a young 
 doctor's understanding. Moreover, their self-conceit was yet too 
 much inflated for them to trouble themselves with the study of diseases 
 or their cure ; they were content to prate about their dualism, their 
 polarization, their representation, their reflex, their differentiation and 
 indifferentiation, their potentiation and depotentiation. This natural 
 philosophy still lives and flourishes in a far-fetched doctrine of the 
 spiritualization of matter, and in ecstatic hallucinations concerning the 
 creation and order of the universe and its microcosm — man. 
 
 After describing the natural philosophical doctrine of 
 sensibility, irritability and reproduction, and characterising 
 it as a playing with empty words, he continues : * 
 
 How impossible is it by all these barren a prioris to obtain such 
 a just view of the different maladies as shall enable us to find the remedy 
 suited to each — which ought to be the sole aim of the healing art ! 
 How can one justify to a sound judgment the seeking to make these 
 speculative subtleties, which can never be made concrete and applic- 
 able, the chief study of the practical physician ? 
 
 In the above-mentioned treatise he also criticises the 
 materia medicas of his time : t 
 
 And whence do these authorities on materia medica draw their data r 
 Surely not from an immediate revelation ? In truth, one would almost 
 be induced to believe they must have flowed to them from direct in- 
 spiration, for they cannot be derived from the practice of physicians, 
 who, it is well known, hold it beneath their dignity to prescribe one 
 single, simple medicament and nothing more in a disease, and 
 would let the patient die and the medical art ever remain as a no 
 art, sooner than part with their learned prerogative of \\ riting artis- 
 tically compounded prescriptions. 
 
 * Lesser Waitings, p. 564. f Lesser Writings^ p. 569.
 
 98 Need of a Reform of Medicine. 
 
 Most of the imputed virtues of the simple drugs have, in the 
 first place, obtained a footing in domestic practice and been brought 
 into vogue by the vulgar and non-professional. 
 
 Barren information of this sort was collected by the old herbalists, 
 Mattholi, Tabernaemontanus, Gesner, Fuchs, Lonicer, Ray, Tourne- 
 fort, Bock, Lobel, Thurneisser, Clusius, Bauhin, &c., very briefly, super- 
 ficially and confusedly, and interwoven with baseless and superstitious 
 conjectures, intermingled with that which the unciting Dioscorides 
 had in a similar manner collected, and from this unsifted catalogue 
 was our learned-looking mataia viedica supplied. One authority 
 copied another down to our own times. Such is its not very trust- 
 worthy origin. 
 
 The few books that form an exception to this (Bergius and Cullen), 
 are all the more meagre in data respecting the properties of the 
 medicine ; consequently, as they for the most part, the latter 
 especially, reject the vague and doubtful, we can gain little positive 
 knowledge from them. 
 
 Similar opinions respecting the allopathic materia medica 
 we frequently find in more recent literature; we might fill a 
 volume with them. But in Hahnemann's time such attacks 
 were unheard of, " audacious " as the allopaths maintained. 
 No physician since Paracelsus had dared to expose with 
 such frankness and boldness the miserable condition of 
 the medical treatment of the period. 
 
 In an anonymous article,* in the year i8oS, after he had for 
 twenty years past been calling the attention of his contem- 
 porary physicians to the evils wrought by the healing art 
 he writes : — 
 
 It must some time or other be loudly and publicly said, so let it now 
 be boldly and frankly said before the whole world, that our art requires 
 a thorough reform from top to bottom. What should not be done is 
 done, and what is essential is utterly neglected. The evil has come to 
 such a pitch that the well-meant mildness of a John Huss is no longer 
 of any use, but the fiery zeal of a stalwart Martin Luther is required 
 to clear away this monstrous leaven. 
 
 No other science or art, or even handicraft, has advanced so little 
 with the progress of time, no art is so behindhand in its radical imper- 
 fection as the medical art. 
 
 Sometimes one fashion is followed, sometimes another, first one 
 theory then another, and when the new does not seem to answer, the 
 old is again tried (which was found to be inadequate before). Treatment 
 
 Allg. Anz. d. D., No. 207. Lesser ]l'riti/igs^ p. 573.
 
 Provings of Drug in foruier times. 99 
 
 is always guided, not by conviction, but by opinion, each new mode 
 of treatment was the more artistic and learned the less it succeeded, 
 so that we are reduced to the wretched and hopeless choice of one of 
 the numerous methods, almost all equally impotent, and have no fixed 
 therapeutic principles of acknowledged value. Each follows the 
 teaching of his own school and what his imagination suggests to him, 
 and everyone finds in the immense magazine of opinions, authorities 
 to which he can refer for confirmation. 
 
 At the conclusion of his treatise On the value of the 
 speculative systems of medicine, he exclaims :* 
 
 Such is the fearful but too true condition of the medical art hitherto, 
 which, under the treacherous promise of recovery and health, has been 
 gnawing at the life of so many of the inhabitants of earth. 
 
 Oh ! that it were mine to direct the better portion of the medical 
 world, who can feel for the sufferings of their fellow creatures, and 
 lon^ to know how they may relie\-e them, to those purer principles 
 which lead directly to the desired goal. 
 
 TJie proving of dnigs on the healthy organism. 
 
 It is true that in all ages drugs were proved, and that on 
 the healthy body. On this point Hahnemann says : -f- 
 
 But in all the works on Materia Rlcdica^ from Dioscorides 
 down to the latest books on this subject, there is almost nothmg 
 said about the special peculiar action of individual medicines ; but, 
 besides an account of their supposed utility in various nosological 
 names of diseases, it is merely stated whether they promote the secre- 
 tion of urine, perspiration, expectoration or menstruation, and more 
 particularly whether they produce evacuation of the stomach and 
 bowels upwards or downwards ; because all the aspirations and efforts 
 of the practitioner have ever been chiefly directed to cause the expul- 
 sion of a material morbific matter, and of sundry (fictitious) acridities, 
 on which it was imagined diseases depended. 
 
 There were a few exceptions to this, as Hahnemann 
 admits, for instance, Conrad Gesner, Storck, Cullen, Alex- 
 ander, Coste and Willemet. Haller also is honourably 
 mentioned by Hahnemann on account of his proposal to 
 ascertain the effects of medicines by provings on the human 
 organism. But even these men only proved medicines in 
 isolated cases, none of them proceeded systematically. 
 
 * Lesser Writings, p. 573. 
 
 t Organon, 5 Edit. Dudgeon's trans, p. 16.
 
 100 H alineviann' s e.vly 
 
 Hahnemann zuas the first zvho made the proving of 
 medicines a system. 
 
 As early as 1790 wc sec Hahnemann experimenting with 
 drugs upon himself. In 1796 he writes in Hufeland's 
 Journal* that the search for specific remediesf was the 
 most desirable and praiseworthy undertaking, but he 
 laments the utter want of any principle for discovering 
 them; hitherto experience only has been the doubtful 
 o-uidc. " Nothing then remains for ns hit to test the medicines 
 on our ozvn bodies. The necessity of this has been perceived 
 in all ages, but a false way was generally followed, inas- 
 much as they were only employed empirically and capri- 
 ciously in diseases." In this way, he continues, no certain 
 results could be gathered, more especially as medicines 
 were given mixed together. 
 
 " The true physician whose sole aim is to perfect his art 
 can make use of no other information concerning medicines 
 than — 
 
 " First, what is the pure action of each by itself on the 
 
 healthy human body. 
 " Secondly, what do observations of their action in 
 
 various simple or complicated maladies teach 
 
 us ? " 
 In order to ascertain the actions of drugs on the health}- 
 body, he recommends proving on ourselves and the study 
 of records of poisoning. " A complete collection of this 
 kind of information with estimation of the degree of reliance 
 to be placed on their reporters would be, if I am not very 
 much mistaken, the foundation stone of a materia medica, 
 the sacred book of its revelation " 
 
 * II., St. 3, p. 465. Lesser lVrifi72g-s^ 309 ef. scq. 
 
 t In this place we may observe that the word specific has a difterent 
 meaning in liomceopathy to what it has among allopathic therapeutists. 
 The latter understand by specific remedies such as are employed for a 
 certain disease ; thus for them quinine is a specific for ague, mercury 
 for syphilis, &c. The physician who seeks for one medicine for a form 
 of disease, falls into routine practice. Homceopathists understand by 
 specific remedies such as are capable of influencing under certain con- 
 ditions, certain organs and tissues, these and none other.
 
 P roving s of Medicines. lOl 
 
 He zealously occupied himself and others who devoted 
 themselves to it with the proving of medicines, the collec- 
 tion of cases of poisoning and the formation from the 
 results thus arrived at of a materia medica which should be 
 free from all assumptions and founded only on experiment. 
 
 His great endeavour was to found a physiological materia 
 medica. 
 
 His first essay of this kind was called, Fragnienta de 
 vit'ibits iiiedicamentonini positivis,\Ji^?A?^, 1805, wherein he 
 arranged systematically the results of his provings and of 
 his studies. He himself says of it in the preface : " Nemo me 
 melius novit, qiiam manca sint ct temiar Nevertheless a 
 merely superficial glance at this collection will show with 
 what devoted diligence and earnestness of conviction he 
 worked at it. The book consists of two parts, of which the 
 first contains 269, the second with the repertory of the first, 
 470 pages. 
 
 The drugs in this work whose effects he partly proved on 
 himself and partly gleaned from the toxicological observa- 
 tions of others, are the following in their order : Aconitum 
 napellus, tinctura acris (Hahnemann's causticum), arnica, 
 belladonna, camphor, lytta vesicatoria (cantharides), cap- 
 sicum annuum, chamomilla, china, cocculus, cuprum 
 vitriolatum, digitalis, hyoscyamus, ignatia, ipecacuanha, 
 ledum palastre, helleborus niger, mezereum, nux vomica, 
 opium, Pulsatilla, rheum, stramonium, Valeriana, veratrum 
 album. 
 
 In the same year, 1805, he says in his Medicine of 
 Expej'ience : * " those substances which we term medicines 
 are unnatural irritants, only calculated to disturb the health 
 of our body, our life and the functions of our organs, and 
 to excite disagreeable sensations, in one word to render the 
 healthy — sick. There is no medicine whatever which does 
 not possess this tendency, and no substance is medicinal 
 which does not possess it." 
 
 Therefore he required the most exact proving of drugs 
 on the human body in order to ascertain their powers. In 
 
 * Lesser Writings^ p. 514.
 
 102 Siibsiitiites for foreign drugs. 
 
 the following year, 1806, Hahnemann contributed another 
 essay on drug provings and minute individualization to 
 Hufcland's/^?/nz(^/.* Two years later he discoursesf in his 
 article On substitutes for foreign drtigs and on the recent 
 announcement of their superflHOUsness^ in the following 
 manner : — 
 
 Let us only teach physicians principles of universal applicability 
 according to which the powers of drugs may be ascertained and 
 tested with certainty, as to what each is incontrovertibly useful and 
 suitable for, to what cases of disease each is unexceptionably adapted, 
 
 and what is the proper dose But we are by along way not 
 
 so far advanced as this. No principles are yet universally recog- 
 nised, according to which the curative powers of medicines (even of 
 such as have never yet been employed at the sick bed) can with 
 certainty be ascertained a priori^ without first subjecting them to the 
 infinitely tedious process of testing them in haphasard fashion at the 
 sick bed, which is almost never convincing and is usually attended 
 with injurious effects. This obscure mode ab cffectii in niorbis 
 whereby little or nothing is determined, has, moreover, the cruel 
 and unpardonable disadvantage that the individual, naturally so 
 irritable when diseased, is apt to be made worse by so many blindly 
 instituted experiments, and may even fall a \'ictim to them, especi- 
 ally since the recent fashion of prescribing large doses of powerful 
 medicines has been adopted. 
 
 But as long as the former better method is not established in the State, 
 and the latter mode only is so, which has been from the beginning 
 acknowledged to be unserviceable and insufficient — so long will 
 contradictory opinions of physicians relative to the curative powers of 
 medicines continue. 
 
 A glaring instance of these " contradictory opinions of 
 physicians " had just been given : the Vienna medical 
 faculty had pronounced cascarilla quite superfluous,^ while 
 
 * On Substitutes for China^ xxiii. St. 4, p. 27. British fourtial of 
 Homaopathy, xlii. 212. 
 
 t AUg. Anz. d. Z*., No. 237. Lesser IVi'i tings, p. 574. 
 
 X In consequence of the continental blockade there occurred a 
 sensible deficiency of foreign drugs, particularly for the immoderate 
 doses of medicine then in vogue. That most keenly felt by physicians 
 was the want of cinchona bark, for which a vast number of substitutes, 
 mostly complicated mixtures of bitter drugs, was proposed. (Hahne- 
 mann repeatedly declared that there could be no surrogates in the 
 sense attached to the word by his colleagues, and in 180S advised as 
 the best help out of the difficulty that it should be noted that when the
 
 Mode of Action of Bark in Ague. 103 
 
 the well-known Professor Hecker, of Berlin, in No. 221 
 of the Allgemeiner Anzeiger der DeiitseJien maintained — 
 " Cascarilla is not only equally efficacious with cinchona 
 bark in intermittent fever, but is even preferable." Hahne- 
 mann showed that this was an unwarrantable assumption, 
 because Hecker never employed cascarilla alone, nor 
 does he mention in what kind of intermittent fever he 
 rave it. 
 
 Similia Siinilibus. 
 
 m order to learn what that " better method " referred to 
 is we must go back some years. In the Instruction to sti.r- 
 geons concerning venereal diseases* 1789, Hahnemann speaks 
 of the mode of action of mercury, which he alleged to be a 
 counter-irritant action on the body, gave a description of 
 in its most developed form, and called " mercurial fever." 
 He had thus already left the beaten track, for it was the 
 fashion to believe that it acted by removing the " miasma " 
 by means of salivation, sweat, diarrhoea or urinary secre- 
 tion. Hahnemann considered the production of his " mer- 
 curial fever" necessary for the cure of syphilis. 
 
 In the following year, 1790, Hahnemann translated 
 Cullen's materia Medica. Cullen (II. 108) explains the 
 efficacy of cinchona in intermittent fever by the " strength- 
 ening power it exerts on the stomach," and adds, " that 
 he has never met with anything in any book which made 
 him doubt the truth of his view." Hahnemann rejects 
 this explanation in a note, and adds : — 
 
 Let us consider the following : — Substances such as strong coffee, 
 pepper, arnica, ignatia and arsenic, which cause a kind of fever, extin- 
 guish the periodicity of intermittent fevers. For the sake of experiment, 
 I took for several days four drachms of good cinchona bark twice a day ; 
 
 medicine was suitable such large doses were not required). Difficul- 
 ties were also experienced from the failure of the supply of other drugs 
 which the Vienna Faculty sought to overcome by publishing in the 
 Allg. Ans. d. Deufschcn, 1808, No. 305, a list of foreign medicines which 
 they alleged to be " quite superfluous," as for instance Peruvian balsam, 
 copaiba, cina, colocynth, sarsaparilla, senega, tamarinds, &c. 
 * Lesser lVriii?j(^s^ p. yy.
 
 104 HaJiiieniann's first proving of Bark. 
 
 my feet, finger tips, &c., first grew cold, I became exhausted and sleepy ; 
 then my heart began to palpitate, my pulse became hard and rapid ; 
 I had intolerable anxiety, trembling (but not rigor), prostration in all 
 my limbs ; then throbbing in the head, flushing of the cheeks, thirst, 
 and in short all the ordinary symptoms of interm.ittent fever [Hahne- 
 mann had suffered from ague in Erlangen, Monro^ II, 396] appeared 
 one after another, but without actual febrile rigor. In a word, even 
 the special characteristic symptoms of intermittent fever, dulness of 
 the senses, a kind of stiffness of all the joints, and in particular the 
 disagreeable numb sensation which seemed to be located in the 
 periosteal covering of all the bones of the body, made their appear- 
 ance. This paroxysm lasted two to three hours each time and returned 
 when I repeated the dose, otherwise not. On leaving off the drug 
 I was soon quite well. 
 
 On page 115 he mentions that a kind of artificial fever 
 must be produced by ipecacuanha in order to cure certain 
 forms of intermittent fever. 
 
 In 1 79 1 his translation of Monro appeared (1794, a 
 second unaltered edition). Here, also, he holds the view 
 (II. 333) that "in insidious fevers from unknown causes in 
 which the vital force is sluggish, a new, strengthening and 
 efficacious fever " must be excited. In the chapter on 
 cinchona, he again declares against "its tonic action" as 
 the cause of its febrifuge property. (II. 378) " If, how- 
 ever, we accept the view given at length in my note in 
 Cullen's Mat. Mcdica, that bark in addition to its tonic 
 action, overpowers and suppresses the intermittent fever 
 chiefly by exciting a fever of short duration of its own, it 
 will not be difficult to explain this paradox. All other 
 substances capable of exciting counter-irritation and artifi- 
 cial fever, given shortly before the paroxysm, check inter- 
 mittent fever quite as specifically, but they cannot be relied 
 upon with such certainty." 
 
 " Sinnlia simililms " had not been pronounced, though he 
 remarks (II. 181) that the mercurial disease resembled that 
 of syphilis, without making any application of the resem- 
 blance. He started with the idea of aiding the inherent 
 recuperative power by a medicinal excitant acting directly 
 on the part affected, while his contemporaries were talking 
 of resolving obstructions, expelling aci-idities and evil hu- 
 mours, removing the " morbidly over-produced, accumu-
 
 Contraria contrariis curentur. 105 
 
 lated inflammatory blood " from organs, remedying poverty 
 of blood, counter-irritating, altering, strengthening, astring- 
 ing, giving tone, &c. 
 
 As a therapeutic axiom, he first alludes to the simile in 
 the year 1796, in the well-known article in Hufeland's 
 Journal: Essay on a nezu principle for discovering the 
 curative pozuer of drugs* In the first place he speaks of 
 the several ways adopted in practical medicine for treating 
 the pathological changes of the body. 
 
 TJie first way^ to reinoiie or destroy the fitndaniental cause of the 
 disease, was the most elevated it could follow. All the imaginings and 
 aspirations of the best physicians in all ages were directed to this 
 object, the most worthy of the dignity of our art. 
 
 Further on he speaks of this method as above all criti- 
 cism, but says that the drugs chosen were not always those 
 best adapted for the purpose. 
 
 I shall now take leave of this roj'al road, and examine the other 
 two ways of applj'ing medicines. 
 
 The author then mentions the drugs which act according 
 to the principle contraria contrariis, for instance, purgatives 
 in constipation, venesection, cold and saltpetre in inflam- 
 mations, alkalies in acidity of the stomach, opium in 
 neuralgia. 
 
 In acute diseases, which, if we remove the obstacles to recovery for 
 but a few days, Nature will herself generally conquer, or if we cannot 
 do so, succumb ; in acute diseases, I repeat, this application of 
 remedies is proper, to the purpose and sufficient, as long as we do 
 not possess the above-mentioned philosopher's stone (the knowledge 
 of the fundamental cause of each disease, and the means of its 
 removal), or as long as we have no rapidly acting specific. 
 
 In chronic diseases, he contends, the mode of treatment 
 according to contraria contrariis must be rejected ; it is 
 improper to treat constipation by purgatives, the excited 
 circulation of hysterical, cachectic and hypochondriacal pa- 
 tients by venesection, acid eructations by alkalies, chronic 
 pains by opium, &c. 
 
 And although the great majority of my medical brethren still adhere 
 to this method, I do not fear to call it palliative, injurious and destruc- 
 tive. 
 
 * Lesser Writings, p. 295.
 
 loG The Search for Specifics. 
 
 I beseech my colleagues to abandon this method (contraria con- 
 trariis) in chronic diseases, and in such acute diseases as tend to 
 assume a chronic character ; it is the deceitful bye-path in the dark 
 forest that leads to the fatal swamp. The \ain empiric imagines it to 
 be the beaten highway, and plumes himself on the wretched power of 
 giving a few hours' ease, unconcerned if, during this specious calm, the 
 disease plant its roots still deeper. 
 
 But I am not singular in warning against this fatal practice. The 
 better, more discerning and conscientious physicians have from time 
 to time sought for remedies (the tJiird way) for chronic diseases and 
 acute diseases tending to chronic, which should not cloak the 
 symptoms, but which should remo\e the disease radically, in one word 
 for specific remedies 
 
 But what guided them, what principle induced them to try such 
 remedies ? Alas ! only a precedent from the empirical game of hazard, 
 from domestic practice, chance cases in which these substances were 
 accidentally found useful in this or that disease, often only in peculiar 
 unmentioned combinations, which might perhaps never again occur ; 
 sometimes in pure simple diseases. It were deplorable indeed if 
 only chance and empirical hap-hazard could be considered as our guides 
 in the discovery and application of the proper, the true remedies for 
 chronic diseases, which certainly constitute the major portion of human 
 ills. In order to ascertain the actions of remedial agents, for the 
 purpose of applying them to the relief of human suffering, we should 
 trust as little as possible to chance, but go to work as rationally 
 and as methodically as possible. 
 
 He then demands provings of drugs on the healthy 
 organism, as he had ahxady mentioned. 
 
 By them alone can the true nature, the real action of medicinal sub- 
 stances be nietJiodically discovered ; from them alone can we learn in 
 what cases of disease they may be employed with success and 
 certainty. 
 
 But as the key for this is still wanting, perhaps I am so fortunate as 
 to be able to point out the principle under the guidance of which the 
 lacunae in medicine may be filled up, and the science perfected by 
 the gradual disco\'ery and application on rational principles of a suit- 
 able specific remedy for each, more especially for each chronic disease, 
 among the hitherto known (and among still unknown) medicines. It 
 is contained I may say in the following axioms. 
 
 Every powerful medicinal substance p7'oduces in the huniaii body a 
 peculiar kind of disease, the more powetful the medicine, the jnore 
 peculiar, marked and violciit the disease. 
 
 IVe should imitate natu7-e, which sometimes cures a chronic disease 
 by superadding another, and employ in the (especially chronic) disease 
 7VC wish to cure, that medicine which is able to produce another very
 
 Different modes of Drug- Action. 10/ 
 
 similar artificial disease, and the former will be cured ; siinilia 
 siiiiilibiis. 
 
 We only require to know, on the one hand, the diseases of the 
 human frame accurately in their essential characteristics and their 
 accidental complications, and on the other hand, the pure effects of 
 drugs, that is, the essential characteristics of the specific artificial 
 disease and attendant symptoms caused by difference of dose, form, 
 (S:c., and by choosing a remedy for a given natural disease that is 
 capable of producing a very similar artificial disease, we shall be able 
 to cure the most severe diseases. 
 
 This axiom has, I confess, so much the appearance of a barren, 
 analytical formula that I must hasten to illustrate it synthetically. 
 
 Before he enters upon this he makes a few more remarks 
 on the mode of action of medicines. 
 
 Most medicines have more than one action ; the first a direct 
 action, which gradually changes into the second (which I call the indirect 
 secondary action). The latter is generally a state exactly the opposite 
 of the former. In this way most vegetable substances act. 
 
 But few medicines are exceptions to this rule, continuing their 
 primary action uninterruptedly, but of the same kind, though always 
 diminishing in degree, until after some time no trace of their action 
 can be detected, and the natural condition of the organism is restored. 
 Of this kind are the metallic (and other mineral ?) medicines, e.g., 
 arsenic, mercur)', lead. 
 
 If, in a case of chronic disease, a medicine be given whose direct 
 primary action corresponds to the disease, the indirect secondary 
 action is sometimes exactly the state of the body sought to be brought 
 about. 
 
 Palliative remedies do so much harm in chronic diseases, and 
 render them more obstinate, probably because after their first antago- 
 nistic action they are followed by a secondary action, which is similar 
 to the disease itself. 
 
 In the " elucidation by examples " of his therapeutic 
 principle, he cites a number of drugs. Hahnemann here 
 commits a great error, the greatest possible under the cir- 
 cumstances. He leaves the method by induction too soon, 
 and assumes the truth of many effects of drugs which he 
 should first have tested. Various hypotheses are quoted 
 instead of evidence, while other examples are very unsatis- 
 factory. If he had only made use of unassailable demon- 
 strations as he did with belladonna, mercury, arsenic, aconite, 
 veratrum album, ipecacuanha, rhus, and discarded all doubt- 
 ful matter, he would have much better served his cause.
 
 io8 Examples of howucopathic medication. 
 
 We shall here quote some of Hahnemann's evidence, we 
 must, however, not forget that he was a child of his times 
 and could not have the knowledge of our day. 
 
 Belladonna excites mania and convulsions, therefore it 
 is effectual in certain cases of insanity and epilepsy. " Its 
 great tendency to paralyse the optic nerve, renders it, as 
 a similarly acting substance, an important remedy in 
 amaurosis, in which I have myself seen very good results." 
 
 It produces a kind of sleeplessness and cures it. Bella- 
 donna has been found useful in serous apoplexy, and it 
 produces similar states. 
 
 Hyoscyamus produces and cures a certain kind of mania. 
 It excites convulsions and is, therefore, beneficial in 
 epilepsy. For similar reasons it sometimes cures chronic 
 sleeplessness. Mercury produces rodent ulcers and caries 
 of the bones ; " experience has confirmed the usefulness of 
 this specific." Arsenic, according to Hahnemann's own 
 experience, is very apt to excite febrile rigors and a 
 paroxysm recurring daily, each time weaker. It is there- 
 fore a curative drug in intermittent fever. Hufeland 
 remarks thereupon in a note : " I must here remark with 
 all due deference to the author, that I cannot yet accept 
 the internal use of arsenic in intermittent fever." 
 
 Arsenic causes many chronic skin eruptions and also 
 cures them under certain conditions. 
 
 Rhus causes erysipelatous skin eruptions and can heal 
 them. Rheum causes diarrhoea and cures certain kinds. 
 
 Every physician who studies Hahnemann's writings in 
 an impartial spirit, must come to the conclusion that with 
 many faults he was honestly anxious to find in the mighty 
 chaos of assumptions, guesses, theoretical speculations and 
 bewildering variety of experience, a firm footing on the 
 ground of natural science for the foundation of medicine. 
 
 From some remarks of Hahnemann in the following years, 
 we see that he was quietly and incessantly occupied with the 
 construction of a therapeutics according to his principles. 
 In 1799 he remarks in his ApotJickcrlexicon (in which he gives 
 observations on the action of single drugs) with regard to 
 sabina, that the leaves and oil of this plant have the power
 
 Siniilia shnilibus an-enUir, 109 
 
 of exciting haemorrhages especially from the uterus, and 
 may be successfully employed in such affections under 
 certain circumstances. Also apropos of hyoscyamus he 
 alleges that its toxic effects greatly resemble diseases which 
 can be cured by it. In the following year he recommends 
 belladonna in scarlet fever on the same therapeutic 
 principle. 
 
 In 1805 the Medicine of Experience appeared, in which 
 Hahnemann pursues the following train of thought* 
 
 Eveiy disease is owing' to some abnormal irritation of a peculiar 
 character, which deranges the functions and healthy state of our 
 organs. 
 
 To this main maxim he adds two " maxims of experi- 
 ence " : 
 
 First viaxini of experience. 
 
 When two abnormal irritations act simultaneously on the body, 
 if the two be dissimilar, then the action of the one (the A\"eaker) 
 irritation will be suppressed and suspended for some time by the 
 other (the stronger). 
 
 Secojid maxim of cxperic7tce. 
 IV/icn t/te two irritations greatly resemble each other, then the one 
 (the weaker) irritation, together with its effects, will be completely 
 extinguished and annihilated by the analogous power of the other 
 (the stronger). 
 
 He supports these axioms by examples from daily prac- 
 tice and concludes : 
 
 In order therefore to be able to ewe, v.e shall only require to oppose to 
 the existing' abnormal irritation of the disease an appropriate medi- 
 cine, that is to say, another morbific power whose effect is very similar 
 to that the disease displays. 
 
 Further on he says : 
 
 It is only by this property of producing; in the healthy body a se?'ies 
 of specific morbid symptoms, tJiat medicine can cure diseases, that is to 
 say, remove and extinguish the morbid in-itation by a suitable counto- 
 irritation. Every simple medicinal substance, like the specific mor- 
 bific miasmata (small -pox, measles, the venom of vipers, the sali\a 
 of rabid animals, &c.) causes a peculiar specific disease — a series of 
 determinate symptoms, which is not produced precisely in the same 
 way by any other medicine in the world 
 
 * Lesser JJ'ritings, p. 510.
 
 1 1 o One single remedy at a time. 
 
 In order to follow still further this natural 5,^uide, and to penetrate 
 more profoundly into this source of knowledge, we administer these 
 medicines experimentally, the weaker as well as the stronger, each 
 singly and uncombined, to healthy individuals with caution and care- 
 fully remov'ing all accessory circumstances capable of exercising an 
 influence ; we note down the symptoms they occasion precisely 
 in the order in which they occur, and thus we obtain the pure result 
 of the form of disease that each of these medicinal substances is 
 capable of producing, absolutely and by itself, in the human body. 
 
 In this way we must obtain a knowledge of a sufficient supply of 
 artificial morbific agents (medicines) for curative implements, so that 
 we may be able to make a selection from among them. My Fmg- 
 menta de viribus medicanicntorum are something of this sort. 
 
 From this method of employing drugs he distinguishes 
 the palHative method, according to which purgatives are 
 given in constipation, opium in pain, cold in inflammation, 
 &c. 
 
 We cannot refrain from quoting the following paragraphs, 
 though we may be accused of repetition. 
 
 If we observe attentively we shall percei\e that wise nature pro- 
 duces the greatest effects with simple, often with small means. To 
 imitate her in this should be the highest aim of the reflecting mind. 
 But the greater the number of means and appliances we heap together 
 in order to attain a single object, the farther do we stray from the 
 precepts of our great instructress, and the more miserable will be our 
 work. 
 
 With a few simple remedies, used singly one after the other, more 
 frequently however with one alone, we may restore to normal harmony 
 the greatest derangements of the diseased body, we may change the 
 most chronic, apparently incurable diseases (not unfrequently in the 
 shortest space of time) into health — whereas w^e may, by the em- 
 ployment of a heap of ill-selected and composite remedies, see the 
 most insignificant ailments degenerate into the greatest, most for- 
 midable and most incurable diseases. 
 
 Which of these two methods will the professor of the healing art, 
 who strives after perfection, choose ? A single simple remedy is always 
 calculated to produce the most beneficial effects, without any addi- 
 tional means : provided it be the best selected, the most appropriate, 
 and in the proper dose. It is iicvcr requisite to mix two of them 
 together. 
 
 We administer a medicine in order if possible to remove the 
 whole disease by this single substance, or if this be not completely 
 practicable, to obserxe from the effect of the medicine what still 
 remains to be cured. One, two, or at the most three simple 
 medicines are sufficient for the removal of the greatest disease
 
 HaJincniann's Precursors. ill 
 
 and if this result does not follow, the fault lies with us ; it is not 
 nature, nor the disease, that is to blame.* 
 
 Now, as in e\eiy case, only a single simple medicinal substance is 
 necessar)', no true physician would ever think of degrading himself 
 and his art and defeating his own object, by giving a mixture of 
 medicines. It will rather be a sign that he is certain of his subject if 
 we find him prescribing only a single medicinal substance.f 
 
 In this work he attempts to support his therapeutic 
 principle by quotations from the writings of the older phy- 
 sicians. 
 
 Occasionally, however, physicians suspected that it was that property 
 of medicines (now confirmed by innumerable observations) of ex- 
 citing (positive) symptoms analogous to the disease, by virtue of a 
 tendency inherent in them, which enabled them to effect real cures. 
 But this ray of truth, I confess, seldom penetrated the spirit of our 
 schools, enshrouded as they were in a cloud of systems. 
 
 Thus Hippocrates or the author of the book riept t6-kwv twv kot' 
 avepwirov (Basil. 1538, frob. page 72, lin. 35) give utterance to the re- 
 markable words : Sia ra Ojjioia vovcros yiverai, Kai Sia. to, Ofxoia irposrpepo/j.fva 
 €/c vosevvTcijv vyiaivovTai, &C. 
 
 He adds the names of Detharding, Major, Brendelius, 
 Dankwerts, and in the Oj-ganon he also mentions Bertholon, 
 Thoury, Storck and the Dane Stahl. In Hufeland's 
 Jonrnal\ he says in 1807 : 
 
 Though here and there a wise man was found who had the courage 
 to oppose the general ideas and to advocate " similia similibus,'' this 
 proposition did not find general acceptation. 
 
 Hahnemann adds later on in the Organon : § 
 
 I do not bring forward the following passages from authors who 
 had a presentiment of homoeopathy as proofs in support of this 
 doctrine, which is firmly established on its own merits, but in order 
 to avoid the imputation of having suppressed these foreshadowings 
 with the view of securing for myself the credit of the priority of the 
 idea. 
 
 He might well say, however :|| " None has as yet taiigJit 
 this homoeopathic therapeutic doctrine ; " emphasis being 
 placed on the word " taught." 
 
 * Lesser Wntzjtgs, p. 533. 
 
 t Lesser Writings., p. 536. 
 
 X Vol. XXVI., St. 2, pp. 5 and 6. 
 
 § Dudgeon's translation, p. 106. 
 
 II Organon, ist edit., p. 5.
 
 112 Contempt for syniptomatic treatment. 
 
 In the year 1807, in Hufcland's Jourjial, he attempts to 
 support his therapeutic principle by very numerous quota- 
 tions of the observations of earher physicians,* in addition 
 to his former instances. But here again he allowed himself 
 to be carried away by his zeal ; the selection of his evidence 
 was not sufficiently careful, so that his opponents in many 
 cases easily discovered inaccuracies 
 
 Hahnemann's viezvs respecting' disease and his examination 
 of the patient. 
 
 As early as in 1786 Hahnemann blames the treatment of 
 single symptoms of a disease instead of the disease itself, 
 the " white-washing " of symptoms as he calls it (Preface 
 to Arsenical Poisoning). He speaks to the same effect in 
 various other places, as e.g., in 1800, in the preface to the 
 ArzneiscJiatz!\ 
 
 And thus as though they were independent beings endowed with free 
 vohtion, each ingredient in a complete prescription has its task allotted 
 to it, velinvitissima Minerva Hygciaque, and many other things are ex- 
 pected of it; for there are many learned considerations in a regular classi- 
 cal prescription. This indication and that one must be fulfilled, three, 
 four and more symptoms must be met by as many different remedies. 
 Consider Arcesilas ! how many remedies must be artistically com- 
 bined in order to make the attack at once from all points. Something 
 for the tendency to vomit, something else for the diarrhoea, something 
 else for the evening fever and night sweats. And as the patient is so 
 weak, tonic medicines must be added, and not one alone, but several, 
 in order that what the one cannot do (which we don't know) the other 
 may 
 
 But what if all the symptoms p7-oceeded from one cause, as is a/ most 
 always the case, and there wet'e one single drug that would meet all 
 these symptoms. 
 
 In order, however, to obtain an accurate picture of the 
 disease, he insisted on a minute examination of the patient 
 and all his symptoms. He thus writes in 1805 in Medicine 
 of Experience :\ — 
 
 * Fingerzeige aif den hom'oopathischen Gebrauch der Ar::neien in 
 der bisherigen Praxis, vol. XXVI., St. 2, p. 5 — 43. This is given in 
 Dudgeon's translation of the Organo7i. 
 
 t Lesser Writings, p. J 02. 
 
 + Lesser Writings, p. 505.
 
 Examination of the Patient. 113 
 
 The internal essential nature of every malady, of every individual 
 case of disease, as far as it is necessary for us to know it for the 
 purpose of curing it, expresses itself by the syniiptonis as they present 
 themselves to the investigations of the true observer in their whole 
 extent, connexion and succession. 
 
 When the physician has discovered all the obscr\able symptoms of 
 disease that exist, he has discovered the disease itself, he has attained 
 the complete conception of it requisite for the cure. 
 
 To enable us to perform a cure, we require to have a faithful 
 picture of the disease with all its manifestations, and in addition, 
 when this can be obtained, a knowledge of its predisposing and 
 exciting causes, in order, after effecting the cure by means of medi- 
 cines, to enable us to remove these also, by means of an improved 
 regimen, and so prevent a relapse 
 
 The patient relates the history of his ailments, those about him 
 describe what they have observed in him, the physician sees, hears, 
 feels, &c., all that there is of an altered or unusual character about 
 him, and notes down each particular in its order, so that he may form 
 an accurate picture of the disease. 
 
 In the following pages he gives ample instructions as to 
 what questions should be asked the patient and how he should 
 be examined. He himself kept a very minute record of the 
 cases of his patients. In each case he noted exactly the 
 history and course of the disease down to the very minutest 
 symptoms and deviations from health. For this purpose 
 he often spent hours examining his patient. He also 
 informed himself of the hygienic conditions of the abode, 
 mode of life, preparation of food, occupation of his time, 
 &;c. ; * all this at a time when physicians, with few excep- 
 tions, limited their energies to writing prescriptions. 
 
 These investigations of the disease were more and more 
 minutely conducted by him as he became more and more 
 convinced in the course of time that every disease had a 
 special individual character. We very soon find him an 
 enemy to all classifications and generalisations as the 
 reader is already aware from his own words.f Here we may 
 
 * Comp. Hahnemaiiifs Leben von Albrecht, Leipzig, 1875, P- 9°? 
 also Elias, Horn. Giirkeiimonate^ Halle, 1827, p. 29. 
 
 t Comp. Apothekerlexicoii, II., p. 88 ; then II., part 2, pp. 62, 99, 
 loi, 123, 151, 152. "The physician who for every pain, every cough, 
 every diarrhoea, has recourse to opium, is an out and out quack," pp. 
 206, 244, 282, 327, 330, 350, 356, 358, 364, 393, 399, 432, 450, 469- 
 
 8
 
 114 Criticism of the ordinary practice 
 
 quote a few of Hahnemann's characteristic remarks in the 
 ArzneiscJiatz, of 1800, in which he insists upon the exact 
 diagnosis and investigation of individual varieties of 
 disease : " I think it a pity that no distinction has been 
 made between the many varieties of dropsy, and that only 
 one dropsy is spoken of The division into leucophlegmatic 
 and inflammatory is not nearly adequate, any more than 
 that of insanity into mania and melancholia. What should 
 we think of a botanist who recognised no division of plants 
 except into trees and herbs?" (page 71) When pareira 
 root is recommended, Hahnemann exclaims : " Must it then 
 be given in all cases of renal and vesical disease without 
 exception ? What a noble remedy it must be if it can cure 
 them all ! " (page 227.) 
 
 Cinchona bark is recommended in a particular minutely 
 described case. Hahnemann says : — " A single accurate 
 description of a case, such as this, in which a drug should 
 be employed, is worth a whole bulky volume of empirically 
 jumbled prescriptions, though componded secunduin arte?n." 
 (p. 202). 
 
 The time of administration and the duration of the 
 action of cinchona are spoken of, and the contradictory 
 views of the best physicians, CuUen, Werlhof, Morton, 
 Talbor, &c., given. On this Hahnemann says : " How 
 exact must have been the observations of the physicians 
 who after their employment of one of the most extensively 
 used medicines, bark, for more than 160 years in a disease 
 marked by characteristic symptoms of the most well-defined 
 kind, neither knew the proper time for its administration 
 nor how long its action lasted. (I found that its action 
 ■ended twenty hours after its administration.) How can 
 they presume to give reliable instruction with regard to the 
 action of more rarely employed drugs in less characteristi- 
 cally defined diseases?" (p. 245) 
 
 A mixture of chamomile, myrrh and potash is recom- 
 mended in ague. Hahnemann : " These one-sided modes 
 of procedure cannot lead us to the discovery of the truth. 
 In the empiric powder described above, chamomile flowers 
 were by far the most powerful ingredient, and they possess
 
 of giving inixtiires of 7inknozvn drugs. 115 
 
 a far _<Treater febrifuge power than myrrh, especially in 
 those kinds of intermittent fever in which a febrile rigor is 
 coincident with internal and external heat. As long as 
 they do not recognise exact symptomatic distinctions, our 
 physicians will be no better than learned-looking quacks." 
 (p. 258) 
 
 Apropos of a " bolus," composed of ammonio-muriate of 
 iron and sal-ammoniac, of each eight grains, oxide of iron, 
 3 grains, and extract of gentian, 10 grains, to be taken 
 twice a day in ague, Hahnemann says : " We should be 
 told exactly in what kind of intermittent fever this wonder- 
 ful mixture was of use. Why precisely so many grains 
 of each ingredient ? Did the Delphic oracle ordain those 
 proportions, which are therefore to be regarded as a revela- 
 tion ? If an unfavourable condition is excited in a patient 
 by this mixture, to which ingredient is it to be attributed ? 
 And why must ammonio-muriate of iron be given specially 
 when the sal ammoniac and oxide of iron already form 
 ammonio-muriate of iron — that is muriate of iron and 
 ammonia in the stomach ? No explanation is offered on 
 these points. We must give it exactly as it is in every kind 
 of intermittent fever ! Sic bene placitum. Blessed are those 
 who believe without reasoning." (p. 265) 
 
 The receipt for a " mild, agreeable and cheap " sto- 
 machic is given. Hahnemann : " We cannot imagine 
 anything more empirical than the unqualified recommen- 
 dation of one remedy as a stomachic in all cases. More 
 general and empirical were not the recommendations of 
 Nicander, Dioscorides, Largus, Macer or the Salernitan 
 school. Will the day ever dawn ? I doubt it." (p. 278) 
 
 In the preface (IV. note) Hahnemann writes: "Indolent 
 . ignorance has always tried to find specifics, that is, 
 remedies which would cure a whole class of diseases, e.g., 
 intermittent fevers in general, without regard to special 
 cases. There can, however, from the very nature of things 
 be no such remedies any more than there can be one 
 universally applicable process for extracting copper in the 
 most perfect manner from all different kinds of ore, 1 n 
 whatever variety of combinations the metal may exist in
 
 Ii6 Objection to nosological classification. 
 
 nature. There can be no such general remedies. But for 
 each single case of disease, there is a particular remedy, 
 created so to speak by nature for the purpose, which better 
 deserves the name of a specific."* 
 
 In 1808, in Medicine of Experience^ Hahnemann asserts 
 the following: — 
 
 Hence it happens that with the exception of those few diseases that 
 are always the same, all others are dissimilar and inmimerable, and 
 so difterent that each of them occurs scarcely more than once in the 
 world, and each case of disease that presents itself must be regarded 
 (and treated) as an individual malady that never before occurred in 
 the same manner and under the same circumstances as in the case 
 before us, and will never again happen precisely in the same way. 
 
 This conception evidently is pushed too far, and even 
 Hahnemann himself does not rigorously follow it. He even 
 wished to see the names of diseases abolished, though he 
 makes the following observation : — 
 
 We observe a few diseases that always arise from one and the same 
 cause, e.^., the miasmatic maladies [no distinction was made in those 
 days between miasma and contagium], hydrophobia, the venereal dis- 
 ease, the plague of the Levant, yellow fever, small-pox, cow-pox, the 
 measles and some others which bear upon them the distinctive mark 
 of always remaining diseases of a pectiHar character; and because 
 they arise from a contagious principle that always remains the same, 
 they also always retain the same character and pursue the same course, 
 excepting as regards some accidental concomitant circumstances, 
 which, however, do not alter their essential character. 
 
 This observation does not accord with what was pre- 
 viously advanced, but the imperfect state of diagnosis in 
 those days must be remembered. 
 
 But putting aside this, Hahnemann deserves the credit 
 of having insisted upon the strictest individualization of 
 diseases, and he showed its necessity more conclusively 
 than any other physician. Classification is so convenient 
 and easy that most medical men incline to it. Hahnemann 
 always advocated individualization, and taught it .systemati- 
 cally in his numerous works. 
 
 * Comp. //'., TS4, 241, 253, 268, 275, 291, 29: 
 t Lesser Writings, p. 502.
 
 Large doses originally prescribed. WJ 
 
 Hahneniania s method of preparing medicine. 
 
 Hahnemann's homoeopathic method of preparing medi- 
 cine distinguished him more than anything else from all 
 other physicians of all times. We will here trace its 
 evolution. 
 
 At the commencement of his practice he naturally gave 
 the usual doses. In 1784,* e.g., he recommends for puri- 
 fying the blood, five to fifty grains of crude powdered 
 antimony to be taken daily, but " only when the body 
 possesses sufficient, I might almost say a superfluity of, 
 strength," in such cases he gave, " if necessary, but not 
 frequently, a purgative of twenty to seventy grains of jalap 
 root once a week." 
 
 He taught, in 1787, that good results could only be ex- 
 pected from conium maculatum if it is given in sufficient 
 doses to cause giddiness, a feeling as if the eyes were pushed 
 out of the head, slight nausea, trembling of the body, and 
 one or several loose stools, " all signs of a full dose." " This 
 varies with the quality of the extract and other circum- 
 stances. Commonly we pass from four grains a day to 
 several drachms." 
 
 Twelve to fifteen grains of the powdered leaves and root 
 of belladonna were to be given every other day. " Some 
 giddiness should follow the administration of this powerful 
 drug if it is to do any good." 
 
 It is the same with aconite, " of which the root seems to 
 be the most powerful part of the whole plant." The ex- 
 tract prepared from the juice of the whole plant was to be 
 given in doses from " half a grain to several grains " several 
 times a day. The " ordinary dose " of digitalis is half to 
 one spoonful of the freshly expressed juice of the leaves 
 twice a day. Hyoscyamus was to be given in the form of 
 the extract, " at first one grain several times a day, to be 
 increased up to thirty grains a day," six to twenty grains 
 of the seeds were to be given.! 
 
 In 1790, he gives, in "nervous fever," one and a half to 
 
 * Guide to the Radical Cure., &.c. B.J. of H., xlii., p. 132. 
 t Kcnnzeichcn der Giite, &c., pp. 92, 96, 98, loi.
 
 ii8 Hahnemann's gradual adoption 
 
 two and a half ounces of cinchona bark (cort. chin, fuse.) in 
 twenty-four hours, then pauses until its action has ceased. 
 
 Cullen does not notice aconitum napellus in his thera- 
 peutics, he does not even enumerate it among his " seda- 
 tives." Hahnemann makes the following- remarks: — 
 
 Aconite is not mentioned. I may remind my readers that it be- 
 longs to the class of acrid narcotic plants, and has a very powerful 
 action. My experience with the extract does not allow me to pass 
 it over in silence. In chronic erratic gout I have applied some of the 
 well-prepared extract with the result of speedily relieving pain. Its 
 efficacy is most palpable and striking in chronic rheumatism and erratic 
 gout, when given internally in sufficient dose to produce its character- 
 istic symptoms. 
 
 These characteristic symptoms were " giddiness, restless- 
 ness, and perspiration." The first dose which produced 
 this effect should be the last. He usually gave it for 
 three or four evenings ; the first dose was one grain, the 
 second two, the third four grains. " If the third had 
 no effect, I gave a fourth dose of eight grains." He 
 then states that he has come across badly prepared ex- 
 tract, of which one scruple could be taken "without marked 
 effects ;* the cause of its powerlessness was the way in 
 which it had been prepared. The fresh juice evaporated 
 over a water bath yields the only reliable extract of aconite, 
 conium, hyoscyamus, belladonna, &c." (Cullen, 320). 
 
 In 1 79 1 (Monro, I. 260), he holds the same views as in 
 1789 about the dose of mercury to be given in certain 
 forms of syphilis. " The ordinary dose for an adult is 
 a half to one grain (of his mere, solubilis) the first day, 
 the dose to be increased daily by half a grain, up to the 5th 
 to 7th day (not exceeding five grains)," till the so-called 
 mercurial fever is set up, when it must be discontinued. 
 
 That he was at this time greatly in favour of powerfully 
 acting medicines is shown by the following note (Monro 
 had been saying that fomentations were often sprinkled 
 over with spirit of camphor before being applied). " Such 
 feeble prescriptions, of which contemporary practice can 
 show many instances, we should abandon to the busy, do- 
 
 * Comp. Monro, II., p. 267.
 
 of small doses of medicine. 1 19 
 
 nothing practice of the common herd of practitioners. 
 Spirit of camphor should be appHed where it is necessary, 
 and emoUient fomentations where they are required." 
 iib. II. 115). 
 
 Monro goes on to say that he has given cinchona " in 
 very small doses " for some time in obstinate fevers. 
 Hahnemann thereupon remarks, " This is, indeed, a per- 
 verse manner of administering bark, which if followed 
 would not give very good results." (I. 199) 
 
 Monro mentions that people who had taken eight to 
 ten ounces of cinchona bark in the course of a month 
 without result, were afterwards cured by taking two to 
 three ounces daily for two or three days. Hahnemann : 
 *' Even this quantity is not necessar}' ; we will not over-load 
 our patient and will attain our object in regular agues as 
 well if we give, shortly before the expected attack, one or 
 two good doses, say one and a half to two drachms or more of 
 good bark two hours and one hour before the commencement 
 of the paroxysm. All doses given long before the attack 
 are of little or no use. If the attack does occur, a similar 
 dose is given just before the second, half as much before the 
 third expected paroxysm, and so on." In certain cases he 
 was in the habit of employing a " nauseating treatment " by 
 means of small doses of ipecacuanha, in order to " over- 
 power" some other complaints, such as intermittent fever, 
 diarrhcea, &c. 
 
 We shall only mention one other out of the number 
 of examples of Hahnemannian posology in this work. 
 Monro writes : " Hyoscyamus is not used in England, 
 because the trials with it have been unsuccessful." Hahne- 
 mann : " Or because the drug was powerless, not having 
 been properly prepared or used in suitable cases. I may 
 here remark and insist that heroic drugs should be given 
 in very small but continually increasing doses, till some 
 severe symptoms manifest themselves, such as are produced 
 by the drug given in a rather too large dose. If this is not 
 done, neither hyoscyamus, aconite, belladonna nor conium 
 can yield valuable results." 
 
 In 1792, he gave Klockenbring, who was suffering from
 
 1 20 His further advance 
 
 an attack of mania, twenty-five grains of tartrate of 
 antimony, a dose " which only caused him usually to vomit 
 moderately three times, sometimes even less frequently,"* 
 
 In the following year he still gave this remedy in doses 
 of five to twenty grains,t and indeed, considered that under 
 certain circumstances this dose was necessary to save life, 
 " where ordinary physicians with their trumpery remedies 
 are slumbering while their patient is dying — occidit qui 
 non servat." He considers ambra a good analeptic, but in 
 larger doses than are ordinarily given. " Thirty grains must 
 be given according to Boswell, before the nerves and blood- 
 vessels are agreeably excited ; smaller doses of the remedy 
 in solution probably suffice." 
 
 In 1795, in cases of fever in which cinchona aggravated, 
 he gave with good results powdered ignatia " in large 
 doses : to children three-quarters of a year to three years 
 old a half to two-thirds of a grain ; to four to six years old 
 children, one to one and a half grains ; to seven to ten years 
 old children, two to three grains every twelve hours." 
 
 About the same time in an " epidemic fever," which he 
 describes minutely, he gave adults fifteen to sixteen grains 
 of camphor in the twenty-four hours, •' but I soon found 
 that I must give thirty grains to weak, and forty grains to 
 strong subjects in twenty-four hours if I wished to produce 
 rapid amelioration." In more than 100 cases he says he onl}' 
 met with one in which this dose of camphor produced dis- 
 agreeable effects, and these were removed by the adminis- 
 tration of half a grain of opium. J In 1798 {Edinb. Disp., 
 II. 362), he recommended sarsaparilla to be given in " large 
 doses of a good, strong decoction." 
 
 These few examples of the doses given by Hahnemann, 
 selected from a great number of observations and detailed 
 clinical records, will suffice to show that Hahnemann at 
 first gave quite as large doses as most, and in some 
 instances even lare^cr. 
 
 * Lesser Writings^ p. 290, note. 
 
 t Apothekerlexicoii, I., p. 158. 
 
 + Hufeland's/w/r/W, V., St. i, 1797.
 
 /// Microposology. 12 1 
 
 From this time forth his doses become gradually 
 .smaller, but not uniformly so with all drugs. In 1800 
 {Arsncischat::;,^. 25), he agrees with Bell's opinion that a 
 more powerful action on the system is obtained in syphilis, 
 if an equal quantity of mercury is given in a shorter time 
 than when employed for six months as an " alterative." 
 Mercury in syphilis is the only instance after 1799 in 
 which he recommends stronger doses. 
 
 If we examine his prescriptions more narrowly, we see 
 that, apart from his laudable endeavours to attain to sim- 
 plicity of treatment, he often, especially in the case of 
 powerful drugs, did not give successive large doses for a 
 considerable time, but began with small ones and gradually 
 increased them up to the point of slight toxic action, and 
 then discontinued and waited the results. In these cases 
 the dose was not repeated till the action of the previous 
 doses was exhausted. In this we see the practical thera- 
 peutist who knew what he was aiming at, the zealous, 
 careful observer, the conscientious physician. Even in 
 chronic diseases in which it was the common practice to 
 give powerful drugs not previously carefully proved upon 
 the sensitive organism, and to continue to give them for 
 weeks and months, he frequently only gave three or 
 four doses, and then observed the changes effected by 
 them in the diseased organism, and noted accurately the 
 duration of their action. This practice was peculiar to him, 
 and distinguished him from all his colleagues, before and 
 of his time. 
 
 While, on the one hand, he was in favour of vigorous 
 treatment, we see that he very soon, on the other hand, 
 began to employ some remedies in small doses, and 
 gradually increased the number of these remedies, though 
 at first he did not raise the smallness of the dose to a 
 general therapeutical principle. He first only accumulated 
 experiences and carefully conducted observations. These 
 labours remind us of his chemical researches, in which it 
 was his constant endeavour to ascertain the limits of the 
 action of substances. 
 
 He advises caution in the use of drugs in various places.
 
 122 His doses of Arsenic, and 
 
 for example, in Cullen (II., 265): "Though I have above 
 remarked that I thought the smaUness of my doses was the 
 cause of the unfortunate result, this must not induce 
 beginners to give unusually large doses of opium in such 
 cases." Further on (II., 496) he warns us against Cullen's 
 practice, who " was firml}- convinced that mercury acts 
 against syphilis by increasing the amount of the evacuations, 
 whereby the poison is removed from the bod}*,'' and his 
 consequent recommendation of " the long-continued and 
 ample administration of mercury." He repeats this warn- 
 ing in Monro (I. 335), and in the EdinbnrgJi Dispensatory 
 (I., 440). His employment of what was considered in 
 those days an unusually small dose, is seen as early as 
 1787 {KennzeicJien der Giite, &c., p. 223), with regard to 
 arsenic, which he recommends as a good external appli- 
 cation in " indolent ulcers," in a solution containing one 
 part in 30,000 of water. Glauber salt " in small doses is a 
 diuretic, the merits of which have not yet been sufficientl}" 
 appreciated." (ib., p. 279) 
 
 In 1790 (Cullen, II., 289), in a woman seventy-six years 
 old, he rapidly cured " a violent vomiting uncomplicated 
 with indigestion, probably caused by a chill," by means of 
 a piece of linen rag soaked in laudanum laid on the pit of 
 the stomach. 
 
 In 1791 (Monro, II., 326), he recommended to commence 
 giving narcotic vegetable medicines " invariably in ver}- 
 small doses," 
 
 In 1793 he speaks of the employment of arsenic, which 
 was then occasionally given in doses of half to one grain 
 with disastrous results, so that Hufeland. in 1796, con- 
 tended against its employment at all in medicine, and 
 almost all the physicians of the day agreed with him. 
 As early as 1787, Hahnemann had written:* " For several 
 centuries timid attempts have been made to employ its 
 powerful action in medicine." He then details his me- 
 thod of treating ulcers, and continues: "I will not speak 
 
 * Kennscic/ie/i der Giitc, &c., p. 223 : conip. also his work on Arsaii- 
 cal\Poisoning, 1786, p. 38.
 
 of tJic Narcotic J\f edict ncs. 123 
 
 of the attempts to cure ague with it, for fear lest a disas- 
 trous abuse of it should ensue." So the therapeutic use of 
 arsenic lay under a ban from which Hahnemann released 
 it for ever. In 1/93 {Apothekerlexicon, Part I.) he recom- 
 mended a dose of one-tenth to one eighth gr. of arsenic 
 instead of the usual dose of three to five times that quantity. 
 " In future times, when we may expect physicians to be 
 more conscientious, clear-sighted and circumspect, this 
 extremel}- violent poison will be converted into an ex- 
 tremely useful remedy for the most desperate ailments of 
 suffering humanity." 
 
 In the treatise from which we have several times quoted, 
 Oil a nezu principle, &c., in Hufeland's Journal, 1796, 
 p. 434,* he advises the adminstration of the drug selected 
 according to his therapeutic principle only in a dose just 
 strong enough to produce a scarcely perceptible indication 
 of the expected artificial malady. He says of belladonnaf 
 that its action lasts 12, 24 to 48 hours. " The dose should 
 therefore not be repeated till the lapse of two days." 
 Opium in certain cases should only be given every twelve 
 to twenty-four hours, arsenic seldomer, every two days, in 
 doses of one-tenth to, at the outside, one-fifth of a grain, 
 in hectic fever only one-twelfth grain ; the duration of the 
 action of aconite is seven to eight hours in certain cases ; 
 camphor should only be given every thirty-six to forty- eight 
 hours, veratrum album every five to ten hours, agaricus 
 muse, twelve to sixteen hours. " Rhubarb is efficacious 
 even in the smallest doses in certain cases of diarrhoea." 
 
 In 1797 {Edinburgh Disp. I., 239) he recommends bella- 
 donna half a grain in two days for adults, and considers 
 " one to two grains of good squills a full dose in most 
 cases," in contrast to the EdinhurgJi Disp. (I. 519), which 
 prescribes four to ten grains, mixed with twice that quantity 
 of saltpetre. In the same place stramonium is recom- 
 mended in doses of ten grains in " insanity." Hahnemann 
 thereupon remarks : " The varieties of insanity are verj- 
 
 * Lesser Writings, p. 312, note. 
 t Lesser Writings, p. 322.
 
 1 24 Ills doses of Nitrate of Silver, 
 
 numerous, so also arc its remedies. This remedy is only 
 useful in some cases, but ten grains is much too large a 
 quantity to give of a good extract." (I. 541) 
 
 In 1798 he insists upon nitrate of silver being given 
 internally only in solution and very dilute. The Edin. 
 Disp., on the contrary, quotes the authority of Boerhaave 
 for its administration in doses of two grains, in pills com- 
 posed of bread crumbs and sugar (II. 230). It further 
 speaks of the drugs which will destroy the poisonous quali- 
 ties of opium without interfering with its medicinal action, 
 Hahnemann : " If we wish to deprive strong drugs of their 
 noxiousness, we must only employ them in suitable cases 
 and in the proper dose. This is their great corrigens, and 
 there is no other besides this." 
 
 In 1799 in the Apothekerlexicon he expresses the opinion 
 that sabina does good service in certain conditions even " in 
 very small doses." Hyoscyamus was efficacious in certain 
 accurately described morbid conditions " in very small doses 
 of one-sixtieth to one-thirtieth of a grain of the extract 
 prepared according to my method and given in solution." 
 One-hundredth and even one-thousandth part of a grain 
 of the inspissated juice of stramonium, if it was of good 
 quality, usually sufficed. With regard to veratrum album, 
 he says that the ancients performed grand treatments 
 with it, but that the moderns avoided it on account of its 
 dangerous effects ; the truth lay between the two, for 
 this drug given in doses one thousand times smaller than 
 those in which it was administered by the ancients, is one 
 of the most valuable remedies. 
 
 In 1800, in the Arrjiicischat:; (p. 56), he gives rhubarb in 
 one-third to one-fourth of a grain in the form of tincture. 
 The English author speaks of an infusion of a drachm of 
 digitalis in half a pound of water, a tablespoonful to be 
 taken two or three times a day. Hahnemann : " This is 
 too venturesome. As the duration of the action of digi- 
 talis is at least two to three days, we should not repeat 
 the dose before the lapse of three days. If we give the 
 same dose every eight hours for three days the action of 
 the digitalis will liave became nine times as dangerous. If
 
 Hyoscyajiins, Hellebore, Lead. 125 
 
 its action is of longer duration, as my experience leads me 
 to believe, the danger will increase in a greater degree with 
 each fresh administration." {ib., S. 125) 
 
 When a teaspoonful of tincture of helleborus nigcr twice 
 a day is recommended, Hahnemann remarks : " This 
 enormous dose should assuredly be diminished to a 
 twentieth part. Two drops of the strong properly pre- 
 pared tincture of black hellebore are enough to act power- 
 fully on an adult, and will do all that is possible to be done 
 in cases where the tincture is indicated, and if it is not 
 indicated so large a dose will cause irreparable damage." 
 (//;., p. 169) 
 
 The author recommends an electuary containing cinchona 
 bark. " An electuary is one of the most inefficacious and 
 disagreeable forms in which cinchona can be administered," 
 says Hahnemann. "We should not seek to introduce the 
 greatest possible number of drugs into the stomach, but 
 .should rather bring them in the most soluble and efficacious 
 form possible in contact with the nerves of the stomach 
 and intestines ; then a very small quantity will be found 
 necessar}'." {ib., S. 197) 
 
 The English author recommends pills of sugar of lead 
 and opium ; we may go up as high as one and a half grain 
 of lead, and " some patients " may even be given one grain 
 or one and a half to begin with ; " it is, however, best to 
 begin with the smaller dose." Hahnemann : " How un- 
 decided is the author in a matter of so much importance ! 
 Sometimes we can begin at once with one and a half grain ; 
 sometimes it is better to commence with the smallest 
 close. Indeed, it would be much safer never to give this 
 powerful metal either in povrder or in pill, but always in 
 solution ; neither should we ever administer it in the form 
 of sugar of lead, for it is at once precipitated in the 
 stomach. Chloride of lead dissohed in 100 parts of boiling- 
 water is better, as it is not precipitated b}- muriatic or 
 carbonic acid. We shall find that one or two drops of this 
 for a dose will do all that can be expected from lead pre- 
 parations. If they are not indicated, of \\'hat use is the
 
 126 His doses of Copper, Mer^erejun, 
 
 empirical administration of such large doses as are here 
 recommended ? They must do harm ! " {ib., p. 217) 
 
 Ammoniaco-sulphate of copper is recommended in the 
 form of pills, at first one, to be increased to " as much as the 
 stomach will tolerate." Hahnemann : " The writer of this, 
 is convinced that we should never venture to introduce 
 .so powerful a metal into the stomach unless in the dry form, 
 for if given in solution as sulphate of copper it will almost 
 instantaneously affect the whole nervous system in a dose 
 100 times smaller than the pills here advised." {ib., p. 259) 
 
 Apropos of another prescription (three drachms of 
 simaruba bark " if the stomach will tolerate it "), he says : 
 "Must the doses administered by physicians be so large that 
 they are almost on the point of being rejected when taken ? 
 Such veterinary practice applied to human beings, such 
 crude and coarse methods of treating the delicate human 
 organism, prove the degraded state of medical practice. 
 The proper drug will be found efficacious in incredibly 
 small quantities without causing violent commotion." 
 {ib., p. 279) 
 
 In syphilitic periostitis, half a pound daily of the follow- 
 ing preparation is to be drunk: half an ounce of daphne 
 mezereum boiled with six pounds of water down to four 
 pounds. The author of this prescription even prefers a 
 stronger dose. Hahnemann : " And this dose is already 
 six times too large. Do not, please, let us each prescribe 
 according to our own pleasure, but let us first fairly consult 
 nature and experience. We must, of course, not use the 
 bark of the root which has been kept a number of years in 
 coarse powder ; but how can the medical man bother him- 
 self about everything ? how can he know everything ? It is 
 quite enough that he leaves this to the apothecary, who 
 leaves it to his dispenser, to his apprentice, or to his 
 pounder — it is quite enough that he leaves it to the tender 
 conscience of one of these hired menials." (p. 321) 
 
 Apropos of pills of conium extract, &c., Hahnemann: 
 " We must not blame the stomach ; the fault is with the 
 physician, who is ignorant that a solution of the inspissated 
 juice, in doses one hundred times smaller ought to be given,
 
 Squills, Coiiium, Arsenic. 12/ 
 
 and this does as much as these many hundred times less 
 powerful pills." (p. 371) Further on we read: "Our 
 author does not seem to know what an incredibly small 
 quantity of squills is able to produce remarkably good 
 effects." 
 
 Hahnemann has two notes, with regard to the dose 
 of arsenic: "Two drops of Fowler's solution contain about 
 one-sixtieth grain of arsenic, and therefore twenty drops 
 one-sixth grain, in every case much too large a dose for 
 old or young, especially as it is recommiCnded to be re- 
 peated two or three times in twent}--four hours, which mul- 
 tiplied experience will not allow me to advise." (p. 393) 
 And further, it having been remarked that arsenic, as a 
 remedy for intermittent fever, is worse than the disease, 
 Hahnemann : " Perhaps so, in the rough hands of the 
 ordinary physician. Baker is quite right there. Apart 
 from this, however, the unqualified recommendation of 
 arsenic in undefined intermittent fevers is just as wrong as 
 its unqualified condemnation. Even a priori, one may be 
 thoroughly convinced that a powerful substance which can 
 be diminished in solution to every variety of dose, might 
 be the most suitable, most innocuous remedy in certain 
 well-defined morbid conditions. Our physicians of to-day, 
 however, will not ascertain these conditions and give the 
 ten-millionth part of a drug, therefore arsenic should not be 
 used by our contemporaries." {ib., p. 396) 
 
 Thus, in the course of years, the number of drugs which 
 he had proved continually increased, and the results of the 
 zealous and careful researches of our genial investigator 
 forced upon him more and more the conviction that the 
 doses hitherto accepted as the normal ones, were much too 
 large. History records no instance, books give no example 
 of a physician ever having attempted to determine the 
 question of the suitable dose with such zealous endeavour 
 as the clear-sighted, indefatigable and thoughtful Hahne- 
 mann. 
 
 He remarked from his own experience that those drugs 
 which were selected according to his principle, consequently 
 in a specific relation to the affected parts, were therefore
 
 128 Preparation of vicdicinal dilutions. 
 
 calculated to influence them in a special degree, and some- 
 times seemed even to act in very small doses more strongly 
 than was desirable. He, therefore, proceeded still further 
 in the diminution of the dose. Here, however, a question 
 of the greatest importance arises : How did he set about 
 it ? Did he take, say^ the ten-millionth part of a grain on 
 the point of a needle and deposit it on the tongue of his 
 patient ? Did he, with some kind of instrument, re-divide 
 this particle into a hundred parts and take a single one of 
 them as the dose to be administered ? 
 
 His method was as follows : He took one part of a drug 
 and mixed it intimately with a certain quantity of a 
 suitable vehicle, as sugar of milk, water or alcohol. Of this 
 preparation he took a fraction and mixed it, by careful 
 trituration or succussion, with a new quantity of sugar of 
 milk, alcohol, &c. Of this preparation, he again triturated 
 or succussed a part with the suitable vehicle, &c. 
 
 In the year 1801,* he recommends tincture of opium in 
 certain cerebral symptoms in scarlet fever, and directs that 
 this should be prepared in the following way : One part of 
 this tincture is shaken up with 500 parts of alcohol, and a 
 drop of this intimately mixed with 500 drops of alcohol. 
 The patient is to take drop doses of this preparation. We 
 may as well here state that Hahnemann later regulated 
 this method systematical l}- by triturating or succussing one 
 part of the drug with ninety-nine parts of sugar of milk 
 or alcohol ; of this preparation he again took one part and 
 mixed it with ninety-nine of the vehicle, and so on. These 
 were called the first, second and third trituration or dilution 
 respectively, or as he termed it afterwards " potency." 
 
 He did not use medicines prepared in this way for the 
 same purposes as other physicians. He did not advocate 
 their administration to produce emesis, purgation, or 
 narcosis ; neither did he employ them to " cleanse the blood 
 of acridities," or to " combine with the excess of ox}-gen 
 present in inflammator}- blood." He did not aim at "cutting 
 the phlegm," " resolving obstructions," " softening indura- 
 
 '^'- Cure and prevention 0/ seartef fevei-. Lesser U'litini^s, p. 43:
 
 '^1)1 Poison thei-e is Physic." 129 
 
 tions," or destroying parasites. He had discovered that 
 with medicines, selected according to his rule and which 
 therefore were not meant to effect a revolution in the body, 
 such preparations influenced favourably the curative process. 
 At first he himself was astounded at his discovery which 
 he speaks of as '• unheard of," and " incredible." He was 
 therefore, all the more anxious to make sure of his ground 
 as he proceeded, and was not only able to confirm, but even 
 to extend his remarkable discovery. In the first years of 
 this discovery he dwelt emphatically on the zveight of the 
 drug contained in his preparations, and recounted to the as- 
 tonished world the results obtained by a millionth, billionth, 
 &c., part of a grain of medicine. 
 
 In 1801, Hahnemann recommended belladonna in scarlet 
 fever, in doses corresponding to the third or fourth dilution, 
 and chamomilla in the same way in certain conditions.* 
 
 In 1805, in his Medicine of Experience, he says : 
 
 None but the careful observer can have any idea of the height to 
 which the sensitiveness of the human body to medicines is increased 
 in disease. It transcends all belief when the disease has attained a 
 great intensity 
 
 On the other hand it is as true as it is wonderful, that even the most 
 robust individuals when affected by a chronic disease, notwithstanding- 
 
 their corporeal strength yet as soon as the medicinal substance 
 
 positively appropriate to their chronic disease is administered to them, 
 they experience from the smallest possible dose as great an impression 
 as if they were infants at the breast.f 
 
 In the year 1806, he wrote in Hufeland's Journal {S\.. 3, 
 p. 40), an article entitled : What are poisons ? What ai-e 
 medicines ?% (For the proper comprehension of this article 
 it must be explained that Hahnemann had been reproached 
 b}' Hecker in 1796 and others for using as medicines danger- 
 ous poisons such as the narcotics introduced by Storck, and 
 therefore the public should be warned against employing^ 
 him, as we shall see more particularly when we come to the 
 chapter on the " opposition to homoeopathy." As we know,, 
 
 *■ Cure and prevention of scarlet fever. Lesser Writings^ p. 442. 
 
 t Lesser Writings, pp. 528, 529. 
 
 + Trans, in Brit. four, of Horn., xlii., p. 222.
 
 1 30 Plea for small Doses. 
 
 Storck introduced into mcdicalpracticc, aconite, belladonna, 
 hyoscyamus, colchicum, stramonium, conium and pulsatilla 
 in the sixtieth year of the last century, and afterwards 
 found in Hahnemann his most active supporter. In 18 10, 
 an author writes in Hufeland'sy(?;^;';^(^/ (St. 9, p. 80), "The 
 practices of Storck, Hahnemann and others have the ill- 
 repute of being mere hazardous experiments." 
 Hahnemann thereupon writes : — 
 
 Has the Creator ever laid it down as a law that a scruple or a 
 grain should be considered the smallest and most appropriate dose 
 for all medicines, even the most powerful ? Has He not bestowed on 
 us means and knowledge whereby we may diminish the more and 
 most powerful substances into small and the very smallest doses 
 and administer them in the tenth of a grain, the more powerful in 
 the hundredth, the thousandth of a grain, the most powerful in the 
 millionth, billionth, aye, even the trillionth, quadrillionth and quin- 
 tillionth of a grain ? Who prevents us doing this and regulating 
 our doses thus (wisely) according to the strength of the different 
 medicines ? The circumstance that medicines are only suitable reme- 
 dies for the human body in different doses, can furnish the sensible 
 man with no excuse for branding the more powerful drugs, that is 
 to say those that can only be used in the smaller doses, with the 
 popular name of poison, and therefore for spurning these great gifts 
 of God, the very remedies which are indispensable for the cure of 
 many of the most serious diseases. But as we can diminish the 
 doses of medicines when they are of the more powerful kind 
 to any desired fraction of a grain, indeed to the very smallest fraction, 
 just as easily as we can increase the doses of medicines of the weaker 
 sort to more than a grain, a scruple, a drachm, what hinders us from 
 according at least as much respect to those more powerful medicines 
 as we do to the less powerful ones ? Thus we shall get rid of the 
 disgrace of having so long echoed the common folk in their denuncia- 
 tions as poisons of the most powerful instruments for preserving health 
 and life, and of having so long deprived ourselves and others of their 
 beneficial use. 
 
 I confess I have often felt deeply grieved at reading the hard words 
 applied by many so-called physicians to the valuable labours of 
 Baron Anton von Storck : " we protest against this poisoning practice." 
 Was not this praiseworthy attempt to furnish us with remedies which 
 w^e did not possess, and which could never be replaced by other 
 substances, was not this philanthropic, highly successful, heroic 
 attempt worthy of a triple civic crown, of a splendid monument to his 
 honour ? He struck out the path and we must thank him — by making 
 use of his gifts, by imitating him, but (as nothing is perfect at a first
 
 Sapere aiide ! 1 3 1 
 
 attempt) with more cautious doses and a more careful selection of the 
 cases of disease for which these powerful plants are suited 
 
 No sensible man who can lay claim to the character of a scientific 
 unprejudiced physician should ever again so far forget himself as to 
 brand with the name of poison substances whose power to alter the 
 human organism is notorious, and whose medicinal power consequently 
 is beyond doubt, and by so doing prevent many blessings and set his 
 own miserable ignorance above these medicinal powers. 
 
 Where the common folk think they see only objects of horror, 
 there the wise man sees objects of the deepest veneration and makes 
 use of them with thankfulness to the Eternal Source of love. 
 
 Sapere aude ! 
 
 This is the first time he makes use of the proud motto 
 which he so appropriately chose. 
 
 Subsequently Hahnemann discovered that the action of 
 a drug was not proportional to its quantity, that, e.g., twice 
 or three times the quantity did not produce twice or three 
 times the effect ; the dimimition of the action of the drug 
 zvas not proportionate to the diviinntion of its quantity. 
 Further, he found that with the above mentioned mode of 
 preparation the efficacy of many drugs, instead of diminish- 
 ing, increased ; that medicines so prepared gave results which 
 could not be obtained with the crude substances. Also the 
 astounding fact became evident that medicines could be so 
 diluted that neither physics nor chemistry could discover 
 any medicinal matter in them, and yet they possessed 
 great healing power. Highly poisonous substances could 
 thus be converted into beneficent and innocuous remedies, 
 and substances which were easily decomposed, and therefore 
 tending to become inefficacious, could be converted into a 
 form in which they were not liable to decomposition, and 
 thereby became powerful remedial agents in the hands of 
 a skilful physician. 
 
 This is Hahnemann's greatest discovery, one of the most 
 momentous discoveries ever brought to light by human 
 research. By this discovery alone he became one of the 
 greatest benefactors of the human species ; it must inevit- 
 ably work a complete revolution in the science of thera- 
 peutics, and will make its way for the weal of suffering 
 humanity in spite of the keen opposition of university 
 faculties and their unreflecting followers.
 
 132 Ilahneniamis discovery of the iiselessness 
 
 No doubt in time the possibility of the action of such 
 medicinal preparations will be explained by natural 
 science. 
 
 HaJinevianns attitude tozvards the sciences auxiliary to 
 medicine and his conception of disease. 
 
 That Hahnemann was not a contemner of natural 
 science and chemistry he has sufficiently proved ; he, in 
 fact, overtopped all his contemporaries in his knowledge of 
 these sciences, as is completely proved by his own writings, 
 without appealing to Hufeland's testimony, who considered 
 him the best chemist among the physicians of his day. He 
 was not slow to utilize these auxiliaries in the treatment of 
 disease, as is seen in several places in his writings ; he even 
 instituted experiments on this subject as his article On Bile 
 and. Biliary Caladi* which we have already quoted, shows. 
 He took out the liver and gall-bladder of a man, who had 
 just been shot, and ascertained the action of various reagents 
 on the bile in order to decide whether these reagents could 
 be usefully employed in affections of the liver. His attempts 
 to utilize the teachings of the allied sciences in disease very 
 soon convinced him of the uselessness of efforts in this 
 direction ; scientific investigation had found no firm foun- 
 dation to work upon, and assumptions and speculations 
 overshadowed real knowledge. It is important to enquire: 
 what was his opinion concerning the influence of natural 
 science and chemistry on the development of medicine ? 
 On this point he gives the following answer in Hufeland's 
 jfonrjial : f — 
 
 "We must go still higher," insists a celebrated teacher of dyna- 
 mology,J who has been reared on the ethcrial milk of critical philosophy, 
 " we must mount up to the original source of diseases, the altered com- 
 
 * Crell's CJiejii. Aimalcn^ 1788, Vol. II., St. 10. 
 
 t iSoi, xi. St. 4. Lesser Writings^ p. 615. 
 
 ± Reil seems to be alluded to here. Comp. his Erkeiintniss unci 
 Kiir dcr Fieber, Halle und Berlin, 5 vols. 1 799-181 5 ; also his Archiv 
 fiir Physiologie, Halle, 1796-18 15.
 
 of Cheviistry and Physics to Therapeutics. 133 
 
 position and form of matter." This ontological maxim, however near to 
 the truth it may appear a priori to the thinker conversant with natural 
 science in general, and with the probable arrangement of our 
 organism, is entirely useless to the practitioner ; it cannot be applied 
 to the treatment of individual diseases. In like manner what Bruce 
 says of the remotest source of the Nile is of no practical utility 
 at its Delta. Still this teacher of natural science has approximated 
 much more closely than we might have expected to what pure 
 experience teaches, in his special views relative to diseases and 
 particular fevers, and given much less scope to mere probabilities 
 than his dogmatical and credulous predecessors. Though a love 
 of system guides all his steps, he always honestly points out where 
 his deductions run counter to the maxims of experience, and has a 
 wise respect for the latter. The medical thinker may educate 
 himself under him, but when he is at the sick-bed, let him not forget 
 that these views are mere individual ideas, mere hints, and that 
 from them no remedial means can be deduced. 
 
 Leaving out of sight the unfortunate comparison with 
 the Nile, Hahnemann has most ably criticised Reil's 
 teachings in these few words. His practical sense, in strong 
 contrast with the speculative spirit of almost all his con- 
 temporaries, recognised the value of Reil's inductive 
 method, but at the same time saw how his steps were 
 hampered by natural philosophy. Very few of his 
 contemporaries arrived at so accurate an estimate of Reil 
 as Hahnemann. On the other hand he pronounced : 
 " That the practical physician can make no use of this 
 
 knowledge It will not lead to the discovery of a single 
 
 remedy." He was right with regard to those days ; but 
 was he so with regard to the future ? This is a question 
 which will determine the whole direction of investigation, 
 the basis of all medicine. We will allow Hahnemann to 
 answer in his own words, and describe the fundamental 
 lines of his efforts. This he does in the Organon (2nd 
 edition, preface). We must premise that " experience " is 
 equivalent to investigation, " sciences of experience " are 
 the same as what are now called the " inductive sciences." 
 What we call " experience " to-day used to be called 
 " empiricism." We must at the same time recall to mind 
 the various medical systems, all of which were founded 
 on the imaginings of physicians and the teachings of 
 natural philosophy then in its most flourishing state.
 
 134 Preface to the Second 
 
 Physicians are my fellow-creatures ; I have no feeling against them 
 personally. The medical art is my subject. We must ascertain 
 whether therapeutics as hitherto taught, has been evolved out of 
 physicians' heads, out of illusion and caprice, or is derived from 
 nature. If it is only the achievement of speculative refinements, 
 arbitrary axioms, traditional observance and dogmatic assumptions 
 deduced from dubious appearances, it is, and must remain a nullity, 
 even though it may date from thousands of years back and show 
 title-deeds conferred on it by all the emperors and kings that ever 
 lived. 
 
 True medicine is from' its very nature a pure science of experience, 
 and should therefore rest only upon pure facts, and the sensible 
 phenomena belonging to its sphere of action, for all the subjects 
 with which it is concerned are distinctly and sufficiently indicated to its 
 sensible appreciation by experience ; knowledge of the disease to be 
 treated and of the action of drugs and also the mode in which the 
 ascertained actions of medicines are to be used in curing diseases, 
 can only be learnt by experience ; its subjects can only be derived 
 from pure experience and observation, and our science should 
 not venture a single step beyond the sphere of pure carefully observed 
 experience and experiment if it wishes to escape degenerating into 
 mere jugglery and nullity. 
 
 The following few irrefragable considerations will show that the 
 whole art of medicine up to this date, though millions of well-inten- 
 tioned physicians have adhered to it through two and a half thousand 
 years for want of a better, is nevertheless in all its parts an utterly 
 irrational and useless art. The intellect alone can {a priori) evolve 
 from itself alone no conception of the essential nature of things, of 
 cause and effect ; there must always be sensible perceptions for 
 every one of its dicta concerning the actual. Facts and experience 
 must be at the root of all revelations of truth. If we take a single 
 step outside the region of observation we shall find ourselves in the 
 infinite kingdom of fantasy and of arbitrary assumptions, the parent of 
 disastrous delusion and of absolute nothingness. 
 
 In the real sciences of experience, in physics, chemistry and therapeu- 
 tics, speculative reason therefore can have no voice ; for if it act alone, 
 thereby becoming the victim to empty assumption and imagination, it 
 can only produce fantastic hypotheses, which in millions of cases, are, 
 and from their very nature must be, only delusions and falsities. 
 
 Such were the magnificent conjuring games of so-called theoretical 
 medicine, in which a p7'iori conceptions and assumptions had erected 
 many imposing scholastic edifices which only showed what their 
 architects imagined about things they could know nothing of, and 
 which were not necessary for the art of healing. 
 
 Medical practice found nothing of any use to it in these sublime 
 systems which soared a long way above all experience. It went boldly 
 its own way at the sick-bed, according to the traditional instructions
 
 Edition of the " Organonr 135 
 
 of its text-books, treating diseases as they had been hitherto treated 
 by practical authorities, heedless, like its predecessors, of the teachings 
 of experience, indifferent about having any real grounds for its prac- 
 tices, quite content with that key to routine treatment — the prescrip- 
 tion manual. 
 
 A sound, unbiassed judgment of this monstrosity easily discerns 
 that what has hitherto been called the art of medicine was only a 
 pseudo-scientific jumble, which, like Gellert's hat in the fable, under- 
 went periodical revolutions, in consonance with the fashion of the day, 
 but in its essential character of a system of treatment always re- 
 mained the same blind irrational procedure. There was no such 
 thing as a true healing art founded on experience ; everything in 
 traditional medicine was only artifice and imagination in the guise 
 of probability, but altogether opposed to nature and experience. 
 
 The disease to be treated was arbitrarily excogitated by patho- 
 logy. The number, form and kind of diseases there ought to be, 
 were dogmatically fixed : just consider ! all the diseases which are 
 produced by nature in infinite variety in human beings under thou- 
 sands of different conditions and in multifarious forms that can never 
 be foreseen are cut down by the pathologist into a mere handful of 
 nosological names. 
 
 Diseases were with superfine subtlety defined a priori^ and hypo- 
 thetical substrata attributed to them that had no foundation in 
 experience (how, indeed, could distinct, pure experience lend any 
 support to such fantastic dreams T) ; no ! on the contrary, reliance was 
 placed upon a supposed insight into the inner nature of things and 
 the invisible vital processes (which, however, is denied to mortals). 
 Also in order to establish something definite in respect to remedies, 
 they inferred the properties of the individual drugs of the materia 
 medica from their physical and chemical and other extraneous 
 qualities, also from their smell, taste and appearance, and especially 
 from their very impure experience at the sick-bed, where in the tu- 
 mult of morbid symptoms only composite prescriptions were used in 
 imperfectly described cases of disease ; the dynamic spiritual power 
 to alter the health of human beings, invisibly hidden in the inner 
 essence of medicines, and never revealed in a pure and true manner 
 save when tested on the healthy individual, were arbitrarily assumed 
 without the medicines having ever been interrogated in this way. 
 
 What had been excogitated, imagined and guessed about medicines, 
 therapeutics now taught how to apply to the assumed fundamental 
 cause of disease, or to single symptoms of it, on the principle of 
 contraries {contraria cojitrarits), according to the doctrine of the 
 hypothesis-framer, Galen, and contrary to nature, and this doctrine 
 was considered amply proved if only sufficiently illustrious authorities 
 could be quoted in favour of it. 
 
 All these unnatural dicta of man, interwoven with all manner of 
 illogical and false conclusions were forced into agreement with their
 
 136 Hahnemann! s doctrine of the 
 
 artificial divisions, subdivisions and tabulations, and behold ! that 
 elaborate house of cards, the art of medicine, was the result ; a thing 
 altogether opposed to nature and experience, a tissue of guesses and 
 assumptions, a [mere nullity, a pitiful self-delusion calculated to en- 
 danger men's lives by its blind, unsuitable treatment, which has been 
 incessantly ridiculed by the wisest men of all ages and which labours 
 under the curse that it is not what it pretends to be and cannot 
 perform what it promises ! 
 
 Sober, unprejudiced reflection will convince us that correct views 
 respecting every case of disease to be treated, the determination of 
 the true properties of drugs, their adaptation to every morbid con- 
 dition and their appropriate dose — in short, the whole true healing 
 art should never be the work of self-satisfied ratiocination and 
 fallacious suppositions, but that its requirements, the materials as 
 well as the rules for its practice, are to be diligently sought in visible 
 nature, in careful, honest observations and pure experimentation, and 
 in these alone, without the adulterating admixture of arbitrary dog- 
 mas. Only thus shall we be acting in a manner worthy of our object 
 — the preservation of the precious lives of our fellow-men. 
 
 I leave it to others to decide whether my conscientious endeavours 
 in this direction have been successful in discovering the true healing 
 art. 
 
 The great difference between Hahnemann and the later 
 natural-historical school is expressed by himself in one 
 small word of three letters: "and." Hahnemann speaks 
 of " chemistry, physics and medical science ; " they said : 
 medical science is applied chemistry and physics, and 
 founded medicine on these two sciences. 
 
 Hahnemann stood in still greater contrast to this school 
 by his " dynamism." In the first decades of his work and 
 research, starting from purely material conceptions, he 
 gradually arrived at dynamic views, and indeed, these 
 occurred to him as a consequence of his pharmaceutical 
 doctrine. 
 
 Chemical and physical morbid changes were in his 
 opinion dependent upon the morbid modification of the 
 vital force. " Diseases must be considered as dynamic 
 derangements of the vital 'character of our organism, they 
 must therefore be cured by agents capable of causing 
 dynamic change." Further : " Diseases depend upon no
 
 Dynamic nature of disease. 137 
 
 substance, no acridity, that is upon no materies morbi, but 
 they are solely spiritual derangements of the spiritual vital 
 force which animates the human body."* Again : " There- 
 fore a disease (which does not come within the province of 
 operative surgery) considered as a thing separate from the 
 living whole, from the organism and its vivifying vital 
 force and hidden in the interior, be it of ever so subtle 
 a character, is an absurdity."! 
 
 Force apart from matter is inconceivable. The vital 
 force inhabiting the organism, must therefore be united 
 with a substance though no doubt the latter is in a state of 
 infinitely minute division. 
 
 In the second decade of this century a solution of the 
 problem was enunciated by the medical investigators of 
 France, which twenty years later was gradually re-echoed 
 in Germany. "We must localize diseases," look for their 
 seat ! Hahnemann considered that most diseases were 
 general affections. So the general current of opinion, to 
 which we owe much, ran contrary to his views. 
 
 But to complete this separation of his views from the 
 general bias of opinion, his Chronic Diseases, their Peculiar 
 Nature and HonicBopathic Treatment, appeared in 1S28. 
 Hahnemann had for years, as he says, been incessantly 
 occupied with the endeavour to ascertain the cause of the 
 heredity of diseases, why one person was subject to a 
 skin complaint, another to pulmonary, nervous, dyspeptic, 
 &;c., disease, and why chronic diseases so frequently obsti- 
 nately resisted the apparently best selected remedies. The 
 habits of life give no satisfactory explanation. The empty 
 expressions " it is inherited," " it is the predisposition to 
 disease," with which the majority of physicians were, and 
 still are satisfied, did not content his inquiring mind. He 
 wished to substitute something reliable in their place ; and 
 this was certainly a praiseworthy endeavour. We have 
 already seen what was the opinion then prevalent with 
 regard to the " itch " and its consequences. " Itch " was a 
 
 * Organon, Preface, p. x. (Dudgeon's translation). 
 t lb., § 13-
 
 138 HaJinemajin's Psora Theory. 
 
 diagnosis which covered many other affections besides the 
 one now known as " scabies " or " itch." Hahnemann was 
 very fond of the history of medicine and Hked to study 
 medical authors. In the course of these studies he was 
 struck with the fact that the most frequent cause of chronic 
 diseases was " psora," the " itch dyscrasia," and he fills 
 thirteen pages with quotations supporting this view from 
 the following authors : Fr. Hoffmann, Morgagni, J. 
 Fr. Gmelin, Hundertmark, L. Ch. Juncker, Sauvages, E. 
 Hagendorn, Lentilius, Reil and many others, who had 
 observed that almost all chronic diseases were sequelae of 
 " psora." He was therefore gradually forced to the con- 
 clusion that in cutaneous diseases there was a " something " 
 which was capable of producing other diseases, and which, 
 transmitted from generation to generation, was the remote 
 cause of many diseases. Besides this " psora " there were 
 other fundamental causes, viz., " sycosis," the phenomena 
 connected with gonorrhoea, and " syphilis." Though there 
 may have been some substratum of truth in these views, 
 Hahnemann, nevertheless, far transcended the limits of 
 probability and fell into a great error. 
 
 Hahnemann soon found the most vehement opposition 
 from his own followers. Griesselich writes as follows, in 
 January, 1836 :* " I have questioned all the homoeopaths 
 I know, whether they consider psora such a fundamental 
 cause of disease, and I must confess that I cannot re- 
 member a single one who thought so." The Central Con- 
 gress of Homceopathists in Frankfort-on-the-Main in 1837, 
 under the presidence of Dr. Rau, rejected this doctrine.f 
 But the efficacy of Hahnemann's so-called anti-psoric 
 remedies was not therefore denied. 
 
 Evidently Hahnemann — as we have repeatedly said — 
 together with his great achievements had also his weak- 
 nesses like every other human being and all geniuses, 
 
 * Frescogemdlde, I., p. 92. 
 
 t Schmidt's /rt/zrZ'w/^d:;- XVII., p. 3S3.
 
 HaJmemann's services to PJiannacy. 139 
 
 Such reformers, endowed with unusual strength, have errati- 
 cally formed heads and rugged characters, and whoever 
 attacks their asperities with the intention of destroying 
 them, may expect the fate which befell the gnat in the 
 fable who thought it had killed a sleeping lion, but while it 
 was singing its song of victory, he rose up and went for 
 his tiny adversary. 
 
 HaJmemann and the Apothecaries. 
 
 Hahnemann's labours for the improvement of phar- 
 macy show his high estimation of this branch of know- 
 ledge, and how important it appeared to him that the 
 physician should have the best possible curative instru- 
 ments at command. Thus he writes in the ApotJieker- 
 lexicon (I. 52, 53): "Simple drugs collected at the proper 
 seasons in all their power, and simple preparations made 
 and preserved in the highest degree of perfection, are the 
 greatest ornaments of a good drug store ; it is necessary 
 and quite fair to ask the public to pay the full price for 
 such drugs ; but to sell stale, powerless or even spurious 
 drugs and preparations badly made, or mayhap converted 
 into poisons in the process of preparation, at even half- 
 price, is to act the usurer's part, in many cases to deprive 
 the suffering of relief, and in some cases even to rob 
 and murder him — a shameful, criminal action." In 
 Trommsdorff's Joiwnal der PJiarmacie^ this passage is 
 cited as " true, well-expressed and laudable." 
 
 What was the state of the drug stores in those days ? In 
 the preface to Keiinaeichcn dcr Giite iind VerfdlscJmng der 
 Arzneiviittel, Hahnemann quotes a work of Gilbert's which 
 draws a vivid picture of the wholesale adulterations of 
 drugs which was at that time practised in the great seats 
 of commerce, such as Marseilles, and Hahnemann adds 
 that the Dutch were not much better for they competed 
 with one another in supplying adulterated drugs in order 
 to bring down their price. " German importers," says 
 
 * 1795, I^I-> PP' 62 and 63.
 
 140 TJie tuiiversal adulteration 
 
 Hahnemann, "must be armed with invincible conscien- 
 tiousness, principles scarcely compatible with the commer- 
 cial spirit, if they are to resist the flattering cheapness of 
 these wares which they buy on trust. They know that 
 their customers, the shop-keepers and small apothecaries, 
 have to deal with an indiscriminating public who must 
 take their wares over the counter without examination, 
 if they only bear the name of the true article ; and the 
 custom-house authorities are convinced of their genuineness 
 if only the full duty is paid." (According to Hahnemann 
 a few excellent establishments in Prussia and Russia were 
 praiseworthy exceptions to this mode of trading). 
 
 Thus the planters of the East and West Indies, in conjunction with 
 the Dutch manufacturers, through a ring of greedy tradesmen united 
 only by the craving for high profits, have the welfare of Europe at 
 their mercy ; and as to the articles they provide us with, after they 
 have passed through the last hand, we are at a loss which to admire 
 most, their enhanced prices or the skill displayed in their adultera- 
 tions 
 
 If we really wish to obtain genuine drugs, the poor apothecary 
 should not be compelled by elaborate pharmacopoeias to keep all 
 manner of crude and composite medicines, which not even Galen, 
 Tvlyrepsus and Zwolfer could preserve from fermentation, mould and 
 vermin. His ability should be tested by competent men, the wholesale 
 dealer in drugs should surpass his customers the apothecaries if 
 possible in uprightness, knowledge of his wares and chemical sci- 
 ence ; the adulterator of drugs should be punished even more severely 
 than the coiner ; the inspector of drug stores should bring to his task 
 a greater amount of knowledge, and the quack who dispenses his own 
 medicines should be compelled to swallow them himself ; but the man 
 who has the courage and skill to restore to the Fatherland this branch 
 of trade, which was taken from us first by the Venetians and then by 
 the Dutch, should be honoured and rewarded. Certainly there is 
 much to be done before the best medicines can be placed in the hands 
 of the physician, who sometimes wants nothing more to enable him to 
 relieve the sufferings of his fellow creatures but that trifle — reliable 
 instruments. 
 
 As it was thus often impossible even for an honest 
 apothecary to procure good wares, little confidence could 
 be felt in the druggists' shops. In small places especially 
 they were often combined with general goods' shops, and 
 not infrequently in the same room. Frequent complaints
 
 of Medicines. 14 t 
 
 were made of the ignorance of their owners, who were 
 even accused of selHng drugs which they knew to be 
 spurious.* If such practices were openly complained of, 
 they must have been of frequent occurrence. If the 
 apothecary went on a journey in order to purchase drugs 
 — and this was necessary in those days — he abandoned the 
 making up of prescriptions and the sale of medicines to 
 his " apprentice," who often knew little or nothing of the 
 art. Even in good, well-supplied neighbourhoods, shops 
 are described where the drugs stood about covered with 
 dust, in no order and in unsuitable vessels.f Professor 
 Trommsdorff who was himself the owner of a well-known 
 drug-store in Erfurt, still in existence, narrates^ that he 
 found in many shops the evil practice of using cinchona 
 bark and rhubarb root over and over again to make 
 decoctions, and other injurious abuses. 
 
 Similar and worse practices were reported and lamented 
 in Q,xqS\!'s, Annalen\ "We might reasonably suppose that 
 apothecaries who had kept shops for a number of years 
 would at la.st become more careful and skilful in their 
 practice, but in vain ! they will not be weaned from old 
 waj's and routine." 
 
 This description is illustrated by a number of examples 
 " whose names could be given if required ; " among them 
 we find (besides the above-mentioned conscious adultera- 
 tion of drugs) the following : " An apothecary once asked 
 mc what I paid for boracic acid and saccharic acid, and 
 what they were ? Two substances not often asked for, 
 and which I imagine are only known to one in ten. It 
 was a disgrace to any apothecary not to know all about 
 such trifling matters." 
 
 Many physicians at that time complained of the unre- 
 liable quality of drugs ; especially blame-worthy was the 
 mode of preparing the narcotics : aconite, belladonna, 
 
 * Crell's Chein. Ajmalcft, 1792, I., p. 259. 
 t BerHnisches Jalu-b. dcr Phar?nade, 1795, P- 197- 
 X Jour. d. Pharmacic, 1796, III., St. 2, p. "jZ. 
 II 1792, I., p. 257.
 
 142 Faulty modes of preparing 
 
 conium, hyoscyamus, &c., which were usually only adminis- 
 tered in the form of extracts. They differed as much as five 
 or ten times in strength according to the time they were 
 boiled or the way in which they were kept ; the most 
 pernicious results sometimes followed their administration, 
 and many medical men did not dare to prescribe them. 
 Scruple and drachm doses of these poisonous substances 
 were sometimes given without injury, if the extract was 
 bad, a fact which could not be known to the physician ; 
 on other occasions, the extract happened to be good, and a 
 fatal issue was almost inevitable. Monro (II. 270) writes that 
 he had repeatedly seen an ounce of extract of hyoscyamus 
 given in twenty-four hours. Hahnemann thereupon di- 
 rects attention to the boiling of the extract, whereby it 
 would be rendered as harmless as extract of lettuce. In 
 another place he warns us {Arneischatc, p. 30}: "If we 
 wish to spoil myrrh, an active and unknown drug, we in 
 Germany make an extract of it. We do not care and, 
 indeed, cannot estimate how much of the strength of the 
 drug is lost, or how much it is burnt during its preparation. 
 All the better for us — it is now all the more secundiuu 
 arteni ! " 
 
 Hahnemann says (Monro, II., 222) that he has seen extract 
 of aconite which could be given in scruple doses without 
 effect, while three grains of a good preparation would be a 
 very strong dose. 
 
 On another occasion he says (Monro, II., 267), that if 
 the extract is prepared by boiling — " and this is the almost 
 universal practice" — it may be taken almost like a food. 
 " The medical man — this is my well-founded opinion — 
 should either make his extracts himself after the afore- 
 said manner (the Hahnemannian), or see that the apothe- 
 cary does so." 
 
 Hahnemann repeatedly complains of the untrustworthi- 
 ness of druggists' shops : " I know capital towns in which 
 there is not a single apothecary who knows hemlock " (z<5.) 
 — " Many drugs are not properly prepared in many drug- 
 gists' shops" {Edinb. Disp. i, 312) — " We cannot even now 
 count upon the accurate measurement by apothecaries of
 
 Extracts of Narcotic Plants. 143 
 
 such small doses as half to a quarter grain" {ib. p. 361.) 
 In another place, he deplores the careless way in which 
 the work is done in many, {ib, II., 492) also that his pre- 
 paration of mercury " is usually so carelessly and imper- 
 fectly prepared."* 
 
 Further : " How many different roots have druggists used 
 instead of black Christmas rose root (helleborus niger), 
 almost every kind except the right one. Ten distinct roots 
 have been introduced into apothecaries' shops under this 
 name, and the helpless practitioner relies upon the officinal 
 extract, helleb. nigri ! wretched man ! " 
 
 An author laments the absence of results from the admi- 
 nistration of extract of aconite, Hahnemann : " The in- 
 spissated juice was worthless. That is the solution of this 
 constantly recurring mystery." 
 
 No single critic has proved the falseness of these stric- 
 tures upon the pharmaceutists of that time. 
 
 Hahnemann, who was theoretically and practically so 
 skilful an expert in the apothecary's art that few equalled 
 or surpassed him, usually gave the patients who entrusted 
 their health to his care, his own medicines, thus trenching 
 on the privileges of the apothecaries. 
 
 " How much lower will the servile spirit of the physician 
 bend under the despotism of the monopolising apothe- 
 cary ?" exclaims Hahnemann, when again discussing the 
 unreliability of a preparation. {ArzneiscJiats, p. 160) 
 
 There was a time when a medical man who allowed his 
 drugs to be prepared by anyone else was looked down upon. 
 But when the mixing of drugs came more and more into 
 vogue, he could no longer prepare the complicated brews 
 himself, and the apothecaries thereupon gradually came 
 into existence in Germany in the XVth century (in 
 Prague and Niirnberg as early as the XlVth century). 
 The apothecary was, therefore, only a means to an end, 
 and he was only required by those practitioners who would 
 not or could not prepare their own medicines. No one 
 ever thought of compelling the physician to have his medi- 
 
 * lb. II., 247 and 371.
 
 144 Origin of the Apothecaries Guild. 
 
 cines prepared by a third person. The encroaching guild 
 of apothecaries contrived to have a law passed at the end 
 of the XVIIth and beginning of the XVIIIth Century in 
 Prussia forbidding physicians to dispense their own medi- 
 cines ; it being expressly added, " that they may not thereby 
 do detriment to the apothecaries."* This did not meet with, 
 a proper opposition from physicians, because they had 
 gradually accustomed themselves to abandon the prepara- 
 tion of their instruments of healing to a third person, and 
 had not themselves sufficient time, inclination, or knowledge 
 to collect the drugs, ascertain their purity, and finally to 
 compound the mixtures. This is the cause of the origin 
 of the privileges of apothecaries, who have taken from 
 physicians through their own fault their natural, original, 
 and inherent right of preparing the drugs discovered and 
 introduced by themselves and not by the apothecaries, 
 whereby they might be sure of the purity of the remedies 
 they prescribed. 
 
 Hahnemann demanded, in opposition to this unnatural 
 condition, the restoration of their original right, and tried 
 to induce physicians to concern themselves more with the 
 purity of their drugs and reminded them of their ancient 
 rights, and many of them demanded back their rights. 
 
 How important was the preparation and dispensing of 
 his medicines by himself is self-evident. Hahnemann 
 would never have made his great discoveries concerning 
 the actions of drugs had he not dispensed his own medi- 
 cines. 
 
 Hahnemann has deserved the gratitude of both the 
 apothecary and the physician for having attacked with a 
 strong arm abuses existing in the druggists' shops, whereby 
 he effected a beneficent reform in this sphere, though 
 his manly intrepid assault has not always been welcomed 
 by the apothecaries. 
 
 * The medicinal edicts in question will be found in detail in Serene's 
 Dispcusirfrcihcit dcr Acfzfc, Berlin, Diimmler, 1877, p. 31 ; a work 
 that well deserves to be read.
 
 Complete List of Hahnemamis JVor/cs. 145 
 
 Hahneniaiuis Writings arranged in tJie order of their 
 publication. 
 
 1777 Translation of Nugent's Essay on Hydrophobia, Leipzig. I. G. 
 
 Miiller. From the Engl. 150 p. 
 1777 Trans, of Stedman's Physiological Essays and Observations, 
 
 with plates. Leipzig. L G. Miiller. From the Engl. 134 p. 
 1777 Trans, of Falconer's Essay on Waters commonly used at Bath. 
 
 Leipzig bei Hilscher. From the Engl. 2 pts. 355 p. and 
 
 439 P- 
 1777 Trans, of Ball's Modern Practice of Physic. Leipzig 1777 and 
 
 1780, with Notes under the name Spohr. From the Engl. 
 1779 Dissertatio inaugur. medic : Conspectus afFectuum spasmodi- 
 
 corum aetiologicus et therapeuticus. Erlangae 1779. 4- 20 p. 
 
 1782 The first small Medical Essays in Aledicinisclie BcobacJitungeii 
 
 von Krebs, Quedlinburg. 1782 Heft 2. 
 
 1783 In the Sammlung der auserlesenen und neuesten Abhandlungen 
 
 fiir Wundartze, Leipzig, Weygand, are several articles by 
 Hahnemann. 1783, 1784, 1787. 
 
 1784 Trans, of Demachy's Procddds Chimiques. Leipzig bei Cru- 
 
 sius. 2 vols. 303 p. and 396 p. From the French, with 
 additions and plates. 2nd Edit. 1801. 
 
 1784 Guide to the Treatment of Old Wounds and Indolent Ulcers. 
 
 Leipzig bei Crusius. 192 p. (trans, in Brit. Jour, of Horn. 
 xlii.) 
 
 1785 Trans, of Demachy's L'Art du Distillateur Liquoriste. Leipzig. 
 
 2 pts. From the French, with additions. 332 p. and 2S4 p. 
 
 1786 On Arsenical Poisoning ; its Treatment and Judicial Detection. 
 
 Leipzig. Lebrecht Crusius. 276 p. 
 
 1787 Trans, of Demachy's L'Art du Vinaigrier. Leipzig bei Crusius. 
 
 From the French, with Additions and an Appendix. 176 p. 
 
 1787 The Signs of the Purity and Adulteration of Drug^s, by B. v. 
 d. Sande, Apothecary in Brussels, and Hahnemann. Dresden 
 bei Walther. 350 p. 
 
 1787 Prejudice against Coal Fuel, the Way to Improve this Combus- 
 tible, etc., with 2 plates. Dresden. Walther. 
 
 1787 On the Difficulty of Preparing Soda by Potash and Kitchen 
 
 Salt. Crell's cJiein. A7t7iate>j, II. St. 11. Pp. 387 — 396. 
 
 1788 Influence of some kinds of Gases on the Fermentation of Wine,. 
 
 tb. I. St. 2. Pp. 141 — 142. 
 1788 On the Wine Test for Iron and Lead, \ib. I. St. 4. Pp. 291 — 306. 
 1788 On Bile and Gall-stones, z<^. II. St. 10. Pp.296 — 299. 
 1788 An Uncommonly Powerful Remedy for Putrefaction, tb. II. St.. 
 
 12. pp. 485 — 486, trans, into French by Cruet. 
 178S Instructions for Surgeons respecting the Venereal Disease. 
 
 Leipzig bei Crusius XIV. u 292 p. (trans, in Lesser ]Vritings i). 
 
 10
 
 146 Complete List of 
 
 1789 Unsuccessful Experiments with some New Discoveries, ib. I. St. 
 
 3. pp. 202 — 207. 
 1789 Letter to Crell on Baryta, ib. II, St. 8. pp. 143 — 144. 
 1789 Discovery of a New Constituent in Plumbago, ib. II. St. 10. pp. 
 
 291 — 298. 
 1 789 On the Principium adstringens of Plants. Beitrage zu d. Chem. 
 
 Annal. Vol. IV. St. 4, pp. 419 — 420. 
 
 1789 Trans, of the History of Abelard and Heloisa, by Sir J. Bar- 
 
 rington. From the Engl. Leipzig. 17 sheets. 
 
 1790 Remedy for the Salivation and Destructive Effects of Mercury 
 
 J. Fr. Blumenbach's Medic. Bibliothek, Vol. 3. pp. 543 — 548. 
 1790 Smaller Articles on Various Subjects. Crell's Annal. I. St. 3. 
 
 pp. 256—257. 
 1790 Complete Mode of Preparing the Soluble Mercury, zA II. St. i. 
 
 pp. 22 — 28. 
 1790 Trans, of Ryan's Inquiry into the Nature, Causes and Cure of 
 
 Consumption of the Lungs. Leipzig b. Weygand. From 
 
 the Engl. 164 p. 
 1790 Trans, of Fabbroni's Dell' arte di fare il Vino ragionamente. 
 
 Leipzig. 278 p. From the Italian, with Additions. 
 1790 Trans, of Arth. Young's Annals of Agriculture, I'tc. Leipzig bei 
 
 Crusius. 2 vols. From the Engl. 290 p. and 313 p. 
 
 1790 Trans, of Cullen's Materia Medica. Leipzig. Schwickert. 2 
 
 vols. 468 p. and 672 p. From the Engl., with Notes. 
 
 1 791 Trans, of Grigg's Advice to the Female Sex in general. Leipzig. 
 
 Weygand. From the Engl. 285 p. 
 1791 Trans, of Monro's Materia Medica. Leipzig bei Beer. 2 vols. 
 480 p. and 472 p. From the Engl, with Notes. 2nd edition, 
 
 1794- 
 1 791 Trans, of De la Metherie's Essai analitique sur Pair pure. 
 
 Leipzig bei Crusius. 2 vols. 450 p. and 598 p. From the 
 
 French. 
 1791 Trans, of Rigby's Chem. Observations on Sugar. Dresden bei 
 
 C. C. Richter. From the Engl., with Notes. 82 p. 
 
 1 791 Insolubility of some Metals, and their Oxides in Caustic Am- 
 
 monia. Crell's Annalcn, II. St. 8. pp. 117 — 123. 
 
 1792 Contributions to the Art of Testing Wine. Scherfs Beitrage 
 
 zum Arcliiv der Medic. PoHzci., Leipzig. Vol. 3. 
 1792 On the Production of Glauber Salt according to Ballen's ^Method. 
 Crell's Annalcn^ I. St. i. pp. 22 — 33. 
 
 1792 Friend of Health. Frankfurt. Fleischer. Pt. i. loop, (trans, in 
 
 Lesser \Vriti7igs., 189). 
 
 1793 Apothekerlexicon. Leipzig b. Crusius. Theil i (A — E), 280 p. 
 1793 Something about the Wirtemberg and Hahnemann's Wine 
 
 Test. Intelligenzblatt der AUgcvi. Liter. Zciiu?7g, No. 79, 
 p. 630.
 
 HaJmemann's Works. 147 
 
 1793 Preparation of Cassel Yellow. Erfurt 4. 
 
 1794 On the new Wine Test and the new Liq. probat. fort. Ci-ell's 
 
 Annalcn, I. St. 12. pp. 104 — in. 
 
 1795 On Crusta Lactea. J. Fr. Blumenbach's Medic. Bibliothek, 
 
 Vol. 3. pp. 701 — 705 (trans, in B. J. of H. xlii.) 
 1795 Apothekerlexikon (F — K) 244 p. 
 
 1795 Friend of Health. Leipzig bei Crusius. Pt. 2, 6 sheets (trans. 
 
 in Lesser Writings, 240) 
 
 1796 Trans, of J. J. Rousseau sur I'education des enfants, under the 
 
 title Mother's Manual. Leipzig bei Fleischer. From French. 
 1796 Description of Klockenbring during his Insanity. Deutsche 
 Monatsschrift, Februarheft (trans, in Lesser Writiiigs, 287) 
 
 1796 Essay on a New Principle for Ascertaining the Cui'ative Powers 
 
 of Drugs. Hufeland's_/i^//r/?cr/. Vol. 2. St. 3 and 4. pp. 391 — 
 439 and pp. 465 — 561 (trans, in Lesser lVriti?igs, 295). 
 
 1797 Something about the Pulverization of Ignatia Beans. Tromms- 
 
 d^ox'i^s Journal der Pharniacie, vol. 5. St. i. pp. 38 — 40. 
 1797 Case of Rapidly Cured Cohcodynia. Hufeland'sy^iz/r;/. Vol. 3. 
 
 St. I. pp. 138 — 147 (trans, in Lesser Writings, 353)- 
 1797 Are the Obstacles to Certainty and Simplicity in Practical A'ledi- 
 
 cine Insurmountable .'' ib. vol. 4. St. 4. pp. 727 — 762 (trans. 
 
 in Lesser Writings, 358). 
 1797 Trans, of Taplin's Equerry, or Modern Veterinary Medicine. 
 
 Pt. I. Leipzig. From the Engl. 387 p. 
 
 1797 Trans, of the New Edinburgh Dispensatory. Leipzig bei G. 
 
 Fleischer d. Jiingeren, with 3 plates. Pt. i. 583 p. with 
 Notes. 
 179S Trans, of Taplin, Pt. 2. 304 p. 
 
 1798 N. Edinburgh Disp. Pt. 2. 62S p. 
 
 1798 Apothekerlexikon (L — P) 259 p. with 3 plates. 
 
 1798 Antidotes to some Heroic Vegetable Substances. Hufel. Jou7-n. 
 
 Vol. 5. St. I, pp. 3 — 21 (trans, in Lesser Writings, 374) 
 1798 Some .kinds of Continued and Remitting Fevers. Hufel. yc;//;'/7. 
 
 Bd. 5. St. I. S. 19 — 52. {Lesser Writings, 382.) 
 
 1798 Some Periodical and Hebdomadal Diseases, ib. Bd. 5. St. i. p. 
 
 45 — 59. {Lesser Writings, 395.) 
 
 1799 Apothekerlexikon (Q — Z) 498 p. 
 
 1800 Trans, of Thesaurus Medicaminum, a new collection of medical 
 
 prescriptions. Leipzig bei G. Fleischer d. J. From the Engl. 
 
 412 p. with a preface by the translator and notes signed " Y.'' 
 
 (The preface trans, in Lesser Writings, 398.) 
 1800 Trans, of Home's Pract. Observations on the Cure of Strictures 
 
 of the Urethra by Caustics. Leipzig bei G. Fleischer d. J. 
 
 147 p. From the Engl, with Notes. 
 iSoi Cure and Prevention of Scarlet Fever. Gotha bei Becker. 
 
 40 p.
 
 148 Complete List of 
 
 1 80 1 Fragmentary Observations on Brown's Elements of Medicine. 
 
 Hufeland's Journal, Vol. 12, St. 2. pp. 52—76. {Lesser 
 
 Writings, 405.) 
 1 801 On the Power of Small Doses of Medicine in General and of 
 
 Belladonna in particular, zb. Vol. 13. St. 2. pp. 153—159. 
 
 {Lesser IVri/ings, 443.) 
 1 801 Observations on the Three Current Methods of Treatment, id. 
 
 A^ol. II. St. 4. pp. 3 — 64. {Lesser Writings, 592.) 
 1 801 \'iew of Professional Liberality at the Commencement of the 
 
 19th Century. Reichsanzeiger No. 32. {Lesser Writi7igs, ^ij). 
 1803 On the Effects of Coffee. Leipzig bei Steinacker, 56 p. {Lesser 
 
 Writings, 450.) 
 1803 On a Proposed Remedy for Hydrophobia Reichsanzeiger, No. 
 
 71. {Lesser Writings, 447.) 
 1805 Aesculapius in the Balance. Leipzig bei Steinacker. 70 p. {Lesser 
 
 Writings, 470.) 
 
 1805 Fragmenta de viribus medicamentorum positivis sive in sano 
 
 corpore observatis. Lipsiae, sumtu J. A. Barthii. 2 pts. 
 VI n. and 269 p. — VL and 470 p. 
 
 1806 On Substitutes for Cinchona. Hufeland's yir^z/r;?.?!:/ Vol. 23. St. 4. 
 
 S. 27 — 47 (trans, in B. J. of H., xlii.) 
 1S06 Scarlet Fever and Purpura Miliaris two Quite Distinct Diseases. 
 
 ib. Vol. 24. St. I. pp. 139 — 146 (trans, in B.J. of H. xlii.) 
 ]8o6 What are Poisons ? What are Medicines? ib. Vol. 24. St. 3. 
 
 pp. 40 — 57 (trans, in B.J. of H. xlii.) 
 1806 Objections to Proposed Substitute for Cinchona and to Suc- 
 
 cedanea in General. Rcichsanaeigcr,'^o ^j. {Lesser Writings, 
 
 542.) 
 
 1806 ^Medicine of Experience. Hufeland's yrwr;/. Bd. 22. St. 3. p. 
 
 5 — 99. {Lesser Writings, 497.) 
 1S06 Trans, of Albrecht v. Haller's Materia Medica. Leipzig. 
 
 1807 Indications of the HomcEopathic Employment ot Medicines in 
 
 Ordinary Practice. Hufeland's Joiirn. Vol. 26. St. 2. pp. 
 
 5 — 43, afterwards in the three fii'st editions of the Orgmion 
 
 (in Dudgeon's trans, of the Organoji). 
 1 80S On the Present Want of Foreign Medicines. Allg. Anzeig. d. 
 
 Deiitschen, No. 297. {Lesser Writings, 551.) 
 180S On Substitutes for Foreign Drugs. //^ No. 327. {Lesser JVritings, 
 
 574-) 
 iSoS On the Value of the Speculative Systems of Medicine, ib. No. 
 
 263. {Lesser Writings, 556.) 
 
 1808 Extract from a Letter to a Physician of high standing on the 
 
 great Necessity of a Regeneration of TVledicine, ib. No. 343. 
 {Lesser Writings, 581.) 
 180S Observations on the Scarlet Fe\-cr. zb. No. 160. {Lesser U^rztings, 
 546.)
 
 HaJinenianiis Works. 149 
 
 1 80S Reply to a Question about the Prophylactic for Scarlet Fever. 
 
 YiVii.Journ. Vol. 27. St. 4. pp. 153 — 156. (Trans, in B. J. of 
 
 H. xlii.) 
 1S09 To a Candidate for the Degree of M.D. Allg. Anz. dcr 
 
 Deictsdien^ No. 227. {Lesser Writings, 625.) 
 1809 On the Prevailing Fever, ib. No. 261. {Lesser Writings, 62S.) 
 
 1809 Signs of the Times in the Ordinary System of Medicine, ib. 
 
 No. 326. {Lesser Writings, 640.) 
 
 1810 Organon of Rational Medicine. Dresden bei Arnold. 1810. 
 
 222 pp. — 2. Edit. 1 8 19, with the title : Organon of Medicine, 
 371 pp.— 3. Edit. 1824. XXIV. and 281 pp.— 4. Edit. 1829. 
 XVI. and 307 pp. — 5. Edit. 1833. XXII. and 304 pp. (This 
 last edition trans, by Dudgeon, 1849.) 
 
 1811 Materia Medica Pura, Pt. i. Dresden 1811. 248 pp. — 2. en- 
 
 larged Edit. 1823. — 3. enlarged Edit. 1830 (trans, by Dudgeon, 
 1883.) 
 
 1812 Dissertatio historico-medica de Helleborismo Veterum, quam 
 
 defendet auctor Samuel Hahnemann, med. et chirurg. Doctor, 
 academ. Mogunt. scient. ut societ. physic, med. Erlang. et 
 societ. reg. oeconom., quae Lipsiae floret, Sodal. honor. 
 Lipsiae. Tauchnitz. 86 pp. (trans, in Lesser Writings, 644.) 
 
 1813 Spirit of the New Medical Doctrine. Allgem. Anz. d. D. 
 
 March. Pp. 626 (afterwards in more complete form in the 
 second part of the M. M. P. {Lesser Writings, 696, and in 
 Dudgeon's trans, of the M. M. P.) 
 
 1814 Treatment of the Typhus or Hospital Fever at present Pre- 
 
 vailing. Allg. A. d. D. No. 6. {Lesser Writings, 712.) 
 1 8 16 On the Venereal Disease and its ordinary Improper Treatment, 
 
 ib. No. 211. {Lesser Writings, 728.) 
 1816 On the Treatment of Burns, ib. No. 156 and 204. {Lesser 
 
 Writiptgs, 716.) 
 1816 Materia Medica Pura. Pt. II. 396 pp. — 2nd. Edit. 1824. — 3rd. 
 
 Edit. 1833.— Pt. III. 288 pp.— 2nd. enlarged Edit. 1825 
 
 (trans, by Dudgeon, 1883.) 
 
 1818 The Same, Pt. IV. 284 pp. — 2nd. enlarged Edit. 1825 (trans, by 
 
 Dudgeon, 1883.) 
 1S19 The Same, Pt. V. 306 pp. — 2nd. enlarged Edit. 1826 (trans, by 
 Dudgeon, 1883.) 
 
 1819 On the Uncharitableness towards Suicides. A/lg. A. d. D. No. 
 
 144. {Lesser Writings, 781.) 
 
 1820 On the Preparation and Dispensing of Medicines by Hom. Phy- 
 
 sicians Themselves. {Lesser Writings, 783.) 
 
 1 82 1 Treatment of Purpura Miliaris. Allg. A. d. D.'i^o.ib. {Lesser 
 
 Writings, 782.) 
 1821 Materia Medica Pura. Pt. VI. 255 pp. — 2nd. enlarged Edit. 
 1826 (trans, by Dudgeon, 1883.)
 
 150 BirtJi, Parentage and 
 
 1825 How may Homoeopathy be most certainly eradicated? Allg. 
 A. d. D. No. 26. {Lesser IVj-ithij^s^ 793.) 
 
 1825 Information for the Truth-seeker in No. 165 of the Allg. A. d. 
 D. lb. No. 194. (Expanded and altered in the Mat. Med. 
 Pura, Vol. 6, under the title " How can small doses of such 
 very attenuated Medicines as Homoeopathy employs still 
 possess Great Power?" Lesser IVrzllngs, p. 817 and 
 Dudgeon's trans, of Ma/. Med. Pura, H., p. 43. The L. IV. 
 gives the article as originally Avritten in 1825, the M. M. P. 
 as altered in 1827.) 
 
 1828 The Chronic Diseases, their Peculiar Nature and HomcEopathic 
 Treatment. Dresden b. Arnold. Pt. I. vi. and 241 pp. — Pt. 
 II. 362 pp. — 2nd. enlarged Edit. 1835. — Pt. III. 312 pp. — 
 2nd. enlarged Edit. Diisseldorf b. Schaub. 1837. 
 
 1830 The Same, Pt. IV. 407 p. — 2nd. enlai-ged Edit. Diisseldorf bei 
 
 Schaub. 1838. 
 1S30 The Same, Pt. V. — 2nd. enlarged Edit. 1839. (Trans, by Hempel) 
 
 1831 Allopathy; a Word of Warning to all Sick Persons. Leipzig 
 
 bei Baumgartner. 32 p. {Lesser IVritzngs, 827.) 
 I S3 1 Appeal to Thinking Philanthropists on the Mode of Infection of 
 Asiatic Cholera. Leipzig bei Berger. 20 p. {Lesser Writings., 
 
 849). 
 1 83 1 Cure and Prevention of Asiatic Cholera. Cothen bei Aue. 
 {Lesser Writings., 845). 
 
 1 83 1 Letter about the Cure of Cholera. Berlin bei Aug. Hirschwald 
 
 15 P- 
 
 1832 Cure of Cholera, with an Appendix. Niirnberg bei Stein. 1832. 
 1832 Remarks on the extreme attenuation of Homoeopathic Medicines. 
 
 Arch. f. horn. Hcilk. Vols. 11 and 12. {Lesser Writi7igs, 
 857.) 
 
 HAHNEMANN, AS A MAN. 
 
 Hahnemann was born at Meissen, in the kingdom of 
 Saxony, on the loth of April, 1/55 ; he was the eldest of 
 a family of ten. His parents adhered to the evangelical 
 form of religion. His father was a painter on porcelain, 
 and his circumstances were not such as to permit him to 
 spend much money on his son's education ; young Hahne- 
 mann was, therefore, destined to learn his father's trade. 
 By the persuasion and with the help of his teachers he was, 
 however, placed in a position to attend the Princely School
 
 Education of Hahnemann. 151 
 
 at Meissen, of which Muller was the principal. "A man 
 who," as Hahnemann says of him in his autobiography of 
 1791,* while he was still alive, " has but few equals in up- 
 rightness and industry, who loved me as his child, and who 
 allowed me a freedom in the choice of the subjects of my 
 education for which I shall always be grateful to him, and 
 which had a perceptible influence on the further course of 
 my studies. In my twelfth year he commissioned me to 
 teach to others the elements of the Greek laneuag-e." 
 Hahnemann received several other marks of partiality 
 from his master. " My father was strongly opposed to my 
 studying. On several occasions he took me away from the 
 grammar school for years together, in order to devote me 
 to some other occupation more suitable to his means. My 
 teachers prevented this by refusing all fees during the last 
 eight years, only begging him to allow me to stay with 
 them and follow my inclination. He could not refuse this, 
 but would do nothing more for me." Hahnemann's last 
 essay before leaving the Princely School was on a 
 subject selected by himself, " The Wonderful Construction 
 of the Human Hand." 
 
 In Easter 1775, my father sent me to Leipzig with the sum of twenty 
 thalers — the last money that I ever received from him. He had to 
 bring up several children on his limited income, and this sufficiently ex- 
 cuses the best of fathers. 
 
 Hahnemann never enjoyed the unlicensed freedom and 
 amenities of a student's life. He had to fight a hard battle 
 with adversity. Besides diligently attending the courses of 
 lectures, he taught German and French to a young Greek 
 from Jassy, and further increased his income by transla- 
 tions. He probably worked through many nights, while 
 his fellow-students were enjoying themselves in places of 
 amusement. " I can myself testify that while I was at 
 Leipzic I honestly tried to follow my father's injunction 
 never to play a merely passive part in the matter of 
 learning. Neither did I neglect exercise and fresh air, in 
 
 * In the work, .S". HaJincviann^ cin biographischcs Dcnknnil, Leipzig, 
 1851.
 
 152 HaJincinann's Wanderings, 
 
 order to preserve that strength of body by which alone 
 mental exertion can be sustained." The fees of his courses 
 of lectures were remitted by all the professors of medicine 
 through the influence of the Counsellor of Mines, Porner, 
 a doctor in Meissen, and it thus became possible for him 
 to save a small sum of money. 
 
 With this sum Hahnemann, in the year 1777, went, after 
 a two years' sojourn in Leipzic, to Vienna, in order to study 
 " practical medicine," for at that time there were no hospitals 
 either in Leipzic or in many other university towns. Before 
 his departure from Leipzic he was cheated out of part of 
 his savings, so that he had only sixty-eight florins and 
 twelve kreutzer to pay for his living ih Vienna during nine 
 months. Here the young medical student diligently 
 attended the hospital of the Brothers of Charity in the 
 Leopoldstadt, and was a zealous disciple of the ph}-sician 
 in ordinary to the Emperor, Freiherr v. Quarin, of whom he 
 speaks with great respect. Quarin, for his part, seems to 
 have shown peculiar partiality for his pupil Hahnemann, 
 for he was the only one whom he took with him on his 
 private visits to patients. 
 
 Hahnemann himself says : — " He singled me out, loved 
 and taught me as if I were his sole pupil in Vienna, and 
 even more than that, and all without expecting any 
 remuneration from me." Professor Bischoff* states that 
 " Freiherr v. Quarin bestowed on Hahnemann his special 
 friendship." 
 
 " The slender resources still remaining to me were on the 
 verge of disappearing," so Hahnemann relates, " when the 
 Governor of Transylvania, Baron v. Bruckenthal, invited 
 me on honourable terms to accompany him to Hermann- 
 stadt as resident-physician and to take charge of his library, 
 which was considerable." Hahnemann obtained this posi- 
 tion through the warm recommendation of Quarinf, a 
 proof that during his long intercourse with his pupil he had 
 
 * A)isichten iiber das bisherige Heilvcrfahrcn, Prague, 1819, p. 28. 
 t Brunnow, Eitt Blick auf Hahnernaufi, Leipzig, S. 4, 1844 (trans- 
 lated by Norton, London, 1845).
 
 Appointments and Marriage. 1 53 
 
 learnt to value his practical knowledge. " Here (in Her- 
 mannstadt) I had an opportunity of learning other languages 
 necessary to me, and also of acquiring other branches of 
 knowledge in wdiich I was deficient." Hahnemann seems to 
 have studied chemistry and the art of smelting with special 
 industry. After he had practised a year and three-quarters 
 in this populous town, he went to Erlangen in order to take 
 his degree of doctor. Here he also attended various lec- 
 tures by Delius, Isenflamm, Schreber and Wendt, to whom 
 he says, he " is indebted for much kindness " ; and on 
 the lOth of August he sustained his thesis : Conspectus 
 affectuum spasmodicorum aetiologicus et therapeuticus — 
 Erlangje, 1779, 4 to 20 p. 
 
 From Erlangen Hahnemann returned to his home. 
 " The yearning of a Swiss for his rugged Alps cannot be 
 more irresistible than that of a Saxon for his fatherland," 
 he writes. After a sojourn of three quarters of a year in 
 the mining town of Hettstadt, in Electoral Saxony, and in 
 Dessau, he obtained in 1781 the post of parish doctor in 
 Gommern, near Magdeburg. On the ist of December, 
 1783, he married Henrietta Kiichler, the step-daughter 
 of an apothecary at Dessau, named Haseler, whom Hahne- 
 mann calls an excellent apothecary.* Hahnemann was 
 not satisfied with a permanent residence at Gommern, 
 and he therefore exchanged this place for Dresden. Here, 
 according to his own statement, he enjoyed the intimate 
 friendship of the towm physician Wagner, who instructed 
 him in forensic medicine (" for he w-as an expert in this 
 branch ") and committed to him (on account of his own 
 illness) the charge of the town hospitals for a year with the 
 consent of the magistrates — a proof that this doctor also had 
 great confidence in Hahnemann's practical knowledge. The 
 Superintendent of the Electoral Library, the well-known 
 philologist Adelung, treated him with great kindness, and 
 as we learn from Hahnemann's autobiography, both he and 
 the Librarian Dossdorf, contributed largely to the pleasure 
 and instruction afforded to him by his sojourn in Dresden. 
 
 * Brunnow, /.c, p. 4.
 
 154 HaJiuevianiis retreat from 
 
 " To be nearer the centres of knowledge," he went to 
 Leipzic in 1789. 
 
 Hahnemann everywhere displayed indefatigable literary 
 industry, and was considered a learned and very skilful 
 physician. 
 
 Hahnemann was in Gotha from the year 1793, and 
 treated the well-known author and private secretary, 
 Klockenbring, who was confined in a lunatic asylum 
 founded by the Duke at Georgenthal, with acknowledged 
 success. He published an acccount of this case in 1796.* 
 
 After he had spent some time in Molschleben, near 
 Gotha, he went in 1794 to Pyrmont, remaining there only a 
 short time, and then to Brunswick. In 1797 he was at 
 Konigslutter ; in 1799 he went to Altona and Hamburg. 
 His residence in this commercial town does not, however, 
 seem to have pleased him, for he soon returned to Eilen- 
 burg in his native country, where he had a difficulty with 
 the municipal medical authority, because he insisted on 
 dispensing his own medicines. On this account he again 
 took to his wanderings and went to Machern near Leipzic. 
 Thence he went to Wittenberg, and then to Dessau, where 
 he remained two years; in 1806, he removed to Torgau. 
 Here he wrote his Oj'ganon der rationellen Heilkinist, and 
 in 181 1 he went to Leipzic to qualify himself at the Uni- 
 versity there, so as to be able to give lectures on his new- 
 system of treatment. Here he and his pupils were 
 zealously occupied with proving medicines on their own 
 bodies, and the further development of his doctrines. His 
 increasing practice aroused the envy of the doctors, and his 
 practice of dispensing his own medicines alarmed the 
 apothecaries. The latter took proceedings against him in 
 1 8 19, on account of his dispensing his own medicines. 
 Hahnemann in vain contended in an able vindicationf 
 that his medical treatment did not come under the existing 
 medicinal regulations, and that his therapeutic implements 
 had nothing to do with the medicines subject to these regu- 
 lations. In vain! Hahnemann was forbidden to dispense 
 
 * See Lesser Writings^ 2S7. f Lesser Writings^ 783.
 
 Leipzic to CoetJien. 155 
 
 his own medicines, and it was made impossible for him to 
 practise in Leipzic. Duke Frederick Ferdinand of Anhalt 
 offered him a refuge at Cothen, together with full liberty to 
 practise as he chose. Hahnemann, therefore, went there 
 in the spring of 1821 as Hofrath and physician in ordinary 
 to the Duke. 
 
 The following few fragments concerning Hahnemann's 
 connexion with the ducal house have been published : * — 
 
 (0 
 
 " Cothen, Jan. 29th, 1823. 
 " My Dear Hofrath Hahnemann, 
 " While expressing to you my thanks for your medical help this 
 year, and for the past two years, and assuring you of my complete 
 satisfaction, I wish you to accept the enclosed trifle as a slight recom- 
 jjense for your medicines and for your ser\ices. May Heaven pre- 
 serve you in good health for many years to the benefit of suffering 
 humanit}'. 
 
 " Ferdinand, Duke." 
 
 (2) 
 
 " I hereby wish to thank you sincerely in my own name, and in that 
 of my wife, the Duchess, for your good wishes for the New Year, and 
 hope that you, too, may be preserved for many years for the benefit of 
 mankind. At the same time let me have the pleasure of assuring you 
 of the continuance of my favour. 
 
 " Cothen, 3rd Jan., 1S29. "Ferdinand." 
 
 (3) 
 " My best thanks, my dear Hofrath, for your kind wishes for my 
 birthday. I owe to your exertions one of the pleasantest gifts on 
 entering on a new year — viz., impi'oved health. I hope to preserve 
 this to your praise and credit. 
 
 " With sincere pleasure, 
 
 " Yours very affectionately, 
 
 "Julie, Duchess of Anhalt." 
 
 (4) 
 " I have learnt with the greatest distress, my dear Hofrath, of 
 the sad blow which has fallen on you this nightf — the news was all the 
 greater shock to me since I had no suspicion of the illness of the 
 
 * Hahnemann's Lebcn totd Wirkcn von Albrecht, Leipzig, 1S78. 
 t His wife's death apparently.
 
 156 Brunnoivs accoiint of 
 
 departed. I beg you to be assured of my most hearty sympathy, and 
 to grant my earnest request that, under this severe shock, you will 
 not neglect your health, which is so necessary to the welfare of man- 
 kind. 
 
 "Julie, Duchess of Anhalt."' 
 
 Duke Henry also expressed his gratitude to Hahne- 
 mann on various occasions. The number of his patients in 
 Cothen grew from year to year, so much so that Hahne- 
 mann was obhged to engage Counsellor Lehmann to help 
 him in his work. He occupied himself with the devel- 
 opment of his system with undiminished energy and 
 pleasure. 
 
 On 31st, March, 1830, Hahnemann lost his wife, who, for 
 forty-six years, had shared the storms of his life with 
 him. 
 
 Hahnenianiis Pei'sonality and CJiaracter. 
 
 Sufficient information is obtainable on this subject, but 
 with regard to the history of his life, the accounts of his 
 biographers are so meagre that it is now very difficult, if 
 not impossible, to fill up the existing gaps. Brunnow re- 
 lates :* " On a bright spring day in the year, 18 16, I, then 
 a young, newly inscribed student of law, was strolling along 
 the pleasant promenades of Leipzic with some companions. 
 The University then possessed several notabilities, and not 
 a {q.\n originals among its professors. Many a professor 
 and tutor marched gravely along in the old Franconian 
 dress of the previous century, with wig and hair bag, silk 
 stockings and buckled shoes, while the flaunting students 
 of the various nationalities strutted about swaggering 
 in hussar's jackets and braided trousers, or in leather 
 breaches with high dragoon boots and clanking spurs — 
 
 " Who is that old gentleman with the intelligent face, walking arm- 
 in-arm with a stout lady, and followed by four rosy-cheeked girls .'' " I 
 asked one of the older students near me. 
 
 " That is the celebrated Doctor Hahnemann, with his wife and 
 daughters ?" was the answer. " He walks round the town regularly 
 every afternoon." 
 
 * Ein Blick ai/f HahncmanJi, Leipzig, 1S44.
 
 I 
 
 Hahneviann in Leip::ic. 1 57 
 
 "Who is this Hahnemann," I asked? " for what is he celebrated?" 
 
 " He is the discoverer of the homcEopathic method of treatment 
 
 Avhich is upsetting the old system of medicine," replied my ac- 
 
 quantance, who, like me, was an inhabitant of Dresden, and who 
 
 served under the banner of Themis. 
 
 Brunnovv made further inquiries, and as he was himself 
 in indifferent health, he consulted Hahnemann, and was 
 admitted to intercourse with the family, concerning whom 
 he gives us welcome information : — 
 
 Hahnemann was then in his 62nd year. Silvery locks surrounded 
 his lofty, thoughtful brow, beneath which his intelligent eyes flashed 
 forth with piercing fire. His whole face had a calmly inquiring, 
 grand expression ; only at times did the expression of a delicate 
 humour replace that of deep earnestness which indicated that he had 
 gone through many troubles and struggles. His bearing was upright, 
 his gait firm, his movements alert, like those of a man of thirty. 
 When he went out he dressed quite simply in a dark colored surtout, 
 and breeches and boots. In his own room, however, he liked to wear 
 a brightly-flowered dressing-gown, yellow slippers and black velvet 
 cap. His long pipe was seldom out of his hand, and this indulgence 
 in tobacco was the only relaxation from his abstemious mode of life. 
 His drink was water, milk and white beer, his food extremely frugal. 
 His whole domestic arrangements were as simple as his dress and 
 food. Instead of a bureau, he used a large plain square table on 
 which three or four huge folios lay, in which he had entered the his- 
 tories of the maladies of his patients, and which he was accustomed, 
 Avhen interviewing them, to consult diligently, and in which he wrote 
 down their cases. For his examination of patients was carried out 
 with the exactness which he recommends in his Organo?i. 
 
 Hahnemann received me most kindly, and our intimacy increased 
 every day. I was attached to him by strong bonds of veneration and 
 gratitude. I shall never forget the good he did me. 
 
 The life in Hahnemann's house was peculiar. The members of 
 the household and his academic pupils lived and worked for one object 
 alone — that was homoeopathy, for which everyone strove to labour in 
 his own way. The four grown-up daughters helped the father in pre- 
 paring his medicines, and willingly took their part in proving the 
 various remedies. The students who were devoted to the great re- 
 former were still more eager to do this, and their names are still to be 
 found carefully recorded in the pathogeneses of the various remedies 
 in the Mate7ia Medica Piira. 
 
 The patients were enthusiastic in their praises of the grand results 
 of homoeopathy, and became apostles of the ne\\- teaching among the 
 unbelievers 
 
 When the day's work was done, Hahnemann was accustomed to
 
 158 HaJineniamis Domestic and 
 
 recruit himself from the hours of eight to ten by conversation in a 
 famihar circle of friends. All his friends and pupils had free access 
 to him, and were happy and cheerful while smoking and drinking 
 white beer. In the middle of the hstening circle in his comfortable 
 arm-chair with his long pipe in his hand, sat the venerable vCsculapius, 
 and alternately related amusing and serious stories from his stormy 
 life, while puffing clouds of smoke from his pipe. Natural Science 
 and the condition of foreign nations often formed the subjects of 
 those evening conversations. Hahnemann had a special partiality for 
 the Chinese, and for this reason that they lay very great stress on the 
 respect and strict obedience due from children to their parents — a duty 
 which is becoming more and more neglected in our civilised European 
 world. Hahnemann's family, indeed, presented an example of the 
 old German family discipline. It was evident that the children not 
 only obeyed but truly loved their parents. 
 
 Hahnemann demanded not only intelligence and industry from his 
 pupils, but also strict morality. I know of a case in which a talented 
 young medical student was forbidden the house on account of a dis- 
 reputable connexion with a pretty girl of easy virtue. 
 
 With regard to religion, Hahnemann, who belonged to the Lutheran 
 confession held aloof from all dogmatic creeds. He was a pure 
 Deist, but he was this with full conviction. 
 
 " I cannot cease to praise and thank God when I contemplate his 
 works," he was accustomed to say. 
 
 Strict as was the obedience Hahnemann demanded from his 
 children, as a husband he was far from having the rule in his own 
 hands. His tall and stout wife, who, as Agnes Frei did to the noble 
 painter, Albrecht Diirer, gave him many a bitter hour, exercised the 
 most baneful influence over him. It was she who cut him off from 
 society, and set him against his medical colleagues. It was she who 
 often caused dissension between himself and his most faithful pupils, 
 if they did not treat the doctor's wife with the deepest respect. Not- 
 withstanding this, Hahnemann was accustomed to call this scolding 
 Xantippe, who took pleasure in raising a storm in the house, " the 
 noble companion of his professional life." 
 
 We learn the following particulars from the Seminary- 
 Director, Albrecht,* who enjoyed familiar intercourse with 
 Hahnemann from 1821 to 1835: — 
 
 Hahnemann was always happiest in his family circle, and dis- 
 played here as nowhere else a most amiable disposition to mirth and 
 cheerfulness. He joked with his children in the intervals which he 
 could devote to them, sang cradle songs to the little ones, composed 
 little verses for them, and used every opportunity to instruct them 
 
 * Hahnemann's Lcbcn^ Leipzig-, 1875, 2nd edit.
 
 Professional Life in Leipzic. 1 59 
 
 Although at first he had but little, he spent as much as he could 
 possibly save on the education and culture of his children. He wished 
 them to learn what was worth learning. His son understood and 
 spoke Latin, Greek, French, English and Italian ; he understood as 
 much of Arabic as could be required and desired from a highly-educa- 
 ted physician. He was also a very fair musician : he played the 
 guitar and the piano, and displayed great skill in many other useful 
 acquirements. He became a medical man, and in this capacity wrote 
 a defence of his father against Hecker (Dresden, 1811). He was per- 
 secuted by both doctors and chemists on account of his practice of 
 dispensing medicines himself. He emigrated at last and died during 
 Hahnemann's lifetime. " Four daughters and a son are, together 
 with my wife, the pleasure of my life," so Hahnemann wrote in 1791. 
 The son, whose name was Frederick, was then five years old 
 
 Hahnemann paid attention, too, to the education of his daughters. 
 They were thoroughly instructed in all domestic and feminine duties 
 by their mother. Their mother had, indeed, greater influence over 
 them than their father so long as they were still at home. She was a 
 remarkable woman of an energetic character and educated above the 
 ordinary standard. She was much respected and belo\"ed by her 
 husband and children. She had also had a musical education, and 
 composed music to words written by herself Hahnemann, too, was a 
 great lover of music, and had a pleasant singing voice, but without 
 knowing a note. He was fond of coming into the parlour when he 
 took an interval of repose from his work — between nine and ten — 
 and of getting his wife to play him something on the piano. 
 
 Here is another description of Hahnemann's family Hfe: — 
 
 Hahnemann combined firmness and kindness in the education of 
 his children ; he was unwilling to punish, and when he did so was 
 always dispassionate and just. Where he could do so it gave him 
 real pleasure to forgive. One of the peculiar features of his educa- 
 tional plan was that his daughters were not allowed to learn to dance. 
 Was he then an enemy of social enjoyment .'' On the contrary, he 
 enjoyed innocent mirth in the society of his friends ; he was fond of 
 jokes, and sometimes laughed till the tears stood in his eyes. But he 
 never indulged in inordinate demonstrations of pleasure, and his self- 
 respect preserved him from anything like a false step, from any over- 
 stepping of the strict line of propriety.* 
 
 All the authors who describe Hahnemann's family life 
 from their own experience agree in bearing witness to the 
 cordial relations existing between Hahnemann and his 
 children. They acknowledge the worth of his first wife, of 
 
 * Hahnemann^ cin biographisches Dc7ikmal^ Leipzig, 1S51, p. 113
 
 i6o Hahnemann on Paternity. 
 
 whom Hahnemann always spoke with love and esteem. 
 Even if she were, as Brunnow says, fond of power and 
 imperious — and Brunnow's writings bear the stamp of 
 truthfulness — ■ yet she must have possessed excellent 
 qualities which were highly valued by her husband. Her 
 energy was, no doubt, often a support to him in his stormy 
 life. " The region of romance was far from her — she lived 
 in realities." 
 
 A letter from Hahnemann to Stapf, written on the i/th 
 of December, 1816,* shows his high conception of family 
 life. Stapf had in the first year or two of his married 
 life, informed Hahnemann of the birth of a daughter. 
 Hahnemann replies : — 
 
 I take the most cordial interest in this happy event — the addition to 
 your family. May your dear little daughter grow up to be a joy to 
 her parents. I, for my part, have been accustomed to look upon each 
 increase of my family, each confinement of my A\ife, as one of the 
 most important events of my life. An offspring of our most intimate 
 union, a new human being springing from our blood sees the light of 
 day, increasing the joys and the (wholesome) sorrows of his parents, 
 awaiting a wonderful development and destiny in this life and a prepai- 
 ation for the higher ends of his existence through all eternity. A 
 solemn thought well calculated to lead us to serious reflections. 
 
 And behold I with what solemn preparation the new citizen enters 
 the world, after the throes of his mother between life and death, and 
 uncertain whether she herself may not sacrifice her earthly life and 
 leave her children orphans and her sorrowing husband desolate. I 
 see the grave of the wife open whose life was so full of promise — the 
 grave of departed happiness for husband and children, and the 
 portals of eternity opening for her — and side by side with these awe- 
 inspiring possibilities there appears the new-born longed-for life for 
 mother and child, the triumphal entrance into existence of a young 
 being of divine origin — ^both events during these anxious moments 
 await decision in the unopened hand of God. What a terrible yet 
 ecstatic time of anxious expectation ! 
 
 For myself, every accouchement of my wife, every one of these 
 almost supernatural occurrences deeply agitates my inmost life. I have 
 accepted each as a refining and purifying process for my moral being 
 from the great principle of Good, the Father of perfected spirits — 
 and I have striven to use these awe-inspiring moments, fraught with 
 eternal purposes, for the cleansing and purifying of my own character 
 
 * Published in 1844 in Archiv f. horn. Hcilk.^ XXI., H. i, p. 157.
 
 Hennicke's Appreciatioji of Hahnemann. i6i 
 
 — and where I could still detect stains in myself — envy towards my 
 fellow-creatures, any suspicious or hypocritical taint in my heart, any 
 trace of falsehood or duplicity, any disposition to appear and to speak 
 differently from my true conviction, I have resolved to purge myself 
 of them. 
 
 The editor of the Allgemeiner Anzeiger der Deutschen^ 
 Legationsrath Dr. Hennicke, passes this judgment on 
 Hahnemann in his paper (1825, p. 901): "The editor 
 (Hennicke) had, in 1792, the honour of making the ac- 
 quaintance of this man distinguished by his rare acumen, 
 his powers of observation, his clear judgment, as well as by 
 his originality of character, uprightness and simplicity." 
 And in another passage {ib. 1833, p. 133): "I have for 
 more than twenty years printed the coarsest invectives 
 against homeopathy and its founder, so long as they had 
 the semblance of truthfulness and justice and bore the 
 name of their author, and this, although I have been for 
 more than forty years on the most friendly terms with 
 Hofrath Hahnemann, and respect him as one of the 
 greatest benefactors of the human race, on account of his 
 far-reaching scientific culture, his piercing intelligence, his 
 profound and clear spirit of observation, and his great 
 medical services, which, for the past fifty years, have 
 been thankfully acknowledged by all competent judges of 
 medical science. Two cures which Hahnemann success- 
 fully accomplished in the year 1792 in Gotha and Geor- 
 genthal, and which excited general admiration, together 
 with the opinion of him held by a doctor who died here 
 (Dr. Buddeus), first directed my attention to Hahnemann, 
 filled me with the greatest esteem for him, and were the 
 origin of our friendly relations and of our subsequent un- 
 interrupted correspondence." 
 
 Griesselich,* who visited Hahnemann in Cothen in 1832, 
 writes of him thus : — 
 
 Hahnemann at the age of seventy-seven showed in every action all 
 the fire of a young man. No trace of old age could be detected in his 
 physical appearance, except the white locks surrounding his temples, 
 andthe bald crown, which is covered with a velvet cap. Small and sturdy 
 
 * Skzssen, SiQ. Karlsruhe, 1832. 
 II
 
 1 62 HaJmeniann at Home. 
 
 inform, Hahnemann is lively and brisk ; every movement is full of life. 
 His eyes reveal his inquiring spirit ; they flash with the fire of youth. 
 His features are sharp and animated. As old age seems to have left 
 few traces on his body, so is it with his mind. His language is fiery, 
 fluent ; often it becomes vehement as a stream of lava against the 
 enemies and opponents — not of himself personally, for that he never 
 alluded to but — of the great truths to the testing of which he 
 had summoned his colleagues for many decades. His memory 
 seems to be unaffected ; after long interludes and side conversation 
 he continues where he left off. When he becomes heated in con- 
 versation, which often happens, whether about friend or foe, or on 
 scientific subjects, his words flow forth uninterruptedly, his whole 
 manner becomes extremely animated, and an expression appears on 
 his countenance which his visitor [Griesselich] admired in silence. 
 Perspiration covers his lofty brow ; his cap is removed : even his 
 long pipe — his trusty companion — goes out and must be re-lighted by 
 the taper which is at hand and kept burning all day. But the white 
 beer must not be forgotten ! The venerable old man had so accustomed 
 himself to this sweet drink that it always stood in a large covered 
 glass on his table ; at his meals, too, he takes this drink, which is un- 
 known in South Germany [Griesselich lived in Karlsruhe]. He does 
 not drink wine ; his mode of life is very simple, abstemious, and 
 
 patriarchal 
 
 There is generally something polemical in Hahnemann's conversa- 
 tion. At the same time he proclaims openly that he would give every- 
 one free scope who entered on the field of experience in order to con- 
 firm and complete defective results (his own included), and who did 
 
 not seek to overthrow them by mere assumptions he is, indeed, 
 
 far from seeking to establish a despotism over his followers which 
 v.-ould shut out every other view. 
 
 Men who have known Hahnemann personally recall with 
 pleased admiration his grand, bright, penetrating eyes, 
 his lofty, clear forehead, his remarkably well-formed head, 
 his firm but not unkindly mouth. 
 
 Certain incidental expressions in his books reveal his 
 ambition to excel the majority of men in his deeds. He 
 had the just consciousness of superior powers. Petty vanity 
 was far removed from him. He wrote to Stapf in 1816, in 
 a letter published after his death : * " One word more ; no 
 more encomiums of me ; I altogether dislike them, for I feel 
 myself to be nothing more than a plain, straightforward 
 
 * Arch. f. d. horn. Hcilk., Vol. XXL, H. i, p. 162 (transl. in BriL 
 Jour, of Hoin., Vol. III., 141).
 
 His indifference to hostile attacks. 163 
 
 man who merely does his duty. Let us express our regard 
 for one another only in simple words and conduct indicating 
 mutual esteem." No single passage in his writings indicates 
 that he ever weakly complained of the persecution to which 
 he personally was subject. Griesselich, in describing his 
 visit to Hahnemann, specially mentions this habit of putting 
 his personality out of the question. He himself writes :* 
 " I care nothing for the ingratitude and persecution which 
 have pursued me on my wearisome pilgrimage, the great 
 objects I have pursued have prevented my life from being 
 joyless." While a storm of opposition was raging against 
 him and repeated attempts were made to crush him, 
 he was occupied with unwearied and unremitting zeal 
 in developing his doctrines, finding compensation for all 
 these attacks in the consciousness of having striven for and 
 attained great ends. " The satisfaction 1 have derived from 
 this mode of treatment I would not exchange for the most 
 coveted of earthly possessions," he writes to Hufeland.f 
 
 In 1829 he wrote to a young physician, Dr. Schrctcr, 
 of Lemberg,! who had been inveighing warmly against 
 Hahnemann's medical opponents, to abstain from doing so : 
 " No good result will come of it. You put yourself out of 
 temper by it (a most undesirable state of mind), and 
 matters wnll not change until Divine Providence produces 
 a better state of things in its own good time. Rather 
 compassionate the poor blind infatuated creatures ; it is 
 mortification enough for them not to be able to accom- 
 plish anything valuable. Just leave them alone and go 
 along in the path of rectitude. Be honourable in your 
 practice without allowing yourself to be led astray ; you 
 will then have the blessing of a good conscience and can 
 live your own life cheerfully and happily in privacy." 
 
 He never for a moment doubted of the final triumph of 
 homoeopathy as is shown by many passages in his works. 
 We quote one here. In the year 18 15 Stapf had expressed 
 
 * Chron. Krank.^ Vol. I., p. 8. 
 t Lesser Writings .^ p. 587. 
 
 t In a letter published after his death, Archiv, XXL, H, 2, p. 1S2 
 {Brit. Jour, of Horn., Vol. V., 398).
 
 164 Testimony to HaJinemaniis 
 
 to him his hope that a distinguished allopath might be con- 
 verted in order that the spread of homoeopathy might be 
 more rapid. Hahnemann answered :* 
 
 Our art requires no political lever, no worldly decorations in order 
 to become something. It grows gradually, at first unrecognised, sur- 
 rounded as it is by all manner of weeds which luxuriate around it, 
 from an insignificant acorn to a sapling ; soon its summit will over- 
 top the rank weeds ; patience ! it is striking deep its roots into th 
 earth, it is increasing in strength imperceptibly but all the more surely, 
 and will in its own time grow into an oak of God, w hich, no longer to 
 be shaken by storms, spreads out its branches into all regions that 
 suffering mankind may be healed under its beneficent shade. 
 
 So Hahnemann wrote in 181 5, when only a few isolated 
 doctors in Saxony were among his adherents. He lived 
 to see his system spread over the whole earth, to see 
 thousands of homoeopathic practitioners, converts from 
 allopathy, some of whom occupied brilliant positions, 
 and, further, to see the number of enthusiastic adherents 
 of homoeopathy amounting to many millions. 
 
 Hahnemann's handwriting was small and neat but firm, 
 and he preferred to write on small-sized paper, as appears 
 from his letters and notes.! He took pains to write every 
 letter distinctly and he wrote a beautiful hand. He was 
 very particular in his forms of expression, and often we 
 find in one line two or three corrections. Up to his latest 
 years he read and wrote without spectacles (Albrecht). 
 
 Albrecht (I.e.) writes thus of his knowledge : — 
 
 His amount of knowledge was astonishing. He was at home in 
 all the sciences, even in those which had no connexion with 
 medicine — information could be obtained from him about them all ; 
 for even if he had not particularly pursued any branch of science, 
 he was sure to have read a great deal about it. " A really educated 
 man " he used often to say " must be well up in all subjects." Thus 
 he was well acquainted with astronomy. A planetary system hung 
 in his room; he was fond of con\ersing with his nephew, Hofrath 
 
 * ArcJiiv, XXL, H. 2, p. 129 {B.J. of H. III., 198) 
 t See Lesser li'/iti/ii^s, p. X.
 
 Scientific acquirements. i 65 
 
 Schwabe, who had a telescope in his garden, on astronomical 
 matters. He was a good meteorologist, and was something 
 of a weather prophet. This he owed to the hygrometer, 
 barometers and thermometers which he liked to watch in his room 
 and garden. He was not less thoroughly acquainted with geography ; 
 and a rich collection of maps formed part of his large library, con- 
 taining works on all branches of science. Magnetism and mesmerism 
 were more closely allied to the study of medicine. Hahnemann 
 paid especial attention to them both and made use of them in certain 
 cases of disease with favourable results. Up to his latest years 
 Hahnemann spent a great part of his leisure hours in reading. 
 
 Hahnemann's numerous translations show that he was proficient in 
 modern languages. But this did not interfere with his love for ancient 
 philology — he was a thorough philologist [his inaugural thesis* shows 
 that he was even able to read Chaldaic works.] This to a great 
 extent explains his friendship with the philologist Professor Adam 
 Beyer. They met occasionally in the evening, and most earnestly 
 discussed syntactic and critical points in Greek and Latin, and the 
 Leipzic Professor listened with particular attention to the opinion of 
 his medical friend on controverted points in various philological 
 controversies. 
 
 Hahnemann's wonderful and thorough acquaintance 
 with all branches of knowledge can, notwithstanding his 
 natural gifts, be only accounted for when we learn from 
 Hartmann that his health was such that he could work 
 through every other night, and this he doubtless frequently 
 did. 
 
 Besides his many translations of scientific works, we are 
 indebted to his industry for the translation from the English 
 of the History of Abelard and Heloise, a work which is of 
 both political and ecclesiastical importance. The Allge- 
 nieine dentscJie Bibliothek\ contains this criticism on it : — 
 
 Hahnemann's translation is correct and fluent, and we can recom- 
 mend his work to those who have long wished to have this interesting 
 subject better treated. 
 
 In the year 1834 a highly cultivated French lady, 
 thirty-four years of age, Melanie d'Hervilly Gohier (born in 
 1800) came to Cothen and placed herself under Hahne- 
 
 * On the Helleborism of the Ancients. Lesser Writings^ p. 644. 
 t 1792, Vol. CVI., p. 243.
 
 1 66 HaJineniann's second luamage, removal 
 
 mann's medical treatment. She succeeded in fascinating 
 Hahnemann by her intelligence, her unusual degree of 
 culture and her natural grace, so that he resolved to throw 
 in his lot with hers. His friends heard with surprise, as 
 Rummel states, that the old man of eighty had married 
 again on 28th January, 1835. His young wife persuaded 
 Hahnemann to quit his native land. Paris she thought 
 was the town where her husband's renown could be still 
 further extended ; Paris alone could give him the honour 
 which was his due. Hahnemann yielded. And Paris and 
 France did not fail to fulfil his wife's promises. He was 
 received with enthusiasm and distinguished marks of 
 honour in Paris, and enjoyed high respect and grateful 
 recognition up to the end of his life. 
 
 His domestic life there seems to have been very happy, as 
 is apparent from his letters. Thus he writes on the 13th of 
 August, 1840, to Dr. Schreter of Lemberg,* in a letter 
 published after his death : — 
 
 I cannot remember in my long life having ever felt better and 
 happier than here in Paris, where I am enjoying the affectionate inter- 
 course of my dear M^lanie, \\ho cares for nothing in the world more 
 than for me. I find, too, that my medical labours begin to excite 
 more than attention — respect — for our divine healing art in this great 
 metropolis. 
 
 He kept up a constant and affectionate correspondence 
 with his family in Germany, who also visited him in Paris. 
 
 On his death, Jahr writes from Paris on the 4th of June, 
 1843, in the Allgein. JionwopatJiische Zeitjing (vol. xxiv. 
 No. 17):- 
 
 HaJiueniann is dead ! 
 
 About the 15th of April he was taken ill with the malady that 
 usually attacked him in the spring — a bronchial catarrh — and it took 
 such hold of him that his wife admitted no one. The report was 
 spread several times that he was dead : this was, however, contra- 
 dicted. I had been intending to call myself, when I received a note 
 from Mme. Hahnemann begging me to come that same day. I went 
 at once, and was admitted to Hahnemann's bedroom. Here— think 
 
 * Archiv.f. horn. Hcilk., \o\. XXIII., H. 3, p. 107.
 
 to Paris, and Death. 1 67 
 
 of the sight ! — instead of seeing Hahnemann — the dear, friendly old 
 man smile his greeting — I found his wife stretched in tears on the 
 bed and him lying cold and stiff by her side, having passed five hours 
 before into that life where there is no strife, no sickness and no 
 death. Yes, dear friends, our venerable Father Hahnemann has 
 finished his course ! a chest affection has, after a six week's illness, 
 liberated his spirit from its weary frame. His mental powers remained 
 unimpaired up to the last moment, and although his voice became more 
 and more unintelligible, yet his broken words testified to the continued 
 clearness of his mind and to the calm with which he anticipated his 
 approaching end. At the very commencement of his illness he told 
 those about him that this would be his last, as his frame was worn out. 
 
 At first he treated himself, and, till a short time before his death, he 
 expressed his opinions relative to the remedies recommended by his 
 wife and a certain Dr. Chatran. He only really suffered just at the 
 end from increasing oppression on the chest. When, after one such 
 attack, his wife said : — " Providence surely owes you exemption 
 from all suffering, as you have relieved so many others and have suf- 
 fered so many hardships in your arduous life," he answered, " Why 
 should I expect exemption from suffering .' Every one in this world 
 woi'ks according to the gifts and powers which he has received from 
 Providence, and 7nore or less are words used only before the judgment 
 seat of man, not before that of Providence. Providence owes me 
 nothing. I owe it much. Yea, everything ! " 
 
 Profound grief for this great loss is felt here by all his followers. 
 All shed tears of gratitude and affection for him. But the loss of 
 those who have had the happiness of enjoying the friendship of this 
 great man, can only be estimated by those who have known him in 
 his domestic circle, and especially during his last years. He himself 
 when not persecuted by others, was not only a good, but a simple- 
 hearted and bene\'olent man, who was never happier than when among 
 friends to whom he could unreservedly open his heart. Well, he has 
 nobly fought through and gloriously completed his difficult and 
 often painful course. Sit ei terra levis ! 
 
 For the student who follows the development of Hah- 
 nemann's great idea, who carefully reads his numerous 
 works, comparing them with the views of his contemporaries, 
 and who thus becomes aware of his iron industry, his rare 
 gift of observation and the lofty enthusiasm with which he 
 strove to do all that lay in his power for the advancement of 
 the healing art, and for those who have repeated, as he de- 
 sired, his experiments, and who know by experience gained
 
 1 68 Testimonies of Opponents to 
 
 at the sick bed what this grand genius has accomplished — 
 for these and such as these it would be taking " owls to 
 Athens" to quote words of praise from the lips of strangers ; 
 it would be like trying to prove Humboldt's greatness as a 
 naturalist by citing the recognition he received from his 
 contemporaries. But for those who hold themselves aloof 
 or are even hostile we may be permitted to quote certain 
 proofs that it is not only homoeopaths who show respect 
 for this man. 
 
 All the following appreciations are from non-homoe- 
 paths : — 
 
 Compare the testimonies quoted on pp. 74, 75. 
 
 Prof J. R. Bischoff* writes in 1819 : " Dr. S. Hahnemann 
 has won for himself during a period of forty years a most 
 honourable name in the field of medicine." 
 
 About the same time Professor Puchelt writes in 
 Yi\x{€i2iX\6^ ?, J oiirnal ^ in an article which he published in 
 the following year, 1820, as a separate pamphlet : — 
 
 All this ought not to make us unjust to a man to whom we cannot 
 deny a very high degree of acumen, logical powers and perseve- 
 rance, who had previously done much valuable work in the field of 
 medicine before the invention of his system, and who, in the system 
 itself, according to our opinion, promulgates many views, which well 
 deserve to be noticed, and which will certainly be acknowledged 
 sooner or later in scientific medicine. 
 
 Further on he repeatedly speaks of him as a " learned 
 physician." 
 
 In the same place Hahnemann is spoken of in a note by 
 Hufeland as " the worthy founder of homoeopathy." 
 
 Dr. V. Wedekind, formerly professor of clinical medicine 
 in the University of Mainz, says : — % 
 
 Hahnemann is known to me as an experienced, learned, and genial 
 physician 
 
 Far be it from me to assert that Herr Hahnemann wishes to serve 
 the purposes of the obscurantists ; his clear intellect loves the light 
 
 My learned opponent 
 
 * Afisichtctt iiber das bishcrigc Hcilverfahren U7id die horn. Kfa/ik 
 licit slehre, Prague, 18 19, p. 27. 
 t St. 6, pp. 15 and 27. 
 J Priifung des horn. Systems^ Darmstadt, 1825.
 
 his Learning and Genius. 169 
 
 Learn, gentlemen, the opinions held by Hahnemann, an old, learned, 
 experienced, highly educated and renowned physician, respecting our 
 science and ourselves. The manner in which this man propounds his 
 ideas, shows so deep and earnest a conviction that you must pause 
 before you reproach him with charlatanry 
 
 How in all the world could the celebrated and learned Hahnemann, 
 fall into the error of propagating such a doctrine ? 
 
 He believes in his theory. Where shall we find a remedy to cure 
 homceopathically this meritorious savant. 
 
 The passage has been already referred to in which Hufe- 
 land characterises Hahnemann as one of the " most dis- 
 tinguished, gifted and original physicians." He continues 
 as follows : " Is it necessary to remind my readers that 
 medicine has to thank him for the discovery of the wine 
 test and of the soluble mercury, which is in my opin- 
 ion still the most efficacious preparation of mercury, as well 
 as for so much else. He has given sufficient proof in 
 many of his earlier writings of a grand philosophical 
 acumen and of a rare power of observation." In Oken's 
 /y/i- (1822, p. 135), Hahnemann is thus spoken of: "This 
 earnest thoughtful man, one of the best physicians of our 
 time." 
 
 Dr. Fr. Groos (physician in ordinary to the Grand Duke 
 of Baden) says,* " I cannot refrain from admiring Hahne- 
 mann's profound thoughtfulness and originality." 
 
 Naumann : f " The doctors of Germany have gladly 
 accorded Hahnemann their respect as a highly accredited 
 thinker." 
 
 He also praises him in these words : " Hahnemann's 
 services with respect to the more accurate knowledge of the 
 properties of many drugs will never be forgotten." {ib. p. 1 16.) 
 
 Urban passes the following judgment in Hufeland's 
 Journal in 1827:! "The undisputed merit remains to 
 him for all time of having directed attention to the pure 
 curative properties of medicines, and of having thus paved 
 the way for a rational and experimental development of 
 the materia medica. 
 
 * Ucbcr das hoiii. Heilprincip. Heidelberg, 1825, p. 19. 
 t Hufeland's Bibliothek, 1825, Vol. LHI., p. 42. 
 % St, 4, p. 80.
 
 i^O Testiuwiiies of Opponents to 
 
 In Froriep's Notizen ans deni Gebiete dcr Natur- nnd Heil- 
 knnde, 1829,* Hahnemann is compared "with other men of 
 genius Although the system of homoeopathy is very in- 
 complete, yet its founder is to be considered thrice happy 
 because he has found a standpoint from which he has been 
 able mightily to move the intellectual world, and his name 
 will be mentioned with reverence and admiration by 
 posterity, along with those of Galen, Paracelsus and Brown." 
 
 In 1833, Kruger-Hansen,t whom no one could accuse of 
 friendship for Hahnemann, writes : " The history of medi- 
 cine will always assign to him an honourable place among 
 those physicians who clearly recognise the faults of extreme 
 allopathy, and who perseveringly call new ideas into life." 
 
 Gcheimrath Dr. Link calls Hahnemann " a man of large 
 information and great acumen."^ 
 
 Kurt Sprengel, the historian, expresses himself thus ; 
 " So far am I from bearing ill wnll to a man whom I have 
 never seen that I have on the contrary for more than forty 
 years spoken highly of his learning and his great technical 
 skill."§ 
 
 Stieglitz :|| " It is impossible to deny that Hahnemann 
 is a man of great intelligence and possessing much know- 
 ledge." 
 
 C. A. Eschemnayer, Professor in Tubingen :1[ " Hahne- 
 mann undertook his great experiment with a perseverance 
 and circumspection to which we cannot refuse our admira- 
 tion." " So much has been achieved that we can only gaze 
 with admiration at this gigantic intellect who conceived 
 the idea of reforming medicine, and showed by example 
 how it was to be done." 
 
 On the 7th of April, 1841, the Saxon Ambassador in 
 
 * No. 7, Klcineit, Rtporior. der gcs. dciifscli. ined.-c/u'r. Joiirn.^ 1S30, 
 IV., 119. 
 
 t Die AUopatliic und Honioopatliic aiif dcr M'agc, p. 11. 
 
 X Hufeland's/^//;-//., LXXVI., St. 6, p. 64. 
 
 § Uebc7' Homdopathic^ translated from the Latin by Schi'agge. 
 MaKdeburg, 1833, p. y:,. 
 
 II Die Hoiiibopailde, Hano\er, 1S35, p. 89. 
 
 H Die AUoopatlne und Hoiuoopatlne, Tubingen, 1834, pp. 47 and 122.
 
 Jiis Lemming and Genius. 17 1 
 
 Paris presented him with the freedom of his native town 
 Meissen. 
 
 It would be easy to add a still greater number to 
 these recognitions of Hahnemann's merits on the part of 
 non-homffiopaths, if Hahnemann required such supports.* 
 
 * [To these we may be permitted to add a couple of testimonies 
 from two of the most learned and illustrious old-school medical 
 authors of this country. Fletcher {Elements of General Pathology, 
 p. 493) says : " Hahnemann's book (Organon) is an original and 
 interesting one, and displays more reflection in every page than many 
 of his reviewers will evince in the whole course of their life and conduct 
 for half a century." Sir J. Forbes writes {Medical Review, Vol. 21, p. 
 226) : " Hahnemann was undoubtedly a man of genius and a scholar, 
 a man of indefatigable industry, of undaunted energy. In the history 
 of medicine his name will appear in the same list with those of the 
 greatest systematists and theorists, surpassed by few in the originality 
 and ingenuity of his views, superior to most in having substantiated 
 and carried out his doctrines into actual and most extensive practice."" 
 —Ed.]
 
 PART 11. 
 
 The Opposition to Homoeopathy. 
 
 As has already been several times mentioned, Hahne- 
 mann first brought forward his method of healing in the 
 year 1796, in Hufeland's Journal:^' A very unfavourable 
 criticism of it appeared soon after in the Journal der 
 Erfindiingen^ by Hecker. It was to the following effect : 
 {a^ Hahnemann's statement of the large number of specific 
 remedies is exaggerated and opposed to rational medicine. 
 {J}') The effects of medicines on the body are so various 
 that they can scarcely be estimated. Nevertheless it 
 cannot be denied that the proving of substances on 
 healthy persons may give valuable indications for their 
 employment as medicines. (<:.) The effects on sick persons 
 are still more variable. Hahnemann's principle has, there- 
 fore, no basis. (^.) The effect of certain remedies in accord- 
 ance with the principle siniilia similibiis is only apparent ; 
 if this were so, smoke, which causes inflammation of the 
 lungs, would also cure it. (t-.) Hahnemann pays too much 
 attention to symptoms. (/!) He recklessly recommends 
 certain very poisonous substances — arsenic, belladonna, 
 hyoscyamus, stramonium, &c. — and for this advice he 
 cannot expect the approval of cautious physicians. He 
 therefore concludes that " Hahnem.ann's principle is a 
 principle without a principle," that it has no practical 
 value and leads to empiricism and the pernicious em- 
 ployment of poisons ; there are better ways of working 
 
 * Essay on a New Principle^ &^c. Lesser Wriiings, p. 295. 
 t St. 22, p. 71.
 
 Hecker, Fischer and Spre7igel. 173. 
 
 than this, which rests on vague, mistaken, and nonsensical 
 allegations. 
 
 This was Hahnemann's first reception ; he did not answer 
 it, but complained incidentally later, in 1800, that he had 
 been " badly treated by this periodical." 
 
 All medical men, however, were not of Hecker's opinion. 
 A later reviewer says :* " Hahnemann has in this article 
 given ample proof of his sagacity, and has thrown much 
 light on the properties and uses of many medicines." 
 " This article has excited much attention, and has been 
 subjected to sharp criticism, which has caused the sup- 
 pression of original and fruitful ideas, probably to the 
 detriment of science." 
 
 Another physician, Dr. A. Fr. Fischer writes,t concerning 
 this first essay : — 
 
 Feeling most strongly that the accurate appreciation of the effects of 
 medicines, particularly of those which are extremely powerful, is 
 indispensable for perfecting the medical art, we gave Hahnemann 
 our approval when he began to investigate the remedial powers of 
 various medicines, and to indicate a new way for their proper appre- 
 ciation, the results of which he communicated in the second and third 
 volumes of the older Hufeland"s Journal. He at that time thought it 
 right to administer medicines in doses adapted to the animal bod)", 
 as is shown by the reports of cases communicated by him to that 
 journal. 
 
 Kurt Sprengel's judgment^ upon the same article is as 
 follows : — 
 
 Samuel Hahnemann has made an interesting attempt in the gen- 
 eral theory of therapeutics to furbish up anew the ideas of the old 
 methodists as to the transformation of the body, by showing by a clear 
 induction that most of the powerfully acting specific remedies are useful 
 in as much as they produce an artificial irritation, often causing symp- 
 toms similar to those of the disease. Our common experience of the 
 action of artificial counter-irritation, by means of which the morbid 
 irritation is removed, confirms Hahnemann's theory completely. 
 
 * Pierer's AUgem. medic. Annal. dcs i() Jalirh., 1810, Nov., p. 961. 
 
 t Die Honwopatliie vor dem RichtcrstiiJilc dcr Vcriiiinft. Dresden, 
 1829, p. 32. 
 
 X Kritische UebcisicJit dcs Ziist(tinics dcr Ai-zncylaindc in den: letzten 
 JdJu-zchend. Halle, 1801, p. 303.
 
 174 Simple prescriptions derided. 
 
 Amongst the notices of Hahnemann's teaching in Hufc- 
 land's Journal itself, we jfind the following: In I799> 
 Sponitzer,* a medical writer of repute, afterwards nominated 
 Rcgierungsrath to the Government of Pomerania, writes : — 
 " In this case, to give only one or at most two remedies 
 would be merely to act in a capricious and irrational man- 
 ner and to neglect the patient. Therefore, I do not agree 
 with Herr Hahnemann. Simplification may be carried too 
 far. Indeed, such abstract ideas are liable to be often mis- 
 understood and badly applied, and are of little value in 
 actual practice." The author expands this view in an 
 article on the difficult teething of children, in which he 
 commends the employment of emetics, clysters and 
 aperients. " These latter must be continued through the 
 whole course of the illness if there is any ground for sus- 
 pecting the retention of concealed noxious matters." 
 
 The simplicity of Hahnemann's doses of medicine ap- 
 pears to Professor Nolde, of Rostock f (1799) "so natural 
 and clear that it can admit of no doubt. On the other 
 hand, it would be going too far to act always in accordance 
 with Hahnemann's proposal to use only one single remedy 
 in diseases," this would, indeed, be quite wrong, e.g:, can- 
 tharides must often be given with camphor, opium with 
 aperients, &c. 
 
 These remarks and views show that Hahnemann's ideas 
 were not understood. He wanted to know the specific re- 
 lations of different medicines to special kinds of diseases, 
 to special parts of the body and to special tissues ; he 
 wished to overthrow the crude ideas respecting morbid 
 matters, and to get rid of the chimney-sweep and stupefy- 
 ing methods of treatment. He showed a correct physio- 
 logical apprehension of the subject, even if he could not 
 utilize the physiology of his day in support of his views. 
 And his colleagues come forward and prate about " con- 
 cealed noxious matters " and a combination of opium with 
 aperients. In order that opium might not paralyse the 
 peristaltic action of the bowels and thus prevent the 
 
 * Vol. VII., .St. 2, p. So. t Vol. \'III., St. 2, p. 68.
 
 ' The Prophylactic of Scarlatina. .175 
 
 expulsion of the morbid matters, an aperient must be 
 given at the same time. This was scientific practice. 
 
 The following confession shows the character of the 
 prescriptions then in use. In Vol. X. (St. 3, p. 60), 1800, 
 Wichmann, after speaking of Hahnemann, says that he 
 gives some remedies in which he has confidence quite 
 alone. " By doing so I make the apothecary, who is accus- 
 tomed to prescriptions a foot long, shake his head over 
 my meagre prescriptions, or even look upon me as an 
 idiot." So that doctors were ashamed to order simple 
 remedies. This makes Hahnemann's remarks (p. 80) 
 intelligible. 
 
 Dr. Jani, of Gera,* was the first who wrote about Hahne- 
 mann's remedy and prophylactic for scarlatina, belladonna. 
 He states that with this remedy he had observed good re- 
 sults in several cases, but that it was not an unconditional 
 prophylactic. " It is therefore conceivable," he says, " that 
 the worthy Dr. Hahnemann made his observations under 
 a more favourable concurrence of circumstances than I did, 
 and was thus led to a false conclusion." In mentioning 
 small doses, Jani says that these have met with opposition 
 on the part of the public. In the following year, iSoi, a 
 reviewer, who had himself made no practical experiments, 
 writes on the subject of Hahnemann's doses in the same 
 periodical (IV. lOO) : " It would be worth while giving the 
 man a civic crown, or, better still, a big pension, to keep 
 him from writing any more of such incredible things." 
 
 Hufeland was of a different opinion : — f 
 
 I was sorry that a man whose services to our art have been so 
 great should have been so badly used in reference to his prophy- 
 lactic for scarlet fever, and I cannot deny that the almost infinite- 
 simal smallness of the dose of belladonna staggered me In any 
 
 case it [Hahnemann's treatise] contains valuable hints on the more 
 subtle effects of medicines and the modifications they may receive 
 in various states of the organism and in the preparation and mode 
 of exhibition of the remedy, to which generally no attention has been 
 given. [Here it is expressly acknowledged that most physicians in 
 
 * Med. cJiir. Ztg., IV., 316, Oct., 1800. 
 t Hiif.Joum. VI., St. 2.
 
 lyG The TJicrapeittic ride of Similars. 
 
 contradistinction to Hahnemann, usually gave no attention to the 
 preparation and exhibition of medicines.] There are undoubtedly 
 secrets here unsuspected by the ordinary pharmaceutist and practi- 
 tioner, and the voice of a man who has occupied himself for more 
 than ten years with the preparation and administration of narcotic 
 and other poisonous substances, deserves the greatest attention. I, 
 at least, am persuaded that the usual quantitative proportion of 
 remedies is not always the right principle for determining their effects, 
 and that a grain may, under certain circumstances and combinations, 
 produce more effect than a ten times greater quantity — nay that even 
 the smallest dose may produce results not to be obtained by a large 
 one. 
 
 In the year 1800 Hufeland in his System dej- prakt. 
 Heilhinde* gives his judgment as follows (he is speaking 
 of the choice of the remedy) : — 
 
 The resemblance of the effects of the remedy to the symptoms of 
 the disease. We notice, for instance, that a certain remedy induces 
 mania in a healthy person, or produces general or local convulsions or 
 paralysis. This may lead us to employ this remedy in cases of mania 
 and in similar convulsious or paralysis. Belladonna which makes 
 a healthy man maniacal cures the insane. A'iolent emotions which 
 can produce a form of intermittent fe\er can also cure it. This 
 principle enunciated by Hahnemann may doubtless serve to guide us 
 to the discovery of useful remedies, but it always remains an empirical 
 principle, and seems to be only applicable in purely nervous diseases. 
 
 In Vol. XIII. of Hufeland's Journal, 1S02, an instance 
 of cure by means of veratrum album on the principle in- 
 dicated by Hahnemann is related. 
 
 The ]\Ied. cJnr. Zeitung contained, 1801 (I. 253), a criti- 
 cism of the Ar::neiscJiat:~, with Hahnemann's notes, in 
 which he so clearly and convincingly showed the absurdity 
 of mixing medicines and enjoined simplicity in prescrip- 
 tions. The reviewer does not give Hahnemann one word 
 of approbation for this, but blames him for rejecting an 
 electuary of valerian, cinchona and sal-ammoniac, as both 
 the worst way to administer it and an unhappy combina- 
 tion. " Both theory and experience," so sa}-s the reviewer, 
 " are in favour of this combination," and strong doses are 
 likewise necessary. 
 
 In 1805 the article entitled Medicine of Experience ap- 
 
 * Jena und Leipzig, 1800. \o\. I., p. 201.
 
 HaJinenianiis first book of Provings. 177 
 
 pcarcd in Hufeland'syi9//r7/«/.'''' Though the author in 1796 
 still held to a large extent the ordinary views, the pecu- 
 liarity of his ideas is here more prominently given. It is 
 evident that he had reflected and worked hard during the 
 past nine years. He advances his views with much greater 
 confidence, and insists on the necessity of proving medi- 
 cines in order to ascertain the finest shades of their 
 specific relations to the several parts of the body, and to 
 use them when those same structures are similarly affected 
 upon which they act specifically. It must be clearly under- 
 stood, and we therefore call attention to it, that he did not 
 seek for specific remedies against certain definite patho- 
 logico-anatomical forms of disease, nor }-et such as act 
 on certain organs, as Rademacher proposed ; he expressl}- 
 protested against this. His idea was to trace the effects of 
 medicines up to the ultimate perceptible phenomena. 
 
 The first collection of the effects of medicines on healthy 
 organisms, according to his own observations and those of 
 others was, as is well known, published in the work, Frag- 
 meiita de viribiis viedicanientoriun, 1805. He himself indi- 
 cates its character by calling it " fragmenta," and he by no 
 means concealed from himself the defects of this first at- 
 tempt, which were also pointed out by the critics. This 
 was, at any rate, the first undertaking of the sort, and was 
 meritorious on this account ; a reviewer! characterised it as 
 " a remarkably interesting and meritorious work." Augustin;!: 
 called it " the results of some excellent experiments on the 
 effects of medicines on the human organism." 
 
 Hahnemann's Medicine of Experience, the forerunner of 
 the Organon, met with the following reception in the Med. 
 chir. Zeitung (HI. p. 25), 1806: — 
 
 No great benefit, either to the theorist or the practitioner, is to 
 be obtained from this diffuse treatise of 99 pages full of para- 
 doxes. Hahnemann appears to have no idea of medical science in its 
 highest sense for he confines it entirely to the senses. Every disease, 
 
 * Lesser Writings, 497. 
 
 t Hufeland's Bibliothek, XVI., p. 181. 
 
 X Wissenschnftl. Uebcrs. der ges. vied. chir. Literatiir des faJwes 
 1805, p. 409. 
 
 12
 
 178 Unable to infiuence routine practice. 
 
 according to him, is produced by some special unnatural irritation, 
 and in order to cure diseases we have nothing to do according to Dr. 
 Hahnemann, but to oppose to it another morbific ag^ent of very similar 
 action. Such is his idea of the action of remedies ! But enough of 
 this ! 
 
 In the year 1807 Hahnemann wrote the article in Hufe- 
 land's Journal, Fingerzeige aufden honioopathischen Gebrauck 
 der A.rzneyen in der bisJierigen Praxis. This was also un- 
 favourably criticised in the Med. chir. Zeitiuig (1808, II. p. 
 147), because Hahnemann only paid attention to symptoms : 
 " Such things are learnt incidentally by every father of a 
 family." The instances adduced are said to be vague, and 
 often to prove the principle " contraria contrariis." The 
 reviewer uses the expression " homoeopathic," without 
 hesitation. 
 
 Hahnemann's endeavours did not produce the effect they 
 should have done, his proposals to prove medicines method- 
 ically in order to ascertain their specific action on one's 
 own body, remained without result. This was also the case 
 with his further proposal to use as simple prescriptions as 
 possible, and not to repeat a dose until the former one has 
 exhausted its effect, so that the knowledge of the manner 
 and extent of the operation of remedies may, by means of 
 united efforts and a rational mode of procedure, be firmly- 
 grounded and extended. The old routine practice went 
 on as before. In 180S he attacked the traditional mode 
 of treatment in a series of articles in the Allgevieiner A71- 
 zeiger der Dcutschen, and powerfully exposed the miserable 
 character of medicine as then practised. We have above 
 quoted some passages from them. These articles were 
 almost all anonymous, and were mostly rejoinders to pre- 
 vious articles from the pen of other physicians ; so that 
 there is no foundation for the accusation that Hahnemann 
 was actuated by unworthy motives or unprofessional conduct 
 in writing in this paper — an absurd reproach which his 
 opponents are in the habit of casting upon him with 
 greater frequency and vehemence the farther his day re- 
 cedes from our own. 
 
 [The author proceeds to show by a series of quotations from and 
 references to articles that were published between iSoi and iS22inthis
 
 Medical articles in a daily paper. 179 
 
 paper (which was first pubHshed under the title of Der Anzetger, then 
 as Dcr Reichsanzeiger^ and finally from 1S06 as Der allgemeine An- 
 vciger der Deutschen) that medical men of the highest rank frequently 
 made use of it to carry on medical controversies with one another, to 
 publish hospital statistics, to recommend special modes of treatment 
 for special diseases, and even to trumpet their own nostrums and offer 
 them for sale. Some of these medical contributors were the most 
 illustrious physicians of the day, occupying the most exalted positions 
 such as Court Physicians, Medicinalraths, Hofraths, Professors of 
 Universities and Chief Physicians and Surgeons of various hospitals. 
 The names of many of them are still remembered in medicine, such 
 as Hufeland, Professor J uncker of Halle, Professor Kreysig of Witten- 
 berg, Professor Harless of Erlangen, Professor Feiler of Altdorf, Dr. 
 von Bernard, physician in ordinary to the King of Bavaria, Pro- 
 fessor J. B. von Siebold, head surgeon of the Julius Hospital, Wiirz- 
 burg. Professor Kieser of Jena, Professor Lobenstein-Lobel of Jena, 
 Hofrath Dr. Fenner, IMedicinalrathDr. Wendelstadt, Professor Dzondi 
 of Halle, and many others of equal rank and renown. The treatment 
 recommended by these coryphaei of old physic would stagger the most 
 ardent advocate of heroic treatment of our clays. One renowned 
 doctor, " perhaps the greatest and most experienced authority on the 
 diseases of children of all times," as an enthusiastic colleague describes 
 him, earnestly recommends his colleagues to treat all cases of croup 
 with leeches and blisters, " as these,'' he says, " are the best, indeed 
 the only remedies for the disease." A learned professor recommends 
 all doctors and attendants in hospitals where infectious diseases are 
 treated, " to establish issues in both arms, and keep them constantly 
 discharging," in order to keep them from catching these diseases. A 
 doctor enjoying an important municipal post, strongly advises typhoid 
 fever to be treated with purgatives and emetics given every day, " for 
 most patients feel strengthened after this medicinal stimulation." 
 The same professor who advised issues as prophylactics against 
 infectious diseases further recommends for protection against the 
 prevailing typhus epidemic, besides issues, blood-letting, emetics 
 and purgatives. Another doctor, the President of the Bavarian 
 Medical Board, counsels all his colleagues, " who have the welfare 
 of their patients at heart," to employ frequent venesections and anti- 
 phlogistics in typhus, because he is convinced that it is an " inflam- 
 mation of the brain." One blood-thirsty enthusiast calls on the State 
 to compel doctors to resort to instant blood-letting in inflammatory 
 diseases. A distinguished Professor recommends his own machine 
 for the cure of spinal curvature, and begs the editor to speak a 
 word for it. One doctor promises to reveal his discovery of the 
 nature of yellow fever if only one thousand persons will subscribe half 
 a-thaler each. A professor professes to cure all agues in old or young 
 by means of glue. An Inspector-General of hospitals denounces the 
 treatment of syphilis with mercury, and calls upon " all medical men
 
 I So Becker's attack on the " Orgmionr 
 
 in the kingdom " to treat it with a mixture of cream of tartar, cinna- 
 mon, opium and ammonia. Another doctor offers for sale a nostrum 
 for syphihs which he says he has discovered. Thus, it will be seen 
 that Hahnemann did nothing unprofessional or unusual in publishing- 
 medical articles in this daily paper, which was not political, but was 
 the organ through which scientific and literary men of all sorts were 
 accustomed to interchange ideas. But what a contrast do Hahne- 
 mann's contributions offer to those of his colleagues. It was in this 
 paper that he published between 1801 and 1821 that series of interest- 
 ing and original essays, which will be found translated in the Lesser 
 Writings. Their titles are : View of Professional Liberality at tJie 
 comnienceniejit of the igth Century : On a pj'oposed remedy for 
 HydropJwbia; Objections to a proposed substitute for Cinchona Bark j 
 Obser^'ations on Scarlet Fever; On the present watit of Foi'eigJi 
 Medicines J On the value of the Speculative Systems of Medicine ; On 
 substitutes for Forcis^n Drugs; On the Regeneration of Medicine ; 
 Address to a Candidate for the degree of M.D. ; On the prevailing 
 Fever; Si^ns of the times in Ordinary Medicine ; On the Treatment 
 of Typhus; — of Burns; — of J'enereal Diseases ; — of Purpura 
 Miliaris. — Ed.] 
 
 In the first half of the year 18 10, Hahnemann's Organon 
 of Rational Medicine appeared. It was criticised in July 
 of the same year by A. F. Hecker.* All Hahnemann's 
 exaggerations and mistakes were clearly exposed, but the 
 good was rejected together with the bad. This critique 
 reveals the personal irritation of the writer. Here is one 
 example — Hahnemann, in the Organon, incidentally blames 
 Hecker for having used " various mixtures " of medicines. 
 Hecker remarks (p. 228, note) : It was in a case of caries, 
 ' I used only (i) a simple solution of corrosive sublimate in 
 distilled water with liq. m)-rrh. (2) Powders for internal use 
 of calomel, sulphuret of antimony and sugar. (5) Some pur- 
 gatives of calomel mixed with jalap on account of a good 
 man}- thread-worms. Greater simplicity was impossible, 
 moreover a cure was soon effected. Whoever calls the 
 remedies used 'various mixtures of medicines' lies'' (the 
 *' lies " printed prominentl}' to attract special attention). 
 
 * Annalen dcr gcsammtcn Medicin, \o\. II., pp. 31 and 193.
 
 Comniencevient of the confiict. i8l 
 
 Here were five remedies used at the same time, and yet 
 "greater simplicity was impossible." Anyone not acquainted 
 with the medical literature of that time, can form from this 
 an idea of the usual prescriptions when they were not 
 simple, and this was usually the case. 
 
 In the Allg. vied. Annalen des ig Jalirhiinderts^ a 
 simple reference was made to the Organon in Nov. 1810, 
 with the following introduction : — 
 
 The system of rational medicine which Hahnemann has unfolded 
 in this work deserves to be favourably judged because the author has 
 been known for more than 20 years as a thoughtful physician and a 
 good observer, who has laboured with unwearied energy to establish 
 and confirm his previously stated opinions, and at the same time he 
 has maintained his reputation as a skilful and successful practitioner. 
 Of course this does not prove the validity of his statements, nor should 
 it influence the unbiassed judgment of the reader. The saying : 
 opiiiionuin covimenta dclct dies remains eternally true. 
 
 In 181 1, a full criticism appeared in the January number 
 of the Med. chir. Zeitung. This journal answered the same 
 purpose as Schmidt's JaJirbiicJier does now ; it contained 
 criticisms of the whole of medical literature. The most 
 prominent physicians of Germany were among its contribu- 
 tors. Unfortunately the reviews appeared anonymously. 
 
 The reviewer begins by blaming the great self-sufficiency 
 with which Hahnemann comes forward and looks down 
 upon his colleagues. The proofs he adduces of his prin- 
 ciple are not sufficient ; Hahnemann pays too much atten- 
 tion to symptoms. " How can that be rational where there 
 is no question of thought, and where nothing but observa- 
 tion by means of the senses is required." Strict indi- 
 vidualisation is good, but it may be carried too far. The 
 keeping of a carefully-conducted clinical journal which 
 Hahnemann recommends is very difficult in ordinary prac 
 tice. " Every disease represents a special process, which 
 like every other natural process, runs its own fixed course.""^ 
 
 * P. 92. Virchow in his Oration on Schbnlein ^pp. 22 and 67), 
 asserts that the expression "morbid process" was first employed in 
 1824 by Stark in a clear and lucid manner. This, and other passages 
 show that this statement is not correct.
 
 1 82 Desultory attacks. 
 
 In certain cases, where by supporting the vital energy the 
 process of healing in the direction taken by nature can be 
 furthered and brought to a more speedy conclusion, the 
 homoeopathic principle ma}', in the opinion of the reviewer, 
 prove useful, but it can never be the chief principle of 
 medicine. 
 
 The reviewer has quite a different estimation of the work in its 
 relation to pharmacology. The experiments of the author, made with 
 medicines on healthy persons and their results may have a very im- 
 portant influence on this branch of medicine. 
 
 The review is written in a very calm style, in spite of 
 Hahnemann's attacks on the ordinary practice. 
 
 A second review appeared in the following number of 
 the same journal which likewise blames the vehement tone 
 of the author and opposes the mode adopted of establish- 
 ing the new principle of cure. " Who would not have ex- 
 pected better logic from a man who has in other ways done 
 so much for medicine ? Siinilia siinilibus ciwantiir is a 
 maxim which no rational physician of any experience will 
 deny, but it is to be accepted, not in Hahnemann's sense as 
 a universal therapeutic rule, but only in special cases to 
 which we are guided not by rational, but by empirical 
 medicine. Hahnemann's idea would, doubtless, have been 
 gratefully received by the medical public if he had an- 
 nounced it as applicable only in certain cases and not 
 universally." After refuting certain theories of Hahne- 
 mann's, the following judgment is passed : — 
 
 The reviewer must admit that in these 222 pages the author has 
 expressed many fine ideas, and has displaced much originality, but it 
 is a pity that their application is too general, and that he attempts to 
 prove that his homoeopathic system is universally applicable. If the 
 intelligent reader draws correct conclusions he will lay down the book 
 not altogether without having derived some satisfaction from its 
 perusal. The reviewer desires further to ask this question, which 
 concerns medical jurisprudence : Is this mode of procedure which 
 Hahnemann here teaches, to make experiments with all sorts of drugs 
 (even poisons) on healthy human beings, in order to obtain a rational 
 materia medica according to homa:opathic principles, quite allowable .' 
 
 This reviewer, too, preserves a judicious calm. Both 
 reviews avoid touching on the question of doses. 
 
 Hahnemann answered none of these reviews, but remarked
 
 of tJie Eiieviy. 183 
 
 upon his opponents' statements, without personally attacking 
 them (with one single exception in which he was provoked 
 to do so) — a fact which is important in forming our judg- 
 ment of Hahnemann — in a subsequent edition of the 
 Organon, as well as in the introductory remarks to the 
 provings of medicines in the Reine Arsfieimittellehre. 
 
 His son, Dr. Frederick Hahnemann, published a Refuta- 
 tion of Hecker's Attacks (Dresden, 181 1.) Indeed, even 
 an opponent of Hahnemann, Professor Puchelt, condemned 
 Hecker's virulence.* He complains of " the dogmatic and 
 contemptuous criticisms of homoeopathy in some of the 
 journals " — he probably alluded to the Neties Journal der 
 Erfindiingen qt^c. in der Medicin, Vol. I., St. 3, which, soon 
 after the appearance of the Organon, published a violent 
 criticism similar to that in the Annalen — and he strongly 
 condemns Hecker's criticism. " Hecker merely attacks and 
 does not appreciate or do justice to Hahnemann's doctrine. 
 He who wishes to judge fairly of an opinion must not 
 hold the opposite one to be unconditionally true." 
 
 Puchelt's review of homoeopathy in Hufeland's Journal 
 did not appear until 1819 — nineyearsafterHecker's criticism. 
 Up to that time Hahnemann's views are only mentioned 
 incidentally in this journal. Thus in 18 10 a doctor men- 
 tions! that in Karlsbad and the neighbourhood sufferers 
 from diarrhoea had taken a glass of hot spring water with 
 very good effect, and he calls this an illustration of Plah- 
 nemann's therapeutic principle. Two years later| the same 
 thing happened when arsenic was mentioned as a remedy in 
 intermittent fever. About the same time§ a physician pro- 
 tests against Hahnemann's demands for simplicity of medi- 
 cal treatment and during these eight years no one took up 
 the pen in support of Hahnemann's opposition to the mixing 
 of remedies. Prescriptions remained just as long, and the 
 hotch-potch of remedies continued to flourish. The efficacy 
 
 * Hufeland's y(W;v/(z/, 1819, St. 6, p. 10.' 
 t Vol. XXXI., St. 9, p. 75. 
 X Vol. XXXV., St. ir, p. 94. 
 § Vol. XXXIV., St. 5, p. 88.
 
 184 Recognition of some good in 
 
 of belladonna in scarlet fever, recommended by Hahnemann, 
 is called attention to in various passages, and in 18 12 
 Hufeland writes in a note:* "It certainly deserves con- 
 tinued and careful investigation. For to be deterred by the 
 infinitesimal smallness of the doses is to forget that here 
 we have to do with a dynamic, i.e., living action, which 
 cannot be weighed by pounds and grains. Is to dilute 
 always to weaken ? Does not dilution often cause new 
 developments and an increased display of the more delicate 
 properties?" 
 
 In the same year-}- Hofrath Schenk, of Siegcn, publishes 
 passages from a letter of Hahnemann's. Schenk asked for 
 advice as to the use of belladonna in scarlet fever. Hahne- 
 mann sent three grains of an extract prepared by himself 
 " because the officinal extracts are often very uncertain 
 and their properties are often destroyed by the heat of the 
 fire, &c.," and gave information as to its further preparation. 
 " I was exhorted to try to overcome any incredulity arising 
 from the smallness of the dose ; it was rather too large 
 than too small, for we had at present no idea of the force 
 residing in powerful medicines." Schenk here expresses 
 his thanks to Hahnemann for his readiness in sending him 
 the belladonna, and gives an account of the very favourable 
 results produced by this remedy in a prevalent epidemic. 
 
 Hahnemann's inaugural thesis, published at Leipzic, De 
 Helleborisnio J^etcnnnX was favourably noticed in many 
 places. " Though the action of veratrum may not be so 
 beneficial as the author thinks, he has nevertheless rendered 
 a further service by collecting all the data referring 
 historically to this method of treatment, and he here gives 
 a complete historical account of it ; such a work as the 
 present has all the more interest because similar works 
 are rare. The first traces of the use of ver. alb. are to be 
 found 1,500 years before Christ," &c.§ Another reviewerjl 
 
 * Vol. XXXIV., St. 5, p. 120. 
 
 t Vol. XXXIV., St. 5, p. 120. 
 
 X Lesser lVriiings.i p. 644. 
 
 § Med. chir. Zte^., XIX., p. 234. 
 
 II Allg. mcd. Annalcn das ig JalirJi., 1S12, p. 1053.
 
 HaJineinaniis doctrine and practice. 1S5 
 
 calls the thesis " an interesting contribution to the history 
 
 of medicine collected with care and in a critical spirit." 
 
 A third* considers it a very " thorough treatise." Professor 
 Choulant is stated to have said that this work displays 
 great learning— an opinion that every reader will confirm. 
 
 In 18 12 Kranzfelder wrote, Symbola ad criticoi nova 
 theoricc, Honiceopathiccd dicta;, Erlanga; 18 12, a work directed 
 against Hahnemann, which seems to have excited no atten- 
 tion. 
 
 Hahnemann stated publicly in 181 3f that homoeo- 
 pathy in the space of three years had found so " many 
 estimable adherents and practitioners." If we hesitate to 
 believe the testimony of the first homceopaths that his 
 teaching had spread rapidly among students and doctors, 
 this is nevertheless manifest from an article by Professor 
 Clarus, of the Faculty of Leipzic,^ who opposes the opinion 
 of his colleagues, that Hahnemann's lectures should be 
 suppressed by force. Science should be free. " I con- 
 clude these remarks with the wish that a proposal, w^hich 
 I advanced long since, may, notwithstanding its difficulties, 
 be carried out, viz., to test Hahnemann's doctrines by a com- 
 mission composed of scientifically trained doctors, and with 
 the co-operation of Dr. Hahnemann himself, in a hospital." 
 The difficulties must have been on the side of the allopaths, 
 for Hahnemann often expressed a wish for a hospital. We 
 shall see later how Clarus saw fit to change his opinion. 
 We here pass over the political journals — the Leipziger 
 Zeitiing, and the Hamburger Correspondent— whxch. also 
 confirm the spread of homoeopathy, although they do not 
 espouse Hahnemann's side. 
 
 The vehemence of the contest advanced pari passu 
 with the spread of homoeopathy. The allopaths and the 
 apothecaries of Leipzic were on one side, Hahnemann 
 and his adherents on the other, and the public espoused the 
 
 * Augustin, Wissensch. Ucbcrs. d. ges. incd. chir. Literatur, 181 2, p. 
 
 \ Allg. Anz. d. Dciitschcn, 1813, p. 634, note. 
 X Huf. Journ.^ 41, St. 4, p. 112.
 
 1 so DeatJi of Prince ScJnvarrjenherg. 
 
 cause of one side or the other. The contest found its way 
 into the pohtical papers of Leipzic, into the beershops, into 
 the domestic circles, and reached its cHmax when Prince 
 Schwarzenberg, the winner of the battle of Leipzic, con- 
 sulted Hahnemann. The latter had been requested by the 
 Prince to come to Prague to give him the benefit of his 
 advice. Hahnemann declined this, and invited the patient 
 to take up his abode in Leipzic. So he travelled there to 
 be treated by Hahnemann. He had had several attacks of 
 apoplexy and suffered from a heart disease. Certainly the 
 Field-Marshal improved under Hahnemann's treatment ; 
 he was able to go out for regular walks. Dr. Jos. Edler 
 von Sax, and other allopaths, declared that Hahnemann 
 neglected to employ " powerful measures," and that he was 
 responsible for hastening the Prince's death. Some time 
 before the fatal termination of the illness Hahnemann visited 
 the patient, accompanied by Dr. Marenzeller who had been 
 sent from Vienna, and found the allopaths employed in 
 making a venesection. After that he never visited the 
 patient again, as Dr. Argenti relates.;|: Unfortunately I 
 am unable to ascertain how often the bleeding was 
 repeated. Five weeks later, on the 15th October, 1820, 
 the Prince died. Clarus remarks : " On the same day, 
 and nearly at the same hour, his solemn funeral procession 
 passed along the same road as that on which he had made 
 his triumphal entrance seven years before." 
 
 The post-mortem examination, which was most minute 
 and thorough, revealed several apoplectic foci. " The size 
 of the heart is uniformly increased to double the normal, 
 and at the sam.e time the walls of the right ventricle of 
 the heart are attenuated and those of the left enormously 
 thickened. The valves of the heart are not ossified but 
 extremely thin and delicate." The art. coronar., hepat. 
 and splenica, as well as the ascending aorta, showed 
 " traces of commencing ossification." The report was 
 
 X Hovi. Bcha7idhiuq dcr Ki'aiikheite7j^ end edit., Presburg und 
 Leipzig, 1820, p. 22.
 
 Hahneviamis rejection of blood-letting. 187 
 
 signed and sealed by Clarus, Dr. von Sax, Dr, Samuel 
 Hahnemann and Prosector Dr. Aug. Carl Bock, 
 
 It is easy then to judge whether the attack of Hahne- 
 mann's opponents on account of his neglect of blood- 
 letting was justified. But anyhow they had the majority 
 on their side. Doctors and chemists at length contrived to 
 obtain the prohibition of Hahnemann's dispensing his own 
 medicines, and he, therefore, left Leipzic for Gothen. 
 
 The constant spread of homoeopathy caused its opponents 
 to take greater notice of it in a literary way than pre- 
 viously. In 1 8 19, Dr. Bischoff's pamphlet, which has been 
 already quoted, appeared, and in it the neglect of blood- 
 letting is severely condemned, as is also " the general tone 
 of the Organon, which is not worthy the importance 
 of the subject," and many of Hahnemann's theories arc 
 scouted. He particularly mentions Hahnemann's former 
 services to medicine, and commends Hahnemann's mode 
 of preparing medicines (p. 120), as well as his proving of 
 drugs. " This part of the work is always valuable " (p. 
 117). He rejects the homoeopathic system, and lauds (in 
 the preface and later) " the method of the ordinary system 
 of medicine vv^hich by the labours of physicians is of so 
 much benefit to mankind." The views of the author on 
 the subject of blood-letting will be given by-and-bye. 
 
 The same year saw the publication of Prof Puchelt's 
 treatise in Hufeland's Journal (a. a. O.) " It is the aim 
 and object of this article to criticise Hahnemann's homoe- 
 opathy which has recently spread so much among the 
 younger doctors and has begun to gain a certain amount of 
 acceptation among the non-medical public. A more com- 
 plete examination of this system seems to me to be 
 specially well-timed, as very little has been hitherto done 
 in this direction." He then condemns Hecker's hostile 
 attacks. He severely criticises Hahnemann's contempt for 
 the sciences auxiliary to medicine (and in this even Hahne- 
 mann's adherents soon joined him), and opposes some 
 theories in Hahnemann's Organon, on which, however, no 
 stress had been laid by Hahnemann himself, and which 
 even his most faithful disciples have rejected. He blames
 
 J 88 Modified acceptance of some 
 
 Hahnemann for forming a system and despising every- 
 thing else in medicine. He proposes to use homceopathy 
 in the case of " dynamic " affections and in such organic 
 diseases as arise from " derangement of the nervous sys- 
 tem." " I should like to know Hahnemann's opinion on 
 
 this modification of his therapeutic principle For the 
 
 rest, we heartily wish that homoeopathy, if it once becomes 
 allied with scientific medicine, may have a still greater 
 influence [what influence had it at that time ?] in producing 
 greater simplicity and moderation in the use of medicines." 
 
 What he says about the personal feeling of allopaths to- 
 wards Hahnemann explains so well the cause of their in- 
 veterate hostility that we must let the author speak for 
 himself. 
 
 However contradictory it may appear at first sight to attempt to cure 
 diseases by remedies which produce similar effects, it must be admitted 
 that the paradox disappears when more careful consideration is given to 
 the question than has hitherto been usually given by the opponents of 
 homceopathy. I believe, indeed, that the system would not have met 
 with so much opposition, that, on the contrary, it would even have been 
 accepted and employed by a great number of physicians, if Hahne- 
 mann had not declared open war upon the whole existing medical 
 art, for every one who has lived and worked in it, knows it is not 
 so entirely built on sand as Hahnemann maintains. 
 
 It would be possible to quote here from the first allo- 
 pathic " authorities " any time during the last forty years, 
 quite as strong a condemnation of the allopathic thera- 
 peutics as Hahnemann's, though perhaps not stated in 
 such impassioned terms as they were not engaged in an 
 anim.ated controversy as he was. 
 
 If he had not allowed himself to be borne away by the rage, which 
 twenty years ago, was very common among the best men, for reform- 
 ing the whole science and destroying everything that was old ; if he 
 had yielded less to the spirit of opposition which led him to take up a 
 position of antagonism to other medical men, he would have met with 
 a more cordial reception, and would have been been inore practically 
 useful. 
 
 In what follows, the feeling of personal irritation dis- 
 played by the allopaths is still more clearly shown : — 
 
 With the hostile attitude assumed by him towards other doctors, 
 some self-effacement is required to attain the point of view from which 
 he may be justly judged, and what is useful extracted from his teach-
 
 of Hahnemann's doctrines. 189 
 
 ing ; we are apt to be prejudiced against him by many offensive ex- 
 pressions, which indeed may ha\-e been deser\ed by some, but cer- 
 tainly not by all the thoughtful physicians against whom they were 
 directed. [Hahnemann's principal therapeutic charges were directed 
 against all allopaths of the period without exception]. This excited a 
 prejudice against him which it was necessary to overcome before a 
 calm judgment could be arrived at becoming a seeker after truth. 
 This power of self-control is not possessed by all, and least of all by 
 those who most deserve the reproach of writing careless prescriptions. 
 The latter act as Hahnemann does with the whole of medicine, they 
 reject the good with the bad, and throw all on one side because some 
 i&w things do not please them. 
 
 The author's characterisation of the medicine of that 
 day shall not be kept back from the reader, because it 
 serves to indicate a phase in the history of medicine, and 
 is also of importance for our purpose. " We live now in a 
 time in which most systems are blended and united. The 
 mechanical and chemical views of the organism [we must 
 remember the condition of physiological chemistry in 18 19] 
 have united, are subordinated to, or collocated with the 
 dynamico-vital view. The humoral and solidary theories are 
 amalgamated, and have resolved themselves into the idea of 
 the reciprocal action of the solid and fluid portions of the 
 organism." From this sentence we seem to be transported 
 into our own times, but the next brings us back into the 
 good old times. " The evacuating and stimulating, depleting 
 and fortifying, and many other conflicting methods of treat- 
 ment dwell peacefully side by side in general therapeutics, 
 and mutually limit one another ; all are used by our con- 
 temporaries in various diseases, though one may prefer one 
 method — another another." Here the entire unsoundness 
 of the allopathy of that period is indirectly admitted. 
 
 In 1822, the first homoeopathic periodical appeared, 
 ArcJiiv fiir die Jioni. Heilknnst, edited by Dr. E. Stapf 
 and later by Stapf and Gross. In the same year, the allo- 
 path, Jorg, published his Kritische Hefte fiir Aei'cte 2ind 
 Wnnddrzte (Leipzig bei Knobloch), in which he attacked 
 the Organon and the homoeopathic provings of drugs. 
 
 At the same time Dr. Groh published a criticism of 
 Hahnemann's system in Oken's periodical /i-/i-(i822,p. 120), 
 and he characterises it as a doctrine " acting like a breath
 
 iQo Hoiniivpai/dc Works of Darkness. 
 
 of poisonous air on the blossom of medicine, which was 
 beginning to unfold after its long winter sleep." But he 
 was no blind antagonist. He accepted a great deal, and 
 owned that Hahnemann had taught " much that was good 
 and true" in the Orgauon. He calls him an "earnest 
 thinker, one of the best physicians of our time." 
 
 He considered it "very praiseworthy" in Hahnemann to 
 call attention to the necessity of individualisation. He 
 blames the large number of medical men who neglect this 
 counsel, and compares them with the knights errant. " I 
 would like to see these practici crrantes, many of whom have 
 been robbing their suffering fellow cteatures of blood and 
 money to the disgrace of scientific Germany, follow these 
 and other teachings of the, in many respects, conscientious 
 Hahnemann, as slavishly as they can." The reason why 
 the critic considered Hahnemann " conscientious in some 
 respects" only, is very soon seen. Hahnemann rejected 
 bloodletting in inflammation of the lungs, inflammation of 
 the brain, croup, etc., as also calomel in large doses, and that 
 was unpardonable. In speaking of the mode of employing 
 remedies " he unwillingly omits to mention (on account of 
 lack of space) the praiseworthy matter contained in this sec- 
 tion,'' and he says, with reference to Hahnemann's proposed 
 method of discovering the curative properties of medicines 
 by testing them on healthy organisms, " I rejoice to have 
 arrived at a point where Hahnemann's services to medicine 
 
 become conspicuous." " He had a profound insight into 
 
 the inner springs of life when he advanced or confirmed the 
 principle that with regard to the action of drugs as with 
 
 everything in life there are alternating states." " It is to 
 
 be hoped that Hahnemann may continue on in the path he 
 has begun to tread, though his materia medica ma}' still 
 be a mdis indigcstaqnc molest 
 
 As the same kinds of attacks on the part of his opponents 
 were constantly repeated during the following years, it is not 
 Avorth while to give more of them in detail. We need only 
 mention that such attacks became more and more vehement. 
 In 1824, there appeared : ITorks of Darkness in tJie 
 Domain of Honiccopat/iy, brought to light by Dr. Th ,
 
 HaJuieinann likened to the Devil. 19 1 
 
 and Authentication of the Facts mentioned in the ' Works of 
 Darkness', by the same author, Altenburg, These con- 
 tained nothing but idle gossip, untruths and personal at- 
 tacks on the homoeopaths of Leipzic, but they are welcome 
 as furnishing evidence of the method of attack pursued by 
 
 the allopaths. Under the pseudonym "Dr. Th " was 
 
 concealed the personality of a Dr. Meissner, who appears 
 in the text in the third person as a witness. Even a few 
 allopaths deprecated such conduct,* and he was cited before 
 the tribunals and punished. 
 
 Hofrath and Physicus Dr. Rau, an old and respected 
 physician, wrote in 1824, On the Value of Honiceopathic 
 Treatment, in which he exposed the weak sides of Hahne- 
 mann's theory, but declared himself in accord with his 
 therapeutic principles. This work and Rau's high reputa- 
 tion attracted many physicians to homoeopathy. 
 
 " Rau was already well known as a thoughtful man," 
 according to Schmidt's Jahrbiichcr (Vol. 7, p. 164), and 
 it is added that he only turned to homoeopathy after a 
 practice of twenty- two years and tested it for twelve years 
 before defending it publicly. 
 
 From this time onwards pamphlets and counter-pam- 
 phlets appeared in such numbers that it would be a weari- 
 some and profitless task to examine each individually. We 
 will only mention in connexion with this period, a book 
 by Professor L. W. Sachs, of Konigsberg, A Final Word on 
 S. Hahnemann s Homcvopathic System, in which Hahnemann 
 is compared to the devil. (Leipzig, 1826, p. 52.) 
 
 There is no fault, no error in the devil, he is out and out the false, 
 the reprobate, the l}"ing one. Now, the homoeopathic system does not 
 suffer from errors (if such could be shown in it, that would redound to 
 its honour !), it is not impregnated with false notions (such could be 
 refuted, corrected, minimised and changed into true ones) it is not 
 illogical (it must in that case be logical in some places, it must 
 have some internal coherence : — but it has no more than a heap of 
 sand) it has not the faults possessed by any other system, no human 
 weakness, but it is contrary to all our conceptions, to all laws of thought, 
 and all the results of experience ; it scorns all Nature's teaching, 
 
 * Augustin, I.e., 1824, p. 334.
 
 192 Hiif eland acts as Umpire. 
 
 mocks at reason, excludes all truth. It cannot be said of it, as Polo- 
 nius says of Hamlet's madness, " there is method in it.'' 
 
 On the other hand, the advantages reaped by the allopaths 
 from Hahnemann's researches are evident. Jorg published 
 in 1825, Materials for a future Materia Medica, obtained 
 bv Experiments on Healthy Persons, Leipzic. He in- 
 stituted these experiments with the help of students, 
 and arrives at the conclusion Hahnemann came to more 
 than twenty years previously, viz., that medical men have 
 little or no knowledge of the positive effects of iTiedicines. 
 In the course of this work we shall see how certain of 
 Hahnemann's teachings begin to take effect, even in the 
 camp of his opponents. 
 
 Hufeland's journal was distinguished b}- the fact that in 
 it the combat was carried on with decency. Hufeland 
 himself seems to have zealously occupied himself with 
 homoeopathy for several years. In the year 1826 (St. i. 
 p. 20 u.f ) he thus formulates his views : — 
 
 Advantages of HonixopatJiy. 
 
 1. It calls attention to the necessary individualisation of 
 cases.* 
 
 2. It will help to give a proper importance to diet. 
 
 3. Will do away with large doses. 
 
 4. Will lead to simplicity in prescribing medicines. 
 
 5. " It will lead to a more exact testing and knowledge 
 of the effect of drugs on the living subject, as it has alread)' 
 done." 
 
 6. The homceopathic system will direct more attention 
 to the preparation of medicines and will lead to a stricter 
 supervision of the apothecaries. 
 
 7. It can never do positive harm. 
 
 8. It will give time to the diseased organism to recover 
 itself quietly and uninterruptedl}-.t 
 
 * This is a confession that medical men neglected this requisite, as 
 do the allopaths of our time. 
 
 f It gives the diseased organism the physiological impulse to cura- 
 tive action, without complicating the natural disease with a medicinal 
 disease.
 
 Proposes a compromise. 193 
 
 9. " It will diminish in an extraordinary degree the 
 expense of treatment." 
 
 Disadvantages. 
 
 1. It may prevent rational treatment.* 
 
 2. Would have an injurious effect upon the study of 
 medicine, as was the case with the systems of Brown and 
 Broussais.t 
 
 3. Would cause sins of omission.:); 
 
 4. Would constitute an attack on the fundamental prin- 
 ciples of all good medical police.§ 
 
 5. Deprives physicians by its maxims of their respect 
 for and trust in the healing power of Nature, to which, how- 
 ever, the homoeopath gives full play. (?) 
 
 Hufeland writes, in reference to the dispensing of medi- 
 cines by the physician : — 
 
 The writer by no means fails to recognise that there are two sides to 
 the question, and he believes that on this subject he is entitled to 
 give an opinion, as during the first ten years of his practice he dis- 
 pensed his medicines himself; it being then the custom in Weimar. 
 He knows by experience that a medical man gives medicines prepared 
 by himself with much greater certainty and confidence, and that while 
 preparing them many new and happy thoughts may strike him which 
 he can use for the benefit of his patients, just as they do every artist 
 
 who prepares the instruments of his own art The patient gains 
 
 by the diminution in expense ; indeed, he thinks that it may be ac- 
 cepted as a self-evident proposition, that it is more to the interest of 
 the physician to have reliable medicines, and his conscience is more 
 concerned in the matter than is the case with the apothecary'. But the 
 monopoly of the apothecaries offers, on the whole, greater security,|j 
 especially the check on doctors through their prescriptions.^ I ad- 
 vise a union in both these respects, so that the doctor should prepare 
 
 * What is rational ? 
 
 t Right for that time. 
 
 X Blood-letting and emetics! 
 
 § The dispensing of medicines by the practitioner ! 
 
 II The apothecary gains more money. 
 
 IT Are medical practitioners, then, conscienceless poisoners ? How 
 often do not the apothecaries make fatal mistakes, which would have 
 been impossible for the doctors.
 
 194 SovietJiing good may be 
 
 his medicines, or cause them to be prepared, and should then give 
 them to the apothecary to dispense.* 
 
 The following is Hufeland's opinion concerning homoeo- 
 pathic preparations : 
 
 With regard to the purely dynamic effect of remedies as accepted 
 by homoeopaths, no one can believe more fully in that than the author, 
 as he has often expressed in his writings. That every effect produced 
 on the living" organism, and therefore also the effect of every remedy, is 
 
 an actio viva, has long been my principle That in the case of many 
 
 volatile substances an almost infinite divisibility, far beyond all ponder- 
 ability, is compatible with a continued efficacy is shown us in the case 
 of musk. A few grains of this substance are able to perfume the air 
 of a whole room, so that every atom smells of musk and must, there- 
 fore, contain some particles of musk, certainly not stronger than the 
 trillionth dilution, and yet the musk does not lose in weight. It has 
 long been observed in the case of ipecacuanha that the smallest doses, 
 iVth or tVth grain rubbed up with sugar, acquire very great and even 
 new powers. Might not then other volatile substances, particularly 
 narcotics, possess a similar, almost endless divisibility, and yet 
 continue to be able to act on the organism 1 This is certainly a 
 question that deserves investigation.! 
 
 To have been the first to call attention to the increase of efficacy 
 by the increase of the points of contact by solution in a fluid or by 
 long continued trituration, is undoubtedly a merit of Hahnemann's, 
 and deserves thanks. 
 
 In the same year (St. i, p. 29-60) a detailed account is 
 given of homoeopathic cures by Dr. Messerschmidt, of 
 Naumburg, and he pursues the subject later on in St. 
 2, pages 59-102. Rummel contributes a polemical article 
 on the homoeopathic side (St. 5, p. 57-74), and a longer 
 article on homoeopathy (St. 3, p. 43-74). Dr. Widnmann, 
 of Munich, blames the bad and praises the good sides 
 of homoeopathy (in the April number of 1827), and writes 
 on the same subject in 1828 (St. 2, p. 3-41). 
 
 In the year 1828, Dr. Ant. Fried. Fischer, of Dresden, 
 wrote an article in the same journal On some Defects of 
 AllopatJiy, with Remarks on the Homa^opathic Illethod of 
 TreatmentX 
 
 * Then patients exist for the benefit of the apothecary ? 
 
 t But still waits for it, as far as the allopaths are concerned. 
 
 \ Huf. fount., 1828, St. 2, p. 42-60.
 
 learned from HonuvopatJiy. 195 
 
 There is first the subject of diet, to which the homoeo- 
 paths assert that allopathy does not give sufficient atten- 
 tion. 
 
 If we observe the practice of many allopaths, the discovery is in- 
 voluntarily forced upon us that frequently even where the therapeutic 
 treatment is most secundum artem, much too little attention is paid to 
 diet. This fact must have been often observed by every attentive and 
 impartial physician, for opportunities are not wanting, and this to such 
 a degree that this lack of attention to diet has often astonished even 
 thoughtful non-professionals, and has caused them to become converts 
 to Hahnemann's doctrines. In vain do we attempt to point out to 
 them the slippery and insecure foundation of his system, for they are 
 far too enlightened to credit any of our teaching with a firm and stable 
 foundation. What do our scientific explanations matter to them ? 
 they have seen how in a brief space of time one system succeeds 
 another ; how the a priori assumptions and assertions even of the 
 most learned doctors are quickly refuted by experience and shown to 
 be untrue. Attracted by the simplicity of homoeopathy, the practical 
 application of which is neither unpleasant to the palate nor burden- 
 some to the purse, the well regulated and strict diet enjoined by 
 homoeopathy induces them to lend a willing ear to the new doctrine. 
 
 This, however, they would not, according to the author, 
 have done, if allopaths had paid greater attention to diet — 
 a subject on which the author dilates. In the strict diet of 
 the adherents of the homoeopathic system we may see 
 " how powerful is the influence of physicians who are reso- 
 lute and confident in their principles and in themselves. 
 
 Even if it is entirely irrational, yet the very follies of 
 
 this school should admonish us to make an earnest search- 
 ing examination of our therapeutic treatment. And here 
 it may be mentioned that our pharmaceutical prescriptions 
 are much too composite. Only a few of us really strive 
 after simplicity in prescribing. Our prescriptions ought to 
 be chemically correct and as simple as possible, if they are 
 not to be the laughing stock of homoeopaths and the jest of 
 all well-educated people Until then we cannot be sur- 
 prised if educated laymen, and especially those who have a 
 knowledge of natural science, make merry over the viixtinii 
 conipositmn of our prescriptions The so-called magis- 
 tral formulas cannot be excluded from investigation Ps. 
 
 mode of treatment simplified in this manner would redound 
 to the credit of our art, and would prevent Hahnemann's
 
 196 Neglect of Uood-letting the 
 
 bait from attracting any more deserters, and would contri- 
 bute to gain more respect for the art among thoughtful 
 students of medicine." 
 
 "The constant changing of medicines,'" the author con- 
 tinues, " is likewise a sign of indecision, and in this par- 
 ticular, too, we must learn from homoeopathy." 
 
 Homoeopaths do not bleed, and God only knows how they arrive 
 at the desired result in those cases where bleeding is the only mode by 
 which we can expect to save the patient ! There are many laymen 
 who do not like bleeding, and these go over to the homceopaths. We 
 must therefore obviate the necessity of blood-letting by means of a 
 
 regimen which does not conduce to the formation of blood We 
 
 possess in oxy-muriatic acid an agent best calculated to alter the 
 crasis of the blood and to subdue its orgasm ; but we must not be 
 sparing of it but must administer it in the greatest cjuantities as a 
 drink. It is a pity that this acid never quite loses its peculiar coaly 
 smell 
 
 Only thus does it seem to me to be possible to convince the 
 educated part of our fellow-citizens of the reliability of our method of 
 treatment 
 
 The medical man who acts according to homceopathic principles 
 prepares his medicaments to a great extent himself; it is most im- 
 portant to him that the simple remedies which he alone has brought 
 into use should not only be prepared with the greatest care, but 
 should also be promptly administered. 
 
 With us the preparation of medicines leaves much to be desired 
 
 The apothecary, therefore, should be an experienced chemist and a 
 good botanist, qualities which are not always found singly, much less 
 
 in combination, in the same person. This must be mended If we 
 
 had arrived at this, we also, like Hahnemann, should be able to give 
 our patient a guai'antee of the purity, excellence and freshness of our 
 medicines, and no longer would there be occasion for the witticisms of 
 those who are eager to find fault with the allopathic method of treat- 
 ment. 
 
 Hufeland then again expresses his opinion on the subject 
 of homoeopathy : 
 
 After repeated trials, and a careful collection of evidence, and after 
 proper consideration of the objections, I hold the same opinion con- 
 cerning it as I expressed two years ago. 
 
 I have seen many successful and indeed highly surprising cures 
 brought about by its means, chiefly in chronic nervous complaints, 
 where other kinds of treatment had been tried in vain. 
 
 But I have also seen unsuccessful cases, and many which lasted 
 longer and were more tedious than they would have been if other 
 modes of treatment had been employed
 
 great sin of Homccopathy. 197 
 
 The chief fault to be found with it however is the neglect of those 
 two most important means of saving life — bleeding and emetics, which 
 it is impossible to replace, and for the neglect of which nothing can 
 afterwards make up. 
 
 The histories of two cases are given. A child had croup. 
 The homoeopath gave hep. sulph. and within twenty-four 
 hours the symptoms of croup disappeared, but the next day 
 capillary bronchitis supervened and the child died. " The 
 child would probably have lived if leeches had been applied 
 at the beginning by means of which the inflammatory 
 diathesis would have been stopped." (No one now would 
 agree with the honourable and well-intentioned Hufeland, 
 any more than they would recognise the correctness of the 
 following view): Another child had " erysipelas of the face," 
 and this disappeared under homoeopathic treatment ; but an 
 abscess formed, it would " probably " have been prevented 
 by the application of leeches. 
 
 It would be as wrong to make homceopathy the universal system of 
 treatment, and not to use what is really good and true in it, as to dis- 
 card it altogether. Let us welcome it as a new method of curin 
 disease, but subordinate it to the approved rules of a rational mode 
 
 of treatment Let its task be to discover new specifics against 
 
 individual diseases No homoeopathic art of medicine, but a 
 
 homoeopathic method in rational medicine ! 
 
 Dr. Fischer, of Dresden, quoted above, appears soon to 
 have altered his temperate view of homoeopathy into the 
 very opposite. He wrote in the following year (1829, 
 Dresden), an indignant pamphlet, entitled, Homceopathy 
 before the fudgment Seat of Common Sense. The good 
 recognised by the author a year before in Hufeland's 
 Journal^ has marvellously shrunk in this book, which is a 
 " text book of instruction for educated people," for, " even 
 among a public claiming to be highly educated, as is the 
 case in my beloved native town [Dresden, where among 
 other homoeopaths, Trinks and P. Wolf practised], homoeo- 
 pathy is making rapid and bold strides." "The most 
 
 shameless bragging of a boastful homoeopath." 
 
 Allopaths could not understand how homoeopaths can 
 be so shameless as to assert that many diseases can be
 
 1^8 Germany disgraced hy being 
 
 more easily cured under homoeopathic treatment than 
 under the irrational treatment by blood-letting. 
 
 Notwithstanding all attacks on the philosophical elaboration of the 
 science of medicine, it stands firm and radiant in immortal ethereal 
 splendour in the everlasting mansion of sublime intelligence, shed- 
 ding forth life-giving and fertilising beams over all branches of know- 
 ledge and culture. That which prejudiced contemporaries dare to 
 mock at will be honoured and cherished by a wiser posterity, as con- 
 taining the ideas and principles of true wisdom. 
 
 He is indignant at the idea of dispensing with bleeding, 
 which is hallowed by the experience of lOOO years. 
 
 It is a humiliating and shameful thought that Saxony is the birth- 
 place of this false doctrine, and Dresden the principal arena of the 
 the homoeopaths. [The Leipzic allopaths were in the habit of com- 
 plaining that Leipzic was the chief scene of action of these " children 
 of darkness."] So much is undoubtedly true that the inhabitants of 
 Leipzic have pretty well got rid of these magical doctors, and they 
 would rather welcome black-a-moors than these genii. They have, 
 indeed, left there an evil odour behind them, but it will not be diffi- 
 cult for a Clarus to destroy it, as the salt works of Kosen are near 
 at hand, and it is easy to procure Nordhausen oil of vitriol (p. 7.) 
 
 According to Fischer homoeopathy proved a failure in 
 Vienna, although that city is not quite free from its con- 
 tamination. " The capital on the Spree alone is a laudable 
 exception to the rule, because the medical authorities there 
 are earnestly concerned to preserve the inhabitants of the 
 town from such fanfaronades ! Why do they not hasten 
 thither? Because they shun the light and wish to hide 
 behind the mask which would there be forcibly dragged 
 away ;" (in 1833 the spread of homoeopathy in Berlin is 
 lamented, consequently only four years later.) " The basis 
 of homoeopathy is furnished by bold and unprovable asser- 
 tions," and this is enforced by reference to the " heroes of 
 grey antiquity." A year before he had blamed the allo- 
 paths for not paying proper attention to diet, the prepara- 
 tion of medicines, &c., now in all these particulars they 
 are far superior to the homoeopaths. The author states 
 that he has already exposed the " follies" of the hom.oeo- 
 paths in a non-medical journal, the Dresdener Merkur. 
 
 We also once gave Hahnemann our appro\al when he first attempted 
 to ascertain the curative properties of various medicinal substances, and
 
 the birtJi-place of Hoiua^opatJiy. 199 
 
 to open a new way for a just estimation of their powers, in the secon 
 and third vols, of the older Hufeland's Journal . [Why did he not 
 then publicly come forward on Hahnemann's side ? It was, in great 
 part, the indolence and indifference of his colleagues which embittered 
 Hahnemann against them]. 
 
 From the following passage it appears that from the 
 beginning he did not rightly understand Hahnemann. He 
 continues : — 
 
 All the less can we allopaths be astonished that Dr. Hahnemann 
 and his adherents declare the medical traditions of thousands of years 
 to be deception and folly, scorn our knowledge, and do not trouble 
 
 themselves about the older medicine and its main doctrines Great 
 
 self-control is required to restrain one's pen. 
 
 When Hahnemann dares to deny the crises of diseases which no 
 school and no physician has ever ventured to dispute, which thou- 
 sands of physicians have recognised in their works, and which 
 millions of practitioners have witnessed at the sick bed, we can only 
 compassionate such an aberration of human intellect 
 
 I and other allopaths think nothing of experiments on senseless 
 animals. 
 
 The homoeopath can render no help when the efforts of Nature to 
 get rid of injurious matter are too violent, or on the contrary, when 
 Nature's efforts are too weak and ineffectual. 
 
 Homoeopathy is nonsense. "Hence, both English and 
 French look upon it as a chimera, and in those countries no 
 one thinks of trying it." (The author must soon have heard 
 the lament over the spread of the detested homoeopathy 
 beyond the Rhine and the Channel). 
 
 We have selected this article from among the multitude, 
 and gone into it more fully, because the author was a phy- 
 sician of repute, and because it is a type of most of the 
 other allopathic diatribes of this time, which constantly re- 
 peat themselves, and which it would be waste of time 
 and paper to examine individually. 
 
 Before we describe the quarrel in its further develop- 
 ments it is necessary to understand the 
 
 Medical Standpomt of the Opponents, 
 
 particularly with regard to blood-letting, emetics, and pur- 
 gatives, which Hahnemann so pitilessly attacked. 
 
 Dr. J. R. Bischoff, professor of clinical medicine, and
 
 200 Blood-letting the sheet anchor 
 
 senior physician to the General Hospital at Prague, Con- 
 siderations on the medical treatment hitherto piwsned, and 
 on the first principles of the Jiomceopathic doctrine of disease. 
 Prague, 1819. 
 
 Page hi: Hippocrates would have saved many lives — 
 " it can be proved from his records of cases of disease " — if 
 he had employed " a cooling treatment, administered mild 
 purgatives and used derivatives and blood-letting." 
 
 At p. 126 and following, the author attacks Hahnemann's 
 statement : " Homoeopaths were much more successful than 
 the ordinary school, which, as has lately again become the 
 fashion, on theoretical grounds advises only the so-called 
 antiphlogistics and merciless blood-letting,* and does a 
 monstrous deal of harm thereby." 
 
 Bischoff appeals to the sense of duty and to the con- 
 science of physicians, " to the approved experience of cen- 
 turies," and to Hahnemann's own instructor, Quarin. 
 
 No harm had ever arisen from a right employment of 
 bleeding, but " great good has been done by it." 
 
 Out of 197 patients, who suffered from inflammation of 
 the lungs and the pleura, only ten died in his hands (as all 
 his students could testify), and of these ten four suffered 
 from phthisis, and three were victims to mistakes in diet. 
 Neglect of blood-letting produces chronic disease ; he had 
 bled two women of eighty-one and ninety-seven years 
 respectively with favourable results. He, in conjunction 
 with a friend, bled a strong man twelve times in three 
 days and a-half, taking a pound of blood each time, 
 and " after the twelfth time profuse bleeding from the nose 
 ensued twice, and the blood still showed a marked in- 
 flammatory coat. Nature gave thus the most convinc- 
 ing proof that not an ounce too much blood had been 
 taken. In six weeks the patient was entirely restored 
 More especially in haemoptysis and pulmonary apo- 
 plexy, in certain cases of nervous diseases and many 
 other affections, blood-letting is often the only saving 
 remedy." The true physician should not suffer himself to 
 
 * He is alluding to the treatment of pneumonia.
 
 of Scientific Lledicine. 201 
 
 be deterred from the repetition of blood-letting when it is 
 seen to be necessary, " by the lamentations of the by- 
 standers, who look askance at this proceeding " ; he must 
 conquer himself and think of the words of Hahnemann, 
 although they refer to the very opposite set of circum- 
 stances : 
 
 " The oak garland bestowed on us by a good conscience 
 rewards us a thousand-fold for such self-conquests." 
 
 Prof Puchelt* " agrees entirely " with Bischoff. The 
 Med. chir. Zeitting also (1820 I. p. 93, 84) declares itself to 
 be in accord with Bischoff's views about bleeding. 
 
 Prof. Heinroth expresses the following views in the Anti- 
 Organon. Leipzig, 1825. 
 
 We must begin by stating that Heinroth was a physician 
 of note. '* This great mind, who would measure himself 
 with his intelligence?" says a certain Kreisphysicus Dr. 
 Wesener.f Mention is made of the " learned Heinroth " in 
 Schmidt's JaJirbiicJicrX and in many other places, and this 
 Anti-Organon is also spoken of as " Heinroth's classical 
 work." He is not unknown to the history of medicine. 
 
 Pages 52 and 53: — What becomes of experience in Hahnemann's 
 observations of patients if he did not find bleeding of great use in 
 inflammation of the lungs ? 
 
 Page 94 -. — The author would acknowledge the principle 
 of similars in emetics for over-loaded stomachs, copious 
 blood-letting for headaches, palpitation of the heart, &c., 
 in the absence of that natural remedy, epistaxis. Hahne- 
 mann does not admit this : "What are we to infer from 
 that ? That all physicians without exception, even the most 
 talented and successful, have acted in a senseless and 
 thoughtless manner." This will give the reader some idea 
 of the " irresistible logic and the classical style in which 
 
 * Hufeland's/<7?^r;zrt;/, 1819, St. 6, p. 11, note, 
 t Hufeland'sy^//T;?rt/, 1828, p. 69. 
 X Vol. 7, p. 106.
 
 202 Contvaria contrariis the 
 
 Hcinroth grapples with and throws his opponent ; he first 
 assumes the truth of Hahnemann's principles, and then 
 logically demonstrates the absurdities to which they lead." 
 
 Page 99 : — How salutary' are the-above-mentioned leeches, cupping, 
 blisters, &€. Where does Hahnemann mention these remedies ? And 
 even venesection ! Is Herr Hahnemann not an avowed enemy of 
 this great remedy? Do we not see the most exhausting haemor- 
 rhages arrested by bleeding to syncope? 
 
 Page 181 : — We can therefore say that the great therapeutic 
 principle is coiitraria contrariis. 
 
 Freiherr von Wedekind, Pi'iifting des Jio^ndopatJiiscJieii 
 Systems. Darmstadt, 1825 : 
 
 Page 49 : — I am perhaps the only living writer who am a pure 
 materialist in contradistinction to Hahnemann. 
 
 He combats both here and in Hufeland's Jo2irnal, 1828, 
 Hahnemann's dynamism, respecting which the opinions of 
 homoeopaths themselves are sufficiently known. 
 
 Page 56 : — The beneficial effects of blood-letting and 
 emetics, &c., are spoken of " I should like to know what 
 physician would not retire from practice if he were obliged 
 to renounce even the employment of purgatives." He then 
 exclaims : " I should like to ask whether the acknowledged 
 impossibility of foregoing the use of evacuating medicines 
 and bleeding is not the most convincing proof of the worth- 
 lessness of Hahnemann's doctrine in practical medicine ? " 
 
 Page 132 : — How on earth could the learned and renowned 
 Hahnemann fall into the error of promulgating such a doctrine, and 
 how could he be so audacious as to speak in such disparaging temis 
 of the physicians who lived 3000 years before him, and of his con- 
 temporaries ? 
 
 Wedekind was one of the most distinguished physicians 
 of his day, a disciple of Fr. Hoffmann, and a pupil and 
 friend of L. Hoffmann, the iatro-chemist. 
 
 Dr. Fr. Groos, Court Physician to the Grand Duke of 
 Baden, Ueber das JionidopatJiisclie Heilprincip. Heidelberg. 
 1825.
 
 true tJierapentic rule. 203 
 
 Page 24 : — Is there any other method of treating true inflamma- 
 tory fevers of such universal application, and yielding such good results 
 as Sydenham's antiphlogistic method ? where, therefore, the principle 
 C07jtraria contraj'iis leads to a radical cure. 
 
 Sydenham was, as is well known, a great advocate of 
 bleeding. 
 
 Groos strove to pronounce an impartial judgment : 
 The principles contraria contrariis and similia similibiis have each 
 
 their unqualified application, each in suitable cases will conduce to a 
 
 radical cure. 
 
 Page 36 : — Homoeopathy will become an extremely valuable and 
 
 integral part of medicine and will remain a treasure-house of noble 
 
 and original ideas. 
 
 But his beloved venesections, emetics and purgatives 
 formed a party-wall which separated him from Hahnemann, 
 as it did so many of his other opponents. 
 
 Mijckisch, Die Honwopatliie in Hirer Wiirde, &c. Vienna, 
 1826 : MiJckisch was director of the second Hospital for 
 Children's Diseases of Vienna. 
 
 Page i : — Medicine has incontestably made important progress 
 towai'ds perfection in the nineteenth century ; whereby with the 
 greatest possible certainty it protects the lives of generations and saves 
 them from premature death by the innumerable host of diseases. But 
 it has only attained this high position as a science of experience,, 
 moulded and regulated by rational criticism. 
 
 Page 41 : — The universal organic law of nature is contraria con- 
 trariis. 
 
 Page 53 : — Intimately conversant with children's diseases for 
 fifteen years I have treated a thousand such children with derivative 
 and revulsive remedies, or, in other cases, with purgatives and ene- 
 mata, or emetics, or blood-letting, or by re-establishing eruptions 
 which had been driven inwards by means of artificial cutaneous irri- 
 tants, and have almost always obtained a rapid and permanent cure. 
 
 Page 60 : — In cases of atony of the stomach and of the prinur 
 vice from quantitative indigestion, manifested by stomach-ache, head- 
 ache, spasms, oppression of breathing, vertigo, &c., should we not 
 give an emetic, which is the approved remedy for these sufferings ? 
 
 Page 72 : — Thousands and thousands of persons suffering from 
 inflammation of the lungs have been quickly and permanently cured 
 by blood-lettings in sufficient quantity and frequency, but we never 
 imagined that artificial bleeding and antiphlogistic agents of all kinds 
 cure in such cases by similarity of symptoms. Nature herself often 
 cures antipathically inflammation of the brain by spontaneous bleeding 
 from the nose and inflammations of the abdomen by metrorrhagia.
 
 204 Seignarc^ purgare, 
 
 ^ 
 
 Pages 93 and 94 :— We quarrel most with Hahnemann for his 
 neglect of purgatives and emetics, for we have regarded them as 
 accredited remedies in obstructions, gastric crudities, material hypo- 
 chondriases, and generally in accumulations of unassimilable matters 
 and such like, because when indicated our patients made speedy and 
 permanent recoveries through their employment. 
 
 Page 95 : — Time, which tries all doctrines, will show whether by 
 the general acceptance of homceopathy all purgatives and emetics may 
 be dispensed with, for hitherto they have proved the most indispen- 
 sable and salutary remedies in material diseases of the digestive 
 system caused by our modes of living. 
 
 Elias, Homoopathische Gurkennwnate. Halle, 1827: 
 
 Page 42 : — The fact that it allows patients suffering from inflam- 
 matory diseases to be suffocated in their blood is no very brilliant 
 proof of the harmlessness of homoeopathy. 
 
 Page 44 : — Homoeopathy is only innocuous in three out of a 
 hundred cases in which it is employed, i. Because, though the pre- 
 vailing morbid character may not be absolutely inflammatory but 
 either purely catarrhal, bilious, gastric, nervous or complicated, still 
 plenty of cases occur in which bleeding either general or local is in- 
 dispensable ; and some chronic diseases, particularly dropsies com- 
 bined with great weakness, in my experience and that of other phy- 
 sicians (and it is perhaps worth as much as that of the homoeopaths) 
 sometimes require general bleeding, and cannot be cured without it. 
 2. Because it ignores the periculum in mora. 3. For a hundred 
 other reasons. 
 
 Fischer, Dresden. Op. at. 1824. 
 
 Page 3 : — Complete ignoring of the aid afforded by Nature, of the 
 
 real essential important vis incdicatrix naturcE neglect of remedies 
 
 found to be valuable during thousands of years, e.g.., bleeding, which 
 no school, by whatever name it was called, could ever dispense with, 
 much less reject as useless, superfluous and injurious. 
 
 Pages 3 and 4 : — An impudent and inexcusable attempt to reject 
 to the injury of humanity as erroneous and false the therapeutics 
 which rests upon experience the edifice erected by the most dis- 
 tinguished thinkers of all ages and nations, which possesses an inestim- 
 able wealth of experience and can show the votive tablets of millions of 
 cured patients, could only be exchanged for a system that should earn 
 the undivided approbation of all adepts in the art — a system which we 
 could hardly expect to get from gods, never from men. 
 
 Page 10 : — It is exceedingly unlikely that homoeopathy can cer- 
 tainly and radically cure active inflammations without bleeding. 
 
 Page 31 : — Magistral formulas and mixtures devised by distin- 
 guished practitioners cannot be altered by conscientious medical men.
 
 clysteTutni donare. 205 
 
 Page 40 : — Only a cold-blooded wretch could see without indigna- 
 tion how Hahnemann has ridiculed and disparaged the old school of 
 medicine, and looked down with pride and contempt upon those 
 mighty spirits who have earned immortal honours for their services 
 to the art of preserving life. 
 
 Page 54 :— The depreciation and disparagement of a Hahnemann 
 and his confederates cannot rob us of the trophies we have won in 
 the treatment of acute and chronic diseases. 
 
 Page 76 : —Among the higher and more wealthy class of citizens 
 where the efforts of nature to cure are either too violent or too power- 
 less for obvious reasons homoeopathy seldom succeeds. 
 
 Page 80 : — It is obvious that the homoeopath, unless he secretly 
 employs allopathic methods, cannot cure certainly and radically those 
 inflammations which are called acute, phlogistic or sthenic. For in 
 these cases commensurate bleeding can alone obviate the excessive 
 reaction, the application of cold to the surface of the body alone can 
 reduce the temperature to the normal, and a sufficient quantity of 
 medicines containing oxygen alone can restore the disordered res- 
 piratory process, otherwise the disease will suddenly paralyse all the 
 functions like a narcotic poison, and hfe will go out in ardent heat ! 
 Anyone who, in cases like this, where the life hangs by a thread 
 and the great danger demands instant and copious abstraction of 
 blood, plays with the life of a fellow-creature by the culpable neglect 
 of what is essential, and in the spirit of Hahnemann employs neither 
 general nor local bleeding, nor the absolutely indispensable anti- 
 phlogistic method, has no claim to the name of a conscientious physi- 
 cian. 
 
 Page 81 : — The author can speak from personal experience ; more 
 than once his existence has depended solely upon an immediate em- 
 ployment of venesection, and he has experienced how every moment the 
 blood pressed more and more upon the central organs and increased 
 the danger to the highest degree ; after the commencement of the 
 venesection, and while the foaming blood was flowing, he at once felt 
 a return of bodily and mental vigour to its normal condition ! Only 
 those who have been in equal danger can realise how entirely at such 
 moments the life depends upon the lancet, and that no known agent 
 can replace venesection. Unfortunately cases are not wanting where 
 homoeopaths have unexpectedly lost their patients by their criminal 
 neglect of bleeding, or have been the cause of their becoming hope- 
 lessly paralysed. 
 
 Page 82 : — If the followers of Hahnemann boast that they have 
 
 sometimes cured cases of acute inflammation we are justified in 
 
 believing that they used deception and employed allopathic medi- 
 cines. 
 
 Page 84 : — And how disastrous are the results of the neglect of 
 bleeding ! if the patient is not at once killed, it is all the worse for
 
 2o6 HovuvopatJis are fools, 
 
 him, for he falls into a rapid or slow cachexia, which kills him in 
 an exceedingly painful manner — and in the face of this the homoeo- 
 pathic school pretend to dispense with bleeding ! they, forsooth, boldly 
 and impudently declare that they treat their patients, indifferent to 
 consequences, according to the caprice of a man whose sole delight is 
 in contradictions, who, untroubled by the evil he does, strives only to 
 act in direct opposition to the experience of looo years. 
 
 Woe to those who suffer from inflammation of the brain, liver, 
 lungs, spleen or stomach, from croup, pleurisy^, pericarditis, periton- 
 itis, enteritis, cystitis or metritis ! they will obtain no relief or even 
 alleviation from homceopaths ; it is in these cases that the homoeopath 
 as we have often observed) deceives the patient, and in the anxiety 
 of his heart resorts to allopathic treatment. 
 
 We are always deeply distressed when we are assured that inflam- 
 mation of the lungs has been rapidly and agreeably cured by a 
 homoeopath without recourse to bleeding ! In such cases we always 
 wish that it may be a false report, and that some good-natured person 
 has been persuaded to testify to it. 
 
 This amiable confession is indeed worthy of thanks, and 
 deserves to be noted. 
 
 Page 6i: — Homoeopathy must appear to every rational being to be 
 the excrement of a mind whose brain has suffered decomposition in 
 ihe living body. 
 
 We cannot here subjoin Hufeland's opinions, as ex- 
 pressed in his Journal in 1830, and in a separate treatise, 
 Die Homdopathie* published, in 1 831, by Reimer of Berlin, 
 without a feeling of sorrow at the unfortunate aberration 
 of a man who had spent a long life in disinterested labour 
 for the benefit of humanity. 
 
 Page 9 : — It may be permitted to an old man to look at things in 
 a light different from that in which they are regarded by eager j^outh. 
 One is placed in quite a peculiar position, when one has already 
 lived through several ages of human life in the domain of science 
 and witnessed so many meteors arise, dazzle and disappear ; so many 
 systems, each of which professed to be the sole true one, thoroughly 
 exploded. 
 
 Page 12 : — I made a declaration to this effect in the Journal 
 fiir praktisclie HcilkiDide in 1826 [known to the reader] : "Time will 
 show." 
 
 Page 22: — Among these are first the contraria conirariis No 
 
 one will deny that excess of blood can be removed by abstrac- 
 tion of blood. 
 
 Translated in B.J. of H., Vol. XVI., p. 177.
 
 criminals and uuirderers. 207 
 
 Page 30 : — But thereby the vital germ of inflammation is not dis- 
 troyed ; this blood-letting alone can effect. 
 
 Page 23 : — Who is there who has not witnessed the excellent 
 effect of purgatives of cutaneous irritants, of issues? the im- 
 mense experience of thousands of years. 
 
 Page 38 : — How I wish my feeble voice could be heard like 
 thunder ! What, as regards chronic, not dangerous cases, may l^e 
 a permitted, temporizing, indifferent, easily remedied treatment, in 
 such cases becomes a crime. He, who out of fanatical regard for his 
 mode of treatment, when life is at stake neglects to use the remedies 
 which a thousand years' experience has proved to be the best ; he 
 who, for example, omits blood-letting when the patient is in danger of 
 being suffocated in his own blood, in cases of pneumonia, apoplexy, 
 encephalitis and generally in inflammations of important oi'gans, and 
 death, or some chronic, incurable disease ensues — such a one has the 
 sin of blood-guiltiness on his conscience, which if he do not im- 
 mediately feel it, will some day weigh painfully upon him, when the 
 intoxication of fanaticism shall have passed away — such a man is 
 doomed by justice to punishment, if not by an earthly, yet certainly 
 by a higher ti'ibunal ; for he is a murderer by omission, just as 
 much as he who sees his neighbour in danger of drowning and refuses 
 to pull him out of the water. 
 
 Simon, 6". HaJineuiann, Pscudovicssias. Hamburg, 1830. 
 
 Page 140 : — So for example, there can be no doubt that, especially 
 in cases of hereditary predisposition to consumption, an occasional 
 venesection and issues on the arm are the best means of preventing 
 its development and of retarding its progress. Every experienced 
 practitioner has had in his own practice instances of this, and of such 
 a convincing character that none of the nonsense of the Organist [so 
 he calls Hahnemann] can upset or even shake it. 
 
 Page 297 : — If for instance, on rare occasions, a considerable 
 pneumonia recovers without venesection, that is a rai-a avis., nigra 
 siinillima cygno; for, as a rule, when an energetic antiphlogistic treat- 
 ment is omitted, the patient becomes consumptive or soon dies of 
 pulmonary apoplexy. 
 
 Simon, Geist der Honwopathie. Hamburg, 1833. 
 
 Page 25 : — We strive to moderate the congestion of important 
 organs, partly by diminishing the mass of blood, and partly by agents 
 which control the circulation and divert it from the implicated organs. 
 
 In Simon's Anti-Jionwopath. ArcJiiv (1835 Heft HI. p. 
 120) a physician says: "The reviewer would be afraid of 
 doing something very superfluous if he tried to demonstrate 
 the universally admitted advantages of bleeding, and the 
 methodus evacuans." Every number of this journal, \\hich
 
 2o8 Without shedding of blood 
 
 worthily represents the allopathic style of polemics, affords 
 similar instances of views expressed in the same tone. 
 
 This is Simon's opinion of Hahnemann's intellect : " He 
 is always the same unreliable ignoramus, both in medicine 
 and in science." * 
 
 An anonymous writer, Winider der Hovidopatliie. Leip- 
 ^^'g. 1833- 
 Page 60 : — True inflammation of the lungs cannot be cured with- 
 out venesection 
 
 Page 61 : — Homoeopathic swindlers and accoucheurs with their 
 confederates and accomplices. 
 
 Page 64 : — Nature has many ways and means of remedying 
 disorders of the organism, and the investigation of these ways and 
 their application in suitable cases is the task of medical science. 
 Nature relieves plethora of blood by haemorrhages ; the accumulation 
 of peccant matters in, and the overloading of, the alimentary canal she 
 
 relieves by spontaneous evacuations without the aid of art She 
 
 combats inflammation by suppuration and gangrene by inflammation. 
 
 Page 69 and 70 : — That chronic diseases often follow the suppres- 
 sion of itch was well known to all physicians, and Hahnemann need 
 not have transcribed 13 pages from the writings of others in order to 
 prove it, unless his love of lucre induced him to do this in order to 
 increase his honorarium. 
 
 Page i i i : — This is the weak side of homoeopathy ; it endangers 
 the recuperation of the- organs, the health and life itself by its neglect 
 of general and local blood-letting. 
 
 At the end of this work we read : " Let everyone now 
 draw his own conclusions as to which side truth lies on." 
 
 Dr. Zeroni, Hofrath of the Grand Duke of Baden, Ueber 
 Heilhuide, AlloopatJiie tuid HomdopatJiie. Mannheim, 1834. 
 
 Page 23 : — In this disease (scarlet fever) the greatest dangers can 
 be obviated by the employment of the well-known and approved 
 remedies of medicine, among which bleeding occupies the first place. 
 
 Pages 25 and 26 : — The author repeatedly speaks of the 
 necessity of blood-letting in scarlet fever. 
 
 Page 27 : — Unprejudiced observation shows that in dysentery all 
 the symptoms of the disordered bowels often disappear after vene- 
 section. 
 
 Page 31 : — One or more venesections are often necessary in 
 dysentery. 
 
 * Anti-hoiii. Archn\ I., H. 2, p. 25.
 
 tJiere is no Salvation. 209 
 
 Page 32 : — Venesection is often necessary in dysentery to save 
 life the homoeopath allows the patient to die. 
 
 Page 35 : — True inflammations, if left to themselves, end in death. 
 
 Page 36 : — In true inflammatory fever the patient will die if not bled 
 in time. 
 
 Page yj : — In inflammation of the lungs the patient cannot be saved 
 except by large and repeated blood-lettings. 
 
 Pages 39 and 40 : — I once saw suppuration and adhesion follow 
 
 pleurisy and blamed myself for not having taken enough blood I 
 
 advise homoeopaths to take particular pains to learn the diagnosis 
 of inflammation of the lungs and pleurae and especially of inflamma- 
 tory fever. 
 
 Pages 45 and 46 : — In my experience patients after recovery from 
 intermittent fever in our climate should not leave the house for at least 
 twenty days. [Hahnemann recommends as much fresh air as 
 possible.] — I have drawn attention to the importance of venesection, 
 purgatives and tonics. 
 
 Page 63 : — It may now be generally assumed that the homoeopaths 
 
 have not the smallest knowledge of true medicine the observations 
 
 of the most remarkable men of the day experience venesection. 
 
 Page 76 : — The homoeopath is not a physician ; he does not know 
 the means by which life may be saved. 
 
 Conclusion : Let us hope that good sense will some day triumph 
 over medical prejudices I 
 
 C. A. Eschenmayer, Professor in Tubingen. Die All'oo- 
 patJdc unci Honioopathie. Tiibingen, 1834. 
 
 Page 39 : — In cases of general orgasm, depleting agents, and 
 venesection must be quickly employed in order to control reaction. 
 
 There are material hindrances to the operation of the vital force, 
 
 such as accumulations of bile, mucus, lymph, worms and excrements, 
 which must be removed by emetics and purgatives. 
 
 Page 61 : — When the action of a pernicious irritation is dimin- 
 ished by bleeding, depleting agents and blisters, who would look for 
 a drug disease here ? 
 
 The author pronounces an objective judgment on homoeo- 
 pathy, and acknowledges many of its advantages. 
 
 Page 30 : — I agree with Hahnemann that a great reduction to sim- 
 pler principles is required, and particularly to such as have a practical 
 value, and that the whole array of hypotheses should be abandoned 
 to oblivion, &c. 
 
 Page yj : — How can the uncertainty with regard to the action of 
 drugs be removed ? Only by proving them on the healthy, and then 
 seeking for a principle by which they may be applied in disease. 
 Hahnemann adopted this plan and discovered the principle. Only in 
 
 14
 
 210 HomocopatJiy Jias its merits. 
 
 this way can we obtain specific medicines, and this is the goal for 
 which medicine should strive. 
 
 Page 47 : — As Newton was led to the discovery of the law of gravity 
 by the fall of an apple, so Hahnemann after a few experiments was led 
 to this thought : are not those drugs which produce certain condi- 
 tions in the healthy capable of curing the same symptoms in the sick ? 
 Many observations tended to confirm the truth of this thought, and 
 Hahnemann now undertook the great experiment with a perseverance 
 and intelligence from which we cannot withhold our admiration. 
 
 Page 100: — The homoeopathists, and chief among them their mas- 
 ter, confess that they are unable to explain how atoms of medicines 
 still display striking effects on the organism. Still such is truly the 
 case, and at least 400 physicians confirm it by their own experience. 
 Even Dr. Kopp, the unprejudiced critic of homoeopathy, is from his 
 own experience so convinced of the efficacy of the 30th dilution that 
 he is ready to testify to it on his oath. 
 
 Page 38 : — Homoeopathy is so thoroughly based on experience, that 
 to deny this betrays either ignorance, caprice, prejudice, indolence or 
 fear of the new system. 
 
 Page 134: — Homoeopathy was founded by a man who has the 
 fullest right to lead physicians on a new path. It has already formed 
 a school which contains many hundreds of worthy adherents, we 
 should therefore allow it full scope. 
 
 Pages 98 and 99: — Confesses that before Hahnemann 
 physicians neglected diet. 
 
 Prof. Dr. Riecke, also of Tubingen, gave an address on 
 September 27th, 1833, the birthday of the King, in which 
 he expresses the following views : * 
 
 In time homoeopaths will return to bleeding As homccopathy 
 
 now stands it is so replete with scientific contradictions, so full of 
 illogical conclusions, that it can have no future before it as a system. 
 It is nevertheless quite wrong to regard it as a phenonemon of no im- 
 portance. It has attacked allopathy on its weakest side, that is, its 
 materia medica, has drawn attention to the monstrous defects of our 
 
 medicine, and a total reform can no longer be postponed As yet 
 
 no university has taken any notice of homoeopaths. In Leipzic a private 
 hospital was established. The student must therefore study homoeo- 
 pathy in its literature, which embraces more than threehundred volumes 
 for and against, none of which will be found in the libraries of the 
 universities. No mere ephemeral sect has ever possessed such a 
 literature. 
 
 The homoeopathic physician must absolutely prepare his drugs him- 
 
 * Alii;. An::, d. Dcutscheu, 1834, p. 42SS.
 
 HoiiKTOpathy has no merits. 211 
 
 self, which considering their simpHcity is not difficult. As all homoeo- 
 pathic medicines have neither chemical reactions, colour, taste nor 
 smell, there are absolutely no conceivable means of assuring oneself 
 of their genuineness except by the physician preparing them him- 
 self. The preparation of his medicines by himself is therefore a 
 conditio sine qua non for the homoeopathic physician. 
 
 Prof. F. G. Gmelin (with Eschenmayer and Riecke the 
 third Tubingen Professor who wrote about homoeopathy 
 between 1834 and 1835) Kritik der Principien der Houwo- 
 patJiie. Tubingen, 1835. 
 
 Page 63 : — It is a well-known fact that a wound will not heal, takes 
 on a bad appearance and may become serious if round worms 
 are present in the intestinal canal. When the worms have been ex- 
 pelled it at once heals. StoU observed something similar during an 
 epidemic of biliary fever. Trifling wounds would not heal, excited 
 serious symptoms, but at once became benignant and healed when 
 the bile was evacuated by means of an emetic. 
 
 Page 64 : — Very few physiologists now-a-days deny that the blood 
 is living matter ; nevertheless an undue quantity of it is often a great 
 obstacle to its proper circulation and interferes with the free activity of 
 the vital force. 
 
 Page 92 : — In this way, for example, laxatives relieve headaches 
 and diuretics lung and heart affections. As the greatest danger to the 
 patient lies in the concentration of the morbid action in one organ, 
 its diffusion through several organs will be of material benefit in 
 serious cases. 
 
 Page 60 : — The old school can pride itself on having advanced to 
 such perfection in the knowledge and treatment of many serious 
 diseases, incurable as a rule when left to themselves, as, for instance, 
 important inflammations, particularly of the lungs and brain, acute 
 hydrocephalus, croup, general syphilis, &c., that it will certainly cure 
 the great majority of these. 
 
 Page 65 : — If the blood is excessive in quantity or consistence, the 
 circulation, and therefore lifeitself is in jeopardy, just as the mechanical 
 occlusion of the windpipe instantly kills even the strongest man. In 
 these cases spontaneous or artifical bleeding, as is well known, restores 
 to health an apparently dying man. Hahnemann entirely denies that 
 the blood is ever in excessive quantity. 
 
 Page 243 : — Homoeopathy denies the oldest and best recognised 
 maxims, e.g., the employment of bleeding in true inflammations, of 
 emetics where there is excessive quantity of bile. 
 
 Page 239 : — In all medical systems, however they may dift'er amongst 
 themselves, the necessity of blood-letting in true inflammations, and 
 of emetics in biliousness is recognised — homoeopathy is almost (?) the 
 only exception.
 
 212 Hahnemann a fool or a madman. 
 
 Prof. L. W. Sachs, director of the Dispensary at 
 Konigsberg. Die HomoopatJiie 7ind Herr Kopp^ Leipzig, 
 1834, says (page 4) that he had been asked by the BerHn 
 Society for Scientific Criticism to write a review of the 
 works of both sides. 
 
 Page 240: — P. Frank's remark concerning the therapeutics of in- 
 flammation of the lungs " vitas sors unica ex cuspide hceret lanceolas," 
 is the simple truth. 
 
 Page 245-247 : — Kopp recounts a case of speedy cure of pleurisy 
 without bleeding, under homoeopathic treatment. 
 
 Page 247 : — I repeat that the circumstances were not as related by 
 Herr Kopp, and that the facts of the case were not as he represents 
 them. 
 
 Such cures without bleeding could not be scientifically 
 explained, therefore they did not occur. 
 Judgment upon Hahnemann : 
 
 Page 61 : — As is always the case with limited intellects and 
 ignorant men, he has not here, and has never elsewhere, succeeded 
 in emancipating himself from the barren abstraction of his vain 
 speculations. 
 
 As he was previously acknowledged to be a man of ordinary 
 sense, he ought to be examined in reference to his morbid aberra- 
 tions in short he must be handed over to a sensible mad doctor, 
 
 (conclusion page 26.) 
 
 Hahnemann has always shown himself deficient in logical rea- 
 soning. 
 
 Hahnemann's article in Hufeland's Journal., Bd. 4 [the reader 
 knows it] shows his inability to fundamentally grasp a simple idea, 
 and pursue it consistently back and onwards ; and this article is the 
 best he ever wrote {ib. page 57). 
 
 Stieglitz* calls Prof. Sachs " a highly talented author." 
 Lockner, Die HomoopatJiie in iJit'er Nichtigkeit, 1835. 
 
 Page 34: — The homoeopath will not bleed as the numerous 
 
 wretched victims everywhere where conscientious homoeopaths are 
 allowed to pursue their course uninterrupted show. [This is an appeal 
 for interference by the State]. 
 
 Lesser, Die HomoopatJiie, Berlin, 1835. 
 
 To the doctor of medicine, who in the year 1935 shall be professor 
 of history in the medical faculty of Berlin, the author dedicates this 
 in the year 1835. 
 
 * Die HoinckpafJu'c, Hanover, 1835, p. 198.
 
 Hahnemann on Allopathy. 213 
 
 Page 34:— Rational medicine (this designation was first used 
 by Hufeland in \i\% Journal in 1828, in contradistinction to homoeo- 
 pathy) not in order to characterise homoeopathy as irrational, but 
 only to intimate that allopathy treats logically and homoeopathy by 
 analogy [a distinction which the homoeopaths energetically repudiated. 
 The homoeopath, Dr. Attomyr, held that for more than 100 years 
 the word "rational," as now used by allopaths, was derived from 
 rations, e.g., as one now speaks of large or small rations for horses ; 
 this made the allopaths very angry.] Rational medicine guides the 
 vis medicatrix, and seizes the reins of unintelligent nature when 
 it sees her wandering from the road and causing disaster. 
 
 Page 144: — In order to prove that homeopathy neglects 
 rational treatment the well-known passage of Hufeland is 
 quoted : " He who neglects bleeding when life is at stake 
 
 when the patient is in danger of being suffocated in 
 
 his own blood, and death occurs, has the sin of blood- 
 guiltiness on his conscience deserves punishment by the 
 
 law is a murderer by omission," &c. 
 
 After the author has communicated some statistics 
 referring to his own military hospital, which "prove" that 
 bleeding is indispensable, he proceeds to quote Hahnemann's 
 own words,* to show his utter futility : 
 
 It is incomprehensible how the allopaths can consider it a great 
 sin if, in inflammatory diseases, e.g.., pleurisy and pneumonia, blood 
 be not drawn off and that repeatedly and in large quantity. But if 
 this is an efficacious sort of method, how can they reconcile it with 
 the fact that of all who die in a year, a sixth part of the whole num- 
 ber dies under them of inflammatory affections, as their own statistics 
 prove ? not one twelfth of them would have died had they not fallen 
 into such sanguinary hands [this agrees strikingly with the subse- 
 quent statistics of the Vienna experiments], had they but been left to 
 nature, and kept aloof from that old pernicious art. Hundreds and 
 thousands more die miserably every year, the most promising youths 
 of the country, in the flower of their age — of wasting, consumption 
 and ulceration of the lungs. You have their deaths on your con- 
 science ! for is there one among you who has not laid the seeds 
 for it by your fine mode of treatment, by your senseless blood-lettings 
 and your antiphlogistic appliances in a previous inflammation of 
 the lungs, which must thereby inevitably turn into pulmonary con- 
 sumption and prove fatal ? This irrational antipathic, barbarous 
 mode of treating pneumonia, by numerous venesections, leeches, 
 and debilitating remedies (called by you antiphlogistics) yearly 
 
 * Allopathy. See Lesser Writings, p. 830.
 
 214 Prophecies of the dire effects of 
 
 sends thousands to the grave by fever from deprivation of the 
 forces, dropsy and ulceration of the lungs ! Truly an excellent 
 privileged mode of quietly destroying wholesale the very flower of 
 mankind. 
 
 After the lapse of fifty years, the professor will agree 
 with us that Lesser could have hit upon no more unfortunate 
 plan of demonstrating the utter futility of Hahnemann's 
 doctrines than that of contrasting Hufeland's and Hahne- 
 mann's expressed opinions. 
 
 Page 175, the house physician prescribes venesection " the 
 old lady," neglects his advice and consults a homoeopath ; 
 naturally she subsequently died of apoplexy " in the first 
 year of her homoeopathic career." 
 
 This is apparently the same lady mentioned in an article 
 by Griesselich in the AUgemeine Jiomoopath. Zeitg* 
 
 The report disseminated by South German Journals, that homoeo- 
 pathy is to be prohibited throughout the whole of Prussia in con- 
 sequence of an unfortunate case that occurred in Berlin, turns out 
 from information given by Stiiler to be false. The death of an old 
 lady who had long been treated with all manner of stimulants and 
 counter-irritants, who was treated first by Hofrath Recher, and then 
 after much persuasion by Stiiler, and who suffered from asthma, after- 
 wards complicated by a paralytic stroke, for which the world would 
 have wished to see her bled, probably gave rise to this report, which 
 Avas received with much jubilation by the physicians here [Karlsruhe]. 
 
 Page 182 :— Lesser continues : I know that there are acute diseases 
 
 in which bleeding must be resorted to as soon as possible and that 
 
 very copiously in order to save life I also know that, in many cases, 
 
 if it is postponed for ten or twelve hours, nothing can repair its 
 neglect ; I know that occasionally large venesections, of 30 to 40 
 ounces {i-iyi pounds) are of the greatest service, and that in many 
 cases such repeated bleedings may be necessary. I know, &c., &c. 
 
 Page 184 : — When once the facetious Attomyr's youthful blood 
 shall cease to effervesce so much, a less amount of vapour will be 
 generated in his brain-pan, and when he then comes to his senses he 
 will have recourse to blood-letting. 
 
 Page 188: — Many an inflammation passes into mortification 
 especially when treated by a homoeopath. Such unfavourable results 
 ensue because either no blood is drawn, or bleeding is not practised with 
 
 sufficient vigour or sufficiently early Inflammatory diseases are no 
 
 doubt not always followed immediately by death, but death often ensues 
 
 * Vol. III., p. 40, 1883.
 
 discarding Phlebotomy. 215 
 
 slowly by adhesions, exudations, thickenings, contractions, indurations, 
 obstructions, ulcerations, and other sequelae of the inflammatoiy 
 disease. All these evils would be avoided, and many tedious suffer- 
 ings and dyscrasias prevented, if the homoeopath would only bleed. 
 
 Pages 191, 218, 227, 234, and 243, contain similar state- 
 ments about bleeding, which will not be without interest 
 for the professor of the year 1935. 
 
 Page 34 Note : — Lesser shows that he agrees with 
 Simon in regarding Hahnemann as " a gross ignoramus in 
 medicine and in science." 
 
 In 1836, Professor Most,* in his article HovwopatJiie, 
 
 quotes Hufeland's words: "Voice of thunder crime 
 
 murderers the law should take cognisance of it 
 
 " and adds : "Thus Hufeland. May his warnings be 
 
 taken to heart by every physician." 
 
 Up till the year 1840, seldom did an anti-homoeopathic 
 work appear which did not violently reproach homoeo- 
 pathy for its rejection of blood-letting, &c. We will spare 
 the reader the perusal of extracts from all of them. We 
 shall only cite a few more authors to show the kind of 
 medical arguments with which they sought to crush 
 Hahnemann. 
 
 Hofrath and Leibmedicus Holscher, of Hanover, speaks 
 in 1840,1 of "the tooth of time which is eating away 
 homoeopathy," thinks that homoeopaths will return to 
 bleeding, and thereupon makes the following observa- 
 tion : " It is a copsoling fact in the history of medicine 
 that it gives us so many proofs that we cannot be deprived 
 of really useful salutary measures, either by juggling or 
 quackery, or the efforts of isolated imposters or their dupes." 
 
 Another author, whom we must trouble the reader with, 
 is Dr. Leopold von Windish, first physician of the Royal 
 Free-town Pesth, Director of the town hospital of St. Roch, 
 &c., &c. Schmidt's y«/^r^«c//^r, 1836. Vol. 9, p. 224: 
 
 The frequently occurring acute rheumatic fevers and inflammations 
 of the chest require antiphlogistic treatment often in the same 
 
 * Encyclopddie der Medicin, 2nd edit., Leipzig, 1S36, p. 1045. 
 t Hanttover'sche Annalen fiir die gcsammtc Heilkzindc, Bd. V., p. 
 865.
 
 2i6 Hoinceopaths all rogues and liars. 
 
 patient at short intervals, eight or more copious venesections must be 
 performed [the interpretation of the word " copious '' is left to the imag- 
 ination] The cruoris always covered by a thick and tough coat 
 
 [this was the scientific proof of the necessity of bleeding] We 
 
 should not be chary of bleeding, for we have seen such patients, 
 treated according to such fallacious and mischievous doctrines 
 [homoeopathy to wit] without blood-letting, die a frightful death from 
 suffocation [the author carefully omits reference to any particular case]. 
 
 Verily I should despise myself, if I could be so lost to shame as 
 that I should communicate to the medical world fictitious cases invented 
 by myself and not observed at the bedside ; particularly in our days 
 when, owing to the unhappy schism introduced by homoeopathy into 
 medicine, not only every rational practitioner, who when it is required 
 bleeds his patients, is denounced, but also, owing to the various opinions 
 caused thereby among physicians as well as laymen of all degrees, dis- 
 putes, quarrels, enmities and even persecutions are excited, and a war to 
 the knife declared ; all of which would never have occurred had not the 
 founder of homceopathy pretended to have obtained the mastery over 
 nature, into whose secrets no created being has penetrated, to mould 
 its eternal laws, which are unknown to him as to all mortals, accord- 
 ing to his fancy to mislead so many educated and uneducated 
 
 people by sophistry, falsehood and cunning. 
 
 Can anything more dangerous or irrational be conceived than what 
 
 homoeopathy teaches concerning bleeding.'' which condemns the 
 
 physician who, in sthenic inflammations of the parenchyma and pleura 
 of the lungs, and at a time when only a thin partition divides life from 
 death, can only save the patient by the lancet ? — which confidently 
 maintains that these diseases can be cured with greater certainty and 
 rapidity by its remedies without recourse to the murderous fleam. I 
 do not know which to admire most in this homoeopathic doctrine, its 
 
 founder's ignorance or his presumption As long as I do not 
 
 myself see these wonderful homoeopathic cures, I shall continue to dis- 
 believe them, the more so as I have seen in our hospital several cases 
 of inflammation of the lungs treated homceopathically, that is to say, 
 without bleeding, perish miserably. 
 
 Further on the author gives full rein to his rancorous 
 hatred of homoeopathy. He is really very angry with it. 
 
 I cannot help thinking that these cases were not real pneumo- 
 nias but merely trifling rheumatic affections easily relieved by rest in 
 bed, warmth, restricted diet, &c. ; the laity, and especially sensitive 
 ladies, have been too ready to accept them for genuine coin, of course 
 not to the disadvantage of the homoeopaths. The insignificant cough 
 accompanied by pain in the side or external muscles of the chest yields 
 
 to the warmth of bed and the administered homoeopathic powder 
 
 without venesection, without leeches or blisters, in short, without any
 
 The sangtiiiiary reign of Broiissais. 217 
 
 of the allopathic impedimenta ; naturally it is thought wonderful, gold 
 and praise are lavished upon the practitioner, who laughs in his sleeve 
 and congratulates himself on his skill in hoodwinking the patient. 
 
 What did the homoeopaths say to all this? They de- 
 fended their views in innumerable works — they demanded 
 an opportunity of displaying their superior results in the 
 hospitals. In vain ! " You are charlatans, impostors, and 
 swindlers ! " was the answer they got. " Experiments have 
 been tried in Russia and lots of other places, and their 
 results have been unfavourable to you. Your ignorant 
 presumption knows no bounds. The State should proceed 
 against this medical demi-monde who stifle their con- 
 sciences in the purse." This is the sort of language with 
 which homoeopaths were met in allopathic literature. 
 
 The same contest raged in America, England, Italy and 
 France. Broussais reigned in France. Opposed to this 
 rational Parisian professor, were the rational German 
 professors, who, however, know how to bleed — innocent 
 midges ! Most diseases were supposed to depend upon 
 " gastro-enteritis," which must be treated by blood-letting, 
 as if the blood in the patient's body were the most viru- 
 lent poison. The results were horrible: In the year 1838, 
 Broussais treated by his method 219 cases of inflammation 
 of the lungs in his hospital; of these 137 died, i.e., more 
 than 62 per cent. ; the remainder recovered slowly, and 
 had serious subsequent diseases* — nevertheless everything 
 was done scientifically. 
 
 The homoeopaths were never weary of protesting against 
 the folly of bleeding and excited in the minds of the pub- 
 lic more and more disinclination to submit to it, and the 
 allopaths complained bitterly of this. Here and there an 
 allopath appeared as an opponent of bleeding ; among 
 these Krliger-Hansen was conspicuous. The expressed 
 opinions of such authors were carefully collected by the 
 
 * Gaz. mc'd. de Paris., 1S39, Vol. V., p. 173.
 
 2i8 All sense and li'orth on 
 
 homceopaths, and disseminated as confirming the sound- 
 ness of their practice. 
 
 The poHtical and literary papers were dominated as now- 
 a-days by the allopathic majority, and were used by them to 
 inculcate the doctrine that everything coming from the 
 mouths of homoeopaths was to be disbelieved. They were 
 all charlatans, swindlers, impostors or dupes, and Hahne- 
 mann was the devil himself. How could truth come from 
 the mouths of such people ? The most distinguished phy- 
 sicians, the professors, the Hof- and Geheimraths, the 
 Royal physicians, all the Universities, the Municipal au- 
 thorities, the State itself, in short, with few exceptions, 
 " all the intelligence, learning, integrity, worth and honesty 
 of the world " were on the other side. The trade in leeches 
 was carried on wholesale, these animals were bought and 
 sold in hundreds of thousands, in millions ; in Paris at the 
 time of Broussais there was a regular leech exchange. 
 Germany possessed a valuable export trade in leeches to 
 England and France,* where all the universities and 
 learned corporations were in favour of bleeding. In the 
 preceding centuries van Helmont (i 577-1644), Sylvius 
 (1614-1672), Bordeu (1721-1771) inveighed against exces- 
 sive bleeding. Bontekoe (1647-1685) also entirely rejected 
 venesection. He preferred diluting the rebellious blood, 
 and for this purpose recommended Chinese tea, which was 
 at that time a rarity. Fifty or more cups were to be taken 
 daily ; the East Indian Company should out of gratitude 
 have voted him a handsome sum of money for this. 
 Latterl}-, Brown and his followers tried to mitigate the 
 medical thirst for blood. Nevertheless, the " scientific " 
 treatment always kept the upper hand. 
 
 Common sense was in favour of bleeding. Bleeding 
 from the nose relieves congestion of the head, the relief 
 is felt at once ; and so it is with other bleedings. Is this 
 not a very important hint to us from nature ? Must not 
 the physician follow the way indicated by nature ? And 
 what will become of medicine if we do not hold by what 
 
 * Hufeland's/fJ//;-;/., 1826, St. 3, p. 59.
 
 tJie side of Allopathy. 219 
 
 we see with our eyes and understand with our reason ? 
 What changes does blood undergo in inflammatory diseases ? 
 It has become morbid from excess of albumen ; the fibrin 
 is morbidly increased in quantity. It is the fibrin which 
 obstructs the finer vessels and retards the circulation and 
 produces consolidation and ultimately suppuration. Rational 
 therapeutics imperatively requires the diminution of the 
 morbid albumen and of the pathological fibrin ; this is treat- 
 ment of the cause. 
 
 What is the condition of the lung after death in a case of 
 pneumonia ? It is gorged with blood. What is the condi- 
 tion of the heart ? It is full of thick, dark-coloured blood. 
 The blood overloads the organs, and the patient is suffocated 
 in his blood. The organs must be disembarrassed. These 
 are the simple but true laws of science. Medicine, however, 
 must be tried by its results, says the professor, experience 
 at the bedside must support the deduction if it is not to 
 remain an empty theory. The professor, therefore, takes his 
 audience to the bedside and opens a vein ; the patient experi- 
 ences a momentary sense of relief. The proof of the correct- 
 ness of the theory is thus afforded, it is evident and clear. 
 The evil after-effects are not considered ; the subsequent 
 course of the disease, especially if it be unsatisfactory and 
 not in accordance with the theory, is not seen by the clinical 
 professor, it is left to his assistants. 
 
 Even as late as the 5th decade of this century the 
 " scientific " bleeding practice was still flourishing. Skoda 
 and Dietl, of Vienna, were considered first rate clinical 
 teachers. Skoda was still a rational bleeder. In the year 
 1842,* he treated in the hospital at Vienna fifty-nine pneu- 
 monias, of which sixteen died, though " free venesection 
 usually gave relief." Gradually a few voices made them- 
 selves heard throwing doubt on the indispensableness of 
 bleeding, and these voices increased in number every year 
 not Vv^ithout meeting with " rational " and violent opposition. 
 Dietl was one of the most decided opponents of venesection. 
 
 * Oesier. vied. Wochenschrift^ 1845, No. 3. YAwtxl, Beitrag zu den 
 Riickschritten^ (Sic, Bremen, 1S40, p. 24.
 
 220 Explosion of dyiianiite in 
 
 He,* indeed, maintains that tartrate of antimony had upset 
 the beHef in bleeding. But there are plenty of proofs that 
 homcEopathy was this tartar emetic to the allopaths. He 
 confesses that he was first led by homoeopathy to aban- 
 don bleeding in pneumonia, but that he afterwards gave 
 up homoeopathy. He does not say what homoeopathic 
 remedies he gave, so that we cannot criticise his treatment. 
 It was, however, according to Dietl, a fact that for some 
 years past the prejudice of the public in favour of bleeding 
 began to decline, " a circumstance partly attributable to the 
 influence of homoeopathy and partly to the spirit of the age." 
 It can, however, be proved that " the spirit of the age " 
 in this matter was determined by homoeopathy. Between 
 the years 1842 and 1846 Dietl treated 380 individuals in 
 the Vienna Wieden Hospital for inflammation of the lungs, 
 85 of these by venesection, 106 with large doses of tartar 
 emetic, and 189 by dietetic means. Of those treated by 
 
 Venesection. Tartar Emetic. Diet. 
 
 Recovered ... 68 ... 84 ... 175 
 
 Died ... 17 ... 22 ... 14 
 
 Mortality ... 207, ... 2077, - 7°/o 
 
 Therefore, in round numbers, 20 per cent, died under 
 rational treatment ; without rational treatment, 7 per cent. 
 As homoeopathy admittedly did no harm, the mortality 
 under rational treatment exceeded that under homoeo- 
 pathy by 13 per cent. As a matter of fact, the results 
 of homoeopathic treatment were much more favourable 
 than those of dietetic treatment. We are not adducing 
 these statistics in proof of the superiority of homoeopathy, 
 but to show that according to them the results of homoeo- 
 pathy must have surpassed those of allopathy. 
 
 These statistics were only furnished by a single indi- 
 vidual, but we quote them because they agree with those 
 subsequently obtained. Richterf even maintains that the 
 allopathic treatment of that day gave a mortality of 25 per 
 
 * Der Aderlass, Vienna, 1849. 
 
 t Der Einjluss der Cellularpathologic, Berlin, 1863, p. 6.
 
 tJie allopathic fo)'t7'ess, 22 r 
 
 cent., while that of expectant treatment was only 7 per 
 cent. Be this as it may, it is certain that the allopaths did 
 a great deal of harm, while homoeopaths had an immense 
 superiority in the results they obtained. This is in inflam- 
 mation of the lungs alone. Think of the number of other 
 inflammatory diseases, " gastric fever," typhus, measles, 
 scarlet fever, small-pox, dysentery, cholera, &c., in which 
 lifelong injury to health often resulted from bleeding. 
 What misery have the allopaths brought upon the human 
 beings who trusted themselves to them ! but we must 
 not blame them for that. They, no doubt, honestly en- 
 deavoured to perfect medical science. But the reproach 
 will always remain at their door that, at a time when the 
 better way was made known, they through pride and 
 indolence refused to inquire into it. 
 
 In 1849 Dietl published his results, which excited the 
 greatest attention among the homoeopaths ; he was violently 
 attacked for his opinions by the allopaths, and he collected 
 and published a great number of new observations* which 
 fully confirmed his first results. But the allopaths would 
 not allow themselves to be so quickly weaned from their 
 dear old habits. As late as 1850, venesection is recom- 
 mended in cholera without a word of disapproval by the 
 editor of Schmidt's /(^/^r^//V//^r; t in 185 1 venesection is re- 
 commended in " all the stages of consumption " X and in 
 1854 it is spoken of as a "sovereign remedy in cholera."§ 
 In i860, in the treatment of scarlet fever, we are recom- 
 mended as a first measure to administer an emetic, then a 
 purgative, and finally, as a third " prime remedy," vene- 
 section. || The year 18671! shows that in inflammation of 
 the lungs free venesection was still employed, and even in 
 the present day many allopaths still hanker after venesection, 
 though now-a-days the majority occupy the same position 
 
 * Schm\dt' s Jahrbiicher, Vol. LXXVL, p. 30. 
 
 t Vol. LXVI.. p. 251. 
 
 % lb., Vol. LXXII., p. 347. 
 
 § lb., Vol. LXXXIV., p. 113. 
 
 II /^., Vol. CVIII., p. 209. 
 
 IT lb., Vol. CXXXV., p. 354.
 
 222 TJie strong arm of the laiv will 
 
 with regard to this disputed point as was occupied seventy 
 years ago by the homoeopaths, to the great advantage of 
 those who trusted to them. 
 
 But the weight of blame which these " rational " physi- 
 cians incurred, with the best intentions and in the firm con- 
 viction that they were doing right, is only in part represented 
 under the head of bleeding. This "rational" medicine has 
 further caused not a little mischief by the administration to 
 the sick body of large quantities of powerful drugs which 
 have often added a worse artificial disease to the natural 
 malady already existing. 
 
 In order to continue the history of the opposition to ho- 
 moeopathy, we must refer back to the year 1829. We here 
 meet with the criminal action brought against a homoeo- 
 pathic physician. Dr. Trinks;* an account of which, founded 
 on the legal documents, was given by Moritz Mliller, for 
 whom even his bitter antagonist in Hufeland's Journal, 
 Prof. Wedekind,t acknowledged his high esteem. 
 
 A woman named Kampfe, twenty years old, fell ill with 
 typhoid fever in 1829, for w^hich she was treated during 
 four days by Dr. Trinks, a homoeopathic physician of Dres- 
 den ; after the lapse of that time she was removed to 
 an allopathic hospital, where she died after four days of 
 treatment. The hospital physician was Dr. Schrag. On 
 the assertion of some laymen that the homoeopathic pow- 
 ders had disagreed with the patient, and because she 
 was violently delirious when received into the hospital, an 
 accusation of poisoning and mala praxis was founded. 
 The following points were ordered to be inquired into in 
 the municipal doctor's official report : — 
 
 Whether the necessary evacuating medicines for the correction 
 and removal of morbid bile were given in sutificiently large doses .'' 
 
 * Archivf. d. horn. Heilk., Vol. VIII., H. 3. 
 t 1828, Vol. LXVI., St. 6, p. 21.
 
 put dozvn the pestilent heresy. 223 
 
 Whether antiphlogistic measures, such as venesection or leeches, 
 and if so, how many, were employed at the proper time ? 
 
 Whether the disease, treated according to Hahnemann's method 
 Avas thereby neglected and aggravated to a fatal degree ; whether 
 poisons were given in a homoeopathic form. The last was denied by 
 the official chemist, after analysis of the intestines. 
 
 After receiving the history of the case and its treatment 
 from the homoeopathic physician, the following report was 
 given : — 
 
 The homoeopathic treatment had not paid attention to the essential 
 nature of the malady. The nature of the disease, according to the 
 opinion of the municipal doctor founded on the report of the post- 
 mortem examination, was an accumulation of corrosive bile with in- 
 durated faeces and violent enteritis. The materies morbi was overlooked 
 and had acted prejudicially on the whole body. Rational and expe- 
 rienced physicians in all ages always appreciated the importance of 
 fever and febrile matter. If derivative, antigastric, antiphlogistic and 
 cooling treatment, together with the removal of the saburra biliosa 
 from the intestinal canal and bleeding at the proper time had been 
 employed, relief would have been given and the patient's life would 
 have been saved. 
 
 In conclusion, this official report called homoeopathy a 
 " mystic absurdity " and a " disgrace to the medical history 
 of our times," which should be put down (of course 
 with assistance from the State), for people's lives were at 
 stake, and the homceopaths rejected with scorn the " ex- 
 perience of the greatest physicians of all ages " (in respect 
 to bleeding, emetics and purgatives). 
 
 We therefore consider it our duty to signify the same, and to append 
 our names and seals — Dr. Erdmann, Amtsphysictis, Gonne, A/ntsc/irr- 
 icrgus. . 
 
 The Stadtphysicus, Dr. Kuhn, of Dresden, cross-examined 
 the accused, Dr. Trinks, on October 5, 1829, as to why he 
 had not employed leeches, cooling and " mildly resolvent," 
 antiphlogistic and purgative remedies. 
 
 Why, seeing that the menses were checked, did you neglect [we must 
 not forget that the case was one of typhoid] the employment of the re- 
 medies which have been sanctioned by the experience of so many — t'.;,'., 
 derivatives, foot and half-baths, vapour baths into the vagina [the post- 
 mortem showed that she was a virgo intacta], frictions on the abdomen, 
 sacrum and inner surface of the thighs, mustard and vesicant plasters, 
 dry cupping and leeches to the same parts or to the cahes and hypo-
 
 224 If at first yo2L don't succeed^ 
 
 gastrium, besides internal remedies such as borax, melissa, fixed air,. 
 saffron, myrrh, the natural balsams, aloes, helleborus niger, and even 
 sabina ? [the victim is to be congratulated, even though she is in her 
 grave, that ' science ' was not let loose upon her.] 
 
 In further examination the enquirer showed some anxiety 
 to know why the homoeopathic practitioner had not em- 
 ployed general and local bleedings, cooling, " mildly re- 
 solvent " and "purgative remedies?" 
 
 Unfortunately, the answers of the accused are not com- 
 municated, about which a man like Trinks would have no 
 difficulty, but M. Muller has made some very appropriate 
 observations in the article referred to. 
 
 The result of the trial will be found in the Archivfiir Jiom. 
 Heilhinst!* From this we see that the Juridical Faculty of 
 Leipzic pronounced that it was not clear that Dr. Trinks 
 was to blame for his medical treatment of Kampfe, and 
 that " the defendant and the two prosectors and reporters, 
 Dr. Erdmann and Surgeon Gonne, should each pay a third 
 of the costs." The law authorities based their verdict on the 
 previous report of the Medical Faculty of Leipzic, in which 
 the following declaration is made : — 
 
 Finally, the aforesaid municipal physician and municipal surgeon, 
 have, unmindful that in a judicial report all attacks on opponents must 
 be eschewed, attacked Hahnemann and homoeopathic physicians in a 
 manner unbecoming educated medical men though, fortunately, not 
 capable of inducing medical judges to swerve from the path of abso- 
 lute impartiality. 
 
 This dispute had not been settled before the Dresden 
 homoeopaths were subjected to a second trial. The allopaths 
 have also given an account of this trial. There are two 
 publications about it. One is by a homoeopath, and is 
 called, Znr GescliicJite der HonwopatJiie, by Dr. Moritz 
 Miiller.f The other, by an allopath, is entitled, Der HaJinc- 
 manniancr als GcsdncJitscJircibcr iind Critiker, by Dr. Fr. J. 
 Siebenhaar, of Dresden.^ Anyone wishing to know how 
 the contest was carried on on both sides should not neglect 
 
 * Vol. X., H. I, p. 2—4. t Arch.f. horn. Heilk. X., H. i. 
 
 X Leipzig, W, Neuck, 1831.
 
 then try, try, tij again. 
 
 225 
 
 to read the reports of the trial. In both works interesting 
 illustrations are given in reference to the previous affair. 
 
 The allopath, Dr. Siebenhaar, was called on the 21st of 
 July, 1829, to see the master shoemaker Leischke, whose 
 physician he had been for several years. The patient was 
 54 >-ears old. It was found that Leischke had " suffered 
 from cough for a long time before this attack." On the 
 above-mentioned day Dr. Siebenhaar found, according to 
 his account, inflammation of the lung with a thickly coated 
 tongue, loss of appetite, and severe vomiting of mucus and 
 bile. Prescription: venesection to 8 or 10 ounces of blood, 
 and a mixture of sal ammoniac, senna, melag. graminis, a 
 spoonful every two hours. Some hours afterwards the 
 " spitting of blood and retching were little altered," and 
 there was profuse perspiration. The next day he was worse. 
 Prescription: local blood-letting, to which however the 
 patient would not submit. He wanted homoeopathic assist- 
 ance. His medical attendant in vain tried to dissuade 
 him from it, and finally declared that he would continue to 
 attend in spite of the homoeopathic treatment, but first 
 prescribed a powder containing sulphur, saltpetre and 
 cream of tartar in equal parts, a teaspoonful to be taken 
 every hour. In the afternoon the homoeopathic physician. 
 Dr. Trinks, was sent for; he being prevented through busi- 
 ness from attending himself, sent his assistant Surgeon 
 Lehmann. Lehmann gave his report of Leischke's state to 
 Trinks at eleven o'clock at night when he returned from his 
 visit, whereupon Trinks, who was still occupied with the 
 first trial, resigned the case and sent word to this effect to 
 Leischke at 8.45 next morning. Lehmann had ordered all 
 allopathic medicines to be left off, but had purposely pre- 
 scribed nothing himself 
 
 The patient was now obliged to have recourse to the 
 homoeopath. Dr. Wolf As Wolf was not at home his wife 
 sent the Surgeon Helwig to the patient. Helwig, though 
 according to the law of that time, not allowed to treat 
 internal maladies, nevertheless gave aconite, and later 
 bryonia, though it was illegal for the medical attendant to 
 dispense his own medicines. He expected that Wolf 
 
 15
 
 226 Glorious trmvipJi over 
 
 would continue the treatment. But the sword of Dannocles 
 of judicial prosecution for neglect of bleeding and other 
 " scientific " measures, was always suspended over the 
 heads of the homoeopaths. Wolf, therefore, after hearing 
 Helwig's report, declined to take the case. Helwig, there- 
 upon, begged the allopath Siebenhaar to continue his treat- 
 ment, and this he "finally consented" to do, "but without 
 being able to effect anything, for the unfortunate patient 
 died just about that time," on 24th July, the fourth day of 
 his illness. The above facts are admitted by both sides. 
 
 Siebenhaar now, as he himself narrates, consulted his 
 colleagues as to what course he should pursue, and the 
 Stadtphysicus, Dr. Kuhn, already spoken of in connex- 
 ion with the previous trial, took proceedings against the 
 homoeopaths, but the judicial authorities did not consider 
 " that a legal post-mortem examination was necessary, I 
 therefore had to content myself with a private autopsy on 
 the afternoon of July 26, in the presence of Drs. Kuhn, 
 Schrag [both of whom took part in the first trial,] and 
 Leonhardi." We must here remark that Helwig in vain 
 demanded to be allowed to be present. The private post- 
 mortem showed " one lung engorged with blood," which 
 ^' was adherent in several places, especially on the left side, 
 to the chest walls." " The left lung was besides partially 
 hepatised in various places, and at some points mortifica- 
 tion had set in." 
 
 " The conclusion drawn from this post-mortem could 
 naturally be no other than that Leischke had died from 
 the effects of violent inflammation of the lungs ending in 
 gangrene." We must here remind our readers that homoeo- 
 pathy was, at that time, reproached with causing gangrene 
 of the inflamed parts by the neglect of bleeding. The 
 judicial proceedings against homoeopathy were commenced 
 and the documents were sent to the Court of Judicature of 
 Leipzic, and this Court, after receiving a report from the 
 Medical Faculty, condemned Drs. Trinks and Wolf to a 
 fine for neglecting a summons for medical help, and Helwig 
 to imprisonment for four weeks for treating without a li- 
 cense and for illegal dispensing, Lehmann to six months
 
 ilie homceopatJiic viisci'eants. 227 
 
 imprisonment with hard labour, because " the patient, when 
 Lehmann visited him, was in a condition requiring instant 
 medical treatment as with every moment his life became 
 more jeopardised," "and the violent inflammation took 
 on a fatal character from the postponement of the requisite 
 treatment till next morning." 
 
 Lehmann therefore acted with culpable negligence. 
 Lehmann was the person who told the patient suffering 
 from vomiting of mucus and bile to leave off the allopathic 
 medicine (a mixture of sulphur, saltpetre and cream of 
 tartar, according to the statement of the allopath him- 
 self, a teaspoonful every hour), and to do nothing in the 
 meantime. " Lehmann, as he was not himself qualified to 
 treat medically, should have sent for a properly qualified 
 physician. He should have communicated Dr. Trinks' 
 decision not to treat the patient some hours sooner." 
 
 The accused appealed, and the Juridical Faculty of Leipzic 
 was empowered to pronounce judgment. This court ac- 
 quitted all except Helwig, who was obliged to undergo his 
 four weeks' imprisonment.* 
 
 It is interesting to read the report of the Medical Faculty 
 of Leipzic. It pronounced : " That in such cases sudden 
 death or relapse into slow consumption could only be 
 
 * Our own criminal jurisprudence can show a case that will match 
 these two processes in German law courts. In September, 1849, our 
 late colleague, Dr. C. T. Pearce, was consigned to Newgate on the 
 verdict of a coroner's jury, which found him guilty of the manslaughter 
 of his brother, Mr. R. D. Pearce, whom he attended during an attack 
 of cholera for a few days, until he himself was laid up with the same 
 disease, when the case was handed over to an allopathic surgeon 
 under whose care Mr. R. D. Pearce died. To get them to pass this 
 monstrous verdict the jury had to be harangued and brow-beaten for 
 two hours and a half by the deputy-coroner, Mr. M. Wakley, who 
 presided in the place of his father, Mr. T. Wakley, who combined in 
 his person the shghtly incongruous functions of Coroner for Middle- 
 sex and Editor and Proprietor of The Lancet (the organ of rampant 
 allopathy, called after the phlebotomizing instrument now, happily, 
 rendered obsolete by homceopathy). Though only " Crowner's quest 
 law," this infamous sentence was hailed as a splendid triumph over 
 homceopathy by all the organs of the dominant clique. See Brit. 
 Jour, of Hom.^ VIII., p. 70. — [Ed.J
 
 228 ^^ Blood is their Argtimeiit." 
 
 obviated by repeated venesections." " That in such inflam- 
 mations bleeding must be practised once, twice, or even 
 three times." Siebenhaar complains of the judgment of 
 the Juridical Faculty of Leipzic, because the interposition of 
 the homoeopaths took from him the opportunity of employ- 
 ing efficacious treatment, (page 35) " Leischke's resolution 
 to be treated homoeopathically prevented me from em- 
 ploying the other indicated remedies — namely, repeated 
 blood-letting and epispastics." 
 
 On page 22, Siebenhaar writes : — 
 
 Daily experience is too conclusive in favour of bleeding We 
 
 must consider the actual facts of the case ; the patient died suffocated 
 in his own blood, as in spite of the bleeding already performed, the 
 post-mortem examination showed the lung gorged with blood and 
 in parts gangrenous, and the liver was also found to be congested 
 with blood, and it can only be supposed that the physician (Dr. Miil- 
 ler), who said that a further venesection would be superfluous or even 
 injurious, must have been making a bad joke. When the latter (Dr. 
 Miiller) in support of his position, promulgated the proposition " that 
 the allopaths do not know and will not learn that homoeopathic treat- 
 ment can supersede bleeding with its consequent weakness and slow 
 recovery of the patient ;" this shows the incredible infatuation of 
 Dr. Miiller in believing Trinks' fables* on the one hand, and his aston- 
 ishing impudence in presuming to persuade rational physicians of this 
 on the other hand. For none but a credulous visionary can believe 
 that such inflammatory diseases can be cured by Hahnemann's me- 
 thod, in spite of the many examples recorded in various periodicals by 
 the deceivers. 
 
 Siebenhaar continues, page 24: — 
 
 This point is emphasized the further it is pursued, and the law 
 should take cognizance of the neglect of bleeding in other well- 
 inarked diseases, such as sanguineous apoplexy, encephalitis, enter- 
 ritis, &c. 
 
 The further consideration of these medico-forensic matters would 
 however occupy me too long, and I will now content myself with the 
 quotation of our respected colleague Staatsrath Hufeland's remark in 
 his masterly treatise Die HomoopatJiie^ published in the Journal der 
 practisclicn Heilkiindc, 1830, page 24 [the reader already knows it.] 
 " He who neglects bleeding where life is at stake and death is the 
 result, has the sin of blood-guiltiness on his conscience, which will 
 
 weigh terribly upon him he should be punished by law he is a 
 
 murderer by omission." 
 
 * Sec Scjidsclircibcn an Hnfcland^ p. 30.
 
 The retort co7irteous. 229 
 
 Hahnemann saw and heard the behaviour of the allo- 
 paths. He had left the refutation of his opponents to his 
 adherents. These events took place in the years 1829 and 
 1830. In 183 1 a book by him : Die Alloopathic, cin Wort 
 der Warmuig* appeared. This work may be regarded as 
 an answer to these fanatical attacks. In 1830 appeared 
 Hufeland's well-known article containing the expressions: 
 " voice of thunder " — " murderers " — " punishment by the 
 law," &c., which was cited with approval by many, Hahne- 
 mann's patience tried by the long conflict seemed to be now 
 completely exhausted. Not we, he says, but yoit are the 
 murderers of the patients. " This irrational antipathic and 
 barbarous treatment, with its repeated bleedings, leeches 
 and depleting medicines, brings thousands every year to 
 their grave." " Truly ! an excellent, privileged method to 
 put the flower of mankind quietly out of the way wholesale. 
 Are we to call this a rational method of healing ? Treat- 
 ment of the cause?" 
 
 Probably with reference to the criminal prosecutions, 
 he advises his adherents " not to receive at any price those 
 patients who have been injured to the verge of incurability 
 by the allopathic exterminatory art." We must realise the 
 " stand-point of science " of that time, and the attitude 
 assumed by it, in order to be able to understand these 
 words. 
 
 First let the patients be again restored by these titled destroyers 
 of health to the former state of natural disease they were in before 
 these medical attacks upon their lives were perpetrated — if they are 
 able to do it ! Allopaths deserve for their determined adhesion to their 
 antiquated homicidal treatment nothing but contempt and abhorrence, 
 and impartial history will brand their names with a stigma on account 
 of their scornful rejection of the real aid which they might have 
 afforded to their much-to-be-pitied patients, had they not impiously 
 closed their eyes and ears against beneficent truth ! 
 
 Hornburg was one of Hahnemann's pupils in Leipzic. 
 He had passed the examination for the bachelor's degree, 
 and had visited the hospitals for a year. He occasionally 
 treated patients in the town homoeopathically, and this 
 
 * Hahnemann's Lesser IVtitings^ p. 827.
 
 230 A viciwi to allopatJiic spite. 
 
 drew down upon him the hostility of the doctors. Also 
 the fact of his attending Hahnemann's lectures gave offence 
 to the professors. He took every opportunity to openly and 
 courageously oppose the old system. He was an intelli- 
 gent, thoroughly well-educated man, and highly enthusiastic 
 on behalf of homoeopathy. Probably many a patient re- 
 covered under his treatment who had been brought to 
 death's door by the murderous treatment of the Leipzic 
 doctors and professors. He was denounced on every pos- 
 sible occasion, and punished sometimes by fines and some- 
 times by imprisonment. His homoeopathic medicine chest 
 was confiscated by command of the Dean of the University, 
 and was buried by the beadle in the burial ground of 
 St. Paul's Church. 
 
 Notwithstanding this he studied diligently, and according 
 to the testimony of his contemporaries, was a man of great 
 medical knowledge (on which account he was much valued 
 by Hahnemann), but he was nevertheless twice rejected by 
 the professors in his examinations. He went to Giessen, 
 from which, however, he was turned away, and had no 
 better fortune at Marburg. Having returned to Leipzic he 
 practised there with great success, but was often involved 
 in judicial processes, the excitement of which gradually 
 shattered his health. The greatest distress was brought 
 upon him by the issue of a criminal investigation in which 
 he was involved in the year 1831, on account of his treat- 
 ment of a woman who was suffering from a very violent 
 pleurisy. The woman did not, however, die under his treat- 
 ment, but only after she had been treated for nine days 
 by Professor and Hofrath Clarus, who himself denounced 
 Hornburg, and insisted on the investigation being dragged 
 on through two years. The anxiety he went through 
 during this time had a very injurious effect on his bodily 
 health. He was attacked with chronic disease of the lungs, 
 which, in the spring of 1833, was followed by influenza. 
 In the summer his condition had improved considerably ; 
 he then received his sentence of two months' imprisonment 
 for unlicensed practice, and for preventing the employment
 
 An unexpected rebuff. 231 
 
 of scientific treatment in a case which terminated fatally. 
 He was three days after this attacked by repeated haemop- 
 tysis, and was buried some months later. A great number of 
 the inhabitants of Leipzic escorted his body to the grave.* 
 
 In the year 1843, the homoeopath, Dr. Baumgarten, of 
 Magdeburg, undertook the treatment of a servant maid, 
 seventeen years old, named Christiana Knoll. She had 
 been ill for fourteen days and was in a hopeless condition. 
 She suffered from exudative inflammation of the pleura 
 and pericardium. Her pallid appearance, the blueish grey 
 colour of her lips and nose, the shortness of her breath, the 
 immobility of the thorax and the abdominal respiration, 
 finally, her total lack of appetite led Baumgarten to form 
 an unfavourable prognosis. Three days later the fatal 
 result followed. A judicial post-mortem examination was 
 instituted, and it was found that the patient had died 
 from exudative inflammation of the pleura and pericardium. 
 The municipal physician declared that death apparently 
 resulted from want of proper treatment. Remedies against 
 inflammation, such as blood-letting, saltpetre, mercury, 
 tartar emetic, should have been employed. The Medical 
 College of the province of Saxony when asked for their 
 opinion held that such illnesses were fatal even under 
 judicious treatment. With regard to the question of 
 medical treatment they could say nothing more than that 
 they, and with them all those doctors who from time 
 immemorial practised the recognised ordinary methods 
 of treatment, would have treated the patient differently and 
 according to the method laid down by the medical men 
 who made the post-mortem examination. But, as they 
 knew the State allowed homoeopathic treatment, they could 
 not enter upon a criticism of it. 
 
 The scientific Faculty of Medicine of Berlin did not 
 agree with this judgment : 
 
 Because the experience of centuries had shown that acute inflam- 
 mation of the pleura, the lungs, the heart and the pericardium could 
 only be removed by a certain indispensable mode of treatment. 
 
 * Allg. horn. Zeitimg, Vol. IV., p. 75, and Archiv f. d. horn. Hcilk.
 
 232 TJie poivcr of the State on the 
 
 The treatment pursued for centuries was blood-letting, mercury, tar- 
 tar emetic, saltpetre, emetics and aperients. Homoeopathic treatment 
 could not replace this efficacious mode of treatment. If our medi- 
 cal examining bodies are obliged very properly to reject every young 
 doctor who holds therapeutic views like those of Dr. Baumgarten,* 
 the tolerance shown by the Medical College in this unfortunate case 
 cannot be justified. If only for the sake of example, it would be wise 
 to call upon Dr. Baumgarten to justify himself from the charges 
 brought against him by the medical men who made the autopsy. 
 
 Dr. Baumgarten was also called upon by the Royal 
 Government in Magdeburg to justify his practice, which he 
 very soon did and in a most satisfactory manner.f 
 
 These few examples, to which many might be added, 
 must suffice to show how the allopaths used the power 
 of the State under their control in this important contest. 
 
 The question of the harmfulness of the allopathic, or as 
 they called it, " rational " " anti-inflammatory " treatment of 
 that day has been finally decided, and that too by the 
 " rational " physicians of to-day, against the " rational " 
 treatment of that time. It is now a matter of history that 
 the allopathic treatment attacked by the homoeopaths has 
 been condemned by the modern representatives of allo- 
 pathy. With regard to this weighty question, history teaches 
 us as follows : — 
 
 * The conduct of the German Examining Bodies in rejecting candi- 
 dates suspected of homoeopathic proclivities has been paralleled in 
 more than one instance by our own Medical Faculties. The Faculty 
 of the University of Edinburgh in 185 1 rejected Mr. A. C. Pope, 
 because he would not bind himself never to practise homoeopathically. 
 The Faculty of St. Andrews made a futile request to Dr. Hale to 
 return the diploma he had recently acquired by examination, because 
 it (the Faculty consisted of one inan, Dr. Day) had discoveixd that he 
 was practising homoeopathically. The Faculty of Aberdeen refused to 
 allow Mr. Harvey to complete his examinations until he should make 
 a declaration that " he had not practised, and did not entertain any in- 
 tention of practising professionally on other principles than those taught 
 and sanctioned in this and other legally recognised schools of medicine." 
 As Mr. Harvey believed in the truth of Hahnemann's therapeutic rule, 
 he refused to make any such declaration, so the Faculty refused to com- 
 plete his examinations for its degree. The Medical Act, 1S58, fortunately 
 deprived British examining bodies of the power to practise such iniquities 
 in the future. See Brit. Jour. 0/ Horn., IX., 513, 609, XVI., 529.— [Ed.] 
 
 t Attg. horn. Ztg., Vol. XXIV., p. 321.
 
 side of the AllopatJis. 233 
 
 That medical school whose treatment was in most cases 
 Tnore dangerous than the disease, and which did so much mis- 
 chief among all classes of citizens, was then armed with the 
 power of the State, it enjoyed unbounded confidence and 
 was supported by the State in its campaign against the 
 hated homoeopathy. The State lent its authority and its 
 arm to those against whom it ought to have shielded the 
 public and oppressed that party which effected much 
 more favourable results. 
 
 An idea can be formed of the character of the personal 
 intercourse between allopaths and homoeopaths from the 
 preceding. Trinks wrote in 1830, Die HouwopatJiie, Send- 
 scJireiben an Hiif eland (Dresden, 1830), which discusses 
 Hufeland's expressed opinion on homoeopathy : 
 
 Hufeland had declared : " Liberty of thought, freedom 
 for science is our principal palladium ; no kind of despot- 
 ism — no autocracy, no forcing of conscience." 
 
 Trinks remarks on this (p. 6, &c.) 
 
 But what penalties did not the allopaths attempt to enforce against 
 homoeopathy, its founder and its adherents ? They had then, and 
 still have, to bear the despotism of the medical caste spirit, the iron 
 pressure of the most abominable intolerance. I will give you a sketch 
 of this sad state of affairs, which you can never witness, because you 
 live far from the arena first entered by homoeopathy. The founder of 
 homoeopathy, a venerable old man, then living at Leipzic, was ridi- 
 culed and scorned by physicians, lampooned in satirical poems and 
 assailed by every calumny that could throw discredit on his personal 
 character. His disciples and audience, all who approached him to 
 become better acquainted with the system of treatment discovered 
 by him, met with the same fate, the most undeserved contempt ; they 
 were, as it were, excluded from the caste of doctors as the Pariahs 
 by the Hindoos. Even this did not suffice, they were persecuted in 
 every possible way, and hmdered in the prosecution of their career. 
 At last the intrigues to drive away the founder of homoeopathy were 
 crowned with success, and a universal shout of joy for their victory 
 burst from his enemies. Hahnemann's oldest admirer and disciple, 
 Stapf, of Naumburg, met with the same fate. He, too, was scorned 
 and ridiculed in every possible way like his master, and lived for 
 many years as one under a ban among his professional brethren. 
 
 Moritz Miiller, of Leipzic, respected by all alike as a man and a phy-
 
 234 Persecuting fury of tiie old school. 
 
 sician, suftered a like fate, after having publicly spoken in favour of 
 homceopathy. Many doctors who had previously been friendly with 
 him now avoided his society, and broke off all connexion with him, 
 not to mention other unpleasantnesses which he had to suffer. I my- 
 self have experienced the oppression of this medical despotism in the 
 highest degree. For two years I have been exposed to all manner of 
 persecutions which could be devised by refined malice, slander, and 
 malignant envy. 
 
 It is certainly difficult in the midst of these persecutions to preserve 
 one's faith in mankind ; it is still more difficult not to refuse one's 
 esteem to a clique who, in their blind hatred, do not hesitate to assail 
 the reputation of honourable and upright men, and who leave nothing 
 untried to destroy what is man's most dearly cherished possession. 
 
 And all this befel the founder of homoeopathy and its adherents for 
 the simple reason that they treated diseases on different principles, 
 and because they cured patients who had been left uncured by the 
 practitioners of the allopathic school. 
 
 Amidst all these unpleasantnesses heaped upon us, we find comfort 
 in the consciousness that we are suffering and striving for a cause 
 which is a blessing to humanity, and which will extend its beneficent 
 influence still further when these persecutions have ceased and the 
 practice of this mode of treatment has been freed from the fetters 
 which the despotism of intolerance has laid upon it ; and, then too, the 
 time will have come when the outside world will no longer look upon 
 homceopathy as a dangerous chimera, and its adherents as dangerous 
 day dreamers, when it will recognise that humanity must bless us 
 for it. 
 
 I would not on any account possess the reputation of the opponents 
 of homoeopathy, the reputation of having caused the most ruthless 
 persecutions of their fellow-creatures, because they thought and acted 
 differently from the teachings of Galenic dogmatism. 
 
 History, which is always a just and impartial judge, will some day 
 write the story of those who sinned so grievously against tfie new sys- 
 tem, against ,its founder, its adherents and its friends. This epoch 
 will form a chapter in the history of medicine similar to that formed 
 in the world's history by the religious fanaticism of Louis XIV. 
 
 Innumerable proofs of the persecuting fury of the allo- 
 paths are to be found hi homoeopathic writings — we call it 
 " persecuting fury," for what other term can describe the 
 conduct of those who, because they were incensed at the 
 spread of homoeopathy sought to throw infamous imputa- 
 tions on the personal character of the homoeopaths, and 
 even attacked their families in their blind fanaticism ? 
 Bulky volumes might be written on these unworthy allo- 
 pathic attacks. 
 
 1
 
 TJie cJiolera approaches. 235 
 
 But everywhere the very significant fact is patent that the 
 violence of the strife was in proportion to the spread of 
 homoeopathy. So that after the cholera epidemic, in which 
 the adherents of Hahnemann obtained such immensely 
 superior results to those of the rational school, it attained 
 a height which has never been surpassed to the present 
 day. We must transport ourselves to that time to under- 
 stand the actual condition of affairs. 
 
 In July, 1 83 1, the fear is expressed in Hufeland's Journal 
 that cholera, which had reached our borders through the 
 Russo-Polish war, might cross them, and doctors rummaged 
 their armoury for weapons with which to attack this mur- 
 derous enemy — " stronger remedies than those hitherto 
 used." Such were aurum muriaticum, oxygen gas, char- 
 coal, quinine, as "cholera very closely resembles intermit- 
 tent fever;" then, too, there were the absorbents — "to absorb 
 the poison out of the primce vice]' " the absorbents are 
 coming into favour." 01. cajeputi, oil to be taken inter- 
 nally, &c. People read with terror that " in the corpses 
 of those who died of cholera, vessels gorged with blood 
 were to be found in the right ventricle of the heart and the 
 vena cava, also in the lungs, the liver, &c." We say they 
 read " with terror," for where blood was thus found con- 
 gested in the corpses, on scientific principles the patients 
 must be bled during life. But " science " could surely 
 hardly go so far as to bleed in cases of cholera. In 
 the same place it was said : " The blood is black and 
 as thick as tar, contains little serum, and at last becomes 
 like pap. Icy coldness of the whole body, even of the 
 tongue, supervenes : " it was rather to be expected that 
 blood should be added than taken away. 
 
 Doubt did not last long on this point, for soon after the 
 notices from Russia appeared, we read : "A vein is at once and 
 without any delay to be opened, and as much blood taken 
 from the patient as seems suitable to his condition." " This 
 remedy was considered to be indicated in nearly all cases."
 
 236 To meet the cholera, the allopaths 
 
 As an internal remedy calomel, combined with opium, was 
 to be administered. A second article appeared " from the 
 pen of an intelligent physician," Blood-letting, leeches, 
 cupping and mustard plasters are the chief remedies 
 recommended, and blood-letting is literally the first and the 
 last remedy mentioned in this article. 
 
 In the following number, further suggestions as to the 
 remedies for cholera are made. The first is " emetics," and 
 Hufeland says, " the proposal is worthy of consideration." 
 Let us put ourselves in Hahnemann's position, witnessing 
 all these preparations. A Dr. Mayer (an allopath) of 
 Berlin thus expresses himself: — 
 
 In spite of the many opponents of Hahnemann's preventive of 
 scarlet fever I find that not only men such as Berndt, Diisterweg 
 Formey, Bloch, Schenk, etc.,* uphold it, but I have (though this may 
 not be very important in the eyes of others) myself experienced the 
 benefit of it on various occasions in my practice of ten years. Dr. 
 Riittel found lately in the case of an epidemic of scarlet fever that 
 belladonna in the proportion of four grains to an ounce of water, 
 where the danger was still distant, and the remedy had been taken 
 for twelve to fourteen days, was a perfect prophylactic. But where 
 the infection was close at hand and even in the house, scarlet fever 
 broke out while the medicine was being^ taken, but in a much milder 
 form. 
 
 Though I cannot explain to myself the favourable influence of 
 belladonna in scarlet fever, I entertain the hope that it may prove a 
 preventive in the case of cholera by allaying the irrication of the 
 plexus Solaris present in that disease. 
 
 " Heaven preserve me from my friends," may well have 
 been the exclamation of Hahnemann if he saw this pro- 
 posal. 
 
 Others recommended opium, the prohibition of all drink, 
 " which was a dreadful measure considering the unbearable 
 thirst present" — zinc, bismuth, musk with camphor, ipe- 
 cacuanha, valerian, sal volatile, hartshorn, natron carbon., 
 
 * All allopaths, to whom the names of Hufeland and Prof. Masius, 
 of Rostock, and others should be added. Comp. Hufeland's_/£'///7?<i/, 
 1812, St, 5, p. 120 ; 1814, St. 5, p. 44 ; 1815, St. I, p. 123 ; 1820, St. 2, 
 p. 3 — 24, where the successful results obtained by many allopaths are 
 ■collected ; 1820, St. 2, p. 3 — 14 ; 1823, St, 4, p. 3 — 17 ; 1831, St. 2, p. 
 108 ; 1832, St. 3, p. 109 ; 1S35, ^t- 6, p. 24.
 
 notJihicr do but meditate on bloody 
 
 237 
 
 menth. piperit., arnica, Colombo, cascarilla with naphtha 
 and opium, tinct. aromatica, calam. arom., cold douches and 
 always leeches and emetics, and cinchona " on account of 
 its resemblance to intermittent fever." 
 
 While these preparations were being made the cholera 
 had already crossed the borders of our fatherland, and the 
 doctors commenced business. The Professors undertook 
 to lead, the allopathic doctors obeyed as usual. Let us 
 then see what was taught by one such leader, Professor Dr. 
 Moritz Hasper, of the Leipzic Faculty of Medicine, in 
 Hufeland's Journal, Sept., 1831. After admitting that in 
 no disease have remedies so opposite been proposed and 
 used, he writes : — 
 
 It is clear that in almost all countries cholera patients but very 
 rarely recover without the aid of medicine [he adduces the testi- 
 mony of seven doctors for this. Then follows a scientiiic account of 
 the pathology of cholera]. The thick black condition of the blood 
 in all the venous system, the congestion of blood in almost all the 
 internal organs — the brain, lungs, liver ; further the suppression of 
 cutaneous perspiration, and the stoppage of the flow of bile, show 
 that the flow of blood from the outer parts of the body has been 
 forced to the inner organs, and has disturbed the functions of these 
 organs. By the clogging of the blood in the heart its action is 
 paralysed, by the engorgement of black blood in the brain, the symp- 
 toms of stupor, deafness, giddiness, buzzing in the ears and dilata- 
 tion of the pupils observed during the disease are to be explained ; 
 for Brodie and Bichat have proved by observation and experiment 
 that such a condition of the blood hinders the functions of the brain 
 like a narcotic poison. These stagnations of the blood always cor- 
 respond to the violence of the symptoms. The stagnation of the 
 blood in the lungs explains the feeling of anxiety and the shortness of 
 breath. Where suffocation is the cause of death, blood is always 
 found accumulated in the lungs ; so, too, the inhaling of charcoal 
 fumes produces similar symptoms, and like the gases in mines brings 
 
 about a rapidly fatal result If we go a step farther and compare 
 
 the action of other poisons on our organism we shall obtain a great 
 deal of light on the subject of cholera. 
 
 The experiments of Fontana with snake poison, of 
 Majendic and Delille with upas poison are given in detail, 
 the experiments of Brodie and others are mentioned in 
 order to show "that most poisons and contagia first pass 
 through the blood and from thence produce disturbances in
 
 238 " Here's the smell of blood stills 
 
 the nervous system." After further statements on the af- 
 finities of certain contagia for special organs, as for example 
 cholera poison for the mucous membrane of the stomach 
 and bowels, he declares cholera to be a disease communi- 
 cable through the air, by human beings and by fomites, 
 which produces decomposition of the blood, " of which the 
 cruor and fibrine or the black carbonaceous blood accumu- 
 lates in the internal organs, injures the nervous system, 
 l^roduces cramps, «&:c., and also secretions from the mucous 
 membrane of the stomach and bowels, and thence diarrhoea 
 and vomiting." 
 
 The method of cure to be pursued is clearly indicated : 
 I. — Removal of the congestion of the internal organs, and 
 2. — The morbid matter accumulated in the bowels is to be re- 
 moved or rendered innocuous. 
 
 The first indication is fulfilled by practising, at the commencement 
 of the disease before the pulse at the wrist has ceased beating, copious 
 bleedings, applying irritants to the skin and giving stimulating reme- 
 dies. The second indication is fulfilled by giving calomel, castor oil, 
 emetics, absorbents and acids. 
 
 The conclusion is " that as a general principle blood- 
 letting, together with the external and internal application 
 of stimulating remedies, form the first and principal reme- 
 dies," 
 
 A long list of remedies " against individual symptoms " 
 is then recommended, to satisfy the requirements of 
 ■" science." 
 
 F. Hoffmann, Vater, Sauvages and others are quoted as 
 vouchers for the usefulness of bleeding ; about sixty authors 
 and several great medical societies of that time are adduced 
 in support of these scientific therapeutics. They all agree 
 that blood-letting at the beginning is the most sovereign 
 remedy. 
 
 We will not detain the reader with a detailed account of 
 the medical treatment of cholera ; it is a highly unexhi- 
 larating subject, which however requires to be touched upon 
 to make the situation clear. We will only quote just a few 
 sentences as specimens from this " rational " treatise. 
 
 This case is one of those where, with Lichtenstadt, we cannot refrain 
 from observing that, with repeated bleeding, the patient might, per- 
 haps, have recovered
 
 " SiicJi a)i enmity luitJi blood of vten." 239 
 
 In this woman (case 26 — she died), hardly a teacupfull of thick, 
 viscid clotted blood could be drawn. Why was not another vein 
 opened ? 
 
 Herr von Loder of Moscow rejects bleeding in this disease : — 
 {a) Because it is not of an inflammatory nature. 
 (/-') Because blood-letting is weakening. 
 
 One can hardly believe that such reasons should be regarded as 
 sufficient by so respected a man. Do we not bleed in cases of con- 
 gestion of certain important organs, in asphyxia, &c., states where 
 there is no inflammation ? 
 
 Still more remarkable is the second ground alleged — viz. : that 
 bleeding weakens the vital force. On the contrary, bleeding may even 
 have a strengthening effect, as is shown, not only in cases of inflam- 
 mation of the more important organs where the whole body is as it 
 were paralysed, in inflammation of the heart, inflammation of the lungs, 
 croup, &c., but also generally in the case in cholera, and this is con- 
 firmed by the opinions of the best practitioners who have observed 
 and treated cholera, as also by the testimony of the patients after the 
 bleeding has been performed. 
 
 Hasper states: "That nearly all medical men who have 
 had opportunities of observing cholera, or what is more im- 
 portant, have taken the trouble to compare the results of 
 different methods of treatment, will agree with us in this." 
 And here he is undoubtedly right. More than 300 cholera 
 pamphlets appeared at that dreadful time, and a great many 
 of them were by professors. No pamphlet by a professor 
 is known which protests against bleeding in cholera. " If," 
 says Professor Hasper, "the mass of blood is diminished, 
 the heart is in a condition to contract again, oxydisation or 
 decarbonisation of the blood, and this is still more im- 
 portant, can be resumed, so that arterial, oxydised blood 
 can be conducted to other organs." This was scientific, and 
 no homoeopathic scoffer with his " unscientific impudence," 
 as they called it, could attack the position. 
 
 Small bleedings do not appear to be of any use, and this is the 
 reason why many practitioners, who, for fear of weakening the patient, 
 only ventured to draw 6, 8 or 10 ounces, brought bleeding into discredit, 
 and declared it to be useless. A large opening must be made in the 
 vein, in order that the blood may flow out in a free stream, if the 
 patient is to be really relieved. 
 
 " Bleed freely " is repeated in at least ten places in this 
 truly scientific pamphlet, which is adorned with all the
 
 240 " Drunk with innocent blood" 
 
 medical learning of the time. " Leeches," " bleeding," the 
 words meet the reader on every page ; even the applica- 
 tion of a red-hot iron to the stomach is recommended. 
 
 What were the results ? According to Professor Hasper 
 they were everywhere favourable where the bleeding was 
 sufficiently copious. But as this advice was almost every- 
 where followed by the allopaths, the v.-hole result ought to 
 have been a favourable one, and this hardly agrees with the 
 fact that, according to Hufeland's Journal and others, more 
 than half the cholera patients died. 
 
 Hasper gives the following statistics: 1,294 cholera 
 patients who had no medical aid all died; of 14,651 cases 
 which had the advantage of medical treatment only 6| per 
 cent. died. 
 
 Of other 1,507 cholera patients, who remained without 
 medical treatment, 1,255 died. This last collection were 
 more fortunate than the former 1,294 who perished root 
 and branch without exception. From this then it is evident 
 that the homoeopaths with their " nothings," could see onl}- 
 corpses as a result of their treatment of cholera. 
 
 An account with authentic proofs by lOO doctors declared 
 that blood-letting, i.e., copious blood-letting, is the best 
 means of cutting short and curing cholera. Scott said that 
 " the occurrence of syncope during bleeding in cholera is a 
 favourable sign." " Collapse is not the result of loss of 
 blood, but it is, on the contrary, put an end to by it ; it is 
 apt to occur if a small quantity of blood only is drawn." 
 
 And such stuff was believed. It must be so — it was 
 proved scientifically. On p. 38, it is asserted that the 
 " black blood (as it is found in cholera) acts like a narcotic 
 poison." Therefore the larger the quantity of the narcotic 
 poison removed, the freer must the body be from it. And 
 the addle-headed homoeopaths could not see that. 
 
 Corbyn is one of the first who used bleeding in cases of cholera 
 with favourable results. Of no patients he only lost two old decrepit 
 - persons. Annesley did not lose one among fifty patients, because he 
 practised bleeding at an early stage. 
 
 Annesley himself gives us information which hardly
 
 Bleeding the specific for Cholera. 241 
 
 agrees with these statistics of Hasper.* He says that 
 the treatment of cholera hitherto pursued filled him with 
 horror, and therefore he resolved to follow the indications 
 of nature. He then gives the results of his treatment of 
 thirteen cholera patients. In the first case the patient had 
 been bled three times without any improvement before he 
 was placed in Annesley's hands. Annesley opened his 
 veins a fourth time, but no blood came and the patient 
 died. In the second case again bleeding was followed by 
 death. In this way twelve patients were treated, and all 
 twelve were dissected, for they all died. The thirteenth 
 patient, an officer, would not consent to be bled. Annesley 
 declined all responsibility for the patient, and he got better 
 in spite of science and the indications of nature. And 
 Annesley ? He calmly continued to bleed, and had plenty 
 of opportunities of performing post-mortems. Hasper 
 continues : — 
 
 Boyd lost only two patients out of twenty-eight when he bled freely. 
 Burrel only lost two patients out of eighty-eight, who were all copiously 
 bled ; Craw, with the same treatment, only lost one out of 100. 
 Dempster confirms this treatment by similar results. Gravier says 
 that bleeding may have a favourable result even when all the signs 
 of approaching death have appeared, when the limbs are cold and the 
 
 oppression is great At a later period Gravier recommends only 
 
 leeches. Colledge states that all died who were not bled, and all 
 recovered who were. 
 
 And so on through many pages. Incidentally less favour- 
 able results appear, but even these are made to bear out the 
 case for bleeding. The sources from which he derived his 
 information are unfortunately not given by the Professor. 
 As, therefore, these accounts are too one-sided for us to be 
 able to have any confidence in the statements when con- 
 tradicted by well-authenticated facts, we must turn to 
 another author. We choose Kriiger-Hansen ; he did not 
 like Hahnemann, but was also no friend of " rational " 
 medicine. He wrote a book Die Homoopathie imd Allopatlne 
 atif der Wage, and in it is described the ordinary treatment 
 
 * On the Asiatic Cholera, from Observations and Autopsies, trans- 
 lated by G. Himly, 1831. Rosenberg, Fortschritte tend Leistungen der 
 Honwopatliie, Leipzic, 1843, p. 221. 
 
 16
 
 342 Allopathic critics of Allopathic 
 
 of cholera to which he was strongly opposed. The following 
 description is taken chiefly from this book: — 
 
 Really it is the turn of the homoeopaths to laugh when we consider 
 that the allopaths sought the seat of the disease now in the spinal 
 cord, now in the nervous system, in the blood, the skin, the bile, or the 
 bowels. One looked upon it as an intermittent fever, others regarded 
 it as a kind of typhus, epilepsy, colic, dysentery, intestinal exanthem, &ic. 
 Some thought that parasites, called cholcrills^ were the cause of the 
 epidemic ; Hahnemann was of this opinion. Rothamel gave the most 
 exact definition : Cholera is a composite disease often of dynamic, 
 generally of asthenic, seldom of hypersthenic and hardly ever of an 
 active, nature.* Those who thought the disease was caused by a poison 
 proceeded energetically to destroy it, or at least remove it from the 
 body. For this purpose, patients were made to inhale suffocating 
 chlorine, were bathed in lime water, were dosed with emetics, &c. Those 
 who sought for the source of the poison in the blood, or who thought 
 that the bowels were inflamed, bled, and this was the almost universal 
 treatment. Mercury, too, was largely used. Others treated only 
 symptomatically ; if the body was cold and stiff, frictions, vapour 
 baths, hot drinks and hot water bottles were employed ; wrapping 
 up the patient in horse dung and the warin skins of newly flayed 
 animals was even recommended ; if the patient was attacked with 
 sickness, mercury was administered to cause stools ; if the patient was 
 purging, but not vomiting, emetics were given ; if the patient had 
 cramps, so-called anti-spasmodics of all sorts mixed together were 
 administered in the hope that some one might avail. Corporations 
 of physicians boldly recommended bleeding, emetics, mercury, and 
 diaphoretics. There were cases in which young and robust persons 
 took six to eight powders of 25 to 40 grains of ipecacuanha, each one 
 strengthened with two to six grains of sulphate of zinc, to begin with. 
 Many doctors carried about emetics with them, and administered 
 them to all who complained of incipient symptoms of cholera. Most 
 doctors advised bleeding under given conditions. These conditions 
 were very frequently present. In all this misery the allopathic doctors 
 disputed among themsehes in no very gentle manner. 
 
 Sachs, of Konigsberg, looked upon the 300 cholera 
 pamphlets that had appeared as so unimportant that the 
 few valuable ones could all be carried about conveniently in 
 the pocket of a practitioner. He himself wrote a work 400 
 pages long on the subject, which contained the following 
 musings: — 
 
 Med. Convcrsat. Biatf, 1S31, No. 41. Die AliOopathic, 1834, No.
 
 treatment of Cholera. 243 
 
 It will hardly be necessary to inform the intelligent practitioner that 
 our recommendation of opium by no means excludes the use of 
 moderate local bleeding where this appears necessary, even if only 
 symptomatically, and to tide over some temporary difficulty. 
 
 In what follows we at once perceive in Professor Sachs, 
 the scientific teacher : — 
 
 The highly fatal collison which is produced by this nervous fever 
 (cholera), between agility and atony, whereby both mutually intensify 
 one another and aggravate the whole condition ; this collision is often 
 rapidly allayed by the decisive action of opium, which increases the in- 
 tensive energy of the blood, and the steadiness and mutual harmonious 
 limitation of the organic functions is restored, so that each one is 
 set to rights in its own action and can be of unimpeded service to the 
 others. 
 
 Professor Kiescr, of Jena, thus prefaced a pamphlet of 
 his disciple, Von Rein, on Oriental Cholera : — 
 
 The pan-epidemic of Cholera has written with ineffaceable characters 
 in the history of medicine the empirical character of contemporary 
 medicine, and its utter irrationality. The Turk instinctively treats 
 this disease more successfully than does the European, with his 
 pretentions to wisdom. In this monograph on the cholera, the first 
 that has appeared of a scientific character, the various questions 
 
 that demand solution are solved in the most satisfactory manner 
 
 for the first time a scientific theory of treatment has been advanced, 
 based on a scientific knowledge of the nature of the disease, worked 
 out by the sick bed, and approved by the most successful practical 
 
 results After maturely weighing the investigations, observations and 
 
 practical results laid down in this pamphlet, we can even affirm 
 with certainty that now that the nature of cholera and the appropriate 
 plan of treatment to be pursued are no longer doubtful, it is likely to 
 be exceeded in fatality by many other diseases. 
 
 We read on eagerly after such promises. Kieser is known 
 to us from the Allgemeiner Anaeiger der DeutscJien as an 
 energetic advocate of bleeding, but subsequently in his 
 System of Medicine he gives utterance to the often-quoted 
 saying, " In the present condition of medical practice, both 
 in Germany and the neighbouring countries, every patient 
 should be warned to shun the doctor as he would the most 
 virulent poison." So in the year 1825, in Hufeland's 
 Journal,^' he considers it wrong to " draw blood by pounds 
 in all pulmonary diseases, and to let the patient die 
 
 '^- Vol. LX., St. 2, p. 40.
 
 244 Scientific reasons for 
 
 from loss of blood," as the blind anti-phlogistic party do. 
 Kieser seems, then, to have come to his senses in the 
 course of years, and we, therefore, expect to find in 
 him an opponent of the horrible allopathic treatment. 
 What, then, does Kieser advise ? The treatment of cho- 
 lera must be that of inflammatory, gastric, nervous fever. 
 TJie principal remedy is blood-letting, proportioned to the 
 strength of the patient and the intensity of the disease ; 
 in cases, then, of the most intense form of cholera, and 
 where the patient was previously robust, blood-letting, 
 from four to five pounds, is desirable ; and even before 
 the disease is fully developed such a mode of proceeding 
 is useful. Reason : "If after venesection to the extent 
 of four to eight ounces, where the violence of the disease 
 required four pounds, the patient, nevertheless, dies, it is 
 wrong to look upon bleeding as having failed in its ef- 
 fect, or even as having been injurious. We could almost 
 think that all sound judgment had deserted doctors [we 
 hear the same assertions now made by professors on similar 
 occasions], for if experience teaches us that a pound of 
 blood can be drawn without injury from children of one 
 to three years old affected with tracheitis and encephalitis, 
 how can one hesitate to take several pounds from a cholera 
 patient who was previously robust, when this does not 
 imply nearly so much loss of blood to him as the one 
 pound to the two years old child ? We can hardly under- 
 stand why practitioners do not once for all try bleeding 
 experimentally on a large scale, as they have so many 
 other remedies." 
 
 The fault then, according to Kieser, consisted in the fact 
 that bleedings to the extent of one to two pounds of blood 
 were too small, in this he agrees with other professors, 
 Hasper for example. 
 
 This was rational medicine! And Kieser (died 1862) 
 was "an authority of the first rank." He contributed 
 largely to the development of physiology, particularly that 
 of plants, to the science of the microscope, and to biology. 
 Hundreds of doctors swore by his authority. His treat- 
 ment of cholera has not yet, however, been fully described.
 
 Bleeding in Cholera. 245 
 
 After blood-letting calomel is to be administered with 
 magnesia, three to ten grains every hour, then follow cold 
 baths for five to ten minutes, not douches as others recom- 
 mended. Then an emetic may be administered, or the 
 patient can again be bled, made to drink cold water and cold 
 compresses may be applied to the shaved head. To get rid 
 of the rest of the inflammation, six drachms of saltpetre or 
 more in 24 hours, combined with liq. minder, when the stage 
 of inflammation passes into the nervous stage. In cases 
 where blood would not flow from the vein that had been 
 opened Rein opened all the veins that he could see. In 
 Hasper's article in Hufeland's Journal p. 59, it is stated : 
 " Rein at once laid bare and opened to the extent of half- 
 an-inch all the veins of the cholera patients which he could 
 see on their bodies ; but in spite of everything two hours 
 were required in the case of each patient to squeeze out 
 from four, six or eight veins two pounds of blood." Often 
 even this was not possible. He then tried arteriotomy, but 
 only a few ounces of blood were to be obtained from the 
 temporal and radial arteries. Kieser asserts that Rein in 
 his private practice " by pursuing this scientific treatment," 
 out of thirty cases of the most severe kind of cholera did 
 not lose one. We ask in astonishment, whether all these 
 counsels and assertions are to be regarded as ironical — 
 but alas! no, it is bitter, "rational" earnest. 
 
 It interests us especially to notice what weapons the 
 allopaths in Austria used against this devastating disease. 
 Here the consummation wished for by so many allopaths 
 had been attained. The practice of homoeopathy had been 
 forbidden since 18 19, in consequence of an imperial edict. 
 The prohibition was not carried out very strictly, but it was 
 the occasion of endless persecutions by the allopaths and 
 apothecaries. 
 
 According to the Medic. Jahrbiicher des osterreich. Staates 
 (vol. XII., p. i), vomiting and diarrhoea are simply the 
 healing efforts of nature " to get rid of substances deposited
 
 246 Results of the ordinmy treatment 
 
 in large quantity on the inner surface of the stomach and 
 bowels, which the animal economy can no longer digest 
 and assimilate." But if the vomiting was very stubborn it 
 does not appear to have been considered as a" healing effort," 
 for in this case opium, effervescent powders, River's drink,aq. 
 lauroc, black coffee, ice, blisters, and theriac plasters were 
 employed. In Hungary, morphia and pyroligneous acid 
 were largely used. At the last period of the epidemic, 
 the Austrian doctors, wishing to change passive into active 
 diarrhoea, administered calomel in doses of half a grain 
 every two hours, mixed with sugar or with magnesia and 
 opium. " The extremely favourable effect of bleedings, 
 local and general, when indicated, is admitted by all 
 physicians. In the paralytic stage of the disease it is not 
 only of no use, but increases the collapse and hastens the 
 end." Kriiger-Hansen remarks on this : " the doctors should 
 have kept such confessions in their own bosoms, and not 
 exposed themselves to the ridicule of the homceopaths ! " 
 Wawruch gives us an example of the disastrous results of 
 the allopathic treatment in Vienna. He relates that 109 
 children were attacked by the disease in the lying-in hos- 
 pital at Vienna at the time of the cholera epidemic, of 
 whom 107 died ; that is to say only two escaped with their 
 lives (Kriiger-Hansen). 
 
 Professor Bischoff treated seven patients for cholera in 
 the hospital of the Joseph Academy at Vienna in December, 
 1831, with the most diverse remedies, six of them died ; the 
 seventh, who had just recovered from inflammation of the 
 lungs, from the effects of the treatment of which he was still 
 suffering, refused all remedies when attacked with cholera, 
 he drank nothing but lemonade, and recovered. 
 
 In September, 1832, 121 Vienna and 83 foreign doc- 
 tors assembled in Vienna on the occasion of the meet- 
 ing of the Natiirforschervcrsanniilung. The treatment of 
 cholera was discussed. Brodowicz, Bischoff and Wawruch 
 spoke in favour of bleeding repeated four or five times 
 during the attack of cholera ; according to Obersteiner 
 and Wirer, bleeding ought only to be employed in the 
 " reaction stage." Bittner thought that the bleeding ought
 
 of Cholera in A Ji stria. 247 
 
 to be limited, and Szots quoted the favourable results of 
 the treatment in Transylvania, where no bleedin^^, either 
 general or local, had been practised. Finally Sterz and 
 Herrmann spoke of the treatment of cholera by emetics. 
 " It transpired," says Kruger-Hansen, " that in the university 
 towns, where the medical teachers resided, the results of the 
 treatment of cholera were much more unfavourable than in 
 any other place, even in the country where there were no 
 doctors." Hasper, the representative of" rational medicine," 
 asserts the contrary. 
 
 What, then, were the results obtained by the homoeopaths, 
 who were very much over-worked at this time, when the 
 cholera was raging. They themselves assert distinctly the 
 superiority of their results over those obtained by " rational 
 medicine." Their statistics are more favourable throughout 
 than those of the allopaths, certainly with the exception of 
 those of Hasper. 
 
 The allopaths proved scientifically the impossibility of 
 better results being obtained by the homceopaths. If the 
 latter asserted the contrary they could be proved to have 
 lied by science. Those who recovered had simply not been 
 suffering from cholera at all. 
 
 Hufeland calls cholera "this scandalum medicorum," in 
 1 832, in his Journal, the April number, p. 4. He relates that 
 no hindrance was put in the way of the homoeopaths by the 
 Prussian Government, a special hospital was even opened 
 for them under the supervision of an " allopathic inspector." 
 
 But unfortunately this object was not completely attained. This was 
 partly because, on account of the well-known rapidity of the dangerous 
 symptoms of this disease, it was not possible always to summon the 
 medical inspector quickly enough, partly because it was not alwaj's 
 possible for him, however quickly he came, to convince himself of 
 the existence of symptoms which had previously been there, but 
 which had already disappeared. What hindered the working of it 
 was however chiefly the fact that most patients had a repugnance to 
 being taken to a hospital, and preferred to remain in their own dwell- 
 ings, where it was impossible for the inspector to perform his part. 
 
 We must therefore receive the greater part of the experience ob- 
 tained on the good faith of the homoeopaths themselves. And it is 
 undeniable that the proportion of those cured to those who died, was 
 extremely favourable. Results still more favourable to the homoeo- 
 pathic method were reported to us from other places.
 
 248 Allopathic testimony to success of 
 
 Hasper was probably thinking of those 1,294 fatal cases 
 when he wrote : — " Those cases where the homceopathic 
 method was employed proved most rapidly fatal." 
 
 Now-a-days no rational professor would venture on the 
 assertion that the allopathic results were more favourable, 
 and we can certainly say without fear of contradiction that 
 the homoeopaths were more successful than their opponents 
 in the treatment of this disease.* We might gather this 
 even from the renewed vehemence of the allopathic attacks. 
 
 * I may be permitted to add a couple of testimonies from the camp 
 of its opponents to the superiority of homoeopathy to the " rational " 
 system in the treatment of cholera. The late Sir William Wilde, the 
 well-known allopathic oculist of Dublin, in his work entitled Austria 
 and, its Institutions^ says (p. 275) : " Upon comparing the report of 
 the treatment of cholera in the homceopathic hospital [testified to by 
 two allopathic medical inspectors appointed by Government] with that 
 of the treatment of the same disease in the other hospitals of Vienna 
 during the same period [the epidemic of 1836], it appeared that 
 while two-thirds of the cases treated by Dr. Fleischmann [the physician 
 of the homceopathic hospital] recovered, two-thirds of those treated 
 by the ordinary methods in the other hospitals died. This very ex- 
 traordinary result led Count Kolowrat (Minister of the Interior) to 
 repeal the law prohibiting the practice of homoeopathy."' 
 
 When the cholera epidemic visited London in 1854, the Board of 
 Management of the London Homceopathic Hospital, then located in 
 Golden Square, which happened to be the centre of the most severely 
 affected part of the metropolis, cleared out the hospital for the recep- 
 tion of cholera patients only. The medical Inspector appointed by 
 the Board of Health, Dr. Macloughlin, was rec^uested to put the 
 London Homoeopathic Hospital on the list of institutions for the treat- 
 ment of cholera, which he was to inspect and report on. This he 
 willingly did, after thoroughly inspecting the arrangements. He also 
 paid a daily visit of inspection to the hospital during the whole of the 
 time it was engaged in receiving cases of cholera. The Board of Health 
 had appointed a committee of medical men, presided over by Dr. 
 Paris, the President of the College of Physicians, to collect the statis- 
 tics of the treatment of cholera in London and to report to Parliament 
 on the results of the various methods pursued in all the difterent in- 
 stitutions. When the report of this Treatment Committee appeared, it 
 was observed that the returns of the London Homceopathic Hos- 
 pital were altogether ignored. Some stir was made in the House of 
 Commons by Lord R. Grosvenor — now Lord Ebury — about this 
 omission, and this led to a separate Parliamentary paper being issued
 
 Honuvopathic treatment of Cholera. 249 
 
 All the evidence points to the fact that the spread of 
 homoeopathy increased rapidly during and after the cholera; 
 the self-reliance and confidence of the homoeopaths grew, 
 and the irritation of their opponents reached the highest 
 pitch. 
 
 At the end of July, cholera broke out at Raab, in Hun- 
 gary. According to authentic statistics, 640 died out of 
 1,501 patients who were treated allopathically.* The re- 
 sults of the homoeopathic treatment of Dr. Bakody, who 
 was settled in Raab, were much more favourable. So much 
 so, that the inhabitants made an appeal through the news- 
 papers for more homoeopathic doctors to wage war against 
 this dreaded foe ? The Protomedicus of Hungary, Dr. 
 Lenhoscek did not consider this appeal suitable for publica- 
 tion, and in his capacity of censor refused to allow it to be 
 printed, appending in his own hand the words " Pro typis 
 non est qualificatum," so that the manuscript was returned 
 to the sender, Franz von Parragh, " episcopal exactor" and 
 advocate. After cholera had ceased at Raab, Bakody in- 
 formed his friend Dr. Ant. Schmit, Physician to the Duke 
 of Lucca, of his mode of treatment and the results ob- 
 tained, and he, contrary to Bakody's wish, sent them for in- 
 sertion to the Allgemeiner Aiweiger der Deittschen, which 
 accepted the article.f It did not contain any expression in 
 the least offensive to any physician, although Bakody had 
 been subjected to the most severe attacks on the part of 
 the allopaths of Raab. 
 
 containing the omitted returns of the London Homoeopathic Hospital. 
 From these returns it appeared that the number of cases treated in 
 the Homoeopathic Hospital was sixty-one, of whom ten died, giving a 
 mortahty of i6'4 per cent. From the other Parhamentary paper, 
 issued under the editorship of the Treatment Committee, it appeared 
 that the average mortahty under the mode of treatment pursued in 
 the other metropohtan hospitals was 5 1 "8 per cent. The Government 
 Inspector, Dr. Macloughlin, though himself belonging to the domi- 
 nant sect, testified most handsomely to the severity of the cases 
 treated in the London Homoeopathic Hospital, and to the astonishing 
 success of the treatment. — [Ed.] 
 
 * Rcchtferti^itn^ des Dr. von Bakody, &^c., won Mor. Miiller, Leipzig, 
 1832. 
 
 t In No. 321 of 1 83 1.
 
 250 AUopatJdc floivcTS of rhetoric. 
 
 Thereupon the County Physicus, Dr. Joseph v, Balogh, 
 and the Town Physicus, Dr. Ant. Karpff published a re- 
 joinder, in which it was asserted that the homoeopathic 
 statistics were false, that all the cholera patients treated 
 by Bakody had died, and that the patients who had 
 recovered had never had cholera. This article was em- 
 bellished with the following flowers of rhetoric by these 
 two gentlemen : — 
 
 The Allgemeiiier Anzeiger der DciitscJien omitted them, 
 but Mor. Muller has happily rescued them from oblivion — 
 "Lying shameless scribbling" — "Facts misrepresented in 
 the most pitiful way" — "Attacks of two medical incroy- 
 ables (Bakody and Schmit) on an art accredited by the 
 experience of a thousand years" — "The whole homoeo- 
 pathic clique." " Bakody is so unfortunate as to have 
 become the butt of many non-professionals by reason of 
 his want of savoir /aire, his unprepossessing exterior (! ! !) 
 and his want of success in his treatment." "Medical 
 forgers." " The word conscientious is out of place in 
 the homoeopathic jargon ; " " The knight Don Quixote ; " 
 " Besides the eight cholera patients who were carried to 
 the grave, Bokody neither saw nor treated any other 
 cholera cases, else the homoeopathic fanatics would have 
 
 crowed still louder;" "Bakody took good care neither 
 
 to hand in his reports to the town magistrate nor to 
 make them known by his proselytes ; " " medical juggler." 
 This was the language used by the allopaths, Dr. Jos. von 
 Balogh, the County Physicus, and Dr. Anton Karpff, the 
 Town Physicus. Bakody rejoined in a most dignified 
 manner, and produced 112 legally attested certificates 
 relating to 1 54 cholera patients treated by him, of whom 
 only six died. As his witnesses there appeared among 
 others: a cathedral dignitary, who gave evidence in the 
 name of the Bishop of Raab, respecting five members of the 
 bishop's household who had been cured of cholera ; further 
 an evangelical preacher, a reformed preacher, a member of 
 the bench of magistrates, three pastors, a count, a notary, 
 an episcopal treasurer, a consistory counsellor, a member of 
 the council, various merchants, mechanics, &c. Their tes-
 
 Uses of the CensorsJiip. 251 
 
 timonies, together with expressions of gratitude to Bakody, 
 are printed by Muller in the work alluded to. 
 
 One very favourite weapon of the opponents of homoeo- 
 pathy was the censorship of the press, especially in Hun- 
 gary, but also in other countries. 
 
 Gricsselich* writes on the subject : — 
 
 Dr. Kiesselbach of Hanau wished an account of the homoeo- 
 pathic treatment of croup to be inserted in a Kassel paper; the censor 
 vetoed it, and the Kassel paper kept silence on the subject of croup 
 and homoeopathy. Hahnemann sent his treatment of cholera to the 
 PreussiscJie Slants Zeitiing, but it could not be inserted Ijccause the 
 Berlin censor, Prof Kluge, would not allow it. 
 
 In 1 83 1 a doctor in Cothen published an attack on Hahnemann in 
 the Cbthener Zeitung on account of his treatment of cholera, to which 
 Hahnemann wished to respond in the same paper, but was refused 
 permission because the censor was a friend of the doctor's. Hahne- 
 mann then had his rejoinder printed in Magdeburg, where no objection 
 was raised. In Leipzic Hofrath Dr. Clarus wielded the censor's shears, 
 of which fact we can obtain evidence in Stapf's ArcJiiv^ and Schweikert's 
 Zcitttng. The cholera is raging at Raab in Hungary ; the public having 
 witnessed Bakody's cures wishes to summon homoeopaths thither. 
 But the notice in the paper is refused insertion by the Protomedicus 
 Lenhoscek as pro typis non qiialificatiini. 
 
 Considering the use made of the censorship we could almost think 
 that there was something dangerous to the State in homoeopathy ; for 
 as far as is known the censorship is only intended to keep peace in 
 the States, but not to hinder doctors from curing, nor patients from 
 being cured. 
 
 Kriiger-Hansent relates also that his pamphlets against 
 blood-letting, &c., were sent back from the Austrian states 
 to Leipzic with the observation : " the censor has not 
 allowed them to pass." 
 
 Austria-Hungary was a pattern place for the allopaths. 
 Read the article in the Allgemeiner Anz. der Deutschen (year 
 1 833) P- 965). Not only was license given "to all base and 
 
 * Skizzcn aits dcr Mappc cities rciscndcn Hoinoppaflicti, Karlsruhe, 
 1S32, p. 128. 
 ■*■ Brillc?ilosc Rcflexio/icfi, p. 19.
 
 252 Uncontradicted calnninies 
 
 infamous attacks on the homoeopaths," but such were even 
 encouraged, and " the oppressed and attacked party was 
 not only not allowed to plead its own cause, but was not 
 even allowed to defend itself, and all attempts to do so 
 were carefully suppressed." " Thus the medical censorship 
 (wielded by the above-mentioned Dr. Lcnhoscek) struck 
 out the following true and beautiful passage from Hufe- 
 land's article on homoeopathy,* which appeared in a Hun- 
 garian paper. ' No kind of despotism, no autocracy, no 
 suppression of opinion ; government itself has no right to 
 interfere in scientific matters, either in preventing research, 
 or in favouring exclusively one opinion ; for both kinds of 
 interference have done harm, as experience shows.' Not 
 only were articles suppressed that directly concerned 
 homceopathy, but even such as were likely to encourage 
 ideas favourable to the principles of homoeopathy. To 
 prove this I may refer to two very modest treatises, one on 
 simplicity in medicine and another on the imperfection of the 
 present matei'-ia inedica, which, were rejected in the following 
 terms." The remarks in Latin of the censor. Dr. Lenhoscek, 
 are given at length, they are to the effect that nothing ought 
 to be printed against the principles of scientific medicine, 
 cultivated as it has been for so many centuries. Homoeo- 
 paths might publish their observations, but they must not 
 attack allopathy. 
 
 The permission here accorded was, however, only an empty consola- 
 tion, as the editors of the only medical journal published in Hungary, 
 were forbidden to accept homoeopathic articles. But all this might 
 have been more easily borne, as it was to be hoped that the advan- 
 tages of the new system would become more and more known by 
 deeds, if not by writings ; but this was not all. The adherents of 
 homoeopathy were exposed to all possible insults and calumnies with- 
 out being able to make any protest. 
 
 We are then told that a writer, Dr. Hanak, supported by 
 the allopathic professor. Dr. Sch., and Dr. T., published a 
 series of abusive articles in Die Bienc, which do not leave the 
 reader one moment in doubt as to the sentiments of these 
 combatants. Here are some specimens : — " Among doctors 
 there are not wanting Icaruses who, forgetting the waxen 
 
 * Hufeland's/<?«r«(^!;/, Feb., 1830.
 
 grozv like rolling snoivhalls. 253 
 
 composition of their wings, fly stupidly towards the sun, and 
 falling into the sea of oblivion, have not even the good fortune 
 of the son of Daedalus of rendering themselves immortal by 
 their fall. Among these we must reckon all those who boast 
 of their universal remedies and universal methods of heal- 
 ing, from Dr. Sangrado to the latest unlucky charlatans of 
 medicine — the homoeopaths." " We must, indeed, anticipate 
 that the homoeopathic folly, like every other work of deceit 
 and darkness, must of itself fall to the ground ; but the 
 friends of light perceive with pleasure that sensible doctors 
 are already raising their voices against it." The most sensible 
 of all ought therefore to be Simon, who, as is well known, 
 proved Hahnemann to be " a mere ignoramus both as a 
 scholar and a physician." "We cannot, therefore, understand 
 how a true Magyar, even if he is sick in body, as long as he 
 is mentally sound, can give himself up to such quackery." 
 " In what respect is a homoeopathic doctor different from 
 and better than a bird of darkness who seeks to gather 
 honey from the cells of his honest colleagues." The whole 
 article seems to be made up of such phrases. 
 
 This article was received with great applause by the opponents of 
 homoeopathy. [Would even now be received with pleasure as we 
 shall hereafter see.] They found in it the expression of their own 
 hatred and ill-will towards this new and aggravating system. The un- 
 instructed public looked on it as a powerful exposition of the worthless- 
 ness of homoeopathy ; and, in order to obtain the desired result more 
 completely, Dr. Hanak resolved to print this article separately, and, with 
 the addition of a few extracts from Simon's book to offer it at a cheap 
 price to the public, A homoeopathic doctor ventured to say something 
 against this abusive and ignorant treatise, and wished to print his re- 
 marks in the Modezeitting^ in default of any other German journal. 
 The article had to be submitted to the medical censorship. After 
 many weeks it was returned to him with the following remark — " This 
 article is not fitted for insertion in the Modczciiicng\ on account both of 
 its form and its subject, and will not therefore be allowed to appear 
 in the Modezeittifig. Ofen. July 12, 1830, M. von Lenhoscek, Royal 
 Counsellor and Protomedicus of the Kingdom — Mp." 
 
 But all this seems mere child's play, compared with what 
 Dr. Kovats says. He wrote Antiorgaiion ac Organorosta^ 
 Pesth, 1830. In this work homoeopathy is termed "a system 
 of jugglery and of deception, quackery, a foolish, bungling
 
 254 Cahnnniarc niidacter. 
 
 science, an occupation suitable for idle cobblers." Hahne- 
 mann was " a wretched vagabond, a wandering, ignorant 
 barber, a blind Paracelsist, a liar, a worthless tempter, a 
 fool, a false, coarse, low fox," and so forth. Hahnemann's 
 adherents are all '' madmen who ought to be locked up." 
 Those who allow themselves to be treated homceopathically 
 are also "fools." He terms a homoeopathic doctor, Dr. Paul 
 von Balogh, of Pesth (who must not be confounded with 
 Balogh the County physicus), " a pander to Hahnemann, 
 a deceiver, a 'shameless liar, an ungrateful fellow who takes 
 upon himself to contemn the teaching of the medical 
 faculty, a charlatan, an ignorant, foolish, low fellow, who 
 can have learnt nothing or else he would have found it 
 impossible to accept the teaching of homoeopathy." 
 
 The homoeopaths were unable to defend themselves on 
 account of the censorship. In Hungary, Surgeon Rochel, 
 Professor Schuster,* of Pesth, and Dr. Lippich treated 
 homoeopathy in the same strain. Repeatedly, and in vari- 
 ous newspapers, the homoeopaths attempted to publish 
 rejoinders. Every time they were rejected, however, by the 
 medical censor, with the declaration that Hahnemann's 
 method of treatment is forbidden in the Austrian States. 
 
 It is no wonder [says \\\q. Allgem. An:;ciger dcr Deidsc/icfi] that in 
 Hungary the most distorted, absurd and laughable ideas prevail on the 
 subject of homceopathy, and that homoeopathy makes but little progress 
 with the public, generally so responsive to all that is good and true, for 
 even learned men ha\e an unconquerable aversion to it. Every day 
 most of the allopathic doctors come to their patients with the good news 
 that homoeopathy is at last, thanks be to heaven, on the verge of ex- 
 piring ; that his Majesty has just strictly forbidden homceopathy by a 
 rescript ; that this was necessary since homoeopathy did so much mis- 
 chief, that its poisonous remedies either kill slowly, or cause miserably 
 diseased life, that they destroy female beauty and make it instantly 
 iippear many years older, &c. [The same ideas founded on the same 
 reasoning are to be met with even now.] The student of medicine in 
 the colleges hears nothmg but jeers and scoffs, or condemnation of 
 homoeopathy. Who is to set them right or awake in them a desire 
 for reading homoeopathic treatises? Is it a wonder if among the nu- 
 merous medical students at Pesth there are so few who have any wish 
 to make themselves acquainted with the new system } But notwith- 
 
 * Author of the anonymous Hahnemajiniana^ Berlin, 1830.
 
 align id adhaerebit. 255 
 
 standing- all this despotism the light of truth will yet conquer in 
 H ungary. 
 
 In the year 1837 the prohibition of the practice of 
 hmoeopathy was removed by an imperial mandate, and for 
 ten years there has been a hospital and a professorship of 
 homoeopathy held by Professor v. Bakody, the son of the 
 Bakody who was so much persecuted. 
 
 In 1843 the readers of Hungarian journals were again 
 entertained with an attack on homoeopathy, to which the 
 homoeopaths thus responded : — * 
 
 Our opponent has wished to persuade his readers that no stumbling 
 block has been laid in the way of homoeopathy by the old school, 
 that we have been allowed to pursue our own way freely. Even now 
 there is a capital in the Austrian monarchy in which a homoeopathic 
 book may not even be announced in a journal, nay, the bookseller 
 may not even expose it in his window. There, as here, anything may 
 be printed against homoeopathy, but nothing in its favour. 
 
 This is the place to describe the medical standpoint of 
 the medical advisers of the Austrian Emperor, in whom 
 he so implicitly confided. It was above all others owing to 
 Andreas Stifft, later his Excellency von Stifft, a vehement 
 opponent of homoeopathy that the practice of Hahnemann's 
 mode of treatment was forbidden. Griesselichj relates the 
 following amusing anecdote : " A Dr. Lobel appeared at 
 Stifft's house to hand him a work which he had dedicated 
 to him. The servant confused his name with that of a 
 Dr. Lowe, a homoeopath, who had come to Vienna from 
 Prague. Dr. Lobel had to wait a long time. At last Stifft 
 appeared and encountered this non-homoeopath with the 
 words, ' You are a homoeopath — a fool ; go ! go ! I will 
 have nothing to do with fools ! ' Exeunt both through 
 opposite doors." 
 
 His Excellency von Stifft was the Emperor's physician 
 in ordinary. As everyone knows Francis II. was then 
 reigning, who was called Francis I. after the extinction of 
 the Holy Roman Empire in 1806. 
 
 His father was Leopold II., with the history of whose ill- 
 
 * Allg. horn. Zeittmg, Vol. XXIV., p. 26S. 
 t Skizzcn^ &c.
 
 256 Death of Francis I. 
 
 ness Hahnemann's opposition to the blood-letting four times 
 repeated, is connected. Francis had lost his wives and his 
 youthful grandson, who is known to the world's history 
 (Due de Reichstadt), under the " rational " system of bleed- 
 ing. The Emperor was 67 years old, and was considerably 
 bowed down by the weight of years,* when an inflam- 
 matory fever, at first declared harmless by his physicians 
 (Stifft and Gunther), attacked him in 1835. Blood was 
 drawn from him. The subsidence of the symptoms, which 
 usually followed temporarily, was declared favourable ; but 
 as was also usually the case, the fever increased afterwards, 
 and he was bled a second time. The symptoms became 
 now more urgent, and both the doctors declared at mid- 
 day, February 28th, that they could not save the patient. 
 A wish was expressed for a further consultation, and three 
 archiducal physicians in ordinary appeared at the sick bed. 
 These approved of the treatment hitherto pursued, and 
 declared that there was still some hope if a favourable crisis,, 
 a profuse perspiration, should take place. To bring this 
 about they bled him twice more, after which the fever in- 
 creased, the strength was proportionately diminished, the 
 breathing became difficult, and within twenty-four hours 
 the action of the heart stopped. 
 
 When the noble-minded patient dismissed, for the last 
 time, the doctors who looked upon his blood as poison, he 
 gave each of them his hand, thanked them for their ex- 
 ertions, and assured them of his love and favour, adding,, 
 generously, that he knew how much they loved him, and 
 that they had done and would do all they could to save his 
 life. 
 
 The report of the doctors upon the post-mortem exam- 
 ination was as follows : — 
 
 The patient died of inflammation of the lungs, the heart and the 
 large blood vessels. The medical treatment was the only correct one, 
 but the frequently repeated bleedings had not been sufficient to restrain 
 within limits the increasing inflammation, and a more energetic treat- 
 ment was precluded by the general condition of the patient, and would 
 have incurred the danger of causing instantaneous death. 
 
 * Comp. Kriiger-Hansen, Brillailose Rcflexio7ien^ 1835, p. 21,
 
 GoetJie oti Hoincvopathy. 257 
 
 The tragic fate which the Austrian Imperial Family 
 experienced, through their " rational " advisers, reminds us 
 of the like fate which befel other intellectually distinguished 
 men through rational treatment. How, for instance, did 
 Goethe fare in this respect ? He makes the following 
 remarks on homoeopathy: — * 
 
 Both [he is speaking of Count Paar and Antony Prokesch, adju- 
 tants of Prince Schwarzenberg] conversant with Hahnemann's system, 
 on which this great prince had set his hopes, made me thoroughly 
 acquainted with it, and it seemed to me that anyone who pays attention 
 to his health and observes a suitable diet, unconsciously approximates 
 to this method. 
 
 Hofrath Dr. Pitschaft quotes this opinion about homoeo- 
 pathy, and adds, " how truly and delicately he expresses 
 himself in reference to the prince." 
 
 Goethe's opinion cannot be said to be more opposed 
 to the homoeopaths than that of Jean Paul was in their 
 favour. He says: " Hahnemann, that rare combination of 
 philosophy and learning, whose system must eventually 
 bring about the ruin of the ordinary receipt-crammed 
 heads, but is still little accepted by practitioners, and rather 
 shunned than investigated."! 
 
 It almost seems to us as if Jean Paul had penetrated 
 deeper into the matter than Goethe with his diplomatic 
 utterance, and it would have been to the interest of the latter 
 to make himself more intimately acquainted with Hahne- 
 mann. The account of his illness confirms this. Hufeland's 
 remarks^ (from 1783 to 1790, he enjoyed intercourse with 
 Goethe, both as doctor and friend) are well known : — 
 
 I have never met with a man who was so largely gifted by heaven, 
 both bodily and mentally ; he was, indeed, a model of the most 
 perfect man. It was not only the power that to such an extra- 
 ordinary degree animated both his body and soul which extorted 
 admiration, but still more the splendid balance of his qualities, both 
 physical and intellectual, and the beautiful harmony of body and mind, 
 so that neither lived at the cost of the other or disturbed its action. 
 
 * Vol. XXXII. of his Works, p. 184. Hufeland's >«r«^r/, Vol. 
 LXXVII., St. 3, p. 4. 
 
 t Zerstr. Bliiitcr, Vol. II., p. 392, Stapf, Lc. I., p. i. 
 :J: Huielaind's Journal, 1833, St. i, p. 31. 
 
 17
 
 258 God lie's maladies and 
 
 In December, 1830, Goethe was attacked by haemorrhage 
 from the lungs, in consequence — as his doctor, Vogel, 
 thought — of grief at losinc;' his son. He recovered from 
 this, though, in his last years the weaknesses of old age, 
 especially stiffness of the limbs, failure of memory for recent 
 occurrences, occasional inability to understand clearly and 
 quickly what was presented, and, besides these symptoms, 
 deafness, became noticeable in him. 
 
 His former great activityof thought, as also the agihtyof his muscular 
 movements, diminished perceptibly from year to year, while his usual 
 difficulty in forming a decision increased. 
 
 The above mentioned haemorrhage filled " a large and 
 deep washing basin half full," and, at the same time, V'ogel 
 bled the old man to the amount of two pounds. 
 
 Goethe ate a great deal, and even when he complained of want of 
 appetite he often ate much more than other younger healthy persons. 
 He never owned to faults of diet, however often he may have been 
 guilty of them. His want of self-restraint in eating, naturally enough 
 often caused indigestion. This was remedied by daily pills of as- 
 safoetida, rhubarb and jalap and clysters. Occasionally, too, some 
 spoonfuls of tincture of rhubarb and some Epsom salts were neces- 
 sary. As his friend Schiller liked the exhalation from rotten apples, 
 so Goethe liked the close air of a room. He could with the greatest 
 difficulty be induced to open a window, that fresh air might be let 
 into his bedroom and study. 
 
 Goethe had, owing to his great productive tendency, at all periods 
 (if his life made much blood. Formerly his blood-making was in 
 favourable proportion to his blood-consumption. In the latter years 
 of his life, however, owing to his complete abandonment of bodily 
 exercise, while he continued to eat abundantly, he became very full- 
 l:)looded, and this state urgently required copious artificial blood-letting 
 by venesection from time to time. 
 
 We have already mentioned that his doctor allowed him 
 to take aperients every day, and " he drank besides Kreuz- 
 brunnen mineral water every day, taking every }-car over 
 400 bottles." 
 
 Hufeland remarks in a postscript: — 
 
 Productivity, both mental and physical, was Goethe's main charac- 
 teristic ; and in the latter it was shown by rich nutrition, extremely 
 rapid sanguinification and reproduction, curative crises in illness, and 
 a fulness of blood. Therefore, in his old age, hemorrhagic crises and 
 the necessity for bleeding.
 
 their rational treatment. 259 
 
 Wc will not take upon ourselves to pass judgment on 
 the treatment of Goethe's last illness, in spite of the 
 numerous medicines he was obliged to swallow. The 
 report of his illness is of very great interest on account of 
 the information as to Goethe's habits of life and views that 
 it contains. But to say that the daily administered aperients, 
 the unremitting use of such a strong mineral water, and the 
 repeated " copious " bleedings (and we know what that 
 meant in those blood-thirsty days,) must have injured the 
 valuable life of this man, can hardly appear an exaggeration 
 now-a-days. 
 
 A physician like Hahnemann, who did not live far from 
 Weimar, and who was such an advocate for fresh air, would 
 certainly, if consulted, have energetically insisted upon its 
 necessity for Goethe. A doctor, by taking a firm stand and 
 by persistent sensible persuasion, can conquer any prejudice. 
 
 That Raphael, Mirabeau, Lord Byron, Gessner, &c., were 
 severely injured by bleeding, that Louis XIIL was bled 
 forty-seven times in one year by his physician Bou- 
 vard, besides taking 215 purgatives and emetics and 312 
 clysters ; that several members of the family of Louis XIV. 
 were killed by bleeding, even according to the testimony 
 of the allopaths of that day, and that Louis XV. did not 
 fare much better in common with very many other re- 
 markable men, all this we will ngt enter into here ; but we 
 are interested in Cavour's fate.* 
 
 After a stormy sitting of Parliament on 29th May, 1861, 
 in Turin, Cavour was seized with slight febrile rigor, to 
 which in the following night " violent pains in the bowels " 
 and vomiting were added. Blood was drawn " which re- 
 lieved the patient." On the following morning, the 30th 
 May, he was bled a second time, and again in the evening 
 of the same day, at five o'clock, a third time. That is three 
 bleedings in twenty-four hours ! Violent fever succeeded, 
 
 * Related at length at the end of Count Cavotir's Life and Labours^ 
 
 by (iuiscppc Massari, Jena, 1874.
 
 26o Cavoiir''s scientific pJiysicians. 
 
 the patient was " very weak and suffering." He passed a 
 good night! Friday, the 3 ist, the fever disappeared, so that 
 Cavour was able to hold a Council which assembled round 
 his bedside for two hours. In the evening he became very 
 feverish. Quinine did no good. On the ist of June he was 
 again bled twice — a quiet night followed. On the following 
 day, June 2nd, he was pale and weak, his left hand and 
 fore-arm cold as marble (the natural consequence of the 
 enormous loss of blood). On attempting to leave his bed 
 the wound in the vein re-opened, and the profuse bleeding 
 could not be stopped till a surgeon was called in. Some 
 hours later violent fever, shortness of breath, confusion of 
 ideas. The night was very bad, and the next morning his 
 excitement increased, his breathing became shorter, and 
 severe thirst set in (results of the loss of blood). Cavour 
 begged that a vein might be opened, this alone, he thought, 
 could save him. The physican was quickl}' summoned, 
 he consented, and a surgeon was sent for who made a 
 new incision but no blood flowed ; by pressing the vein 
 he succeeded in drawing off two or three ounces of thick 
 blood. The incisions of the veins made on the first day 
 were not healed. The consulting ph}-sicians prescribed 
 a solution of sulphate of quinine. Cavour begged it 
 might be administered in the form of a pill, because he 
 knew that the taste of the quinine would cause him to 
 vomit. The doctors refused, they thought a solution better. 
 He took the medicine with great repugnance, vomiting 
 followed, and was renewed each time he attempted to 
 take the drug, which he would only do at the persuasion 
 of the friends who surrounded him. In the following night 
 high fever and delirium. Ice compresses on the head and 
 mustard plasters on the legs. The next night he was 
 very bad again. Next morning cupping glasses were 
 applied to the nape, and again blisters on the legs. But 
 the blisters would not rise and the painful application of 
 the cupping glasses was not felt by the patient. Victor 
 Emmanuel, who visited his Minister just before his death, 
 proposed to the doctors to open a vein in his neck. The 
 doctors promised to take the proposal into consideration ;
 
 Homoeopaths unscientific impostors. 261 
 
 but death prevented them. Cavour died suffering from un- 
 quenchable thirst.* 
 
 Before we leave the subject of the contest about the coarse 
 views of " science " and about blood-letting, we should add 
 that the opponents who attacked the homoeopaths in the 
 most violent manner on account of their neglect of blood- 
 letting, almost all expressly stated that anxiety for the public 
 weal made them take the pen in hand, because every year 
 thousands were sacrificed to the bloodless treatment, the 
 " imposture " and " quackery " of homoeopathy. When the 
 homoeopaths asserted that by their mode of treatment they 
 obtained better results, that was " a lie," " the homoeo- 
 paths did not themselves believe it." If patients affected 
 with serious diseases recovered, their diseases were only 
 " slight," and the homoeopaths had made a false diagnosis, 
 a trivial indisposition was exaggerated by the " impostors " 
 into a severe malady, in order to throw dust in people's 
 eyes. But if, for instance, a case of pneumonia died, in 
 spite of homoeopathic treatment, it was certain that " ener- 
 getic treatment," blood-letting, &c., in short, " scientific " 
 therapeutics would have saved the patient. Homoeopathic 
 literature abounds with authentic instances of the incredible 
 persecution they were subjected to in consequence of their 
 rejection of bleeding, emetics, &c. 
 
 I will give one other example of how the allopaths in 
 their periodical literature took every opportunity of acri- 
 moniously accusing their opponents of repudiating " scien- 
 tific " treatment. 
 
 The following evidently highly-coloured versions of 
 certain cases, taken from Walther's Journal f. Chirnrgie, 
 were given in Schmidt's Jahrbiicher : -f- 
 
 * The case of the Princess Charlotte is a good pendant to the above. 
 " The princess was very well — indeed, in the opinion of the physicians, 
 she was ' too well.' For some time past they had kept down her ' abun- 
 dance of humours ' by repeated bleedings and the meagerest possible 
 
 fare And so the unhappy princess, after a hard struggle of 52 hours, 
 
 bore a dead boy, on the 5th November, 18 17, and 5 hours afterwards 
 was herself a corpse.'' — Aleiii. of Karolinc Bauer, II., 260. — [Ed.J 
 
 t Vol. VI., 1835, PP- M6 and 153.
 
 263 Fatal rcsnlts of not bleeding: 
 
 A healthy, robust, blooming servant girl, about twenty years old, was 
 seized with simple rheumatic bilious fever and placed herself under 
 the care of a qualified physician, and after a few weeks died in great 
 agony and delirious. The patient had throughout got no purgatives, 
 neither had she been bled ; the physician had contented himself with 
 the administration of some of the new-fangled remedies. At the post- 
 mortem the viscera, especially the stomach, were found gangrenous in 
 places ; the mesentery and intestines showed signs of intense inflam- 
 mation ; the walls of the small intestine were thickened and studded 
 Avith elevations which, on section, were seen to contain a quantity of 
 corroded villous intestinal membrane and partially inclosed orange- 
 coloured biliary matter which had caused ulceration. The large intes- 
 tine was full of impacted faeces. A considerable quantity of blood 
 had escaped into the pleural cavity and the lungs were intensely 
 inflamed. 
 
 A case of apoplexy, which had passed from homoeopathic 
 into allopathic hands, is then described: — 
 
 In spite of a rational physician having been called in, and the best 
 known remedies for sanguineous apoplexy having been administered 
 the patient could not be saved, and died, in spite of everything pos- 
 sible being done (venesection. Sec), in three days, leaving a widow and 
 numerous small children. 
 
 The author has seen similar cases in the time when Brown's plan of 
 treatment was the rage ; where patients suffering from fever, to whom 
 a sensible physician would have administered emetics and laxatives 
 for the excess of bile, were treated by the benighted Brownian, who 
 dreaded the supervention of asthenia, with cinchona and camphor, 
 and perished miserably, suffering from terrible colic, distortion of the 
 features, aberration of the mind, obviously from internal inflammation, 
 cursing and abusing the physician, Sic. 
 
 He must have been an intrepid fellow to leave this 
 earthly scene cursing and abusing, and the Brownian was 
 certainly wrong in thinking he had to do with asthenia. 
 
 Such outbreaks of partizan animosity were readily ad- 
 mitted into the most serious allopathic journals (Ph. von 
 Walter, the editor, was, as is well-known, the preceptor of 
 Schonlein and Johannes Miiller), and Schmidt's fa l/rbnc/ier 
 considered them suitable for a still wider circle of readers. 
 If the allopaths expressed themselves with such virulence 
 in scientific journals, we may imagine what animosity thc}^ 
 displayed in their intercourse with the public.
 
 A temperate opponent. 263 
 
 OberhofratJi Kopp o?i HoniaopatJiy. 
 
 Kopp wrote a work entitled : Experiences gained and 
 observations made during a tnal of Houia:opathy at the sick 
 bed, by Dr. J. H. Kopp, Oberhofrath, President of the 
 Wetterau Society of Natural Science, &c., Frankfort-on- 
 the-Main, 1832, Hufeland thus speaks of Kopp : — * 
 
 When a physician hke Kopp, who is recognised by the whole 
 medical public as one of their most estimable, thoughtful and expe- 
 rienced physicians, distinguished also by his powers of practical obser- 
 vation, expresses an opinion on this new and important subject, he 
 deserves our full attention. It has long been our wish that such a man 
 should devote his attention to an impartial examination of homceopathy. 
 But a rare combination of qualities is required for such a purpose. The 
 greatest love of truth and impartiality, no prejudice against the matter 
 in hand, but rather the hope and the wish to find in it something good 
 and helpful to medicine, readiness to accept all that is good and 
 useful, even if presented in the strangest form, and, as in the case of 
 homoeopathy, in the most repulsive manner, a complete knowledge of, 
 and long experience in medicine as it has been practised up till now, 
 and likewise a complete study and a long and extensive experience in 
 homceopathy ; and, finally, what is required to crown the whole, a calm, 
 benevolent mind, and a spirit ennobled and raised above the vulgar 
 herd by true and wide culture. Happily, these qualities are all united 
 in Kopp. 
 
 Hufeland quotes some sentences from him which accord 
 with his own ideas, and speaks particularly of his views on 
 the subject of bleeding without criticising them. Kopp 
 held similar views respecting homceopath}' to those of 
 Hufeland. 
 
 Hufeland was never violently attacked by the allopaths 
 on this account. He was the head, so to speak, of the 
 family of physicians, and was respected and honoured by 
 the allopaths to an extent to which the history of medicine 
 in Germany offers no parallel. Among foreigners only 
 Boerhaave can be compared with him in this respect. If 
 Hufeland was attacked he always replied in a mild but firm 
 and dignified tone, confining his remarks to the matter in 
 hand. We will only recall the case of Roschlaub, Professor 
 
 * Hufeland"s/w/';7w/, 1833, st. n, p. 73-
 
 264 Kopps moderation pleases 
 
 of Medicine at Landshut, and his excitement theory. Hufe- 
 land opposed him ; Roschlaub became violent ; Hufeland 
 never lost his calm though decided tone. So the contest 
 lasted between these two men, through a whole decade, to 
 the year 1 806. Five years later Roschlaub, who was an en- 
 ergetic, self-reliant man, publicly owned his faults towards 
 Hufeland,* and publicly apologized to him ; a rare occur- 
 rence that does honour to both men, as a writer justly 
 remarks. A proof of how thoroughly Hufeland deserved 
 this respect is furnished by his article in the 2nd part of the 
 32nd volume of h\s J ojwnal, "An account rendered to the 
 public of my attitude towards Brownism." In spite of all 
 the personal attacks on him on the part of Brown's 
 adherents, he had never defended himself personally, 
 although by reason of this forbearance he was frequently 
 misunderstood and misrepresented, of which even Sprengel 
 gives an example in his History of Medicine. Hufeland 
 had kept silence in order not to embitter the strife unneces- 
 sarily, " I was only concerned on behalf of the truth." With 
 regard to his zeal for medical science, he says, " Not only 
 with my understanding, but with my whole being have 
 I embraced this science ; it has become my life." 
 
 Kopp was also highly respected, but he was not Hufe- 
 land ; the allopaths, Simon and Sachs, attacked him some 
 time after the homoeopaths had entered the lists against 
 him. Kopp was thus exposed to a cross fire, and was on 
 thoroughly bad terms with both parties. In spite, however, 
 of the violence of the attacks no one omitted to express 
 his respect for Kopp's learning, his practical skill, and 
 honest, zealous endeavours after truth — with the exception, 
 indeed, of Simon, who, when Sachs called him " estimable " 
 added a point of interrogation. Nothing was sacred to 
 Simon ; no, weapon was too bad for him to use against 
 homoeopathy and against his enemies — Kriiger- Hansen for 
 example. Kopp says : — 
 
 Even though I wilHngly accept the results of experience in the new 
 doctrine that commend themselves to me, j-et I condemn the system. 
 
 * Hufeland's>//;7/^/, 181 1, Vol. XXXII., st. i, p. 3.
 
 neither side. His views. 265 
 
 Judging- from its present course, homoeopathy, in the hands of homcco- 
 pathists themselves will, after a few years, take an entirely different 
 shape. — ( Preface). 
 
 The treatment of diseases according to " general indications," as it 
 is called, has done harm. The practitioner, who is acquainted with 
 the specific powers of medicines and understands how to employ 
 them in disease, practises medicine most successfully (p. 5). 
 
 Undoubtedly burnt sponge has an elective affinity for the throat, 
 phosphoric acid acts specially on the sexual organs, sabina and ergot 
 on the uterus, copaiba on the urethra, squills and cantharides on the 
 urinary passages, boletus laricis on the capillaries of the skin, iodine 
 on the glands, hepar sulphuris on the trachea. Each drug acts speci- 
 fically on one or more organs ; that is, it acts more powerfully and 
 strikingly, specially or exclusively on one or more organs (p. 6). 
 
 If we regard homoeopathy fi'om this point of view — that its work 
 is to investigate the specific cjuahties of medicines — it must be attrac- 
 tive to every physician. It is not the theory advanced by Hahnemann 
 — his so-called system — but the experiences and experimental investi- 
 gations on which it is founded which form the essential part of 
 homoeopathy (p. 8). 
 
 In the form in which Hahnemann enunciated homoeopathy, it will 
 hardly be followed by any, even ultra-homoeopathic practitioners (p. 9). 
 
 Homoeopathy could hardly find a more general acceptance in its 
 present form among medical men — especially not in France and 
 England ; the older practitioners rarely occupy themselves with it 
 because it is so far removed from the common practice, because its 
 study is difficult and wearisome, and because they have been dis- 
 appointed with many former systems. 
 
 As a rule, however, all medical men who have not engaged in the 
 practice of homoeopathy are opposed to it, and its bitterest enemies 
 are those who do not sufficiently know it. 
 
 Everyone who wishes to judge homoeopathy should test it at the 
 
 sick bed Hahnemann's system may pass away, but his experiences, 
 
 if they are proved to be new and true, will remain for ever (p. 1 1). 
 
 The study of the specific remedies of homoeopathy may be of 
 advantage even to allopaths : observation of the effects of remedies 
 on healthy persons ; a closer and more thorough acquaintance with 
 medicinal substances, and especially their specific properties ; the 
 avoidance of haphazard mixtures and compounds ; attention directed 
 to diseases produced by medicines and their prevention ; simplicity 
 of prescriptions — the stamp of all good medical treatment ; care in the 
 choice of remedies ; knowledge of their sphere of action (p. 14). 
 
 One good feature of Hahnemann's system is undoubtedly the 
 proving of remedies on healthy persons in order to ascertain their 
 specific powers. This plan of ascertaining the powers of medicines 
 has great advantages, and Hahnemann has the inalienable merit of 
 having discovered and enlarged it (p. 35).
 
 266 Kopps respect for HaJineuiamis 
 
 We cannot fail to recognise the extent of Hahnemann's talent if we- 
 consider how exhaustive were his investigations of specific remedies, 
 and with what difficulties he had to struggle in pursuing this path. His 
 observations of the effects of medicines on the disposition, the tem- 
 perature of the body, the sleep, with regard to thirst, &c., in respect to 
 the time of day or night, movement or rest, contact, the time before 
 or after eating, when in the open air or in the room, as to the dura- 
 tion of the action of medicines, iTcc, bear witness to the fertility of his 
 genius and to his power of discovering new and true points of view in 
 the realm of nature. 
 
 The proving of medicines on healthy persons alone does not suffice 
 to show the full range of their action : experience at the sick bed is also 
 a necessary factor for this purpose. 
 
 Hahnemann's materia medica in its present primiti\c condition 
 must be purged of false and doubtful statements. 
 
 Kopp then attacks in detail some paragraphs in Hahne- 
 mann's Org-anon, which were even then only accepted as true 
 by few individuals and are now regarded as true by none ; 
 blames Hahnemann because he presumes to usurp a dicta- 
 torship in medicine, and shows that cures are not always 
 effected homoeopathically, as Hahnemann says they arc. 
 Then examples are given of homoeopathic cures and failures. 
 In these cases it can be proved by the unsuccessful issue 
 that he frequently made a false selection of remedies. The 
 treatment is sometimes complicated by the employment of 
 blisters, an inconsistency which is much to be blamed. 
 Such accounts are only confusing. These half-and-half 
 treatments could only displease both sides. 
 
 A physician who denies the efficacy of minute doses may be asked 
 whether he has ever thoroughly gauged the sensitiveness of the human 
 organism in both its extremes. 
 
 It is true that homoeopathic doses do often effiict rapid and wonder- 
 ful cures and without any attendant suffi::rings ; but they frequently 
 also have no effect at all [certainly, if the wrong medicine is chosen]. 
 
 If I were member of a jury that was to give a Aerdict on the effect 
 of the homoeopathic dilutions, I could honestly say nothing else but 
 this : They are generally efficacious, but there are cases where no 
 effect is observed from their administration (p. 114). 
 
 Kopp was not prepared to give up bleeding. He draws 
 attention to the fact that in adult females of all races blood 
 is lost periodically. " This is the weak side of homoeopath}" 
 — it neglects general and local bleeding by venesection and
 
 great services to medicine. 267 
 
 the application of leeches, and thereby endangers the main- 
 tenance of the integrity of the organs and imperils health 
 and even life itself" 
 
 " A genuine allopathy and a moderate homceopathy more 
 nearly approach one another than is commonly supposed ; 
 on either hand lie the dangerous extremes." If the homoeo- 
 paths had accepted Kopp's views, bleeding would be still 
 in full swing. 
 
 Hahnemann's observations respecting specific drugs are one thing, 
 and the theory propounded by him is another. We should be wrong 
 to form our opinion of homoeopathy only on the latter. While there 
 is much that deserves attention and is valuable and interesting to the 
 physician in the former, one main cause of the number of virulent 
 opponents of homoeopathy is that medical men were repelled from 
 giving it a fair trial by the defects of the Hahnemannic theory, as 
 also by its novelty and by its being directly contrary to the ordinar)- 
 practice (p. 465). 
 
 Any unprejudiced person following critically Hahnemann's practical 
 career, from his first appearance as an author, as a teacher, as founder 
 and master of a special school, will not be able to deny his unflagging 
 spirit of research, his speculative originality, and the mighty intel- 
 lectual power of the man. He strove to carry out courageously his 
 bold plans with great talent, knowledge of mankind and sagacity, the 
 accumulated learning of years, and a rare persistency. We see in him 
 everywhere the experimental observer who was in his earlier days an 
 earnest and diligent worker in the field of chemistry. His services in 
 more accurately ascertaining the specific properties of drugs and the 
 great sensitiveness of the human organism, are undeniable (p. 471). 
 
 Simon {Pseudomessias, third part) speaks of Kopp as a 
 sensible practitioner and critic — " an excellent practitioner " 
 "of ripe age and experience" &c., &c. 
 
 Sachs* says of him : " Kopp is one of the best informed 
 and most justly respected German physicians, a man who 
 has brought to the most difficult of the arts a fine and 
 
 independent intellect," "he enjoys a very honourable 
 
 place among German physicians." Sachs angrily ex- 
 claims, p. 27i,"Herr Kopp, an estimable physician, a writer 
 of varied learning, a man of ripe experience and, as it has 
 always seemed, without any temptation to indulge in eccen- 
 tricities, far from prone to theorise, of a reflective mind 
 
 * Die Homoppathic und Hcrr Kopp^ Leipzig, 1834, p. 39.
 
 268 Proving medicines on the healthy 
 
 and practical skill, not to be seduced into metaphysical 
 speculations, but confining himself to experimental science, 
 has undertaken an examination of homceopathy !" — incon- 
 ceivable ! For everything ever written by Hahnemann is, 
 whatever Kopp may say, according to the decided opinion of 
 these two allopaths, utter nonsense. Simon declared Hahne- 
 mann to be a "crass ignoramus," "his inability to seize an 
 idea and pursue it, is clearly evident from everything he has 
 written," (p. 5), and Sachs, for the second time, likens him 
 to the devil in whom there is as much truth as in Hahne- 
 mann. But Kopp was unreservedly blamed for administer- 
 ing homoeopathic drugs at the sick bed — such palpable 
 nonsense did not deserve trial. 
 
 Allopathic opinions on the proving of drugs on the JieaWiy 
 
 organism. 
 
 The opinions of Bischoff, Puchelt, Hufeland, Gmelin, 
 Riecke, Eschen mayor and Kopp on this subject have 
 already been mentioned. 
 
 Professor Heinroth expressed the following opinion {I.e. 
 p. 103) :— 
 
 Who has made us acquainted with all this, with the w hole apparatus 
 of the materia medica, based on so many thousand observations ? The 
 writer has often asked this question, and can only find this answer — 
 necessity, instinct and chance. 
 
 And in a note (p. 104) he says : — • 
 
 In this respect chance and fate are one. What happens to us is 
 nothing else but what is sent to us. Sapienti sat I 
 
 Page 105 : — Therefore it appears to us that most probably necessity, 
 instinct and chance are the discoverers of the materia medica, which 
 is transmitted by tradition and has grown gradually. 
 
 Page 107 : — It really appears ridiculous that Hahnemann should say 
 that he has ascertained the effects of medicines on healthy persons. 
 
 Page i 10 : — The idea of testing medicines on healthy persons is 
 repugnant to reason and repellant to common sense. The art of 
 such almost criminal experimenting had to be invented before one 
 could even think of such a thing. A healthily constituted person
 
 denounced as criminal. 260- 
 
 v 
 
 can at the most make one trial out of curiosity as to how a medicine 
 tastes, but he will never try how it acts, for he is not ill ; and who 
 would wish to make himself ill by means of medicine ? 
 
 Heinroth still further developed his views. 
 
 Page 112 : — Once more — only sick persons and not healthy ones- 
 have made us acquainted with the curative properties of medicines ; 
 and it is just as impossible to discover these properties when in health 
 as it is only possible to gain this experience in a diseased condition. 
 Diseases and their remedies are correlatives in the same way as health 
 and food. Just as senseless as it would be to seek to discover the 
 effects of food on patients, is it to try to ascertain the effects of 
 medicines on healthy persons. INIedicines show their power only in 
 the diseased condition, as food does only in the healthy condition. 
 
 And what does Hufeland's Journal say about Heinroth : 
 " who can vie with him in intelligence ? " Schmidt's Jahr- 
 biicher calls this work " the classic work of Heinroth." F. 
 Groos wrote :* " Heinroth, this celebrated Leipzic scholar !" 
 " I remember having read in Hcinroth's notes to his trans- 
 lation of Georget's works that he declares that he has com- 
 pletely refuted Hahnemann's teachings." But we have 
 interrupted Heinroth. 
 
 Page 134: — " Human beings become mere experiment- 
 ing machines, pharmacometers to please the materia 
 medica." So it goes on through several pages, and it is 
 proved that the proving of remedies is a "crime" (p. 137). 
 " Every power in nature is to be learnt by the effect it 
 produces, and are we to learn the curative power before it 
 produces an effect? We again exclaim with Hahnemann — 
 Folly ! " 
 
 That Heinroth did not stand alone in the views he held 
 is clear from the criticism in Schmidt's Jahrbiicher. His 
 book was looked upon as one of the best and by many as 
 containing the most thorough and convincing refutation of 
 " the heretic Hahnemann," as Ferd. Jahn called him If 
 Hahnemann was extinguished by Heinroth " by the ir- 
 resistible force of loeic." 
 
 * Ueber das Jiotn. Hcilpriiicip^ I.e., p. 4. 
 
 t Almimgen ciner allgcm. Natiirgeschichtc dcr Krankheitcn, 
 Eisenach, 1828, p. 116.
 
 2/0 Prophecies of t/ie speedy 
 
 Miickisch, I.e. 1826, p. 123, refers to the judgment of 
 Heinroth on " these senseless proving-experhnents of 
 Hahnemann's on healthy persons," and arrives finally at 
 the conclusion that such provings on the healthy " are con- 
 trary at once to nature and to reason." 
 
 Professor Sachs, Simon, Lesser, the anonymous author of 
 the Wonders of HomccopatJiy and others wrote in the same 
 strain, but on the other hand it is not to be denied that 
 many of Hahnemann's opponents recognised his services in 
 having sought to found a physiological materia niedica, 
 and of having given the first impulse towards it. 
 
 Allopathic viezvs on the duration of Houui'opatJiy and pro- 
 posals for its destruction. 
 
 As homoeopathy was " nonsense " it could not possibly 
 have a long existence, especially in view of the tremendous 
 obstacles which were placed in its way. If the allopaths 
 had been right in their judgment, it must necessarily follow 
 that the speedy downfall of homoeopathy was to be antici- 
 pated. But if progress were made in the spread of homoeo- 
 pathy this is a proof that the judgment of its opponents was 
 mistaken. 
 
 Professor Kieser prophesied in the year 1825 : — * 
 
 From what has been already stated it necessarily follows that both 
 Hahnemann's and Broussais' theories can only have an ephemeral 
 existence, and can receive recognition from the public only so long 
 as the present inflammatory epidemic character of diseases prevails, 
 and that both will lose their hold on the public as soon as a different 
 epidemic character of disease appears. 
 
 In 1825! the Obcrmcdicinalrath and ph}'sician-in- 
 ordinary Stieglitz, laments : " the monstrous system of 
 Hahnemann, which has spread especially in and around 
 Prague and Leipzic, is very deplorable." 
 
 * Hufcland's>//r/7., Vol. LX., St. 2, p. 36. 
 t Hufcland'syt'w;/., Vol. LX., St. i, p. 99.
 
 extinction of honuvopatJiy. 271 
 
 Professor Hcinroth writes in the same year,* " Homojo- 
 pathy will receive its death blow from this axiom [the 
 effect of medicines and the reaction of the organism], 
 
 we have now accompanied it to its death bed." The 
 
 hospital director Miickisch wrote in 1826,! "Both systems, 
 the homoeopathic and the animal magnetic are mere 
 fashions, and will, therefore, soon be forgotten." 
 
 In 1825 an allopath writes in the Altgcnicin. Anacig. dcr 
 DciitscJien (p. 675):— "The author has seen in his forty 
 years' practice many systems of medicine and methods 
 of treatment pass like thunder clouds, and so, too, this 
 homoeopathic delusion will come to an end without its 
 being necessary to abuse it." The opponents seem soon to 
 have abandoned this last opinion. 
 
 Professor Sachs wrote in 1826 A last iverd on Ilahnc- 
 inann's System. Kraus, whom Professor Most| calls his re- 
 spected teacher, says in the same year :§ " Hahnemann has 
 bestowed an unsuitable name on a false doctrine, which will 
 perish before the knowledge of the word in its new meaning, 
 for this will be ridiculed centuries hence by men who will 
 compassionate the weaknesses of our age." " Hahnemann's 
 erroneous doctrine will have perished in a few years." 
 Nietschll prophesies : " It is just as easy to foresee that the 
 new theory will go out of fashion as soon as any other 
 novelty occupies the general attention." " Hence most 
 doctors are convinced that this dazzling monstrosity, with- 
 out any counter-measures will, perhaps, soon reach the term 
 of all perishable things." " Truth will gain the victory over 
 the follies of the day." " I think I may prophesy that very 
 soon nobody will any longer believe in homoeopathy."' 
 " Let us avoid all personalities in attacks on a system which 
 will soon cease to exist ! PI ad others who have formerly 
 attacked Herr Hahnemann gone to work with the same 
 humanity as Herr Plufcland, it would, perhaps, never have 
 
 * Z.f., p. i8g, note. 
 
 t Z.f., p. 169. 
 
 X Encyclopiidic dcr Median, \o\. I., p. 1042, Leipzig, 1836. 
 
 § Krit. eiymolog. ined. Lexicon, Gottingen, 1826, 2nd edit., p. 403. 
 
 II Bcmerkungen iiber Homoopaihic, Hanau, 1826, pp. 10, 31, 44, T^.
 
 -/- 
 
 Premature rejoicings over 
 
 been introduced into practical life and non-professionals 
 would have had one reason the less for abandoning their 
 good opinion of doctors and their art." " The already tot- 
 tering condition of homceopathy." 
 
 In 1S27 Elias* rejoices over "the decreasing adhesion" 
 of the public to homceopathy, and says that " this is the 
 most striking proof that homceopathy is a useless thing." 
 
 In 1828, Bernsteinf compares Hahnemann with Brous- 
 sais and Rasori, complains of the great spread of homoeo- 
 pathy in Warsaw, and promises its speedy downfall. In 
 1828, Dr. Wetzler wrote a book, entitled HaJinemanns 
 homccopatJiy at its last gasp. Augsburg. Fischer of Dresden 
 {l.c. 1829), as we showed at p. 198, prophesied the down- 
 fall of homoeopathy in Leipzic, and also mentioned the 
 reason why it cannot exist in Berlin, France, and Eng- 
 land. At p. 53, he says: "But my own understanding gives 
 me security that the State itself cannot long suffer such 
 foolish and unreasonable quacker}^" Obermedicinalrath 
 Wildburg wrote, in 1830, Some Instructive Words on the 
 HovioeopatJiic Healing Art (Leipzic, 1S30, preface), and 
 thus administered comfort to the allopaths : — 
 
 Remember how eagerly gymnastics were received in their time, and 
 with what zeal they were long pursued ; but how soon it was recog- 
 nised that this mode of promoting exercise among youth was in many 
 respects injurious I What a rage existed at one time for using mag- 
 netism in diseases ; but how soon it was dropped. It was just so with 
 the prophylactic against scarlet fever,t with the belief in miraculous 
 cures and cures by starvation. And is not the same to be expected 
 Avith regard to those Russian baths which have been received with so 
 much enthusiasm ? Calmly and quietly, therefore, may the allopaths 
 await the fate of homoeopathy. 
 
 Hufeland says in i83i,§ "The experiment is not yet com- 
 pleted." " Time will show." 
 
 Kleinert's Repei^toriiun contained, in 183 1, this encourag- 
 
 * Gurkejztno/iaie, p. 45. 
 
 t Hufeland's /tfz/r;/., Vol. LX\'II., St., 2, p. 85. 
 
 % In 1835, Professor Fleischmann, of Erlangen, among others, re- 
 ported favourable results from Hahnemann's remedy for scarlatina. 
 He had employed it since 1807 (Huf Journ. LXXX., St. 6, p. 21). 
 
 § Die Hoiii6flpathiL\ Berlin, pp. 5 and 12.
 
 iJie decease of HomceopatJiy. 273 
 
 ing news : " In Brunswick, homoeopathy seems to be near 
 its end."* The anonymous writer of Wonders of Hoinoeo- 
 patJiy (p. 4) prophesied in 1833 : — 
 
 Homoeopathy will live, and, purged from its dross, will prove to be 
 a valuable method of healing. 
 
 Page 20 : — I can foresee that when the inflammatory constitution of 
 diseases again prevails, the inisuse of homoeopathy will as surely come 
 to an end, as was the case with Brown's system (p. 26.) 
 
 Hahnemann bears considerable resemblance to the old heroes of 
 medicine. yEsculapius had no fixed abode, but wandered through the 
 land, accompanied by a goat, healing the sick who came to hiin ; and 
 Hippocrates, who often changed his abode, rode on a mule through 
 Greece and the neighbouring countries (p. 27). 
 
 The fame of Hippocrates was not so great during his lifetime, as we 
 see from his complaints in his letters to Democritus ; his fame arose 
 after his death from his writings, but in the case of our Hahnemann it 
 can easily be anticipated that his fame will be still less after his 
 death than during' his life. 
 
 Sachs, HouiccopatJiy and He?-}" Kopp (1834, p. 2), says : — 
 " What have I to do with homoeopathy which is non- 
 existent — is nothing." " Kopp predicts that it will be im- 
 perishable " (p. 272). " Homoeopathy has never appeared, 
 and does not exist " (p. 272.) Damerow saw in 1834 " that 
 homoeopathy was already attacked by decay."-|- Schmidt's 
 JahrbiichcrX in 1834: "Whether homoeopathy will defy 
 time and its opponents is very doubtful." Simon, in 1834 
 expressed the same hopes. § 
 
 Homoeopathy has already outlived its most brilliant period in 
 Austria, where it first gained some attention by its novelty ; the en- 
 thusiasm of the non-professional public for it there, as well as in 
 Saxony, Thuringia and other places, has sensibly cooled and is steadily 
 diminishing. Homoeopathy resembles cholera, which, while breaking 
 out in new regions, is almost forgotten in those places where it for- 
 merly prevailed. 
 
 All the allopathic medical men at that time prophesied 
 
 * Suppl. to Vols. IV. and V., p. 435. 
 
 t Med. Ztg. d. Ver.f.Heilk. in Pretisscn, 1834, No. 36. Kleinert, 
 Rcpertoriiein, &c. 
 X Vol. III., p. 269. 
 § Antihom. Archiv, Vol. I., H. i, p. 20. 
 
 18
 
 2/4 Houuvopathy is dead! 
 
 the speedy downfall of homccopathy, so that a homoeopathic 
 physician was able to write in 1834 : — * 
 
 The grave of homoeopathy has been dug for more than thirty [more 
 correctly twenty] years by more than 30,000 allopathic doctors ; they 
 are all standing round the freshly dug grave, and are waiting for the 
 cortege which shall commit the long looked-for corpse to their eager 
 hands, that they may bury it as soon as possible and show it the last 
 honours. Professor Sachs already prepared the funeral sermon in his 
 Schlussiuort some years ago, but see ! tlie grave still stands open, and 
 the corpse does not arrive. 
 
 The mourners, however, did not lose patience. Lesser j 
 soothed them thus : " Now the good man can dismiss his 
 cares, for homoeopathy has come to the end of its life in 
 Berlin." Augustin,^ in 1835, called homoeopathy, " This 
 fashionable method of'cure." Stieglitz§ advised them not to 
 return home yet, for the corpse would soon arrive : — 
 
 The educated classes who chiefly favour homoeopathy [others assert 
 with equal assurance that homoeopaths bid chiefly for the support of 
 the uneducated public] will not allow themselves to be permanently 
 deluded by such an imposture. ]Many who are now inclined to homoe- 
 opathy will soon recall to their minds what ordinary medicine has 
 done for themselves or their circle of acquaintances. 
 
 Stieglitz did not probably then suspect that a homoeo- 
 path. Dr. Weber, would, by and bye, succeed him in his 
 position as physician in ordinar)^ to the King of Hanover, 
 and that the king would express himself most gratei"ully 
 respecting his homoeopathic treatm^ent as compared with 
 the allopathic. The homoeopathic physician in ordinary 
 received an autograph letter in which the king expresses 
 his especial satisfaction with the results obtained by 
 homoeopathic treament, Vv'hich had a very dejDressing 
 effect on the allopaths.|| 
 
 But of what use was it to talk ? The allopaths were 
 tired of waiting in the churchyard. Many of them began 
 to suffer from cold feet, and went hom.c with colds ; they 
 continued to bleed their patients and to write their long 
 
 * Die AUoopaihic^ No. 6. 7 Z.r., ]3. 42, note. 
 
 J L.c.^ p. 186. § Die Homoopaihic, 1865, p. 9. 
 
 II Allg. horn. Z/g., Vol. LVI., p. 161, and Vol. LVIII., p. 20.
 
 The allopathic funeral unites, 275 
 
 prescriptions. Some, indeed, ascended a height, and called 
 out that they saw the corpse coming — certainly it is 
 coming now ! — -but they met with little attention. When 
 the Vienna school had found the key to the success of the 
 homoeopaths and thought to place themselves on a level 
 with them by means of nihilism, hope of a joyful funeral 
 feast again rose, and they began again to catch sight of the 
 corpse. " VVe hope still to see the whole illusive fabric 
 confounded and evaporate in a bad smell ;" such was, in 
 1853, the wish of a hot-headed allopath;* and Professor 
 Aug. Forsterf thus comforted his fellow-believers in 1857 : 
 " Outside of Germany this system has made but very little 
 way, and now there are hardly any traces of it to be found." 
 This was very consoling, but the complaints from France, 
 England, Spain, Italy, America, and other quarters of the 
 globe of the desperate tenacity of life shown by this tire- 
 some system were too loud for the words of the professor 
 to give the longed-for feeling of security. Soon the last 
 allopath had disappeared from the side of the grave. On 
 the return journey they shook their wise heads and groaned 
 forth : " iiiundiis vult decipi " — " the want of judgment of the 
 crowd " — " the world given over to folly " — and so forth. 
 
 In 1834 Schmidt's Jahrbiichey contained a quotation 
 (vol. III., p. 269) from another paper on the spread of 
 homoeopathy : — 
 
 While an anonymous writer who has just increased the number of 
 works on homoeopathy by a new one, describes homoeopathy as a 
 frightful abortion with a big body, goat's hoofs, crooked arms and long 
 lingers, fox's eyes, donkey's ears, and a hydrocephalic head, others 
 find the system uncommonly attractive. The number of its adherents 
 is increasing, and it has become quite the fashionable beauty — it is 
 spoken of by everyone. Whether, however, it will be able to defy 
 
 *• Cliarlatancrie dcr Horn., Weimar, 1853, p. 40. 
 t Gnindriss dcr Encycl. d. Mcdicin. Jena, 1857, p. 125. — Fielitz, 
 Die medic. Weltwcisen^ Sondershauscn, 1857, p. 26.
 
 276 Homoeopathy still lives, and 
 
 time and its opponents, and, like Ninon de I'Enclos, be able to retain its 
 old admirers and attract new ones in its old age, is very doubtful, but 
 its spread is immense notwithstanding. Not much less than half of 
 the medical works that appear in Germany at the present time relate 
 to the subject of homoeopathy. Its literature is already so extensive 
 that even homoeopathists begin to complain that they have no time to 
 read all and study Avhat is good. Se\en periodicals are devoted to 
 homoeopathy— the first number has just appeared of an eighth, which 
 merely contains extracts from the others ; another one will shortly 
 see the light in Karlsruhe ; a tenth in Paris, an eleventh in North 
 America. The first dozen is therefore nearly complete. In Germany, 
 its native country, homoeopathy has spread rapidly. In Baden a few 
 years ago there was one single homoeopathic doctor ; since that 
 time more than 40 doctors have studied and are practising homoeo- 
 pathy. In Wirtemberg, about ten years ago, only one doctor practised 
 the new method. Now it appears to be gaining ground here, and 
 in Stuttgart there is a young homceopathic missionary. In Bavaria 
 there are only a few homceopathic doctors ; in Wiirzburg no single 
 apostle of the new faith has yet appeared. In Munich lectures have 
 been given for two years on homoeopathy ; and a homoeopathic 
 hospital is to be erected. In Austria the number of homoeopathic 
 doctors is increasing. In Saxony and in Thuringia it counts a great 
 many adherents, and its founder is still, in his old age, labouring with 
 youthful zeal. In Leipzic a homceopathic dispensary was opened last 
 year. In Sax-Meiningen the government last year issued an order 
 to the apothecaries to provide themselves with homoeopathic remedies. 
 In the two Hesses it has met with a cordial reception. In Prussia, too, 
 homoeopathy is making its way ; in Hamburg some doctors have 
 recently carried its banner, and for elexen years it has taken up its 
 abode in the capital of Brunswick. Several societies are labouring, 
 etc. 
 
 Further on the progress of the new doctrine in foreign 
 lands is considered, in France, Switzerland, and Italy. In 
 Italy it is dead (1834), according to this author: "It made 
 only an ephemeral appearance there :" — 
 
 In the Iberian Peninsula there appears to be not yet any notion of 
 homoeopathy ; and it has failed in gaining any approval from the 
 proud English. In Russia it was long kept down by the late Reh- 
 mann, Avho was at the head of the medical faculty there, and an 
 opponent of homoeopathy. Now, however, it is left more free, and 
 an Imperial rescript appeared in October of last year which allowed 
 qualified doctors to practise homoeopathy, ordered the establishment of 
 homoeopathic pharmacies in St. Petersburg and Moscow, and even 
 allowed doctors to dispense their own medicines themselves under 
 certain conditions. On the other side of the ocean, too, the new
 
 displays astonishing vitality. 277 
 
 system has found its admirers. The medical facuky of New York has 
 •elected Hahnemann an Honorary member ; in Philadelphia a society 
 has been formed named after him, and lately a North American 
 homoeopathic journal was announced. 
 
 From these short notices we can see that homceopathy has spread 
 considerably in the last few years, and it may not be an exaggeration 
 when the number of homoeopathic doctors is given by its adherents 
 as 500. But notwithstanding this the attentive observer cannot but 
 notice that homoeopathy, spreading as quickly as it has done, is now 
 encountering a crisis in which the question of its very existence is 
 involved. Either it will issue from this crisis victorious and purified, 
 or it will tumble down and be buried under its own ruins, and this, 
 according to all appearance, is what will most probably happen."^- 
 
 Whiche\-er way the matter may be decided, something useful may be 
 gained for medicine, and even if homoeopathy should be destroyed and 
 be recognised as but a barren fruit-tree, yet a greater attention to diet, 
 a restraint on the abuse of drugs, greater simplicity of treatment, more 
 attentive observation of the specific effects of medicines, and a more 
 severe criticism with regard to medical experience, will be the happy 
 final result of the bitter contest. 
 
 * That was the account given by an old-school writer of the state 
 of homoeopathy in 1834. Things have altered somewhat since then. 
 Germany, including Austria-Hungary and Switzerland, has upwards 
 of 400 practitioners, four or five hospitals, and four journals. In Great 
 Britain there are upwards of 250 avowed, and a large but unknown 
 number of unavowed practitioners, three hospitals, and two monthly 
 periodicals. In France there are more than 150 practitioners, two 
 hospitals, and three monthly periodicals. In Russia there are about. 
 100 practitioners and one or two periodicals. In Belgium there are 
 twenty-seven practitioners and one monthly periodical. Italy has only 
 forty-one practitioners and one monthly periodical. Spain has a large 
 number of practitioners, two hospitals, and three or four monthly 
 periodicals. In the United States of North America there are between 
 7 and 8,000 practitioners, fifty-four hospitals, several State-supported 
 lunatic asylums, upwards of 100 societies (some of them numbering 
 many hundreds of members), twenty periodicals, besides nine annual 
 transactions of societies, and five annual reports of hospitals. The 
 neighbouring British province of Canada has a considerable number 
 of practitioners. Mexico has a good many, and a monthly periodical. 
 In South America most of the States are well provided with practi- 
 tioners, and several of them, as La Plata, Monte Video, Colombia, 
 have homoeopathic periodicals. Australia, New Zealand, Hindostan 
 and China, are all provided with homoeopathic practitioners, indeed 
 there is scarcely a corner of the world where the disciples of Hahne- 
 mann have not penetrated. — [Ed.]
 
 2/8 HouHvopathy will not die 
 
 Another allopath is staggered by an incomprehensible fact 
 
 (1835):-* 
 
 It is certainly remarkable that a system resting on such an insecure 
 foundation should be so well received in spite of all opposition — that 
 it should even find reception and defenders among the educated 
 classes. No other system has made such an epoch, such rapid pro- 
 gress ! When did non-professionals ever evince so much interest in a 
 medical system? After hardly thirty years, homoeopathy has travelled 
 through all civilised countries both of the old and new world. 
 
 Cry for State help. 
 
 How could the allopaths protect themselves against the 
 spread of homoeopathy ? They had not spared their abuse 
 and calumnies, but no satisfactory result followed. The 
 State must help. Fischer (Dresden), in 1829, had clamoured 
 loudly for State help. Three years previously we learn 
 from Hufeland's Journal, that the action of the govern- 
 ment against the homoeopaths was required. In Austria, in 
 1819, the celebrated guardian of the health of the Emperor 
 Francis I., his Excellency v. Stifft, obtained an imperial 
 edict against the practice of homoeopathy. In 1831, Pro- 
 fessor Dr. C. H. Schultz completed his Honwobiotik, and 
 dedicated it to the minister von Stein zum Altenstein, and 
 on p. 13 he advised the government "to forbid entirely the 
 practice of homoeopathy." In 1834, Dr. Burmann, the Court 
 physician and physicus in Hanover, wrote :t "Homoeopathy 
 — the unscientific audacity of which defies every canon of 
 reason — should not be suffered by any State." 
 
 Professor Sachs ::|: " Hahnemann has called us ' prejudiced 
 people, who go about unpunished, and do the greatest 
 injury to the State by robbing it of its citizens.' Supposing 
 Hahnemann were right? Supposing homoeopathy were not 
 destitute of wholesome truth? It would not be absolutely 
 
 * Simon's Antihom. Archiv, I., 3, p. 36. 
 
 t Henke's Zcitschrift f. d. Staatsarziieikiuidc, 1S34, VII. Kleinert, 
 Repertoriwn der ges. incd. Journalistik. 
 
 X Die Ho?!!, itjid Ha-r Kopp, Leipzig, 1S34, p. 6 — 36.
 
 tvitJiout the help of the State. 279 
 
 impossible. If a military professor were to teach that fort- 
 resses should be attacked with sugar-plums or soap-bubbles ; 
 if a teacher of mathematics were to assert that two and two 
 make five, and that a part is greater than the whole ; what 
 would the State do? It would, certainly, send him about 
 his business. Hahnemann makes similar assertions ; no 
 good can, therefore, come from him ; what should the State 
 do? Doctors take an oath to the State to act, according 
 to the laws of science, ' on a scientific basis.' The homoeo- 
 paths contemn science ; they have broken their contract 
 with the State, and, therefore, have no rights as regards 
 the State." Thus writes with incisive logic this " talented 
 author." 
 
 Dr. Fischer, of Erfurt,* holds the following opinions : — 
 One bright side of homoeopathy is the excellence of its 
 narcotic tinctures, as compared with allopathic extracts ; 
 another good point is its discovery of specific remedies and 
 their use in diseases ; an indirect advantage is the great 
 simplification of medical treatment. But the State ought 
 to forbid homoeopathy in cases of syphilis, ophthalmia, and 
 intermittent fevers. Dispensing their medicines ought to be 
 forbidden to doctors. In the Wiirtenibergischer Landbotc^ 
 a physician says, " that it is the duty of the authorities to 
 forbid any one to practise who gives himself out as a 
 homoeopath." 
 
 In Bavaria the allopaths at last obtained so much, that| 
 (the medical committees through the country having been 
 consulted) the use of homoeopathy in medico-judicial cases 
 was forbidden. As a sign that there were exceptions 
 among the allopaths, we notice that one doctor wrote 
 against this proceeding, and he was, according to his own 
 statement, far from being a friend of homoeopathy. He 
 says : — 
 
 * Med. Zeit. dcs Ver.f. Hcilk. in Prctisscji, No. 55, 1S33. Klcinert, 
 Repertoriuni, &c. 
 
 t 1834, No. 125. — Die All'6opatliit\ 1834, No. 17. 
 
 X By ministerial ordinance of the 231x1 Dec, 1835, according to 
 others, of 4th January, 1836.
 
 28o If the State zvill only help 
 
 This order is an attack on the personal rig^hts of the patient and 
 on the most sacred rights of science. Science is a republic, and every 
 scientist is a representative citizen thereof. Here there is no dictator- 
 ship, least of all in medicine and the natural sciences. Distant as 
 we still are from the truth and from the limit of scientific knowledge, 
 we see in the rise of new systems and theories a striving- of the human 
 spirit of investigation after truth and the light of knowledge. Op- 
 ponents of homoeopathy who rejoice at these measures should re- 
 member that they are acquiescing in the infringement of a right which 
 all medical men should defend with every intellectual weapon at 
 their command. Such a proceeding is a triumph for homoeopathy 
 a defeat of their opponents, because it is evident, from the fact of 
 their invoking physical force, that they are unable to figdit and defeat 
 it with reason.* 
 
 In the same way Dr. Stachelroth, district physician of 
 Ottvveiler,t although no adherent of homoeopathy, looks 
 upon it as hardly possible that the homoeopathic system, 
 " which is valued and practised by so many excellent men," 
 rests entirely on a delusion, and he defends the trustworthi- 
 ness of the homoeopathic method. 
 
 Such views however, are but rarely met with. The majority 
 were in favour of State help, and the State exerted itself with 
 sufficient energy. 
 
 The allopathic opinions were very frankly expressed in 
 a pamphlet: The Road to the Grave of Homeopathy .' ^ 
 Tiie author has preferred to barricade himself behind 
 " anonymity," and thence to dedicate his work " to the 
 public and to governments." Part I. the author begins : — 
 
 Homoeopathy had hardly come to life, it did not breathe, its organ 
 was still powerless to announce its existence by a cry — the dumb and 
 naked creature was shunned and hated by all as an abortion. When 
 the doctors were called upon by the father to view and to judge of his 
 little daughter they found that its organs from the larynx to the lungs 
 were well formed, but it was in truth a monster ; a big trunk, feet like 
 a goat, crooked arms and long fingers, eyes like a fox, ears like a 
 donkey, and much water in the head. 
 
 It was abandoned, and not visited. Weeks grew to months, 
 months to years, years to decades, and see ! homoeopathy appears as 
 a maiden of thirty years — that despised and neglected abortion is now 
 
 ■^ Annalen do- Staatsarz!iciku)idL\ 1836, 19. — Kleinert, Tvir/^?/-/. 
 t Henke's ZcitscJi.f. Staatsai-znciku)idL\ 1835, ^°- — Kleinert, I.e. 
 X Quedlinburg und Leipzig, 1834.
 
 Jioiiuvopatlis may be burnt like witcJies. 281 
 
 surrounded and flattered by stalwart young- men, she shows herself 
 to the world and displays her true flesh and blood even to those who, 
 not taken by her charms, looked upon her as nothing but carrion. 
 This vermin will not disappear so long as it finds nourishment. 
 
 Page 26 : — Prince ! Minister ! learn with astonishment what that 
 homoeopathy which you have suffered and which flourishes in your 
 
 land really is Is it not a disgrace to any public paper even to 
 
 mention homoeopathy ? 
 
 Page 29 : How ought government to treat, not homoeopathy, but 
 homoeopathic doctors ? It would be disgraceful to the State if only the 
 theologian and the jurist should enjoy a fixed salar)?, protection, 
 respect, while the physician, who must expend more rather than less 
 time, money and mental labour to arrive at his position, should be 
 treated like a pedlar and neglected. 
 
 So it goes on to p. 32, where the grave is dug: — 
 
 (i) Let the public be taught what its opinion of homoeopathy ought 
 to be ; (2) let the truth be told respecting the assertions of homoeo- 
 paths about the pretended progress of homoeopathy in foreign countries, 
 which are mere lies and false statements. Let the loudly-trumpeted 
 homoeopathic miraculous cures be exposed when that can be done ; 
 let the concealed hirelings be unmasked ; for it is well known that in 
 Dresden many people have been bribed to insert reports of marvellous 
 cures in the Drcsdcncr A7iseigcr. (3) Let the position of homoeopathy 
 in relation to medical police and the law be explained. 
 
 Page 23 : Homoeopathy is dead, its ghost only haunts us. 
 
 Page 38 : So long as the invention of an eccentric doctor is allowed 
 to circulate in the land, order ceases to prevail. 
 
 Schmidt's JaJirbilchcr (II. p. 372) declares its agree- 
 ment witli the tenor of this pamphlet, though the fact 
 of its being anonymous does not seem to please it. In 
 1 841 Medicinalrath Dr. Sander* energetically demands 
 State help for the suppression of homoeopathy. 
 
 We are surprised at the horrible stupidity of our ancestors, who 
 piously burnt with solemn legal forms women afflicted with hysterical 
 convulsions as witches possessed by the devil, but will not a later age 
 smile at our boasted enlightenment, at our weakness, who dare not 
 suppress a manifest imposture in a practical science, a life-destroying 
 
 mode of treatment, a palpable superstition? Many have already 
 
 been sacrificed to this system, and until time disabuses the public 
 and the physicians there will be many more victims. If this method 
 is recognized as deception and error, why are not forcible steps taken 
 against it ? 
 
 * Hitzig's Annalcjt der Crlminalrcchtspflt\s^e, Vol. XVII., H. 3, p. 
 350.— .4//^--. horn. Zcitg., Vol. XXII., p. 198.
 
 283 Causes of the rapid 
 
 This treatise speaks of the case of a woman suffering" 
 from mental illusions, who did not improve under homoeo- 
 pathic treatment. " I can," so Sander had declared in his 
 report to the authorities in which he at the same time 
 demands the prosecution of the homoeopathic practitioner, 
 " I can however, as a doctor, give the assurance that un- 
 der the true appropriate treatment with blood-letting, with 
 cooling, derivative, opening, alterative and soothing medi- 
 cines, the disease was quite curable." We must mention 
 that the patient subsequently enjoyed the benefit of " ra- 
 tional" treatment, but this time, as it happened, without 
 the desired result. " Let us," the Medicinalrath further ex- 
 claims, " let us leave their sinister nocturnal habits to these 
 obscure night creatures — but as soon as homoeopathy ap- 
 pears in the light of day and in practice, it ceases to be 
 harmless mysticism ; it becomes quacker}-, which must 
 not be ridiculed, but seriously combated and suppressed." 
 " There is a true science of medicine — founded on scien- 
 tific principles, and derived from the experience of a 
 thousand years." 
 
 The desire for the support of the police in their combat 
 with the homoeopaths was most prominent at the time of 
 the cholera and soon after. 
 
 The reasons for the spread of homoeopathy were the same 
 as those of to-day. Foolish, simple, silly people " were 
 attracted by the homoeopathic snare." Some asserted that 
 the homoeopathic public was chiefly formed of uneducated 
 people ; others declared that the educated public contri- 
 buted the larger contingent of adherents ; one controver- 
 salist thought that clergymen and schoolmasters were " the 
 pillars of homoeopathy ; " another was convinced that the 
 higher ranks of the military and lawyers were attracted b)' 
 the " delusion." It was agreed that Hahnemann had been 
 very adroit in appealing to the non-medical public (this he 
 only did after the medical profession had rejected him). 
 But there were men who looked deeper.
 
 spread of Hahnananns system. 283 
 
 The espousal of the cause of homoeopathy by the 
 Allgevieiiier Anrjeiger dcr Deutschen contributed largely to 
 the spread of the new doctrine, and this paper was very 
 unfavourably regarded by the allopaths. They termed the 
 editor the Sancho Panza of the Don Quixote Hahnemann, 
 and made many other jests at his expense, which are to 
 be found in the ]Vo7iders of HoviceopatJiy, 1833. It was 
 a deadly crime to admit articles favourable to homoeo- 
 pathy into its columns ; and it was no atonement that its 
 opponents too were allowed to hold forth in the language 
 peculiar to them. Thus Dr. A. H. Nicolai in the same paper 
 of 1832, p. 4254, was allowed to call the founder of homoeo- 
 pathy " weak minded or insane, most probably the former, 
 as is usual in old age." 
 
 What could induce the editor, Dr. Hennicke, publicly to 
 espouse such nonsense ? He was, in other respects, as no 
 one could deny, an intelligent man. But that too was to 
 be explained. Kraus was acquainted with the circumstances 
 and revealed them :* " I cannot believe the report which 
 has just been spread that Hahnemann is indebted to a cer- 
 tain secret alliance for many of these deplorable articles 
 in favour of his system and for their spread. I cannot 
 think that sensible men would willingly engage in such 
 stupid cheatery— for such secret alliances are nothing else 
 — which is more abominable and criminal than highway 
 robbery and arson." " Attention should be called to an 
 attempted stroke of policy to gain the support of the mob 
 by summoning the police against themselves, and thus 
 posing as martyrs." 
 
 Besides State help — the favourite resource up to the 
 present time — other proposals were made. Prof Toltenyi, 
 of Vienna, declared in the Hungarian medical paper Orvosi 
 Jar of July 6th, 1845, that the best way to overthrow 
 homoeopathy was by means of publicity. He owns that 
 he had formerly expressed the contrary opinion, and had 
 been opposed to publicity. " My readers will be astonished 
 at hearing me express this opinion. I willingly own my 
 
 *- L.C., p. 405-
 
 284 Publicity zvill surely kill it. 
 
 fault in having opposed publicity. I had not then learnt 
 by experience." " So long as the homcjuopaths pose before 
 the public as persecuted individuals, as victims of a good 
 cause (as they say), so long they will find proselytes among 
 doctors and protectors among the non-professionals." 
 
 In the professor's opinion homoeopathy is everywhere 
 losing ground — only in Austria does it flourish — because 
 there it is persecuted. 
 
 The homoeopaths in Hungary are still greater braggarts than those 
 in Austria. The Etna which has been kindled in other states has 
 opened a new crater here. For heaven's sake, my dear compatriots, 
 let them alone. Only do not get involved in any scientific discussions 
 with them, for you know that they have always protested against 
 reason. Take care not to enter into any practical trials of curing 
 diseases with them, for on this field they will certainly wriggle away 
 from you. But publicity is the most effectual weapon. Let the ho- 
 moeopaths, then, open their hospitals and mount their rostra ; the hun- 
 dreds of ears that will hear them, the hundreds of eyes that will follow 
 them with attention will soon overthrow them. If history does not 
 deceive us, and if experience deserves respect, then the result of this 
 publicity must be the same as it has been in England, France and 
 Germany. 
 
 In those countries homoeopathy had been destroyed, 
 the author thinks.* 
 
 This very sensible proposal met with no applause 
 among the allopaths, and this was fortunate for them ! for 
 if they had allowed the homoeopaths free scope, the beauty 
 and the dominant position of their own therapeutics would 
 soon have come to an end. It was only possible by means 
 of State help to defend their mode of treatment against 
 homoeopathy. 
 
 But even this mighty aid seemed not enough for some of 
 them. Calumnies, and the most violent personal attacks 
 on Hahnemann and the homoeopaths were called in to 
 help. The most remarkable achievements in this line arc 
 
 * AUg. horn. Ztg., Vol. XXXIV., Xos. 10 and 11.
 
 Let us try abuse and calumny. 285 
 
 found in the Wonders of HonmopatJiy of 1833 ; The ivay to 
 the Grave of HovioeopatJiy ;'^ Lesser, o.c., and many others, 
 Simon was a shining example to all. In conjunction with 
 others who held his views, he published, besides the works 
 already mentioned, a special periodical for combating 
 homoeopathy — the Anti-homoopathische Archiv." 
 
 The frolicksome manner in which the allopaths here dis- 
 ported themselves is shown by the following examples : — 
 Hahnemann is thus described by an allopath-f- who professes 
 to have met him several times (such epithets as " shameless 
 deceiver," " swindler," " charlatan," &c., we will pass by, as 
 they are things of course) : 
 
 Page 46. — "Hahnemann's language bears the stamp of 
 ignorance." 
 
 Page 52. — "I do not know how the idea has arisen that 
 Hahneman possesses acumen and learning. He has cer- 
 tainly not revealed either in his writings." Repeated 
 mention is made of Hahnemann's " stupidity " (p. 44, 47, 
 
 SZ. 113. 
 
 Page 46. — " When he examines a patient the deceiver 
 pretends to take notes for the sake of appearance." 
 
 Page 50. — A story is related that on one occasion an- 
 other allopath, with whom Hahnemann was not acquainted, 
 went to him as a pretended patient. Hahnemann examined 
 him a long time — a whole hour — and entered the state- 
 ments of the " patient " in his journal, and finally demanded 
 a large fee. " When the strange doctor discovered himself 
 and called Hahnemann a monstrous quack, he behaved 
 like a madman." This was in 1835, and Hahnemann was 
 eighty years old. 
 
 " At the first visit it cost me much trouble to keep serious, 
 and not to laugh in the face of the old impostor, every time 
 he opened his mouth." 
 
 The allopaths knew very well that they might say what 
 they liked without fear of contradiction. At p. 53, a state- 
 ment of Hahnemann's is mentioned that he did not read 
 
 * Both works were characteristically published anonymously. 
 t Vol. I., H. 2.
 
 286 HaJLiieniaiin a sJiamclcss huuibng. 
 
 the attacks on him. If Hahnemann had wished to read 
 and answer all the hostile pamphlets that appeared even 
 only up to the year 1840, he would be still at work. But 
 his reticence encouraged this class of combatants. 
 
 All impartial writers of that time and the personal 
 accounts of men still living who knew Hahnemann, arc 
 unanimous that he was amiable and courteous in personal 
 intercourse. 
 
 Page 49. — •" If the most modest objections are made, 
 he becomes wild, stamps with his feet, behaves, in short, 
 like a lunatic." 
 
 Page 44. — A story is told which manifestly bears the 
 stamp of invention. " The Russian princess N. met Hahne- 
 mann while walking with her little boy, of about seven 
 years, and in passing the child did not take off his cap 
 to the great man. The shameless humbug vehemently re- 
 proached the princess the next day, spoke so bitterly about 
 naughtiness and bad bringing-up that the lady was seized 
 with an attack of convulsions, which frequently recurred 
 when she got home. Although the old rascal was the 
 cause of it all, he would not visit the princess in spite 
 of the most urgent entreaties. This conduct nearly cost 
 the great man his life, for the highly exasperated husband 
 of this lady \\as very near running him through with his 
 sword." 
 
 After a long discourse on the excellence of bleeding, we 
 are told on p. 71: "A doctor who has ever seen the 
 wonderful effect of a big bleeding, I mean to the extent 
 of twenty ounces and upwards, could never entertain the 
 foolish and cruel notion of neglecting it and waiting till an 
 
 attack of bleeding at the nose should come on This is 
 
 my advice, to banish doctors from the country as soon 
 as bleeding, emetics, and purgatives arc pronounced un- 
 necessary." 
 
 We should not certainly be expecting too much if we 
 cherished the hope that some, at least, among the allopaths 
 would raise their voices against this method of carrying on 
 the warfare. But there was silence all round! Silence? 
 Joy reigned in Israel, and care was tak'cn to circulate this
 
 His imscrupulons avarice. 287 
 
 allopathic periodical as much as possible. The most severe 
 criticism of this ArcJiiv is found in Schmidt's JaJirbilcJier^' 
 "The exterior of the AntiJiouidopatJiisdic Archiv is attrac- 
 tive." 
 
 In order to annihilate Hahnemann morally, certain letters, 
 said to be by him, are published in this periodical, whose 
 sole object seems to be to propagate personal attacks on 
 Hahnemann and his adherents. No evidence is given of 
 the genuineness of a single one of these letters, though 
 Simon gives it to be understood that the originals could be 
 seen at his house in Hamburg. A man such as Simon, 
 against whom so many intentional untruths and the com- 
 plete loss of all self-control can be proved, deprives himself 
 of the right to be believed, and the whole contents of this 
 periodical serve only to shew the height which was reached 
 by party hatred, and can, for that very reason, never be 
 used as a proof against Hahnemann or against homoeo- 
 pathy. Almost all the " facts" alleged, in so far as they 
 can now be investigated, can be proved to be malicious 
 inventions. 
 
 A certain class of his opponents dwelt, with special 
 pleasure, on " Hahnemann's avarice." They, at last, even 
 dared to make the statement that Hahnemann had only 
 been induced to propagate his s}-stem by love of gain, 
 and that he himself knew it to be a swindle by which he 
 could make money. 
 
 To prove this, an extract was made from \\\& Dorfrjcitung, 
 the object of which was to entertain the readers at the 
 expense of truth. Hahnemann is said to have given his 
 fiancee a ring, in 1835, which cost 500 thalers, and to 
 have given to her in addition 40,000 thalers, and 32,000 to 
 each of his children. As this subject was pursued with 
 much zeal by his adversaries, we must discuss the repulsive 
 theme. 
 
 * Vol. VIII., p. 242.
 
 288 HaJincinaniCs cJieniical mistake. 
 
 According- to Hahnemann's will,* he possessed, in the 
 year 1835 — being then in his 8ist year — a fortune of 60,000 
 thalers (;^9,ooo), and two small houses in Kothen, which 
 represented a value of about 10,000 thalers {£1,^00). He had 
 saved this sum, after a long life of hard toil, by dint of great 
 economy, and by denying himself all expensive pleasures. 
 An allopathic "rational" practitioner would have been 
 sorely dissatisfied with Hahnemann's income. And how 
 many benefits did Hahnemann confer on the sick ! And 
 what good was ever done at the sick bed by the " rational " 
 professor of that time ? 
 
 " Alkali pncunC 
 
 Hahnemann thus denominated a substance which he 
 thought he had discovered (in 1800) in borax. In order to 
 understand this mistake we must transport ourselves to that 
 period. We must repeat what we have once already stated : 
 If a substance is placed before a chemist, now-a-days, for 
 investigation, he asks himself of what known substances is 
 this body composed? Then the question was, generally: 
 What new substance, hitherto unknown, does it contain? 
 From the faulty modes of investigation, the absence of 
 a definite method of analysis, and — what was worse — the 
 impurity of the re-agents, which were shamefully adulterated 
 in that day, many mistakes arose. 
 
 Professor Klaproth — who was then the first, or one of the 
 first chemists of Germany — discovered a new and hitherto 
 unknown substance, " diamond spar " : it was a mistake.t 
 Proust discovered " sal mirabile perlatum," a salt of pearl 
 (Monro 1.67), in the urine; it was supposed to be a com- 
 bination of soda with a new acid (pearl acid) ; it was 
 subsequently ascertained to be the already known phos- 
 phate of soda. 
 
 * Given literally in Fliegciidc Blatter iibcr Homoopatliie, 1878, No. 
 15 and 16. 
 t CrelFs Annalcn, 1789, I., p. 7, 'ind ib., 1795, II., p. 534.
 
 Mistakes have been made before noiv. 289 
 
 Other chemists — among them von Ruprecht, Professor of 
 Chemistry — discovered new metals : borbonium in baryta, 
 parthenum in chalk, austrum in magnesia ; also the sedative 
 salt (boracic acid) was supposed to have been reduced to a 
 metal ; on examination, these discoveries were found to 
 be iron, probably derived from impure Hessian crucibles, 
 Klaproth, who, together with Karsten, HermbstLidt, and 
 others, detected these errors, warned the public against 
 these discoveries in the Intelligenzblatt of the Janaer Litem- 
 turzeitiing oi 1790, No. 146.* 
 
 Borax had long been an object of special attention to 
 chemists. Prof. Fuchs wrote, in 1784, a monograph f upon 
 it, with a historical account of the views as to its composi- 
 tion ; which, in 1784, were still uncertain and contradictory. 
 " We know very little about borax, and are not yet agreed 
 as to its composition, for one says it contains this substance, 
 and another that," says Fuchs in his preface. The cele- 
 brated De la Metherie,! in 1791, thus speaks of boracic 
 acid : " The constituents of this acid are atmospheric air, 
 inflammable gas, caloric and water. But it is probable that 
 it contains the other gases also." In 1796 § it was still 
 thought " that boracic acid was composed of phosphoric 
 acid." 
 
 In 1799 Crell states|i that borax is composed of soda 
 and boracic acid, but thinks {ib. p. 323) that the acid in 
 borax " is intimately mixed with some unknown earths 
 or a kind of phlogiston." In order to ascertain this, he 
 instituted sixty-seven experiments, which he describes in 
 detail, but without coming to any conclusion from them ; 
 he, however, maintains that borax contains something 
 peculiar besides. 
 
 Crell's y4««(^/^« IT published, in iSco, an article of four 
 
 * Crell's A7ina,.e?i, 1791, I., 5 and 119. 
 
 f Versiich "^einer natiirlichen Geschichte des Borax unci seiner Be- 
 standiheiie, Jena, 1784. 
 X Ucbcr die reinen Ltiffarien, translated by Hahnemann, II., p. 2'J2>' 
 § Crell's Annalen, 1796, II., 453. 
 II ^^n 1799, H-, 320. 
 tiSoo, r., p. 392—395- 
 19
 
 290 One man may steal a horse, 
 
 pages entitled : Pmicmlangensah, endeckt von Herrn Dr. 
 Savincl HaJinemann, in which the latter describes the 
 properties of a " new kind of fixed alkali, called ' alkali 
 pneum,' from its property of swelling out to twenty times 
 its size when heated to redness." This article was also 
 copied into other periodicals. 
 
 Hahnemann had worked zealously as an amateur in the 
 field of chemistry for twenty years, and with the most 
 valuable results for chemistry and for the welfare of man- 
 kind. He never obtained any assistance from the State, 
 or any other source, and was not even able to fit up a 
 proper laboratory, such as the apothecaries possessed. 
 Disinterested love of research and of science had made him 
 go to great expense for a laboratory, costly re-agents, &c. 
 Thinking he had made a very valuable discovery, he 
 handed over his alkali pneum to an agent in Leipzic who 
 sold it for a friedrichsd'or the ounce. In those days there 
 were no patents whereby chemists now-a-days secure re- 
 muneration for their discoveries, and make the consumer, 
 and eventually the patient, pay so heavily (as in the case 
 of salicylic acid). 
 
 Professors Klaproth, Karsten and Hermbstadt analysed 
 the new alkali, and found that it was borax ! Instead 
 of communicating their results to Hahnemann who had 
 given proofs enough that he was striving after the same 
 objects as themselves, and asking him for an explanation, 
 they published their discovery in the Jenaer Litratnrzcitimg, 
 and called Hahnemann to account. Prof Trommsdorff, 
 who owned an apothecary's shop, hastened to communi- 
 cate this incident to a larger public in the ReicJisanzeiger, 
 the name then borne by the Allgemein. Anzeiger der 
 Dciitschcn, and called Hahnemann's proceeding, " unex- 
 ampled impudence." Crell,* however, lamented Hahne- 
 mann's " great mistake." 
 
 The latter at once explained the matter in several 
 journals, among others'in Prof. A. N. Scherer's Journal der 
 Chemie (1801, p. 665). " I am incapable of wilfully dcceiv- 
 
 * Index to the vol. for 1800.
 
 another must not look over a hedge. 291 
 
 ing, I may, however, like other men be unintentionally 
 mistaken. I am in the same boat with Klaproth and his 
 ' diamond spar,' and with Proust and his ' pearl salt' I had' 
 before me some crude (probably Chinese) borax (supplied 
 by J. N. Nahrmann, of Hamburg). A solution of potash 
 dropped into a filtered ley of borax, not yet crystallizable, 
 precipitated a large floury saline sediment. As authors 
 assure us that pure borax is rendered uncrystallizable by 
 
 the addition of potash is it wonderful that I took the 
 
 precipitate for some new peculiar substance ? The re- 
 agents also displayed different phenomena from those of 
 ordinary borax" as Hahnemann had already stated in Crell 
 (loc. cit.). Hahnemann now gives in three pages a detailed 
 account of the course and cause of his mistake, and finally 
 states that he had already given back what money he had 
 received. 
 
 Prof A. N. Scherer addsf/.^.j: — 
 
 Why did Professor Trommsdorff (the only person who has dared 
 to throw any doubt on Hahnemann's integrity), not await this defence 
 before making (in the Reichsanzeiger) such an exceedingly ill-natured 
 and intolerant attack on Hahnemann 1 Everyone who, like myself, 
 knows him, will acknowledge that Herr Hahnemann is an upright 
 and truth-loving man. It is incredible that he would consciously sell 
 borax as a new substance, that could not be expected from him ! Such 
 charlatanry cannot be attributed to Hahnemann! What well-merited 
 aspersions would he not have anticipated .^ 
 
 .... Our foreign colleagues will, from this proceeding, receive new 
 confirmation of their assertion that savants are nowhere as malicious 
 in their treatment of each other as in Germany .... Is no one 
 capable of making mistakes ? or has Professor Trommsdorff himself 
 never made a mistake ? Let him recall to mind his celebrated denial 
 of the existence of oxj^gen in oxide of mercury. 
 
 At all events, Hahnemann has more readily acknowledged his error 
 than did Herr Trommsdorff in the case alluded to. In Hahnemann's 
 case it was unintentional error, in Trommsdorff it was wilful, for he 
 admitted that he had combated Lavoisier's system before he had 
 begun to study it. 
 
 Lastly, he says that Klaproth's " diamond spar " was a 
 mistake similar to Hahnemann's. 
 
 Six years later Hahnemann wrote in \\-\q Allgein. Anzeig. 
 tier Deutscheii, 1806, p. 2297, "If I once made an error in
 
 292 Doctors never take fees from 
 
 chemistry — for to err is human — I was the first to acknow- 
 ledge it as soon as I was better informed." 
 
 This story of the pneum has been misrepresented, even 
 to this day, by the adversaries of Hahnemann, in order to 
 demonstrate to the public that he was a vulgar impostor, 
 and hence to draw the inference that homoeopathy is an 
 imposture of a similar character. Does such an un- 
 scrupulous method of carrying on the contest redound to 
 their honour ? 
 
 The letter to the father of the epileptic patient. 
 
 In order to brand Hahnemann as a charlatan, a letter 
 which he wrote in Brunswick to the father of an epileptic, on 
 June I, 1796, was widely circulated, and it was published, 
 twelve years later, in the Allgenieiner Anzeig. d. Deittschen, in 
 1808, by the ex-Ducal physician in ordinary. Dr. Brlickmann. 
 Hahneman had an epileptic under treatment, and demanded 
 an unusually high fee in a letter addressed to the father of 
 the patient, from which Brilckmann and his other oppo- 
 nents sought to prove that he was a "charlatan." It was 
 only after 1830 that this letter, published by Brlickmann, 
 evidently from personal motives, was seized upon by 
 Hahnemann's opponents to use as a weapon against him. 
 This letter does not prove that Hahnemann acted like a 
 charlatan ; that he, for the sake of making money, promised 
 results which he himself knew to be impossible. In many 
 places of his medical writings, in Hufeland's Journal (1796) 
 — Apothekerlexicon, &c. — he maintains the possibility of 
 curing epilepsy. He employed in those days especially 
 belladonna, hyoscyamus, stramonium, conium, &c. ; these 
 medicines had only been introduced into the materia medica 
 a short time before by Storck. The use of these " heroic 
 vegetable substances" was not general. Most doctors 
 avoided them on account of the violent toxical symptoms 
 which they produced in the ordinary doses and in their 
 uncertain preparations, Hahnemann had, likewise, admin-
 
 tmaired patients — oh, no ! 293 
 
 istered these narcotics in the ordinary doses, and obtained 
 bad results.* But he did not on that account abandon 
 them, he diminished the dose, as we have already seen, and 
 was thereby enabled to make extensive use of them ; while 
 his colleagues either did not know these remedies, or ab- 
 stained from their use on account of their poisonous effects. 
 Moreover, he administered his properly-prepared remedies 
 singly, and not in complex prescriptions. Hahnemann was 
 thus already in advance of his colleagues. 
 
 Page 787, /. c. — Briickmann writes : " Dr. Hahnemann 
 gave to our patient, for several months, little pills about the 
 size of a large pin's head, and only very few of them;" his 
 practice thus agreeing with his statements as to the proper 
 size of the dose of the narcotics, e.g., in his Apotliekerlexicon. 
 Therefore, when Hahnemann promised good results from 
 his treatment of epilepsy, it is clear that it was his firm 
 conviction that he would obtain them. 
 
 The reason for 'dxQ personal attack of Briickmann is very 
 obvious. " Hahnemann blames and belittles his colleagues 
 simply from love of gain," Hahnemann gave many and 
 sufficient proofs, up to 1796 — and still more up to 1808 — 
 that he was convinced that physicians did a great deal of 
 harm. They rejoined by ascribing to him bad motives 
 from their hatred of his behaviour. Hahnemann, by his 
 fearless conduct on all occasions, served humanity. He 
 had access to the Duke of Brunswick, and may, very 
 probably, have freely expressed his views to him, and have 
 succeeded in arousing his attention. This fact would not 
 render the position of Briickmann, the physician in ordinary, 
 more comfortable. 
 
 Page 785, /. c — Briickmann says : " Hahnemann has 
 little practical knowledge." 
 
 Page 788. — " Several physicians afterwards attended 
 patients who had been treated and w^Z-treated by Hahne- 
 mann, and restored them to health." Doctors of that day 
 against Hahnemann ! 
 
 Page 788. — " Hahnemann did not act well by his patients 
 
 * Hufeland's >«/'«., 1798, Vol. V., St. i.
 
 294 -^ " worthy man " not necessarily 
 
 from a moral point of view. I might mention a certain 
 young lady from Hanover, and others." 
 
 The adversaries of homoeopathy called Briickmann a 
 " worthy man," in order to gain credit for his calumnies. 
 A man who does not hesitate to publish such wretched 
 scandals in one of the most widely-read papers of the day 
 in order to depreciate a personal opponent cannot be called 
 " a worthy man ; " we have seen how high Hahnemann's 
 moral standard was both for himself and others. If op- 
 ponents appeal to the judgment of a third person who calls 
 Briickmann " a worthy old man," the fact must not be sup- 
 pressed that this third person* thus expresses himself con- 
 cerning Hahnemann (p. 973) : " I only know Dr. Hahne- 
 mann through his learned and useful works, and I respect 
 and admire this man for his God-like intelligence, even if 
 all his observations on the mode of action of the remedies 
 he describes, may not be entirely confirmed." Briickmann 
 had scoffedf at the proving of drugs on healthy subjects, 
 and concerning Hahnemann's Fragmenta de viribus medica- 
 mejiiornm, the incompleteness of which had been admitted 
 by Hahnemann himself, he expresses the following opinion : 
 — " If all medical men were to make such experiments on 
 themselves, I am afraid that they would soon be crippled 
 both in mind and body." The third person already men- 
 tioned writes : — " The letter here quoted is certainly a rather 
 remarkable composition, but we should rather look to the 
 good and useful things this man, to whom medicine owes so 
 much, has done." Further, " it is very much to be desired that 
 the public should be spared the recital of such matters — • 
 they are an abomination to it." A man to whom such con- 
 temptuous advice could be given as is here given to Doctor 
 Briickmann, cannot really be held to be a " worthy old man," 
 and this epithet appears to be only an empty formula, and 
 the only real means of judging his character is furnished 
 by his article. Twelve years after the event he retails the 
 scandal in order to injure an opponent, and that, too, in 
 
 * " H. of the department Ocker." 
 t L.c, p. 792 and 793.
 
 a man of tuorth. 295 
 
 one of the most widely read journals in Germany. That 
 sufficiently indicates his character! He called Hahne- 
 mann a " charlatan." 
 
 Hahnemann replied : — * 
 
 His character is known in Brunswick, and his article reveals in 
 every line a mind revelling in the blacker sides of noble humanity. 
 He artfully kept back this calumny twelve years, until the witnesses 
 who could have proved its falsehood were dead, and until the clear- 
 sighted Duke of Brunswick, who would have punished such an action 
 towards me whom he loved, was dead. A scandal of this kind (I 
 cannot understand how the editor of a paper like the A7izeiger der 
 Deiitschen, which is generally kept so free from personalities and ras- 
 cally abuse of men of unstained character, could have allowed its pages 
 to be soiled with it) deserves no refutation. 
 
 Envy prompted this libel, and in the concoction of the calumny, men- 
 dacity and weakness of intellect strive for the mastery. It was envy 
 respecting several cures of a remarkable nature which I was suc- 
 cessful in accomplishing in Brunswick, which incited him to make the 
 malicious private insinuations with which he persecuted me for many 
 years. Envy was the spark which, smouldering for twelve years within 
 his breast (for up to this time I get patients from his district), broke 
 out at last into a fire, by the light of which the world was to read the 
 important secret that I had not succeeded in the treatment of such 
 and such a case. 
 
 It was Brlickmann, too, who first used against him 
 publicly his mistake as to the alkali pneum. " Was this 
 simply love of gain, or was there any other reason ?" This 
 turn of expression was calculated to have its effect upon 
 the uninstructed public. Brlickmann must have known, or 
 at least he should have ascertained, how matters really 
 stood before writing publicly in this manner. The period 
 when the mistake occurred was only eight years distant. 
 " Another part," Hahnemann replies, " consists of old accu- 
 sations which were long ago refuted, but are now raked up 
 by him (he has never read, or he ignores the refutation), 
 and mixed up with ignorant statements and misrepresen- 
 tations. The remainder are simple untruths which could 
 have had their birth only in his own mind." 
 
 Bruckmann had called him a dealer in secret nostrums, 
 and had scoffed at his frequent change of residence, and 
 
 lb., No. 97, p. 1025.
 
 296 Did Hahnemann deny the 
 
 had thus again gossiped about his private affairs in a 
 widely-read journal. Hahnemann answers : — 
 
 When I then aroused his envy I was not in a position to lay the 
 principles of my new and efficacious system of treatment before the 
 world ; they had not arrived at a sufficiently advanced stage. But 
 when I had sufficiently matured them I gave them to the world in a 
 book, which neither he, nor the like of him, could ever have appreci- 
 ated, encased, as they are, in old-world prejudices ; hinc ilia: lacrimcE.' 
 I submitted my mode of treatment to a more intelligent public. A 
 dealer in secret nostrums does the exact contrary. 
 
 Whether I ought to have gone on vegetating, rooted like a polypus 
 to my native rock, and never have dwelt occasionally in freedom in 
 different countries in order to attain a wider culture (as the most dis- 
 tinguished men of all ages have done), is a matter on which I can 
 hardly suffer myself to be dictated to by Briickmann and his friends. 
 
 " Hahnemann Denies the Healing Pozver of Nature." 
 
 From a passage in the Organon Hahnemann is accused 
 of denying the healing power of nature. His opponents 
 have repeated this reproach so frequently, that in the end 
 even the homoeopaths themselves have been confused, and 
 in their writings and even at a meeting of the Central 
 Society in Magdeburg in 1830, they declared " that they did 
 not agree with Hahnemann in rejecting the vis medicatrix 
 naturae." 
 
 In order to understand the passage of the Organon 
 quoted below, we must endeavour to realise the situation of 
 that day. His enemies had cast upon him the following 
 reproach among others : Your method of treatment is in 
 direct contradiction to our great teacher — Nature. Open 
 your eyes ! A rush of blood to the head, a congestive head- 
 ache, is healed by nature by a wholesome bleeding from the 
 nose. We copy nature and draw blood when congestion is 
 present. You fly in nature's face and reject bleeding. In 
 a case of ophthalmia you see an eruption make its ap- 
 pearance in the contiguous parts of the face and the inflam- 
 mation is thereby diminished. We follow this hint of 
 nature and excite an artificial eruption or inflammation by
 
 Vis inedicatrix Natnrce? 297 
 
 means of blisters, moxas, cauteries, setons, &c. Have you 
 never seen the original malady relieved by metastases ? 
 have you never seen a skin eruption disappear on the super- 
 vention of diarrhoea ? At variance with nature you try to 
 fulfil her requirements! 
 
 Hahnemann was often assailed with such reproaches by 
 his earlier opponents, and the passage cited by later oppo- 
 nents from the fourth edition of the Organon, was an an- 
 swer to these attacks, as is clearly shown by the text. 
 
 They (the allopaths) allege that their multifarious evacuant processes 
 are a helpful mode of treatment by derivatio7i, wherein they follow 
 the example of nature's efforts to assist the diseased organism, which 
 resolves fever by perspiration and diuresis, pleurisy by epistaxis, sweat 
 and mucous expectoration — other diseases by vomiting, diarrhoea, 
 and bleeding from the anus, articular pains by ulcers on the legs, in- 
 flammation of the throat by salivation, &c., or removes them by metas- 
 tases and abscesses, which it develops in parts at a distance from the 
 disease. Hence they thought the best thing to do was to imitate 
 nature .... In this imitation of the self-aiding power of nature they 
 endeavoured to excite by force new symptoms in the tissues that are 
 least diseased .... in order to admit of a gradual lysis by the 
 curative powers of nature. [And in a note] : It is only slighter acute 
 diseases that are wont, when the natural period of their course has 
 expired, to terminate quietly in resolution, as it is called, with or 
 without the employment of not very powerful allopathic remedies 
 .... But in severe acute and in chronic diseases, crude nature and 
 the old school are equally powerless.* 
 
 Here, it will be observed, he is only speaking of the 
 derivative method ; the meaning is, in this connexion, that 
 by means of ulcers and metastases, &c., severe acute and 
 chronic diseases cannot be cured by an imitation of the, 
 in this case, crude operation of nature. 
 
 The old-school merely followed the example of crude instinctive 
 nature in her efforts, which are barely successful even in the slighter 
 cases of acute diseases.! 
 
 He remarks in a note : — 
 
 The pitiable and. highly imperfect efforts of the vital force to relieve 
 itself in acute diseases, is a spectacle that should excite our compas- 
 sion and command the aid of all the powers of our rational mind. 
 
 * Organon, Dudgeon's translation, p. 24, 25. 
 t Loc. cit., p. 27.
 
 298 Proof that Hahnemann 
 
 He tries to show that the self-help of nature, to which his 
 opponents appeal in order to justify their bleedings, pur- 
 gatives, setons, &c., is not worthy of imitation. That 
 our interpretation of his meaning is the true one is shown 
 by other passages, and at all times he gives full credit to 
 the healing power of nature. 
 
 In his Essay on a new Principle &c.,* 1796, he main- 
 tains that nature, unassisted, will triumph over most acute 
 diseases if the obstacles to recovery are removed. 
 
 In the year 1797 he says : — f 
 
 I do not now allude to cures effected by dietetic rules alone without 
 drugs, which if simple are not to be despised, and which are very 
 successful in many cases. 
 
 .... If it be necessary to make considerable changes in diet and 
 regimen, the ingenuous physician will do well to mark what effect such 
 changes will have on the disease before he prescribes the mildest 
 medicine. 
 
 In his criticism of Brown In Hufeland's JonrnalX which 
 we have already quoted, we read : — 
 
 That kind nature and youth will, assisted by such appropriate 
 regimen and even by itself, cure diseases having far other producing 
 causes than deficiency and excess of irritability, is the common ex- 
 perience of every impartial observer ; but Brown must deny this in 
 order to support his scholastic system. But without reckoning this 
 divine power, &c. 
 
 In 1 801 he thus criticises Brown.§ 
 
 According to him we must not trust anything to the powers of 
 nature; we must never rest with our medicines, we must always either 
 stimulate or debilitate. What a calumniation of nature, what a dan- 
 gerous insinuation for the ordinary half-instructed practitioner, already 
 too officious ! What a ministration to his pride to be deemed the 
 lord and master of nature ! 
 
 In yEscidapins in the Balance, 1805, he again draws atten- 
 tion to the healing power of nature : — 1| 
 
 It were easy to run through a catalogue of similar acute diseases, 
 and show that the restoration of persons who, in the same disease 
 were treated on wholly opposite principles, could not be called cure 
 but spontaneous recovery. 
 
 * Lesser Writings, p. -yy]. f Lesser Writifigs, p. 363. 
 
 X Lesser Writings, p. 413. § Lesser Writings, p. 618. 
 
 II Lesser Writings, p. 472.
 
 acknowledged NaUire^s healing poiver. 299 
 
 In 1808 Hahnemann writes: — * 
 
 Do not the poor, who take no medicine at all, often recover much 
 sooner from the same kind of disease than the well-to-do patient, who 
 has his shelves filled with large bottles of medicines ? 
 
 In 1 83 1 he, in Allopathy, says : — -f- 
 
 If they call this an efficacious sort of method, how can they reconcile 
 this with the fact that of all that die in a year, a sixth part of the 
 whole number dies under them of inflammatory affections, as the r 
 own statistics prove ! Not a twelfth of them would have died had 
 they not fallen into such blood-thirsty hands — if they had but been 
 left to nature, and kept away from that old pernicious art. 
 
 Griesselich,$ who visited Hahnemann in 1832 in Cothen, 
 says: " Hahnemann has often been reproached for his con- 
 tempt for the healing power of nature. I myself was led 
 into this error by something in the Organon In con- 
 versing with Hahnemann I have never perceived anything 
 tending to the denial of this healing power. It appears 
 that the reformer must have given occasion to misunder- 
 standings," Negligent perusal and ignorance of his works 
 are the causes of these misunderstandings. 
 
 A follower of Hahnemann's, Dr. Kammerer, of Ulm, 
 wrote a small book in 1834 : Die Homdopathik heilt ohne 
 B Intent zieJmiigen (Leipzig, 1834). Hahnemann wrote the 
 preface, and in it he declares that he fully concurs with its 
 contents. What role does the healing power of nature play 
 in it? (p. i) : "Blood-letting implies an undervaluing and 
 slighting of the great healing power of nature." At p. 6 
 the course of inflammatory diseases, pneumonia, &c., is 
 described, where they are left to nature and generally re- 
 cover. " Venesection weakens the organism and interferes 
 with the healing power of nature." Page 16 : — " The benefit 
 cent power of nature." PAGE 17 : — "The proper healing 
 power of nature often effects wonderful and rapid cures." 
 " The severest illnesses often get rapidly well of them- 
 selves." " Even in chronic diseases the marvellous healing 
 
 * Lesser Writings, p. 553. 
 
 t Lesser Writings, p. 830. He is speaking of blood-letting in cases 
 of fever, especially pneumonia. 
 X Stcizzen aus der Mappe eines reisenden Homoopaihen, 1S32, p. 35.
 
 300 Did Hahnemann steal his 
 
 power of nature is seen." Page i8: — "Another power — 
 a medicinal power cannot possibly be more beneficial than 
 the inherent recuperative power." PAGE 21: — "Diseases 
 are cured as rapidly, or more so, by the proper healing 
 power of nature than by the best remedies." In this work 
 of eighty pages, on almost every page the healing power of 
 nature is lauded. Finally he says : " Let leading medical 
 men pay more attention to the requirements of nature." 
 Hahnemann thus concludes his preface : " Our dear Kam- 
 merer, of Ulm, whose sensible treatise I have now great 
 pleasure in introducing to the public." 
 
 " HaJuiemann Stole Jus Doctrine from other Authors'' 
 
 We have already said that Hahnemann referred in 1805 
 to the testimony of older authors as supporting his prin- 
 ciple of cure, mentioning among others, that of Hippo- 
 crates in the passage from Trepi towcov. 
 
 In 1806 Ploucquet* entered the field, and quoted a 
 passage from Thorn. Erasti Dispiitat. (III. 226), in which 
 this sentence occurs : " cum dicit Paracelsus, simil. similibus 
 curari, non insanit, non stulte loquitur, sed recte sentit 
 et philosophice pronunciat." Ploucquet adds no remark 
 of his own — he seems to imply that he discovered this 
 passage incidentally while reading this author. 
 
 In 1808 an opponent of Hahnemann quotes this remark 
 of Ploucquet's in the AUgemein. Anzeig. d. Deutschen, No. 
 78, in order to contest the priority of Hahnemann for his 
 doctrine. 
 
 In 1829, a Dr. Mannsfeld wrote in Henke's Zeitsch. filr 
 Staatsarzneikiinde\ mentioning Hahnemann's sim. simil. as 
 a " repetition of the Paracelsian paradox." 
 
 In 1 83 1 Professor Schultz, of Berlin, entered the arena, 
 and wrote the Hovwobiotik. In this it is asserted that Hahne- 
 
 * Hufeland's Journ.^ St. i, p. 170. 
 
 t Kleinert, Repert. der ges. deutsch. vied. u. chir. Journalistik, I., p. 
 
 143-
 
 system from Paracelsus? 30 1 
 
 mann borrowed his homoeopathy from Paracelsus. Schultz 
 distinctly asserts that the principle of similars, the denial of 
 nature's healing powers, and the rejection of the principle 
 contraria cojitrariis, and of the use of mixtures and of 
 large doses, are found in Paracelsus, as is also dynamism. 
 Consequently, Hahnemann borrowed his system from 
 Paracelsus. Notwithstanding this, he has totally mis- 
 understood the latter. " Homoeopathy is the principle of 
 Paracelsus misunderstood, falsely represented, and dressed 
 out in an unscientific garb" (p. 108). 
 
 In the ArcJiiv f. d. Jiom. Heilk* Rummel has taken 
 the useless trouble to refute this nonsense instead of laugh- 
 ing at it. It would have been a useful undertaking if the 
 professor had shown that Paracelsus mentions in such 
 and such a place that certain remedies show their 
 healing power on the homoeopathic principle. Schultz 
 would thereby have excited great interest, and have earned 
 the gratitude of all homoeopaths, who would not have 
 grudged him the innocent pleasure of accusing Hahne- 
 mann of plagiarism. He, however, observes profound 
 silence respecting this point, and quotes instead two vague 
 expressions which Rademacher interprets in quite a 
 different way, and Rademacher is certainly one of the men 
 most thoroughly acquainted with Paracelsus's writings. In 
 the whole book — 263 pages long — however much we may 
 search, we can find no further proof of the allegation respect- 
 ing Paracelsus's principle ; instead of this, the reader meets 
 with vague expressions, such as the following in p. 192. 
 
 Hence the essential principles of potentiation, of self-attraction and 
 self-repulsion, and of the direct development of a new repulsion 
 from the substance formed by attraction— which is the organization of 
 these powers to a living system — cannot be understood. 
 
 None the less this article served the opponents of 
 homoeopathy as a proof of the statement that Hahnemann 
 had not himself discovered his therapeutic principle, but 
 had stolen it from others. Simon took up the idea 
 eagerly. 
 
 * Vol. II., H. I, p. 196.
 
 302 Paracelsus taught 7iot Homoeopathy, 
 
 Unfortunately Rademacher, who understood the merits 
 of Paracelsus and his teaching better than any one else, 
 and who had rendered it accessible to medical men, ex- 
 pressed the following opinion :* " He rejected the principle 
 contraria conirariis — but that he substituted for it the 
 principle : sames are cured by sames (so R. translates here 
 and on p. 115 the similia similibus) has indeed been re- 
 cently asserted, but it is quite untrue. Paracelsus says : — 
 
 A physician who is faithful to nature says : this is morbus terebin- 
 thinus, this is morbus sileris montani, this is morbus helleborinus, etc.; 
 and not : this is branchus, this is rheuma, this is coryza, this is 
 catarrhus. These names are not founded upon the basis of the 
 medicine ; for same should be compared to its nominal same. 
 
 Paracelsus asserted that every diseased organ has its 
 remedy in external nature. These remedies he calls 
 (parodying the doctrine of signatures) the external organs, 
 and he thence constructs the apparent paradox " same 
 must be driven out by same." Thus, says Paracelsus, herbs 
 are also members. This is a heart, that a liver, this a 
 spleen, &c., which means that such and such a herb acts 
 on the heart, the liver, &c. 
 
 The (allopathic) historian H. Damerow contests the state- 
 ment that Hahnemann borrowed from Paracelsus.-|- By the 
 homoeopaths, however, Paracelsus was frequently said to be 
 a forerunner of Hahnemann^ He is indeed to be looked 
 upon as such, but not with regard to the 'similia siuiilibus, 
 but rather, in so far as he, in opposition to the followers of 
 Galen — did not attack the supposed inatej'ies viorbi, and 
 the pathological appearances discovered in the dead body, 
 but used specific remedies without having attained the ex- 
 perimental and individualising standpoint occupied by 
 Hahnemann. 
 
 In any case the ferment produced by Hahnemann 
 was the principle cause why the man who had been mis- 
 judged for three centuries was rescued from the heap . of 
 
 * Third edit., Berlin, 1848, I., p. 87. 
 t Jahrbiicherf. ivissenschaftl. Kritik, 1S32, p. 274. 
 X Trm\is, Ha/memanti's Verdienste um die Hcilkunst^ Leipzig, 1843, 
 also Oesterr. Zeitsch.f. Horn., 1848, p. 478.
 
 but something quite different. 303 
 
 abuse and calumny with which he had been covered. 
 A hundred years after his death Guido Patin resented the 
 fact that the booksellers sold the works of the " o-reat 
 rascal " (Rademacher), and A. F. Hecker {I.e. p. 6^) desig- 
 nates him, in 18 19, "an extremely rude, ignorant, immoral 
 and selfish man." 
 
 J. G. Zimmermann, who treated Frederick the Great 
 in his last illness, writes thus of him : 
 
 He even assured his disciples that he would seek advice from the 
 devil if God would not help him. He lived like a pig, looked like 
 a cartel', and found his greatest pleasure in consorting with the 
 lowest and most abandoned characters. He was drunk during the 
 greater part of his famous life, and all his works seem to have been 
 written when he was tipsy. 
 
 H. Conring, professor in Helmstadt, called him a '' Mon- 
 stnun Jiominis, in perniciem onnis inelioris doctrincc naium."* 
 
 Paracelsus was partly to blame for this want of recog- 
 nition on the part of his colleagues, because he attacked 
 them too severely, and contemned both anatomy and the 
 ordinary knowledge possessed by doctors. But his greatest 
 crime was that he ventured to oppose the learned big-wigs, 
 and such behaviour has never been left unavenged by them ; 
 just as doctors generally have always persecuted with pecu- 
 liar animosity those who dared to disparage the customs 
 they held sacred and to introduce revolutionary novelties. 
 They only differed from the religious parties in that they 
 lacked an inquisition. Had the allopaths had power to 
 send their enemies to the stake, Hahnemann and his 
 adherents would have been burnt. The reader will, by-and- 
 bye, have an opportunity of judging what the allopaths of 
 to-day would like to do if they had the power. 
 
 Hippocrates was accused by his contemporaries of 
 burning the library attached to the Temple of Health at 
 Cnidos, in order that he might enjoy a monopoly of the 
 knowledge it contained, and he was called by his rivals 
 (TKOTocpayov (dung-catcr), because he so carefully took note of 
 the character of the excrements. 
 
 * Comp. F. Alook, Theophrastus Paracelsus., Wiirzburg, 1876, 4, 
 p. 3, also M. B. Lessing, Paracelsus., &c., Berlin, 1839, p. 247.
 
 304 Harvcy^s discoveiy ?iow said 
 
 Galen, who guided the ideas of medical men and their 
 treatment for many centuries, was persecuted so passion- 
 ately by the doctors of his time that he was obliged to 
 leave Rome. 
 
 Harvey (died 1657) met with the most violent oppo- 
 sition when he made known his discovery of the cir- 
 culation of the blood. He was declared to be insane, 
 so that the public lost all confidence in him, and his 
 practice fell off. Thirty years later Professor Riolan in 
 Paris called him a charlatan. " Malo cum Galeno errare, 
 quam cum Harveyo esse circulator" (circulator signifies 
 also charlatan). And yet the proofs were so clear that 
 it was only necessary to look in order to be convinced, 
 and long and careful study and numerous experiments, 
 such as were essential in order to judge of homoeopathy, 
 were not required. When Harvey's teaching became 
 gradually recognised, writers arose who proved that he 
 had not the priority of the discovery. 
 
 Blumenbach's Medic. Bibliothek thus describes the way 
 of the world : — * 
 
 Many persons thought it a serious risk to trust their health to a 
 man who went so far as to dare to state that God caused the blood to 
 circulate in our bodies in a different way from that described by the great 
 Galen ! Pretended refutations were hailed upon him from all quarters 
 of Europe — each one more bulky and more contemptuous than the 
 last. And when this was found of no avail, and the correctness of the 
 matter had to be acknowledged, another lot raised their voices and 
 demanded how people could possibly look upon it as a new discovery. 
 Had not King Solomon, in Ecclesiastes (Chap, xii., v. 6), spoken most 
 clearly of the silver cord and the golden fountain, of the pitcher at 
 the fountain and the wheel at the cistern, and was not the circulus 
 sanguinis major described there to the life? Others wished to 
 force this honour not on the wise Solomon, but on the sage Plato ; 
 others on their father Hippocrates ; others on the estimable Bishop 
 Nemesius ; others ascribed the discovery to a Spanish farrier, de la 
 Reyna ; others to various other persons, to anyone but the true 
 discoverer ! 
 
 Even after the lapse of two centuries, at the beginning of 
 the year 1840, an American professor could not be quiet, he 
 
 * Vol. III., No. I, p. 365, Gottingen, 17SS.
 
 to be a mere plagiarism. 305 
 
 attempted to snatch the laurels from Harvey's head and to 
 place them on that of an American. On this side of the 
 Atlantic an Italian joins in the fray (1846), and tirades 
 " against the impudence of that Englishman Harvey, who 
 by forged papers which were circulated through Italy, 
 robbed Cesalpino of the honours due to him ; and in the 
 life of this English pirate we read that he left Italy in the 
 year 1606." The Italian Andreas Cesalpinus was the dis- 
 coverer of the circulation for all who wish to believe it.* 
 
 Our Hahnemann fared no better. The passages from 
 old authors, which he himself had quoted in corrobora- 
 tion of his views, were sharply criticised by his opponents 
 and pronounced irrelevant ; Kurt Sprengel declares that 
 the passage from Hippocrates, Trepl t6izwv, is detached from 
 its context and is rather to be understood in the sense of 
 contraria contrariis.\ Professor Sachs caused this passage 
 to be translated in his ScJilusszuort (1826, p. ZZ) by a philo- 
 logist, as he says, and quotes the whole passage in full, 
 which is only given in brief by Hahnemann, and comes to 
 the conclusion that Hahnemann did not believe in his own 
 interpretation. Others for whom Simon acted as spokes- 
 man,t considered this a new proof that Hahnemann was an 
 impostor. This passage was also discussed in the AUge. 
 Anzeig. der Deutscheii, but was interpreted in the sense 
 Hahnemann gives it (1822, p. 261 7j. 
 
 In 1846, an article appeared in the periodical Jamis 
 (vol. i., p. 'j'^'J^, Hippocrates a Homceopath, which begins 
 thus : " Dr. Landsberg has just made the equally inter- 
 esting and striking discovery that homoeopathy is not a 
 discovery of Hahnemann's, but is contained in its essence 
 in the works which have come down to us under the name 
 of Hippocrates. We must call this discovery striking, be- 
 cause on one hand Hippocrates has been studied so many 
 thousand times without the discovery which is so clearly 
 
 * Sc&Janus^ Zeitschrift f. Geschichte der Med. II., p. 547. 
 t Kurt Sprengel, Uebcr Homoopathie, eingeleitet von Schragge, 
 Magdeburg, 1833. 
 X Ceist der Honi. Pscudomessias. 
 
 20
 
 306 Hahnemann stole all Ids 
 
 expressed ever having been made. Knowledge is often 
 ascribed to Hippocrates which he did not possess ; and 
 here a fact so important, in a historico-medical point of 
 view, has been overlooked — a fact which is not only the 
 result of inferences which are often only too deceptive, 
 but which is stated as a manifest apophthegm. And yet, 
 on the side both of the allopaths and the homoeopaths, 
 as Herr Landsberg justly remarks [the article by Dr. 
 Landsberg is taken from the well-known Journal of von 
 Walther and von Ammon, Vol. 3, and these introductory 
 remarks appear to come from Professor Henschel], a great 
 deal of trouble has been taken," &c. We eagerly look for 
 this celebrated, newly-discovered passage. Prof. v. Walther, 
 the King of Saxony's physician in ordinary, von Ammon 
 and Prof. Henschel regard it as convincing; and the histor- 
 ian, Prof Haesar, mentions it in the same volume (p. 872), 
 and has nothing to say against it ; he can only add, 
 with a sigh, " So the inspiring hope grows of being able to 
 trace the earliest germs of homceopathy to the gods and 
 demi-gods of India." And what is the celebrated passage 
 which nobody as yet knew ? ■n-epl t^tw^ tS>v kut ^vOpwirov, &c., 
 the identical one that Hahnemann had quoted forty-one 
 years before, and the interpretation of which, in his sense^ 
 was held to be a proof that he was an impostor ! 
 
 In the Janus the passage was quoted more fully, and 
 furnished with notes : — 
 
 Another way, Hippocrates says, of practising medicine is the fol- 
 lowing : " By using just that which produces the disease — a cure is 
 effected by the disease itself" Here some examples of strangury, of 
 cough, and of fever are given, and it is stated that they may sometimes 
 be cured by the same things that produced them — homceopathically — 
 and sometimes by the contrary — allopathically ; — and again, as a phar- 
 macodynamic illustration, the instance is given of the free use of 
 warm water, both for drinks and baths, because by means of the 
 heat they bring to the body, the fever heat is expelled. In the 
 same way gastric vomiting is removed by the use of an emetic, which 
 produces vomiting in healthy persons. Hippocrates, however, adds 
 and thus, to a certain extent, as the author remarks, recognizes 
 homceopathy as a method, that there are cases which are better suited 
 for allopathic treatment (inreuavTioKn), others better suited for homoeo- 
 pathic treatment {Tolffiv hixoioKxi), &.Q. At the end of this di\ision —
 
 ideas from Hippocrates. 307 
 
 from which only extracts have been given — Hippocrates further speaks 
 about the size of the dose, and remarks in this connexion that we 
 ought not to employ powerful medicines needlessly and seek to weaken 
 them by quantitative relations, but strong remedies ought to be used 
 for severe maladies, and weaker remedies for the less severe. Hahne- 
 mann, indeed, has only made use of this maxim in order to caricature it, 
 /.*., to surround his teaching" with a nimbus which corresponds to the 
 principle of ;;^^/■;7(://^J■ vidt decipi. So much is, however, certain that 
 he had already met with the idea of his dilution-theory, as well as 
 with the 'iixoia. sr t^/ioia, and that, in fact, no part of his teaching is 
 peculiar to himself except that which was developed at a later period — 
 the psora theory. 
 
 But as Hahnemann's psora theory is rejected by his 
 adherents, Hippocrates remains the father of the actual 
 homoeopathy, so that all the harm it has done and all the 
 annoyance it has caused the allopaths ought to be visited 
 on the head of Hippocrates. All their abusive epithets, 
 therefore, hit Hippocrates and not Hahnemann. 
 
 One thing is, however, difficult to understand ; all those 
 who accuse the founder of homoeopathy of plagiarism call 
 it a false doctrine. Why, then, is it necessary to ascribe 
 this false doctrine to another man ? Is not a great incon- 
 sequence involved here, the point of which is directed 
 against the combatants themselves ? 
 
 One further remark on this subject. We own, indeed, 
 that to represent Hahnemann as a man who has no ideas 
 of his own, and who, in his cunning or folly, has stolen 
 from others that which has been for more than seventy 
 years considered as in the main true, and which has been 
 practically tested by thousands of physicians, is well 
 adapted to the purpose of disparaging him. It makes 
 Hahnemann and his adherents appear as charlatans and 
 fools. Therefore, this manoeuvre has been continued up to 
 a recent date with the aid of the whole allopathic press. 
 If, however, there is a want of agreement in this not 
 unimportant matter, there is a danger incurred that in the 
 end the public will not believe in it in spite of the most 
 decided assurances. We think then that we arc advising 
 the allopaths to their own interest when we recommend 
 them to arrive at a final decision as to who the culprit 
 was — whether Hippocrates or Paracelsus. Or is it, perhaps
 
 3o8 Galen and Alberti Jioinceopathists. 
 
 H. Alberti, as Koppe will have it. To be sure, the man 
 whose work is quoted is not H. but M. Alberti, and he 
 says something quite different, as Sorge* showed. But an 
 allopathic combatant desirous of obtaining his end is not 
 put out by such trifles. Leupoldtf again says of Galen, 
 that he was not disinclined to the principle of siinilia 
 similibns. So that Galen might very well be represented 
 as the one whom Hahnemann robbed. 
 
 Trials of HoviaopatJiy by its Opponents. 
 
 Hahnemann's course of development shows that he did 
 not arrive at his discoveries on paper, but that he followed 
 the path of induction. He undoubtedly sought to support 
 his discoveries by theories, but expressly asserted that he 
 
 * Zcitsch. des Berli?icr Ver. Jiom. Ao'zfe, I., p. j^. ]Michael Alberti 
 or (Latinized) Albertus enjoys in indexes and biographies the reputation 
 of having written an enormous number of works on every conceivable 
 subject connected with medicine. But when we come to examine these 
 works, many of which are sure to be found in every good medical 
 library, we find them to consist mostly of inaugural theses written by 
 medical candidates for the medical degree in Halle, during the period 
 when M. Albertus held the office of dean. The work Koppe mani- 
 festly alludes to, though it is evident from his mistakes he only knows 
 it at second or third hand, is a dissertation by one Frederick Adrian la 
 Bruguiere of Stargard in Pomerania, written in 1734, and entitled Dc 
 ciiratione per similia. Several authors besides Koppe have been led 
 by the title of this work to credit Alberti with the discoveiy of the 
 homoeopathic method, but Sorge who has had an opportunity of 
 seeing and reading the dissertation shows that it has nothing to do 
 with Hahnemann's homoeopathy. The author only says that the cura- 
 tive efforts of nature to free herself of disease by means of crises and 
 evacuations, should be assisted by the administration of such medicines 
 as cause or promote such crises and evacuations, thus sweating is to 
 be forwarded by diaphoretics, vomiting by emetics, haemoptysis and 
 epistaxis by blood-letting, diarrhoea by purgatives, for these processes 
 being all efforts of nature to throw off something morbid and injurious 
 to the organism, the doctor as the servant of nature should help her 
 to do this in the way she shows she wishes to do it. — [Ed.] 
 
 t Gesc/u'chfe der Mcdkifi, 1863, p. 145.
 
 Machfs iiacJi ! 
 
 309 
 
 wished to be judged only by results. He constantly calls 
 the results of his experiments " unheard of," " incredible." 
 " Repeat my experiments, but repeat them accurately," is 
 his well-known phrase. " If the results are not exactly as 
 homoeopathy teaches, then homceopathy is lost."* 
 
 As was shown, Hahnemann very soon began to use medi- 
 cines in a way peculiar to himself At first he advocated 
 " energetic treatment," and preferred to use " strong " medi- 
 cines. We notice that he was especially careful with the 
 narcotic herbs, gradually increasing the strength of the 
 doses till the desired effect was obtained. Then he left 
 off the medicine in order to watch carefully the result and 
 the duration of the effects of the medicine. In the course 
 of many years he arrived at giving a single dose and care- 
 fully watching the effect on the body ; only after the effect 
 had passed away did he repeat the dose. 
 
 What physician has ever studied this difficult question so 
 carefully as the great observer Hahnemann ? None of his 
 opponents have seriously followed him on this important 
 path of investigation ; medical literature makes mention 
 of no physician who sought to solve in this indispen- 
 sable manner this important problem with such zealous 
 care and such calm and faithful observation. By such 
 studies, extending over years, was Hahnemann led step by 
 step out of the ordinary routine to the vast and beneficent 
 field of his system of therapeutics. The allopaths — to give 
 one example only from this department of medicine — ad- 
 minister mercury like the homoeopaths in certain kinds of 
 catarrh of the bowels. The size of their dose is about a 
 grain of calomel. Has any professor or doctor carefully 
 noted down the cases with all the attendant circumstances, 
 (they have as yet been vainly sought for in allopathic 
 writings) in which calomel has been of use, and has he then, 
 in one such case, prescribed a ten times " weaker " dose, 
 which he is certain was prepared according to Hahnemann's 
 directions ? Has he carefully observed the effect of it ? 
 Has he, in case of a non-result, given a stronger dose to the 
 
 * Reinc Arz7ieimittcllehre^ 2nd edit., 1825, p. i.
 
 310 TJiey all witJi one consent 
 
 patient in question, and found curative effects which did 
 not result from the "weaker" dose? Has he continued 
 such observations, which are, moreover, to the real interest 
 of the patient, through many years, and noted them down 
 with the most careful attention to all objective and sub- 
 jective phenomena ? 
 
 This was the mode gradually adopted by Hahnemann in 
 his treatment. None of his opponents have imitated him. 
 Even his finished results, which were attained with so 
 much labour, have been treated with contempt, and that in 
 spite of his earnest and repeated entreaties, and pills and 
 mixtures have been more used than ever. " What would 
 my opponents have risked," so Hahnemann says,* " if they 
 had followed my directions from the first and begun with 
 the use of these small doses? Could anything worse befall 
 them than that they should do no good? Such small doses 
 could not hurt ! " 
 
 Most of his opponents did not even make superficial 
 trials, and the few who did experiment seemed to have 
 carried out their superficial experiments with a precon- 
 ceived purpose. 
 
 Bischofff says that duty will not allow homoeopathy to 
 be tested in cases of inflammation of the lungs. 
 
 Heinroth, who lived in Leipzic at the same time as 
 Hahnemann, and had therefore an opportunity of observ- 
 ing him, writes (/.r., p. 5.) : " Hahnemann has given many 
 proofs that he is as thoroughly convinced of the truth of 
 his doctrine as that he is a man of firm character." How- 
 ever, Heinroth would make no trials of homoeopathy : 
 " False notions lead to false results." 
 
 Neither did Elias (p. 18) : " Facts against homoeopathy are 
 very much wanted." 
 
 Sachs, in his Scidnsswort, and Fischer say nothing about 
 trials. 
 
 SimonJ agrees with Muckisch that Hahnemann's appeal 
 
 * CIn-072. I\}-a7ikJi., Vol. I., p. iv. Preface. 
 
 t L.c, p. 127. 
 
 X Pseudomessias, p. 300.
 
 began to make excuse. 311 
 
 to them to make a trial of homoeopathy is a " wretched 
 proposition," because valuable time would be lost. " We 
 cannot be expected to test every palpable absurdity — life 
 is too noble for that."* 
 
 Sachs (^HovKjeopatJiy and Herr Kopp, p. 56) attacks 
 Kopp's remark : " The facts may be true, while the theory 
 founded on them is false." This does not apply to homoeo- 
 pathy (p. 57) " because there is no such thing." 
 
 Stieglitz {I.e., p. 163) : " Hahnemann's utter untrust- 
 worthiness acquits us of any obligation to give his system 
 a practical trial." 
 
 Prof. Munk :— t 
 
 I should consider it contrary to my conscience to treat my patients 
 according to a method which, from the moment of its first appearance 
 until now, has been regarded by the whole scientific world as useless 
 and injurious. Besides this the further testing of homoeopathy at the 
 sick bed is quite superfluous, because this test has often enough 
 been employed, and that cjuite impartially and objectively. 
 
 All subsequentcontroversialists express themselves exactly 
 or nearly in the same way. Hufeland, Groos, Kopp made 
 trials which resulted favourably to homoeopathy. Others, 
 such as Lesser and Friedheim, made trials of the system, 
 and arrived at the conclusion that bleeding is necessary in 
 diseases in which everyone now knows that it is injurious. 
 Eigenbrodt, a young military doctor, who was still studying, 
 and therefore without practical experience, by desire of the 
 Hessian Government, witnessed the treatment of patients 
 in the Vienna Homoeopathic Hospitals, and stated, as his 
 opinion, that homoeopathy was of no use, and sought to 
 prove it. The homoeopathic physician of one of the hos- 
 pitals in question^ showed the course of the cases treated 
 during Eigenbrodt's attendance was not as stated by him, 
 and that Eigenbrodt's accounts were coloured by a fore- 
 gone conclusion. 
 
 * Geist der Horn.., P- 77- 
 t Die Hombopathie, Bern, 1868, p. 106. 
 
 X Caspar, Parallelen swischat Horn. ti. Allop., Vienna and Olmiitz, 
 1856.
 
 3x2 T} ials of Jiomoeopathy secji 
 
 The folloiving Public Trials of Homoeopathy were 
 7indertake7i : — 
 
 In 1 82 1 Stapf treated some patients suffering from chronic 
 diseases in the BerHn Charite. The patients recovered, and 
 the trials were broken off. Sachs * says : " The results 
 are said to have been very unfavourable ; the silence of the 
 commission can be looked upon as a proof of their utter 
 worthlessness." As if the commission would not have an- 
 nounced the results to the whole world if they had been 
 unfavourable. 
 
 In the same year trials were made by Wislicenus in the 
 Garrison Hospital at Berlin, under the control of military 
 surgeons. The results were favourable. " The military 
 doctors took away the journal of the cases kept by Wisli- 
 cenus under their superintendence, in order to read it at 
 their leisure. In spite of his urgent entreaties, they forgot 
 to bring it back again. "f Lesser| says that the journal 
 was kept by a military surgeon appointed for the purpose 
 and delivered to the commission. " To give an account 
 of these experiments was not the business of the highest 
 functionaries. Some day I shall make them known." 
 Lesser's book is full of spite against the homoeopaths, 
 so that even Schmidt's Jahrbiicher expressed its dissatis- 
 faction with it. The reader would not have been re- 
 ferred to some future time, and would not have had to 
 wait in vain to this day if there had been anything un- 
 favourable to homoeopathy in this trial. 
 
 In the year 1829 — 30, the Leipzic homoeopath, Dr. Herr- 
 mann, in Russia (at Tultschin and St. Petersburg), treated 
 some hospital patients at the request of the Russian War 
 Minister. At Tultschin 165 patients were treated thus, 6 
 of them died ; at St. Petersburg 409 patients came under 
 homoeopathic treatment, 16 of them died. This is the 
 account of the homoeopaths.§ The allopaths say : At Tult- 
 schin, out of 128 patients who were treated by the homoeo- 
 
 * Schluss7U0}-t, p. 67. t Rosenberg, Lc, p., 21. 
 
 % L.C., p. 305, note. § Rosenberg, I.e., p. 12.
 
 through different spectacles. 313 
 
 pathic physician 5 died, notwithstanding that he had ob- 
 tained all possible advantages for his patients, but among 
 those treated allopathically not one died out of 457 patients. 
 At St. Petersburg, according to the allopathic account, 31 
 patients died out of 431 treated homoeopathically.* The 
 Russians were just as much attached to the " scientific" 
 mode of treatment as the German and other professors. 
 In cholera, too, so Hasper tells us, the homoeopathic results 
 were " very unfavourable as compared with the treatment 
 by bleeding." The great mass of patients in these experi- 
 ments were suffering from inflammation of the lungs, gastric 
 and nervous fever. According to the allopaths, the homoeo- 
 pathic doctor laid great stress on fresh air, cleanliness, and 
 diet. 
 
 In Vienna (1828) trials of homoeopathic treatment were 
 instituted by the staff physician Dr. Marenzeller. The ho- 
 moeopaths give favourable accounts (Rosenberg, /.c.), and 
 publish the 37 cases. The allopaths are silent on the sub- 
 ject. The judgment of the allopathic commission was to the 
 effect that these trials were not in favour of, but that at the 
 same time they were not against homoeopathy. But the trial 
 was stopped sooner than had originally been determined. 
 The allopaths assert that the Emperor declared that his 
 soldiers were too dear to him for him to abandon them any 
 longer to the murderous homoeopathic treatment (Rosen- 
 berg, /.(?.). Simonf is still more minutely acquainted with 
 the details : — 
 
 The homoeopath sent his patients, when they were dying, into the 
 allopathic division of the hospital, and so lessened his number of 
 deaths. This story came to the ears of the Confessor of his Majesty 
 the Emperor, either through having seen the records of the homoeo- 
 pathic department, or simply by crediting the current reports. So 
 much is certain, that the Emperor, after an interview with him, 
 gave commands to put an end to the homoeopathic experiments. 
 [Simon goes on true to his principle of personally attacking his op- 
 ponents :] With regard to Marenzeller, he is a man without scien- 
 tific training, and even without ordinary cultivation. He cannot write 
 
 two lines of German correctly He maintained that women should 
 
 be delivered on all fours like beasts. 
 
 * See Antihomoop. Arc/iiv, 1834, Vol. I., H. 2. 
 t Antihomoop. ArcMv, 1834, Vol. I., H. 2., p. 125.
 
 314 Homoeopathy too successful, 
 
 Simon offers no proofs for this assertion. We will only 
 mention that Dr. Marenzeller, body-physician of the Arch- 
 duke John of Austria, was a highly cultivated man, who 
 was quite abreast of the science of his day, and enjoyed 
 a great reputation with the intellectual classes, who 
 constituted the bulk of his practice, and for that reason 
 attracted the whole fury of the opponents of homoeopathy. 
 Marenzeller, born in 1765, was originally, when he occu- 
 pied the post of Privatdocent, lecturer on anatomy and 
 surgical operations in the general hospital of Vienna. In 
 1788 he went through the Turkish campaign as regimental 
 surgeon, and was nominated staff physician to the Italian 
 hospitals in 181 3.* He was the first in the Austrian 
 States Avho openly espoused Hahnemann's system — to do 
 this no little courage was required. In 1854 he died 
 in Vienna, aged 89 years, and was in full medical activity 
 up to a year before his death. With regard to the un- 
 justifiable attacks of the allopathic opponents, it is not 
 superfluous to quote a letter of King Frederick William 
 IV. to Marenzeller, dated Charlottenburg, January 3rd, 
 1842:— 
 
 I am grateful to you for the confidence with which you, in your 
 letter of October 14th, recommend the homoeopathic method to my 
 protection, and I attach no small value to the recommendation of this 
 important subject by a man who, like you, has practised homoeo- 
 pathy with success through a whole generation. I shall willingly 
 continue, as I have begun, to give the system every help that might 
 aid in its development. I have already sanctioned the erection of a 
 homoeopathic hospital, and have pi'omised the necessary funds from 
 the State Treasury, and I intend to permit homoeopathic practitioners 
 to dispense medicines themselves under certain conditions, and nego- 
 ciations are still going on on this point.f 
 
 Stieglitz;]: says in 1835, of the trials of Marenzeller : — 
 What hindered the publication of these trials is veiled in obscurity. 
 [Any impartial reader can easily understand it.] Only this is clear, 
 that, in consequence of these trials, the practice of homoeopathy was 
 forbidden in the Austrian States. 
 
 * Allg. horn. Zeitg. Vol. XLIX., p. 54. 
 
 t AUg. Leips. Zeitg., No. 21, 1842, p. 299. Allg. horn. Zeitg., Vol. 
 XXL, p. 224 (see below about the hospital here alluded to). 
 X L.C., p. 191.
 
 imist be suppressed. 315 
 
 It is well known that nine years previously, in 18 19, the 
 practice of homoeopathy was forbidden in the Austrian 
 States, and that at the instigation of the same Dr. Stifft, 
 who was President of the Commission at these trials, the 
 same Stifft, who was so great an advocate of "scientific" 
 bleeding. The wording of the prohibition was as follows: — 
 
 In consequence of the decision of the Court of Chancery, his 
 Majesty orders that the practice of Dr. Hahnemann's system of ho- 
 moeopathy is to be universally and strictly forbidden.* 
 
 Stieglitzf also quotes the account by Miihry, in Casper's 
 WochenscJirift {ox 1835, on the homoeopathic experiments 
 made by Andral and Bailly in the Pitie. According to 
 this account no single individual had been cured in five 
 months. This is too much even for the " great critic " 
 Stieglitz. He thinks some at least must have been cured 
 by the healing power of nature.J Munk§ says of these 
 experiments: " Andral treated 130-140 patients according 
 to homoeopathic principles, and in the presence of homoeo- 
 paths, but without any result." 
 
 In 1 828 trials were instituted at Naples. The homoeopaths|| 
 ascribe the victory to themselves, and date from that time 
 the spread of homoeopathy in Italy. The allopaths^ state 
 that homoeopathy was defeated. The result was this : of sixty 
 patients, fifty-two were perfectly cured and six improved — 
 two died. These trials caused great excitement in Naples. 
 The allopaths had spread the report that there were numbers 
 of dead and dying in the homoeopathic establishment, so that 
 the King of Naples sent the Crown Prince to make investi- 
 gations. He found none either dead or dying. He there- 
 
 * Governmental decree of 2nd November, 1819, No. 49665. AUg. 
 Jiom. Zcitg., Vol. XX., p. 271. 
 
 t Z.c, p. 196. 
 
 X For a masterly exposure of Andral's pretended homoeopathic 
 experiments, see Brit. Jour, of Horn.., Vol. II., p. 119. 
 
 § L.c, p. 53. 
 
 II Rosenberg, I.e. ; also AUg. horn. Zcitg., Vol. XXIII., p. 18 ; also 
 Vol. XXXIII., p. 310. 
 
 1 Munk, /.f., p. 107.
 
 3i6 Trials of homceopathy alloived 
 
 upon exclaimed : " Then those whom I see here must have 
 risen from the dead."* 
 
 Prof. Ronchi, of Naples, accused Hahnemann of being 
 mad,-|- and in the beginning of the year 1830 the allopaths 
 declared homceopathy in Naples to be dead. As a matter 
 ■of fact it is spreading there up to the present time. 
 
 Further trials were instituted by the homoeopaths, Tes- 
 sier in Paris and Charge in Marseilles. According to the 
 allopaths, the results were unfavourable, while the homoeo- 
 paths asserted the contrary with regard to the first. In 
 the case of Charge the trial related to the homoeopathic 
 treatment of cholera in the beginning of 1850. One ward 
 for patients was assigned to him in the Hotel Dieu in 
 Marseilles, and according to previous agreement, patients 
 were sent to him by the allopaths. The allopathic hospital 
 doctors sent him (as was to be expected) the most hopeless 
 cases.J The trial lasted three days. Patients were treated 
 for seventeen days in the Hotel Dieu at Lyons by a ho- 
 moeopath. Dr. Gueyard (when?) and, according to Munk,§ 
 the result was unfavourable. Nothing on this subject is 
 mentioned in homoeopathic literature. In 1835 some cases 
 of itch were treated homoeopathically in Stuttgart — fiasco 
 of the homoeopaths. 
 
 At the time of the cholera in 1831, the Leipzic homoeo- 
 paths petitioned the town council to hand over to them one 
 of the cholera hospitals which were to be established, in 
 order that they might treat patients gratuitously in it. An 
 answer was given through the municipal physician Clarus, 
 that their petition would be granted under the following 
 conditions: — "The patients to be received shall be ex- 
 amined by Clarus before admission, and the entrance certi- 
 ficate be signed by him. The homoeopathic medicines 
 are to be taken from an ordinary apothecary's shop." The 
 homoeopaths replied that Clarus and other allopaths were 
 free to visit the hospital at any time, but that the question 
 
 * AUg. horn. Zcitg., Vol. XXXI 1 1., p. 305. 
 
 t Kleinert, Repertoj-iuni der gcs. iiied. J., 1833, VII., 141. 
 
 X Allg. hom. Zettg., LI., p. 63. 
 
 § L.c, p. 108.
 
 tinder the inanagemeni of its enemies. 317 
 
 of the admission of patients ought not to lie with Clarus 
 (who was known as a fanatical opponent), because otherwise 
 no patient would be admitted into the hospital unless he 
 were half dead. The medicines should be prepared and 
 administered under proper control, but they could not agree 
 to the dispensing of the medicines by the apothecaries. 
 The town council, influenced by Clarus, would not consent 
 to this. * 
 
 The homoeopathic physician. Dr. Stern, practised in 
 Miskoltz, in Hungary. He had previously written a 
 pamphlet against homa2opathy,t but owing to a peculiar 
 coincidence of circumstances, Saul had become a Paul. 
 There are many examples of similar conversions in the 
 history of homoeopathy. He wanted now to prove publicly 
 that the results of allopathy were excelled by those of the 
 new method, and applied to the vice-president of the 
 province for permission to treat gratuitously for one year 
 in a special locality the numerous prisoners. This was 
 granted, and the prisoners were allowed to choose whether 
 they would be treated homoeopathically or allopathically. 
 A lively agitation against this both by word of mouth and 
 by means of the press, on the part of the adherents of 
 the old school, was the result, but the desired effect was 
 not produced. Homoeopathy was delusion, quackery, &c., 
 and a Dr. Fleischer complained of the ingratitude shown, 
 after the many years' services of the allopathic doctors. 
 But the permission was maintained. The homoeopath began 
 his labours in 1844; the fatal results prophesied did not 
 occur, and at the end of the year, out of 99 patients, not 
 only had none died, but the cures effected had been more 
 rapid than had ever been observed under allopathic treat- 
 ment. Besides various external chronic maladies, gastric 
 and other fevers, inflammation of the lungs and pleura 
 constituted a large proportion of the diseases treated. The 
 agitation of the allopaths grew ; they called meetings and 
 
 * The documents alluded to will be found in Cholera, Homoopathik 
 ti. Medicmalbehorde, by the Leipzic Homoeopathic Society, Leipzic, 
 1831. 
 
 t Allg. horn. Zeifi;., Vol. LVI., p. 159.
 
 3i8 HomccopatJiy declines hnpossihk 
 
 councils, for this horrible homoeopath had dared to propose 
 a continuance of his treatment. At last, after three months, 
 his opponents gained their object, and a command was 
 issued from the royal Government to put an end to the 
 further homoeopathic treatment of the prisoners, because 
 the hospital had been established without the permission of 
 the Government, and, therefore illegally, and because the 
 homoeopathic method — " from its very nature " — was not 
 suited for many kinds of diseases. Any one who would 
 like to have the pleasure of admiring the noble conduct of 
 the allopaths in this contest will be able to do so in the 
 Allge^neine JionioopathiseJie Zeitung* 
 
 In 1840, two rooms in the Elizabeth Hospital, in Berlin, 
 were given up to a homoeopath for homoeopathic treatment, 
 from which he withdrew after some time on grounds that 
 had nothing to do with the question of the results of ho- 
 moeopathy. 
 
 In consequence of representations on the part of six 
 homoeopathic practitioners of Berlin, a ministerial rescript 
 of the loth September, 1841, was issued to the effect that 
 permission was given for the establishment of a homoeo- 
 pathic hospital with twelve beds for three years at the 
 cost of the State, with the condition that the admission of 
 patients should only take place through a commission 
 named by the Government. The six homoeopaths were 
 called upon to propose a suitable physician. The choice 
 fell upon Dr. Melicher. The hospital was never started. 
 Melicher declared at a later date that he himself was chiefly 
 to blame for this, because three years (with twelve beds) 
 was too short a time to decide so important a question, and 
 because, according to all experience, no impartiality could 
 be expected from allopathic judges.t 
 
 Why were the allopathic advisers so anxious that admis- 
 sion should take place only through them ? Why did it 
 not suffice that they should always have free access to the 
 wards of the hospital ? 
 
 * Vol. XXIX., p. 97. 
 
 t AUg. horn. Zcitg., Vol. XXXIII., p. 179.
 
 conditions and is condeninea. 319 
 
 These are the trials of homoeopathy at the sick bed, of 
 which its opponents assert that the results were more un- 
 favourable than under allopathic treatment, and that the 
 impotence of homoeopathy was fully proved by them. 
 Considering the hostile disposition prevailing, we might 
 have expected that the allopaths would never admit the 
 superiority of homoeopathy over the old privileged system 
 " resting on the experience of centuries." 
 
 " Homoeopathy was not able to assert its preponderance 
 over other methods in the case of cholera," the anonymous 
 writer of the Wonders of HoimvopatJiy declares in 1833 
 
 (P-^47)- 
 
 Simon writes in 1834:* — "The new method of treatment 
 furnished no more favourable results in Russia than the 
 old." 
 
 In No. 1 1 of the BeobacJitnngen baij'. Aerzte iiber die 
 Cholera, 1832, Dr. W. Sander declares " that homoeopathy 
 had obtained worse results than the treatment by bleeding 
 and emetics." 
 
 Prof. Hasper, the great advocate of " energetic bleed- 
 ings" in cholera, states in 1832 : — " Those cases in which 
 the homoeopathic method was used proved most raj^idly 
 fatal."t 
 
 Other critics, like Stieglitz, &c., expressed themselves 
 thus : — " The results of the homoeopathic method were 
 precisely the same as those of dietetic treatment." But as 
 the same critics declared the methods of bleeding, &c., to 
 be more beneficial than the dietetic method, the judgment 
 was really this: — Allopathy has obtained more favourable 
 results than homoeopathy in the treatment of pneumonia, 
 pleurisy, measles, scarlet fever, gastric fevers, typhus, dy- 
 sentery, cholera, &c. 
 
 Since the blood-thirst of the allopaths and their par- 
 tiality for emetics and purgatives has abated, no State 
 trials of homoeopathic treatment have been undertaken. 
 Now-a-days, even the allopaths would own that the then 
 
 * Antihoin. Archiv, I., p. 19. 
 
 t Hufeland's Journ., Vol. LXXIII., St. 4, P- Hj-
 
 320 Candid allopatJiic admission. 
 
 " rational " treatment yielded worse results than unassisted 
 nature. Let us put on one side all conclusions as to the 
 positive results of homoeopathy. What follows from these 
 facts ? 
 
 The statement of the allopaths that homoeopathy was 
 unsuccessful in these trials and obtained no more favour- 
 able results than allopathic treatment is manifestly untrue. 
 Allopathy has shown itself an extremely partial jud.e^e in 
 this matter, and its judgment is therefore valueless in mat- 
 ters relating to homoeopathy. Again, in numerous passages 
 the allopaths have expressed the self-evident opinion that 
 to judge of a method of treatment in one single disease, 
 several hundred cases are insufficient. In order to judge of 
 homoeopathy, some hundred cases of more than a hundred 
 different kinds of diseases sufficed to make the desirable 
 fact clear that homoeopathy was ineffective. What says 
 Dr. Fischer, of Dresden ?* " When we read an account of 
 homoeopathic successes, we always wish that it may not be 
 true." This characterises the allopathic mode of looking at 
 things up to the present day. 
 
 A very characteristic light is thrown on the tactics of the 
 allopaths in a pamphlet by an Englishman, Dr. Horner, 
 entitled, Reasons for Adopting the Rational System of 
 Medicine. He had previously been president of the Pro- 
 vincial Medical and Surgical Association at Brighton, con- 
 sisting of several hundred members. In a meeting over 
 which he presided a resolution was passed, that henceforth 
 no homoeopath was worthy of belonging to this great asso- 
 ciation. Six years later Horner, from an opponent, had 
 become an adherent of homoeopathy. He had only made 
 himself practically acquainted with homoeopathy after that 
 resolution had been passed. Gradually he was convinced, 
 hy striking proofs, of the superiority of the system, and was 
 the first to suffer from this resolution of the Association. 
 Horner was the oldest physician of the Hull hospital, and 
 he held it as his duty to treat his hospital patients homoeo- 
 pathically. He was forced to give up his position. This 
 
 * Op. cit., p. 84.
 
 Strike! but don't hear. 321 
 
 event caused a great commotion, and 90,000 copies of his 
 pamphlet were spread through England in a few months. 
 
 In this pamphlet Dr. Horner gives an account of the 
 manner in which the statistics of the homoeopathic treat- 
 ment of the cholera at the London Homoeopathic Hospital 
 in 1854 were burked by the commission of allopathic 
 medical men appointed by Government to inquire into the 
 results of the different modes of treatment pursued in the 
 London Hospitals, the London Homoeopathic Hospital 
 being one of those specially set aside for cholera patients, 
 and put under the supervision of an allopathic inspector, 
 who testified to the severity of the cases received and the 
 excellent results obtained, which were very much superior 
 to those obtained under allopathic treatment in any other 
 hospital in London.* 
 
 The historian Leupoldt, who was certainly not favourable 
 to homoeopathy, wrote very sensibly in the year 1863 : 
 " What is still required is to enter more fully and more 
 positively into the question of homoeopathy, and at first less 
 theoretically than experimentally." This respected his- 
 torian admits, also, that homoeopathy had not been sufifi- 
 ciently tested on the only decisive ground, that of practical 
 observation, up to the year 1863. But after 1863 no 
 practical trials were undertaken.! 
 
 Recent Attacks. 
 
 All the more zealously were all possible means resorted 
 to in order to represent homoeopathy as the work of a 
 cunning impostor — a " so-called method of treatment " dcs- 
 
 * A more detailed account of this iniquitous transaction will be 
 found at p. 248, note. 
 
 t What feelings and views the opponents have respecting homceo- 
 pathy is well shown by an incident that lately took place in England. 
 Major Vaughan Morgan offered St. George's Hospital in London a 
 sum of ^5000 if a ward in the hospital should be devoted for five years 
 to the homoeopathic treatment of patients, in order to make a fair trial 
 of the efficacy or otherwise of the system of Hahnemann. The offer 
 was refused, and Morgan repeated his offer to other hospitals, with 
 the like result. — Allg. horn. Ztg., Vol. CVH., p. in. 
 21 , ,
 
 322 fit slice denied by literary journals. 
 
 titute of all solidity — as an exaggerated mysticism to be 
 placed in the same category as cures by sympathy and 
 moonshine. The combatants of 1830 had laid the founda- 
 tions for this. During the first decades, Hahnemann's ser- 
 vices of former times were still recognised and remembered 
 with gratitude. A work which, like those of the present 
 day, had treated Hahnemann's labours with scorn, would 
 then have appeared to every reader to bear the stamp 
 of unbridled party hatred. Gradually the effects of the 
 cabiviniare andacter began to work on the general public, 
 the memory of the former services of the founder of 
 homoeopathy was effaced, and the road was left clear. In 
 the colleges and in medical writings nothing but scorn 
 and ridicule was poured on him ; while young medical 
 men were systematically imbued with the strongest re- 
 pugnance to homoeopathy. 
 
 The political and literary papers naturally sided with the 
 majority. Here was a welcome and undisturbed arena for 
 the activity of the allopaths ; there was no fear of rejoinders 
 nor of the refutation of the wildest assertions ; for, with but 
 few unimportant exceptions, all these organs refused to 
 insert any correction of the most downright falsehoods, 
 even the setting right of historical perversions and the sim- 
 ple rectification of facts. The Gai'tenlaiibe distinguished 
 itself most in this line. 
 
 Any doctor who expressed a favourable opinion of 
 homoeopathy was at once looked on as a heretic ; anyone 
 who practised it was a pariah, was expelled from profes- 
 sional association, and persecuted with relentless hatred, 
 It made no difference whether he had formerly given ample 
 evidence of earnest endeavours after truth or whether his 
 character was blameless — he was a heretic, and as such he 
 was branded and under a moral ban. Why ? Because his 
 scientific views differed from those of the allopaths. The 
 same is the case to-day. Men in distinguished positions 
 who dared to defend publicly what they recognised as 
 truth, were persecuted in every possible way. If its op- 
 ponents were so firmly convinced of the folly of homoeo- 
 pathy, publicity was the best weapon with which to combat
 
 Fate of Rapp and Henderson. 
 
 j-j 
 
 it. Imposture shuns the light. If homoeopathy was to be 
 honourably attacked, if the allopaths felt themselves firm 
 in the saddle, why should a man who defended it publicly 
 be tabooed ? W. Rapp, Professor of Clinical Medicine in 
 Tubingen, at the melancholy period of universal therapeutic 
 decay — at the time of prevalent nihilism — began to study 
 the works of those men who did not despair of medical 
 art or exclaim with Professor Dietl : " In knowledge, not in 
 action, lies our power," but who, like Hahnemann, held 
 firm to the conviction, " There is an art of healing." 
 
 Rapp found the heretic Hahnemann had brought into 
 the light of day much that was good and useful, though 
 occasionally in a rather crude form, and he was man enough 
 to assert publicly his convictions. The results might have 
 been anticipated. The Ministry was soon induced to order 
 him to abandon clinical instruction and to content himself 
 with lecturing on theoretical subjects ; but, on the other 
 hand, they did not omit to express a high opinion of Rapp's 
 " excellent qualities in all other particulars, and his scientific 
 zeal." Rapp, under these circumstances, sent in his resig- 
 nation (1854), and was transferred to Rottweil as chief 
 medical officer, with a suitable pension, his title and rank 
 being left him. The number of Rapp's auditors was 
 greater than that of his predecessor, Wunderlich. The 
 latter had, in the last six terms, 99 students attending his 
 theoretical lectures ; Rapp in the same length of time 
 (from the summer of 185 1 to the winter of 1854) had 145 
 scholars. Wunderlich's clinical instruction was attended 
 during that period by 191, Rapp's by 228 students. Rapp 
 is now physician in ordinary to the King of Wirtemberg. 
 
 A few years before. Professor Henderson, who had won for 
 himself a great name in the scientific world, and who was 
 listened to by a numerous audience, was forced to resign 
 his clinical professorship in the Edinburgh University for 
 the same reason. Altogether, the contest was carried on 
 in Great Britain with great bitterness on the part of the 
 allopaths. In 1851 the Universities of St. Andrews and 
 Edinburgh, as well as the Royal College of Physicians of 
 Edinburgh, determined not to confer the degree of doctor
 
 324 TJie Wonders of HomosopatJiy 
 
 on any candidate who did not pledge himself solemnly 
 never, during his whole life, to practise homoeopathy. 
 Every allopathic medical man was turned out of the medi- 
 cal societies who dared to consult with a homceopath, and 
 this practice was carried out with great strictness.* 
 
 The same course was pursued in Francef and the other 
 " civilised" countries. Similar attacks were everywhere re- 
 peated, and their violence was in proportion to the degree 
 in which homoeopathy had spread — ^just as in Germany. 
 
 So the allopaths did, and still do their work both by 
 word of mouth and by writing. In order to judge of their 
 present mode of combating homoeopathy, I shall here give 
 an account of the works of some living combatants. 
 
 The Wonders of HoniceopatJiy expounded to all friends 
 of tntik and especially to the goveininients, by one who 
 knoius them, Prof. Dr. Karsch of Miinster ; Sondershausen, 
 1862. . Karsch states and proves to his readers the fol- 
 lowing : Hahnemann had some knowledge, but he was 
 unable to earn a livelihood for himself and his family ; 
 in despair he gave himself up to charlatanry and founded 
 homoeopathy, in which he himself did not believe. Karsch 
 proves this thus : Hahnemann and the homoeopaths say 
 that Hahnemann departed from the ordinary course since 
 1790. Karsch relates some cases in which Hahnemann 
 ordered strong doses after 1790, and gave utterance oc- 
 casionally to traditional views. "Therefore" Hahnemann 
 was himself not convinced of his homoeopathic principles 
 — " they were all fables," " wretched lies," " swagger," &c. 
 It was the same with the psora — the theory of which was 
 propounded by Hahnemann contrary to his own convic- 
 tions. 
 
 The whole system of homoeopathy was thus the pro- 
 duct of a cunning charlatan, driven to despair by want — 
 promulgated against his better knowledge, and only with 
 the object of enriching himself at the expense of foolish 
 mankind. The homoeopathic doctors had the same object. 
 
 * See Allg. horn. Zeitg., Vol. LIV., p. 80, and Vol. LX\'., p. 32. 
 t lb., Vol. XLIII., p. 140, and Vol. XLVI., p. 364.
 
 discounted by Karsch. 325 
 
 Karsch had set himself a difficult task. To read Hahne- 
 mann's writings — to witness his earnestness, his industry 
 in working and in observing, and then to assert and try- 
 to prove from these very writings, that he himself was 
 not persuaded of the truth of his teaching — required truly, 
 besides other qualities, a degree of effrontery at which one 
 cannot fail to be astonished. If we were to follow the au- 
 thor sentence by sentence, and examine his work, the most 
 patient reader might well lose patience. Here are some 
 few specimens of Karsch's style : — 
 
 He speaks (p. 66) of Hahnemann's attack on the doctors 
 of the Emperor Leopold (compare above p. 88) and states 
 that Hahnemann had no sufficient knowledge of their 
 treatment, and in spite of this had attacked it ; " he, who 
 properly speaking, had hardly ever treated a patient him- 
 self."* Karsch very prudently keeps silence as to the four 
 bleedings — which, in the Emperor's weak state, was just the 
 essential point, and preferred to confine himself to praising 
 the imperial doctors as " highly esteemed and distinguished 
 practitioners." He also mentions Dr. StoUer — but calls him 
 Stolter. Curiously enough he is also called Stolter in the 
 Wonders of Homoeopathy of 1833, p. 5. Karsch does not 
 here mention the source, but is well acquainted with the 
 book, and has even borrowed the title. But that work lays 
 stress on the bleeding; bleeding was then still scientific, 
 and its rejection a great fault of Hahnemann's, which in 
 itself sufficed to lower him in the eyes of readers, so that it 
 was not necessary first to call the Emperor's doctors "distin- 
 guished and highly-esteemed practitioners." Karsch could 
 not disparage Hahnemann on the ground of his blaming 
 the bleeding ; he had to act differently, so he preferred to 
 call those doctors " distinguished " practitioners, but would 
 have been filled with horror if they had appeared four times 
 at his bedside with the bandage and lancet for bleeding. 
 
 Pages 60, 61 : — The author shows the same skill in men- 
 tioning the case of Leischke (comp. above p. 225), of whom 
 he states that under homoeopathic treatment he lost his life 
 
 * See above, p. 74, 75, and p. 153.
 
 326 Denial of all merit, chemical 
 
 " by neglect of proper treatment." As this neglected treat- 
 ment which the allopaths thought ought to have been had 
 recourse to in the case of a patient suffering from chronic 
 lung disease consisted in bleeding, &c., it could not be 
 mentioned, and would not have suited his purpose, so 
 Karsch says nothing about it. 
 
 Hahnemann wrote in a letter to Hufcland that at one 
 time, about 1790, he despaired of the medical art, and nearly 
 gave up its practice. Karsch mentions this and says, p. 43 : 
 " This is contradicted by a statement of Hahnemann's 
 which he made after he professed to have despaired of medi- 
 cine," and he quotes the passage from Hahnemann's Alte 
 Schdden, &c., in which the latter speaks of the favourable 
 results he had obtained, and boasts of them. This was in 
 1784. Karsch, however, ascribes this work to the year 
 1794. Only by this means could he use Hahnemann's 
 statement for his own purposes. Now Karsch had this 
 treatise in his hands, for he quotes it verbatim, and gives 
 reference to the page. Hahnemann, in this work, is speak- 
 ing of a limited class of diseases, and not of the medical 
 art in general. After Karsch has performed this feat, he 
 exclaims on the ground of this proof of Hahnemann's 
 mendacity : " Oh ! you potentising homoeopaths ! What in 
 reality is there in your potencies ? Where is your scrupulous 
 conscientiousness, your vaunted modesty ? Where is the 
 proof of your bold assertions ?" 
 
 In such a mode of conducting a controversy, it is hardly 
 necessary to mention that Karsch gives a very unfavourable 
 opinion of the work, and (p. 42) calls it "quite worthless" 
 (comp. Professor Baldinger's opinion, above, p, 64). He 
 speaks thus of Hahnemann's work on Arsenic (p. 24). 
 " Hahnemann also wrote a work on arsenical poisoning, in 
 which he strongly recommends what had already been sug- 
 gested as an antidote by Navier {Antidotes to Arsenic, 
 Greifswald, 1782, p. 65), viz., soapsuds — a pound of soap 
 rubbed and beaten up with four pounds of boiling water, 
 boiled for two minutes, and taken by cupfuls within two 
 hours." This is all Karsch says about this work. He 
 directs the attention of the reader to the soapsuds, describes
 
 or medical, to HaJinemann. 327 
 
 in detail [its preparation by beating it up and boiling, &c., 
 as if this were the chief contents of the work. He does not 
 make a single allusion to the principal subject on which the 
 whole work turns. He does not omit to ascribe even the 
 soap to another ; he names Navier, and indicates the pas- 
 sage where the latter speaks of the soap, as if he, Karsch 
 had discovered this, though Hahnemann had already given 
 the source Karsch quotes {Arseiiikvergiftiing; p. 98), and 
 has certainly made no attempt to pass off as his own 
 Navier's recommendation of soap as an antidote. 
 
 Karsch has recourse to a similar manoeuvre with re- 
 gard to mere, solub., p. 26. He mentions that an oxide of 
 mercury had been known before Hahnemann, and quotes 
 two authors in proof of this as against Hahnemann. But 
 Hahnemann himself quotes these two authors ; but this 
 Karsch does not mention. He does indeed own, when 
 appealed to by a homoeopath, that Hahnemann was a man 
 full of information and an excellent chemist, but he repre- 
 sents his labours in such a distorted light — in some re- 
 spects, indeed quite incorrectly — and abridges them in 
 such a way that the reader gets quite a false idea of 
 Hahnemann's merits. In the same manner he either does 
 not or will not understand the value of his " wine test," 
 
 Karsch proves with his wonted dexterity that Hahne- 
 mann administered mixtures contrary to his own doctrines. 
 As is known, Hahnemann treated the lunatic Klocken- 
 bring in 1792. He relates incidentally that, to his great 
 surprise, the lunatic wrote out a prescription for mania, 
 and that in the most suitable form and in proper dose ; 
 it begins B/ Sem. Daturas, gran, ii. " What a pity," ex- 
 claims Karsch, " that we do not know the other valuable 
 ingredients." In this manner, from this remark of Hahne- 
 mann's on the prescription of a madman, a proof is furnished 
 that Hahnemann, contrary to his principles, administered 
 mixtures, and that his treatment of this case could not 
 have been homoeopathic. Nothing is proved by the mad- 
 man's prescription. Hahnemann does not say that he 
 himself gave the prescription. That the treatment of 
 Klockenbring was not homoeopathic, is made clear from
 
 328 HaJinemann no Homoeopath f 
 
 the 25 grains of tartar emetic which Hahnemann gave 
 him. If a homoeopath should allege that this treatment 
 was homoeopathic, he would only show his ignorance of 
 the history of homoeopathy, nothing more. 
 
 Then follows the second and last proof of Hahnemann's 
 practice of giving mixtures of drugs. In 1797 he, according 
 to the Biographisches Denkmal, translated anonymously the 
 System of Veterinary Medicine of an Englishman, Taplin. 
 Karsch describes the introductory remarks, which treat of 
 " new improvements " and old and faulty methods of treat- 
 ment. In the book itself there are some long prescrip- 
 tions. Karsch thereupon exclaims : " How could Hahne- 
 mann publicly laud such a thoroughly unhomceopathic 
 work, containing such composite prescriptions, as a new 
 method of treatment ? He was no homoeopath ! " This 
 sounds well, but Karsch omits to add that the introduc- 
 tory remarks are not by Hahnemann, but by Taplin — 
 that Hahnemann, therefore, commends nothing in the 
 whole book, does not make even a single note, but sim- 
 ply translates. It is by such devices that Karsch proves 
 that Hahnemann's opposition to the mixing of drugs was 
 contrary both to his conviction and his practice. 
 
 Further on Karsch thus instructs his readers : " When 
 homoeopaths represent the great Hufeland as an admirer 
 of Hahnemann, they forget to remark that Hufeland pub- 
 lished a special treatise in 1831, called HoviceopatJiy, Berlin, 
 Reimer, 8, 44 p., in which he expresses his opinion that 
 the new in it is not good, the good is not new, and that it 
 must be looked upon as the grave of science." This ex- 
 hausts Karsch's criticism of this book. With this compare 
 above p. 192, 196, or, still better, read Hufeland's own 
 pamphlet,* in order to learn the allopathic mode of con- 
 ducting the controversy. 
 
 In describing Hahnemann's character, we saw how beau- 
 tiful his idea of famil}- life was, and what love he felt for 
 his wife and his children. Of the former he always speaks 
 with respect and veneration, although Brunnow alludes to 
 her imperious ways. If Hahnemann, in spite of this, thought 
 
 * Translated in Brit. Journ. of Hotn., Vol. XVI., p. 177.
 
 TJie light of Medical Science, 329 
 
 always of her with love, it proves his noble character, and 
 is in itself worthy of praise. Karsch makes an attempt to 
 disparage his adversary by sneering at his wife. Referring 
 to Brunnow's remarks he says, p. 108: — 
 
 A change in the character of Frau Hahnemann might have been 
 brought about by their improved circumstances. Upstarts often 
 become vain, proud and arrogant. Hahnemann himself speaks with 
 the greatest respect of his wife. In his autobiography, composed at 
 Leipzic m 1791, he says: — " Four daughters and a son, together with 
 my wife, form the spice of my life." Mustard and cayenne pepper are 
 certainly spices ! 
 
 These are the characteristics of a man who is called upon 
 to give advice to the State in the matter of homoeopathy, 
 as well as in other things, and to assist in the education of 
 youth. 
 
 In the year 1876, Prof Jurgensen, of Tubingen, came to 
 the front.* He begins thus : — 
 
 Knowledge is power, it is no longer necessary to tremble on ap- 
 proaching the sick bed .... during the last decades the art of 
 medicine has borne fruit under the light of science. 
 
 In 1826 — exactly fifty years previously — Miickisch, also 
 a physician of a large hospital, wrote thus : — 
 
 The sublime science of medicine has, during the 19th century, 
 reached a degree of perfection which enables it to protect the life of 
 generations, and save them from premature death by the innumerable 
 kinds of diseases. 
 
 And Miickisch bled copiously, even in the case of 
 children, and used emetics and purgatives as if it was a 
 question of sweeping a chimney. 
 
 Jiirgensen gives quinine in cases of inflammation of the 
 lungs to the amount of i ^ drachms and more, and chloral 
 hydrate to the extent of 2 drachms ; he even threatens to 
 increase the dose of quinine if the fever is obstinate. And 
 yet observations are recorded in allopathic literature which 
 show that from a few scruples of quinine, blindness and 
 deafness and destructive processes in the cavity of the 
 
 * Die luissenschaftliche Heilkimde 11. ihrc Widersacher. Sammhmg 
 klin. Vortrage, No. 106, pp. 879 — 916.
 
 330 Glorification of AllopatJiy. 
 
 drum of the ear and in the labyrinth, and that even from 
 ^ to 1 34^ drachms of chloral hydrate, great danger to life, 
 were " the fruit of medicine in the light of science." 
 
 " The course of the development of therapeutics gives sure 
 signs that much will be obtainable by our grandsons that 
 was denied to us." It is to be feared that our grandsons 
 will reject Jiirgensen's legacy in the same way that they 
 have already partially rejected that of Miickisch. 
 
 " If the doctor has to be told what homoeopathy is," says 
 Jiirgensen, " if he knows nothing more than that it consists 
 in giving infinitely small doses, he will hardly be a match 
 for those laymen who are acquainted with Hahnemann's 
 system. This is not the place to say what would be the con- 
 sequence. A doctor's reputation will certainly not be in- 
 creased by such ignorance, nor will his position be better 
 assured." In order to remedy this evil, Jiirgensen gives 
 necessary instruction on the subject. According to him, 
 homoeopathy has done nothing either for the development 
 of medicine or for its practice — it is sheer nonsense. It 
 has done no good, it does no good, and will never do any- 
 thing for the advantage of science. Its destination is to 
 be uprooted like thistles from the field of science. 
 
 In order to enliven his readers, he quotes certain pas- 
 sages from Hahnemann which appear to him peculiarly 
 harsh, and exclaims: "Now, I ask, is it possible to live 
 under the same roof with these people? Oh no! science 
 does not permit it." 
 
 As the allopaths find a peculiar pleasure in refuting cer- 
 tain absurdities and theories of Hahnemann by the aid of 
 our present knowledge, we must repeat that Hahnemann 
 considered his theoretical explanations of no importance 
 for his therapeutic rule. He says : " I can only vouch for 
 the what, not for the howr Hahnemann's earliest ad- 
 herents did not accept these errors and these theories. 
 Thus C. Hering writes :* " I am universally regarded as a 
 disciple and an adherent of Hahnemann, and I am willing- 
 to declare that I belong to those who adhere to him most 
 
 * ArcJiiv f. d. horn. Heilkitndc, Vol. XVI., H. 3, p. 92.
 
 Disparagement of Homeopathy . 331 
 
 faithfully and pay the most enthusiastic homage to his 
 greatness, but I affirm also that from the time of my first 
 acquaintance with homoeopathy (182 1) up to the present 
 day (1837) I have never accepted a single one of the theories 
 in the Organon as they are there given." 
 
 Jiirgensen has been set right from various quarters, by 
 Huber* among others. We mention the following in order 
 to show the characteristics of the allopathic strategy. J. 
 uses certain expressions of a homoeopathic non-professional 
 in order to blacken homoeopathy, without adding that the 
 homoeopathic doctors themselves most strongly object to 
 such conceptions of a doctor's knowledge. 
 
 Jiirgensen informs his friends of the following " truth." 
 " It has been laid to Hahnemann's credit that he first drew 
 attention to the necessity of testing the effects of medicines 
 on healthy subjects ; according to his own statement this 
 honour belonged to Albrecht von Haller." 
 
 What ignorance or distortion of facts is contained in this 
 sentence ! This one sentence gives a sufficient answer to 
 the question : What objects had Jiirgensen in view in this 
 article ? Were they honourable or worthy ones ? 
 
 The so-called isopatJiy originated fifty years ago ; the 
 majority of homoeopaths never occupied themselves with it. 
 Only a voice here and there was raised in its favour. They 
 pointed to cow-pox inoculation, which was introduced and 
 generally practised by allopaths, as an illustration of iso- 
 pathic treatment. 
 
 Jiirgensen naturally represents this " isopathy " in a most 
 unfavourable light, and adds that it had been " recently " 
 introduced. This word "recently" shows the object which 
 this treatise was intended to serve. For forty years the few 
 homoeopathic doctors, who at first defended " isopathy," 
 have been silent on the subject. 
 
 Such accusations are " simple descriptions derived from 
 the authentic sources " — so Jiirgensen wishes his readers to 
 believe.f 
 
 * Aiidiatur et altera pars ^ Vienna, 1877. 
 t L. r., p. 880.
 
 332 Hahnemann a mesmerising impostor. 
 
 A single allopathic doctor practises in his vaccinations, 
 more isopathy than all the homoeopathic doctors put to- 
 gether during the last fifty years, that is to say since " iso- 
 pathy " was first introduced. 
 
 Jiirgensen proves fi-om the report of the Homoeopathic 
 Hospital at Pesth that the results of homoeopathy show no 
 therapeutic advantages, but he omits the results of the 
 treatment of typhus fever fully given in this report. This 
 shows the results were very different from what they are 
 represented to be by Jiirgensen. 
 
 In his Treatment of Pneumonia^ ^00 cases of pneumonia 
 are not enough for him to determine the suitable thera- 
 peutics of it, and here 306 cases of pneumonia, 6% of typhus, 
 &c., suffice to enable him to judge of the power of homoeo- 
 pathic treatment. 
 
 Jiirgensen skims through the Oj'ganon, and finds near its 
 end a few casual remarks on mesmerism, by Hahnemann. 
 Charming ! Something can be made of this! Let us hang 
 the mantle of animal magnetism on Hahnemann's shoulders. 
 Let us represent mesmerism to be a gross imposture! Now 
 we have settled the mystic Hahnemann ! 
 
 However good Herr Jurgensen's intentions may have 
 been, and however much he may deserve the praise accorded 
 him by the allopaths, he is very unfortunate on this point. 
 In 1876, mesmerism was still mysticism, nonsense, idiotcy, 
 and the like. Jiirgensen could therefore still say emphati- 
 cally, " The laws of nature do not apply to the magnetic 
 condition." A year before Virchow-]- called it " a false doc- 
 trine." Three years later the Danish " Magnetiser" Hansen 
 hit upon the unfortunate idea of making a professional 
 tour through Germany. German medical professors took 
 to imitating the magnetic arts, and what was worse, they 
 obtained successful results, wrote many books on the sub- 
 ject, and recommended magnetism in the medical journals 
 as a remedy ; and what was worst of all, the reality of 
 mesmerism was fully recognised at the first Medical Con- 
 
 * Sammhmg klin. Vortrdge v. Yolkmann, No 45, p. 345. 
 t Heilkrdfte des Orgatizsmus, p. 10.
 
 History of medical inesnierisvi. 333 
 
 gress at Wiesbaden, without encountering any opposition,, 
 and its therapeutic value was discussed — and Jiirgensen was 
 present, and listened and — kept silence. Jiirgensen could 
 not know that while he was attacking Hahnemann's mes- 
 merism, Hansen was packing his portmanteau. 
 
 But, putting the surprising successes obtained by Hansen 
 on one side, there was hardly a doctor in Hahnemann's 
 time who has written so many medical works as he, who so 
 seldom alluded to the curative powers of mesmerism as 
 Hahnemann did. Hahnemann seldom prescribed its use,and 
 that he himself practised it has not been proved, and is very 
 unlikely. But yet mesmerism was j-aV/i///?^ in Hahnemann's 
 time, notwithstanding the absurdities connected with it. 
 Several periodicals devoted to animal magnetism, were pub- 
 lished, e.g., the MagnetiscJies Magazinfiir NiederdeiitscJiland, 
 Bremen, 1787 and 1788 (not unfavourably reviewed in the 
 Medicin. Joiu'nal, by Professor Baldinger), then the ArcJiiv 
 fiir Magnetisnms und Somnambnlisimis, by Hofrath Prof. 
 Bockmann of Carlsruhe ; Strasburg, 1787 and 1788. Pro- 
 fessors Eschenmayer, Kieser and Nasse issued the ArcJiiv 
 fiir tJiier. MagJietis^mis, 'Leipzig, 18 17 — 1824; and Professor 
 Wolfart of the Berlin Faculty, edited the faJirbiicher fiir 
 den Lebensniagneiisimis, Leipzig, 1818 — 1822. Alex. v. 
 Humboldt wrote :* " I would here remind you of the possi- 
 bility of the so-called magnetic cures, in which the mere 
 approach of the hand produces warmth and stimulation of 
 
 the exposed parts of the body It is certainly easier to 
 
 deny facts than to investigate them or to refute them 
 by counter-experiments." Lichtcnstadt, Treviranus, G. H. 
 Schubert, Nees v. Esenbeck, Olbers, Ennemoser and others 
 recognised the existence of these inexplicable phenomena. 
 In the medical journals of 1785 — 1835, there are numerous 
 articles on the " excellent effect of animal magnetism," 
 in " violent convulsive diseases," in " hardness of hearing," 
 in " mental diseases," and of " the disastrous results of its 
 misuse," which were also admitted at Wiesbaden in 1882. 
 
 * VerssiicJie iiber die gereizte Mttskclfasej; Posen and Berlin, 1797,. 
 Vol. I., p. 225.
 
 334 Illustrious medicai advocates 
 
 Professor Puchelt expressed himself thus, in the year 
 1 8 19, on the subject of animal magnetism : — * 
 
 Now that the Mesmer-Wolfart magnetic medicine [Wolfart was 
 sent by the Prussian Government to Mesmer in order to form at the 
 actual source a judgment on the subject in question] is kept with- 
 in bounds by Kieser's School of Magnetism, and since the employ- 
 ment of magnetism has been confined to particular cases both by 
 Kieser and by the majority of doctors who attribute any importance to 
 magnetism at all, and among these we must reckon all who are not 
 entirely blinded to natural phenomena by the dust of book learning, 
 and who have not, owing to their exclusive chemical labours, lost all 
 interest in the manifestations of life, and as such views point to a con- 
 nexion of magnetic medicine with scientific medicine, we shall say no 
 more about it here. 
 
 In Austria the use of magnetism was forbidden.f In 
 Berlin magnetism was included in the course of study of 
 the university. Prof. Wolfart gave lectures " On mesmerism 
 and the curative indications of animal-magnetism."j Prof. 
 Ph. V. Walter even raised animal magnetism to a principle 
 of the materia medica, and held that the efficacy of all 
 medicines depended on an animal-magnetic action. "The 
 art of healing is a continual magnetic process," he writes. 
 " In this consists the magic of the healing art and the 
 hidden power of drugs. A relation must exist between 
 the doctor and his patient of the same kind as that which 
 is efficacious in animal-magnetism. "§ 
 
 In 1834 Hufeland, that " honest seeker after truth," pro- 
 nounced his final judgment on mesmerism,|| and mentioned 
 that the French government called upon the Medical 
 Faculty in Paris, in 1780, to pronounce upon the question 
 of magnetism, and that they rejected it as a deception. In 
 1 83 1 a report of this same Faculty appeared which was 
 favourable to magnetism, and thus maintained the exact 
 contrary to what the scientific men had previously done. 
 
 * Hufeland's Journ., 1819, Vol. XLIX., St. 6, p. 10. 
 t Horn's Archiv f. ined. Erfahru7igen^ 1808, p. ic2r. 
 :j: Hufeland's Journ., 1819, St. i, p. 118. 
 
 § Epliemeriden der HeilkitJtde, von Adalb. Fr. jNIarkus, Bamberg 
 and Wiirzburg, 1812, Vol. IV., H. 3, p. 173. 
 
 II Hufeland's Jouni., Vol. LXXIX., St. i, p. 44.
 
 of aimnal magnetism. ' 335 
 
 Hufeland relates that in 1784 he opposed it out of ignor- 
 ance. For fifty years he had closely investigated the sub- 
 ject, and had arrived at the following conclusions: — 
 
 (i.) Magnetism is a fact. (2.) The magnetic state can be pro- 
 duced at will on suitable subjects by the influence of another living 
 individual. (3.) Certain morbid affections depending on the nervous 
 system can be cured by such magnetic influence. 
 
 He adds, in conclusion : — 
 
 I shall never forget what Goethe once said to me on this subject : — 
 " I have never occupied myself with magnetism ; it contains too many 
 mouse-holes and mouse-traps." 
 
 It is said to have been Kant who first ranked the sup- 
 porters of magnetism in the category of impostors, and 
 this was also done by Pfaff, of Kiel. Rudolphi, the Berlin 
 physiologist, had " the courage," as the allopaths of his 
 time assure us, to denominate the so-called animal-mag- 
 netism an imposture, and since that time this " courage " 
 became scientific, and Jiirgensen naturally displayed it. 
 
 Even a superficial examination of German homceopathic 
 literature would have shown Jiirgensen that mesmerism 
 occupied a much smaller space in it — both relatively and 
 absolutely — than in allopathic writings. We, of course, al- 
 lude to medical literature only. The homoeopathic doctor 
 mentioned by Jiirgensen, B. Hirschel, in 1840, publicly op- 
 posed the abuses of magnetism. Schmidt's J ahrbilcJier^' 
 contains the following remarks on his work: — 
 
 The author is animated by the scientific spirit ; he possesses the 
 critical faculty, scientific knowledge, thoughtfulness, and love of truth. 
 He opposes folly. We give him the most friendly welcome. 
 
 That Hahnemann, in 1796, first introduced his special 
 mode of treatment to medical circles that he wrote his two 
 other works on the subject for medical men, and addressed 
 his Organon, as is especially shown in the first edition, to 
 the profession only, is well known, and is proved by the cir- 
 cumstance that this work was reviewed in medical journals 
 exclusively. 
 
 The controversial Jiirgensen, however, makes this state- 
 ment : " Hahnemann, from the beginning, did not appeal 
 
 * Vol. XXXII., p. 375-
 
 336 Patients made to S2if-er not to think. 
 
 to the medical profession only." This assertion certainly- 
 better serves the object of his article. 
 
 He then continues with regard to non-professionals : — 
 
 A high degree of culture is necessary to enable a person to ac- 
 knowledge his incapacity to express an opinion where the expert 
 says it is his duty to do so. Most people are not capable of such self- 
 knowledge and self-control. 
 
 One great hindrance to the reception of homoeopathy 
 was its rejection of bleeding. Many of the lay public 
 whose attention had been called by Hahnemann to its in- 
 jurious consequences, became convinced of the hurtful 
 character of this practice, and kept the doctors who prac- 
 tised it at a distance, while the representatives of science 
 were still insisting on the necessity of blood-letting in " in- 
 flammatory" and other diseases. According to Jijrgensen 
 these non-professionals ought to have possessed enough 
 " self-control " to submit tamely to allow their blood to be 
 scientifically shed by the professionals. 
 
 In another place, Jurgensen expressly says that in cases 
 of pneumonia, bleeding ought not to be resorted to in order 
 to allay fever, and that such a proceeding would be the 
 " act of a weak man whom fate had made a doctor for the 
 punishment of his fellow-creatures."* According to Jiir- 
 gensen, then, the allopathic professors and doctors of Hahne- 
 mann's and of more recent times, were men whom fate had 
 made doctors for the punishment of their fellow-creatures, 
 and the lay public of that period ought to have possessed 
 enough " self-control " to have resigned themselves un- 
 hesitatingly to the judgment of these instruments of an 
 evil fate. The majority showed this "self-control " even to 
 their own destruction, and it is these whom Jurgensen 
 commends, patients such as he himself desires, who sacrifice 
 their own opinions on the altar of " science." 
 
 Jurgensen is favourable to hydropathic treatment. The 
 lay public appears to have played no passive part in the 
 development of this treatment. The hydropathic system 
 was.' not thought much of when the non-medical Pro- 
 
 * Volkmann's Samniluui^ kl. Vorlr., No. 45, p. ;^2)^.
 
 History of the Water-awe. 337 
 
 fessor Oertel, of Ansbach, in the AUgeiuein. Anzeig. d. 
 Deiitschen, in 1826,* declared himself strongly in favour of it, 
 and from that time onwards for many years he continued 
 to call the attention of suffering mankind to " the benefits 
 to be derived from the use of God's gift — cold water." 
 What medical journal of that time did so much for the 
 spread of the water-cure as this periodical, edited by a non- 
 professional? Both friend and foe used its columns to 
 ventilate their opinions, and allopathic doctors were not 
 wanting who warned the public of the dangers attending 
 water-treatment, e.g., in haemorrhoids and gout, since inflam- 
 mation of the brain and phthisis were likely to ensue from its 
 employment.! Oertel was undaunted, he answered every at- 
 tack, and won many laymen over to his treatment, and they 
 were indefatigable in publishing its results, whether favour- 
 able or unfavourable. By this means a wholesome pressure 
 was brought to bear on the doctors. Oertel, indeed, gave 
 his opinions pretty freely about " medical men," but always 
 kept within parliamentary bounds. Of his treatises, he re- 
 commended among others. Newest Water Treatment, ivitJi 
 Musical Accompaniment. Niirnberg, Campe. He led his 
 readers, not by force, but gently on the wings of music into 
 the kingdom of the water nymphs. He certainly worked 
 too much in one groove, and shared the fate of most doc- 
 tors who, from seeing that a certain remedy has good effects 
 in some cases, immediately proceed to generalise and em- 
 ploy it for a great number of diseases. 
 
 Oertel naturally recommended cold water as a remedy 
 for the approaching cholera, and at a later period ex- 
 claimed, "Victoria! cold water has conquered the cholera!" 
 Certainly he did obtain better results than the allopaths. 
 
 In 1830, among others, a doctor calls attention in the 
 Allgem. Anz. d. Deiit.\ to the danger from the approaching 
 cholera. He recalls the circumstance that hospital fever 
 had only been checked when Professor Markus introduced 
 
 * See Nos. 287 and 2S9. 
 
 t See 1830, No. 63, p. 801, and many other places. 
 
 X No. 314, p. 4203. 
 
 22
 
 338 Holo the authors of Hydropathy 
 
 bleeding- as a prophylactic for it ; the same means ought to 
 be used to protect against cholera. It is difficult to say- 
 how many laymen followed this professional advice with the 
 needful " self-knowledge." It can, however, be proved that 
 Oertel, who advocated the use of water instead of bleeding, 
 had great influence. This layman spread the knowledge of 
 the hydropathic treatment through the widest circles by his 
 knowledge, energy and perseverance, at a time when few doc- 
 tors employed this treatment. Oertel himself willingly admits 
 that the merit of having placed the hydropathic treatment 
 on a scientific basis belongs to Dr. I. S. Hahn, of Schweid- 
 nitz* (died 1 773), and published a fifth edition of his work,t 
 of which four editions had been issued during the author's 
 life| — the first in 1738. With the exception of this physi- 
 cian (whose father and brother had also rendered consider- 
 able services), Oertel claims the merit of having up to that 
 time been most successful in his advocacy of the cold water 
 cure. He is right. History contains traces and sugges- 
 tions of many things which only become common property 
 after the lapse of many centuries. The merit consists in 
 the introduction of the method — and of this merit a large 
 share is due to Oertel. This is the case in a still greater 
 degree with the peasant Priessnitz in Austrian Silesia, who, 
 soon after Oertel, practised the cold water cure with still 
 greater energy. We must ascribe the introduction of 
 hydropathic establishments to Priessnitz, and hou- this 
 
 * L.c, 1832, No. 33S, p. 4425, and other places. 
 
 t Ilmenau, 1833, and Niirnburg, 1834. 
 
 X Unterricht von K7-afft iind Wiirckiing des frisclicji IVassers in die 
 Lciber der Menschen^ 4th enlarged edition, Breslau and Leipzig, 1754, 
 290 pp., with a frontispiece and thirty-five cases " from his own ex- 
 perience and that of two other medici," and a letter " from a foreign 
 divine," in which a number of successful results are j-elated which this 
 clergyman had from the employment of cold water ; and also how a 
 medicus, who lived in the same place as the clerg}-man, opposed him, 
 and warned patients against him, p. 271. In the preface it is men- 
 tioned that Dr. Schwerdtner, of Jauer, and Hahn's father supported 
 him energetically, "in spite of all the calumnies and opposition of 
 many prejudiced colleagues and of others who dreaded the injury 
 likely to accrue to the medical profession."'
 
 were treated by the Medical Profession. 339 
 
 man was persecuted by the profession ! He had not, as 
 Jiirgensen says, " the high degree of culture necessary to 
 enable him to admit his own incapacity to express an 
 opinion when the professional says it is his duty to do so." 
 
 We should like to hear an answer to the question : 
 "What doctor ever did so much for the introduction of 
 hydropathic treatment as the non-professionals Oertel and 
 Priessnitz ? " Both certainly committed gross mistakes, 
 especially Priessnitz, although " scientific " doctors are not 
 behind them in the harm they have done in other ways, 
 
 Jiirgensen, indeed, gives quite a different account of the 
 historical development of the hydropathic system.* " Un- 
 fortunately this interest was only transitory. People forgot, 
 or wished to forget. This may have been caused by the 
 influence of Priessnitz, Oertel, and other hydropaths." 
 Jiirgensen would wish to prove that the Salamanca pro- 
 fessors would have discovered America much sooner if 
 Columbus had not stood in their way. In order to avoid 
 misunderstandings we may at once state that we do not 
 wish to defend the indiscriminate use of cold water in 
 fevers as is now common, nor indeed its excessive system- 
 atic employment. 
 
 What professor, medical counsellor or medical excel- 
 lency introduced medical gymnastics ? It was the Swedish 
 fencing-master. Ling (1776- 1839). 
 
 The Turko-Roman and Russian baths did not originate 
 in the universities, but they were introduced by laymen. 
 
 The " Female Medical Rubbers " have certainly done, 
 and still do, a good deal of harm, but no one doubts that 
 they have occasionally done more good than many a pro- 
 fessor decorated with stars and crosses. That " science " 
 has changed the German word " Streichen " into the French 
 word " Massage," alters facts no more than the word " hyp- 
 notism " affects the existence of magnetism, which was 
 likewise kept afloat by laymen. 
 
 If all the old doctors had held the same opinions as 
 
 * Klinische Studieii iibcr die Bchandlung dcs Abdojninaltyphus 
 ruittelst des kalten IVassers, Leipzig, 1 866, p. 1 3.
 
 340 TJie psora theory a common article 
 
 Jiirgenscn he would not now possess the universal remedy — 
 quinine ; and mercury, secalc, opium, sarsaparilla, ipecac- 
 uanha, &c., would not have been introduced at all, or, at 
 any rate, not so soon into the pharmacopoeia. Conceit is 
 a bad companion in the region of therapeutics. We shall 
 not be misunderstood. 
 
 It is a constant reproach made by his opponents for the 
 last seventy years against Hahnemann and the homoeo- 
 paths, that they addressed themselves to the lay public. If 
 they had been polite, they ought to have retired modestly 
 w^hen the professors repelled them. Let us put on one side 
 the positive work accomplished by homoeopathy, and look 
 only at the question of bleeding. Jiirgensen established, 
 in 1872, the injuriousness of venesection as a febrifuge in 
 inflammation of the lungs. Let us suppose that Jiirgensen 
 had made and published this discovery in 1772 ; the pro- 
 fessors would have repelled him, called him *' unscientific," 
 given him all sorts of names, and repeatedly prosecuted 
 him before the tribunals, because he did not bleed like his 
 accusers. What would Jiirgensen have done? We imagine 
 that he would also have addressed the lay public and called 
 upon them to judge his cause ; for there was no other way 
 open if one had sufficient energy to fight for the good cause. 
 
 The author takes so great a pleasure in the " psora," the 
 " itch-miasm " of Hahnemann, that we cannot help rejoic- 
 ing along with him ; but at the same time, the question 
 again arises : why did Jiirgensen pass over in silence the 
 itch theories then in vogue? It would not in any case 
 have been superfluous if Jiirgensen, by giving an account 
 of the views then prevailing, had given his readers a his- 
 torical basis by which to judge Hahnemann's doctrine. It 
 would also have been only fair if he had mentioned that 
 even in the first years after the publication of this theory, 
 no homcEopath recognised the itch as such a fundamental 
 malady. If we transport individuals from the time in 
 which they lived, we can prove that Hannibal was a bad 
 general, because he did not attack Rome after the battle of 
 Cannae with 48 pounders. But this is the mode of war- 
 fare pursued by the allopaths. Whatever good Hahne-
 
 of AllopatJiic medical faith. 341 
 
 mann accomplished was borrowed from some one else, and 
 whatever errors of the time in which he lived are shared by 
 him, are attributed to him alone, and judged according to 
 the standard of our present knowledge. It gives us an in- 
 structive glimpse into the allopathic arsenal if, in contrast 
 to the attack of this professor, we look at what some of 
 Hahnemann's earlier opponents say on the subject of psora. 
 
 Wedekind, 1825, l.c., p. 87 : "I can willingly credit Herr 
 Hahnemann that phthisis and asthma may be derived from 
 the itch." 
 
 Hufeland, 1831, Hoviojopathy (p. 32): "The physician 
 at last discovers that a hidden scabies or syphilis lies at 
 the root." 
 
 Wonders of Honiceopathy, 1833, p. 69: "It was well 
 known to all medical men that suppressed itch is very 
 frequently followed by chronic diseases, and Hahnemann 
 need not have covered thirteen pages with quotations from 
 old authors in order to prove this, but his avarice drove him 
 to do this in order to increase his honorarium." 
 
 Schmidt's Jahrbiicher, 1834 :* "Did not Autenrieth pro- 
 pound a modified psora theory not long before Hahnemann?" 
 
 Lesser, 1835 I.e., p. 334 : " The truth of the matter is that 
 an inveterate and incautiously suppressed itch has at all 
 times caused after-diseases, and not unfrequently death. But 
 this has long been known to every intelligent physician." 
 
 Eisenmann, the well-known adherent of the natural 
 historical school, writes in his Priifung der Honioopatkie, 
 Erlangen, 1836, p. 24: "A celebrated German physician 
 stated, long before Hahnemann borrowed the psora theory 
 from him, that very many chronic diseases — but not six- 
 eighths of them, as Hahnemann asserts — are produced by 
 badly treated and suppressed itch." 
 
 We saw above that it was asserted in two medical 
 journals that Hahnemann borrowed his system from Hip- 
 pocrates "all except the psora theory." These journals were 
 edited by professors of high repute. Now Eisenmann comes 
 forward and cruelly deprives Hahnemann of this last shred 
 — psora. Eisenmann was one of the most esteemed allo- 
 
 * Vol. I., p. 393.
 
 342 Folly and ivealtJi the main 
 
 paths of his time, so that Hahnemann is not only entirely- 
 annihilated, but reduced to nothing. 
 
 Jiirgcnsen was followed in i88i by a like-minded col- 
 league called Koppe, who, among other things, confided to 
 his readers that Hahnemann, in 1796, " was hardly known as 
 a physician." He says, on p. 41 : "Soon medical men began to 
 occupy themselves with homoeopathy," and gives many other 
 equally valuable pieces of information. Koppe surmised 
 with justice that Jiirgensen had probably written his treatise 
 on an unlucky day, when he was irritated by the perusal of 
 some homoeopathic works which had fallen into his hands, 
 and had observed that a knowledge of the subject was not 
 necessary to constitute him an accepted champion with his 
 brethren of the faith, Haser* declares: "That many of 
 the opponents of homoeopathy in this controversy did not 
 disdain to employ the most despicable weapons, such as 
 the notorious Fickel." Koppe makes use of Fickelf in many 
 ways with evident pleasure. 
 
 Jiirgensen was refuted from two quarters,:]: an honour 
 which must certainly have been the greatest surprise to 
 himself, but which was due to the fact that he received 
 great praise from the allopaths, who did not blame his 
 mode of conducting the controversy in the very least. 
 
 Meanwhile Prof. Liebreich, of Berlin, opposed homoeo- 
 pathy publicly in a tone which, for his own sake, he ought 
 not to have adopted. He declared that a combination of 
 folly and wealth formed the mass of the homoeopathic 
 clientele, but probably for the moment forgot the homoeo- 
 pathic dispensary in Berlin, superintended by eight doctors, 
 and which was attended by destitute patients, and in such 
 increasing numbers that the doctors were not able to give 
 advice to all those who sought their help. The journals 
 
 * GescMchte der Median, 1881, II., 802. 
 
 t Fickel was an unprincipled rogue who published a number of 
 pretended provings and cures. His cheat was soon detected by the 
 homcEopaths. 
 
 X Sorge, Zcitsch. dcs Bcrlitic?- Vcrcins horn. Aerate, 18S1, and 
 Mayntzer, Die Hoinoopatliic iind Allopatliie, Leipzig, 1883.
 
 supports of Hoiiio:opathy. 343 
 
 show that in the period from 1878 to 1883, z>., in five years 
 24,000 patients were treated in more than i20,oco con- 
 sultations. 
 
 Our readers can imagine the daily, mean and irritating 
 attacks delivered by the allopaths in their intercourse with 
 the public, at meetings and in political and other papers, 
 &c. We may just mention here that recently in Berlin, 
 dissertations for the doctor's degree were written against 
 homoeopathy. When we add that they are dedicated to 
 the professors, the reader will know their contents before- 
 hand. It would be unfair to call the authors to account. 
 No one is responsible for the instruction he has received, 
 and it is a rare exception to find a young doctor free from 
 a blind faith in authorities on leaving the university. 
 Most doctors never escape from the domination of 
 authority. 
 
 A Historian as a champion of Allopathy. 
 
 If a historian of Haser's reputation lends himself to party 
 purposes it is a striking proof how deeply the opponents of 
 homoeopathy were imbued with hatred of it. Haser deals 
 with homoeopathy in 1 1 pages. He says of Hahnemann : 
 "After the conclusion of his studies." What studies ? He 
 does not mention any, but, on the contrary, throws doubt 
 on their existence by the following statement : — '' The Uni- 
 versity of Erlangen conferred on him a doctor's degree hi 
 abscniiar This method of belittling Hahnemann is new, 
 and peculiar to this historian. He cites as his authority for 
 Hahnemann's life, Ein biographisches Denkmal and Karsch. 
 But Karsch, who is also an eminent man, says nothing about 
 " absentia^' and we read in the Biographisches Denkmal, 
 p. 5, that Hahnemann attended the lectures of four pro- 
 fessors in Erlangen, defended his thesis on the loth of 
 August, 1779, and thereupon received his doctor's degree. 
 This is also related in Karsch's book, quoted by Hiiser, 
 p. 21. 
 
 Haser appears as a most reckless partizan. He demeans
 
 344 ^ medical historian disdains 
 
 himself, e.g., to attack the second Frau Hahnemann, " who 
 generally appeared in masculine attire, attended lectures on 
 anatomy, &c," This "etc.," in its connexion, can only 
 mean that she was a Vv'orthless person, and he implies that 
 it was an immoral act of Hahnemann's to marry her in his 
 8oth year ! What were the real circumstances ? Melanie 
 d'Hervilly-Gohier came in 1834, in her 35th year,from Paris 
 to Cothen, in order to consult Hahnemann. According to 
 report, she performed this journey in masculine attire, per- 
 haps for the sake of greater security, or for some reason 
 which may interest female gossips, but not a man. She 
 attended lectures on anatomy. Why ? She was the daughter 
 of a painter, and herself an artist of unusual talent. There 
 still exists a large portrait in oils of Hahnemann, executed 
 by herself, which, both in conception and execution, shows 
 the artist's hand, and is, in the judgment of men who knew 
 Hahnemann personally, the best portrait of him existing* 
 Hiiserdoes not allude to the fact that Melanie was an artist, 
 although this is stated in the: Biographisches Denkmal, which 
 he expressly gives as his authority, and of which he says 
 that " it is distinguished by its efforts to be impartial." But 
 there is still more to be read in this biography. Several 
 letters are given from her and from Hahnemann to the 
 members of his family who remained in Germany. We see 
 from these what a happy domestic life Hahnemann led in 
 Paris ; with what affection he thought of his relations in 
 his dear old home, to whom, at this same wife's request, 
 he left his whole fortune, with the exception of a small 
 sum ; we read, not without emotion, how she wrote cheer- 
 fully to his family : " He is as blooming as a rose, and 
 as merry as a young bird." Again, her husband is full 
 of praise of her faithful care : " You yourselves could not 
 take better care of me." " She will soon write to you 
 herself in German, for she can do anything she wishes 
 to do." The letters of the Parisian homoeopaths describe, 
 with satisfaction, the devotion of Hahnemann's wife to the 
 
 * An engraving of this portrait may be seen in Dudgeon's trans- 
 lation of the On^anon.
 
 to stick to truth. 345 
 
 man who was so highly honoured by all. The book Haser 
 uses as an authority contains all this and much more, but 
 yet he sees fit to throw imputations on the family life of 
 the founder of homoeopathy in a historical work. -Surely 
 the private life of any individual ought to be sacred, and 
 above all, where, as in this case, his nearest relations arc 
 still alive. 
 
 That he contemns Fickel's weapons is certainly, under 
 these circumstances, to be reckoned to his credit. But we 
 cannot be surprised when he writes : " Vanity and the 
 desire of gain were the cause of Hahnemann's course of 
 action." What accuracy of description of homoeopathy is 
 to be expected from a man who says such things ? 
 
 Kurt Sprengel acted on other principles when he wrote 
 his Versuc]L ciner pi'agmatischen GescJiicJite der Heilkunde, 
 that gigantic work, the product of thirty-six years of un- 
 wearied industry, which is still unfinished. He was guided 
 by the principle professed by Thucydides, " to create a 
 treasure and a possession for all times, and not merely to 
 gain applause in the present time." Kurt Sprengel wished 
 to make Lucian's words his rule : " Remember that you 
 should not write in order to be praised and honoured by 
 your contemporaries, but fix your eye on future ages. 
 Expect from these the reward of your labour, that it may 
 be said of you : He was a man of unfettered intellect, and 
 of courage in speech and in writing, free from flattery or 
 slavish feelings, a man by whom truth was prized beyond 
 everything." 
 
 A certain Dr. Johannes Rigler delivered a discourse on 
 homoeopathy in October, 1880, before the West Berlin 
 Medical Society. According to him no piece of quackery 
 " is more significant and lamentable " than this system of 
 treatment. The statements of Herr Rigler " met with the 
 complete approbation of all the members present." We 
 will quote some of these statements. " Hahnemann first
 
 34<5 If i^^(^ facts are against my theory, 
 
 promulgated his wonderful system in the Organon, pub- 
 lished in Dresden in i8io." 
 
 With a refinement of cunning, Hahnemann, from the very first, 
 denied the competence of medical men to judge of his system, and 
 appealed to the impartial judgment of the lay public. 
 
 We have already seen that exactly the reverse was the 
 case. He published his first exposition of his method in 
 Hufeland's Journal; his first drug provings were published 
 in Latin, and in the Organon (ist ed., p. 104) he recom- 
 mends this Latin work to those who wished to test his 
 principles. And on the strength of this falsehood is founded 
 the accusation of Hahnemann's " refined cunning." 
 
 The medical profession could do nothing but ignore with silent 
 indignation this disgusting monstrosity. 
 
 What is the opinion of the hostile but unimpassioned 
 Krijger-Hansen ? — 
 
 Hahnemann thereby excited a very bitter opposition; he was placed 
 under an interdict, he would have been imprisoned, banished, or even 
 crucified or burnt, like some wise men of old, if only there had been 
 an inquisition in existence. 
 
 Further : " It is strange that the majority of allopaths 
 should have attacked homoeopathy so fiercely, and looked 
 upon every homoeopath as an enemy."* 
 
 The same author writes thus of the homoeopathic prac- 
 titioners : 
 
 I have often had occasion to enter into literary relations with the 
 most zealous defenders of his doctrines ; and I feel myself bound to 
 state that I have been surprised by the friendly courtesy with which I 
 have been met [Kriiger-Hansen attacked homceopathy vehemently, 
 but confined himself to the subject], and I shall alwajs be very 
 grateful to them.f 
 
 Rigler continues : — 
 
 It is incomprehensible how Hahnemann found it possible to test 
 thus his hundreds of remedies. Besides the manifest absurdity 
 involved, we see here the most palpable and shameless falsehood. 
 And here, as usual, one lie led to another. 
 
 * Die Homoopathie ttnd Allopathic atcf dcr Waage, Giistrow und 
 Rostock, 1833, p. II. 
 
 f Hcil und Unheilmaximeii der Leibivaltcr, Ouedlenburg und 
 Leipzig, 1840, p. 22.
 
 so much the tvorse for the facts. 347 
 
 Sorgc points out the absolute falsehood of this state- 
 ment, by showing that all the medicines proved by 
 Hahnemann and his earliest disciples, during a period of 
 more than forty years, amounted only to ninety-five. 
 Hahnemann only proved a part of these, as he clearly 
 states in his Fragvienta de Viribtis, Materia Medica Para 
 and Chronic Diseases. Numerous assistants helped him, 
 for a period of twenty-eight years, in proving the other 
 remedies. Neither Hahnemann, nor any of his adher- 
 ents, ever stated that he had proved hundreds of remedies. 
 Here, then, an absolute untruth is attributed to the founder 
 of homoeopathy, and on the ground of this untruth he is 
 accused of " palpable and shameless falsehood." And 
 notice this — all the allopathic doctors present gave their 
 " entire approbation " to Rigler's statements. Chief among 
 them was the Geheimer Ober-Medicinalrath Dr. Bardeleben, 
 Professor and Teacher at the Royal University of Berlin, 
 
 Further, the lecturer proceeds to state that Hahnemann 
 used the poisonous toad (rana bufo) for medicinal purposes. 
 This, again, is an unmitigated falsehood. Sixteen years 
 after Hahnemann's death, an allopath, Vulpian, first made 
 experiments with the poison of the toad, and it was only 
 after this mentioned in homoeopathic periodicals.* After 
 Rigler had given this piece of information to the society 
 which placed implicit reliance on his words, he added the 
 following remarks : — 
 
 Unfortunately, the excellent Hahnemann has never revealed why he 
 hit upon the toad and sentenced it to the torture in order that it might 
 be incorporated into the homoeopathic materia medica. According to 
 a Tyrolese superstition, toads are unfortunate souls who are con- 
 demned to wander about the earth in this form and do penance for 
 their sins. It is possible that by the decree of a cruel fate homoeo- 
 pathy came mto the world solely to crown the penance of these poor 
 creatures by a fresh martyrdom. Or did Hahnemann accept as literal 
 truth the words of the poet, "the toad, ugly and venemous, wears yet 
 a precious jewel in its head." But enough of this folly ! 
 
 Let us realize the situation. A doctor undertakes to 
 deliver a lecture before an assembly of doctors whose 
 
 * Zcitsch. d. Vercins Iwm. Aerzte Oesterr.., 1S59, \o\. H., No. 7, and 
 AUg. Jiom. Zcitg.^ i860, Vol. LX., Monatsbl, No. i and 2.
 
 348 Rigler's ^' light of truth" proved 
 
 president was an appointed teacher at a university. He 
 entitles his lecture : Against JiomQ:opathy and homeopaths 
 and their present position in the State. In this he is 
 guilty of the most barefaced falsehoods, and this with 
 " the complete assent of all members of the society present." 
 Not a single voice is raised against it ; on the contrary, 
 they are so enraptured by this lecture that they determine 
 unanimously, without any opposition whatever, to print it 
 and disseminate it as widely as possible, which was done. 
 When the other allopaths became acquainted with this 
 curious lecture, not a single voice among the whole allo- 
 pathic body was raised against it, and several other 
 medical societies applied to the West Berlin Society before 
 whom this precious discourse had been delivered, praying 
 them to take suitable steps to suppress the mischievous 
 homoeopathy. 
 
 Meanwhile, a homoeopathic physician* called attention 
 to the monstrous statements contained in Rigler's discourse, 
 and care was taken that this refutation, founded on facts, 
 should be brought before Bardeleben, Rigler and Co. In 
 judging the motives of the opponents of homoeopathy it is 
 important to notice that, in spite of this, no attempt was 
 made to correct even the most glaring misstatements. On 
 the contrary, an appeal was made to State authority for 
 assistance in the contest. Rigler had, at that very meeting 
 of the West Berlin Medical Society, " with the complete 
 assent of all the members of the society present," expressed 
 the wish that the apothecaries should be forbidden to 
 " disfigure their shops " by inscribing over them " Homoeo- 
 pathic and Allopathic Pharmacy." 
 
 The following resolutions were passed : The permis- 
 sion to dispense their own medicines by homoeopathic 
 practitioners, which has existed hitherto, " to the great 
 injury of the reputation and dignity of medicine," should be 
 withdrawn. Besides this, no medicines prepared homoeo- 
 pathically were to be kept in stock in the apothecaries' 
 shops. Fine resolutions certainly, and going direct to the 
 point ! 
 
 * SorgQ, Fiir die Homoopathze^ Berlin, 1880.
 
 to be the darkness of falsehood. 349 
 
 Rigler continued his labours, and wrote a book in 1882, 
 entitled : HomooopatJiy and its importance to the general 
 tmlfare. 
 
 In the preface he writes : 
 
 Ignorance of the true nature and tendencies of the subject has 
 allowed views to prevail with regard to homoeopathy, both with the 
 pubHc generally and in the law-making circles, which are not conso- 
 nant with facts, and can only have an injurious effect on the State and 
 on society. Let us, therefore, try to present the life and work of the 
 founder of homoeopathy, and the development and spirit of his dis- 
 covery in the light of truth. 
 
 He relies on the " in every respect, excellent little work 
 of Karsch," with which we are already acquainted. " Karsch 
 has rendered a great service by this work, which may be 
 pronounced a model of its kind." Rigler has, however, 
 added his own services to those of Karsch, and has gone 
 beyond him in many respects. What trouble Karsch took 
 to convict Hahnemann of the crime of using mixtures of 
 drugs! Rigler simplifies the process and writes, p. 25 : 
 " For the rest, he treated his patients according to the 
 traditional methods with mixtures of drugs." And to 
 prove this he quotes certain passages from Hufeland's 
 fonrnal, in which mixtures of drugs are not even alluded to. 
 Karsch at least tried to appear as though he appreciated 
 Hahnemann's talents. Rigler can detect nothing in him 
 but " acuteness and a certain literary capacity." 
 
 He calls Hahnemann's attack on the four bleedings 
 which shortened the Emperor Leopold's life, the " most in- 
 famous accusation." We should expect from what we 
 have seen of his adroitness that he would cunningly sup- 
 press, the question of blood-letting and only speak of 
 " treatment," and we are not disappointed. If only 
 Hahnemann had more frequently repeated such " infamous 
 accusations," if he had only attacked this destructive prac- 
 tice with still greater power and influence than he possessed, 
 much unhappiness would have been spared. There would 
 also have been no shedding of the precious blood " to the 
 extent of causing the most profound syncope," by means 
 of which, aided by the " evacuating method," the life's
 
 350 In order to criticz.-:e impartially 
 
 thread of the ever memorable Queen Louisa was pre- 
 maturely cut. 
 
 Rigler thus writes of Hahnemann's first wife : " Hahne- 
 mann's noble companion of his professional life, as he calls 
 the ' scolding Xantippe ' whom he had the happiness to call 
 his wife." He tries to place his second wife in as unfavour- 
 able a light as possible, retails some completely apocry- 
 phal miserable gossip, and represents her as being eighteen 
 instead of thirty-five years of age, which certainly suits his 
 purpose better, but he gives no authority for this statement. 
 
 And the homoeopathic practitioners ? 
 
 Page 67 -. — " The whole lot of them exceed even their 
 master in infamy and cunning," is what he says of Hahne- 
 mann's first adherents. Griesselich, he asserts, " called his 
 opponents ' dogs,' and challenged them to mortal combat." 
 Where does Griesselich say anything of this sort ? Rigler 
 takes refuge behind Stiirmer, who was of his own way of 
 thinking ; Stiirmer does not give his authority for the state- 
 ment. Griesselich was staff-surgeon-general in the Baden 
 army, and in that capacity was a favourite with his subor- 
 dinates. That would surely have been impossible if he had 
 really acted in this vulgar manner. 
 
 Words such as the following are ascribed to the homoeo- 
 paths, p. 59 : " Affinitatsamelioration, Indifferenzirungs- 
 blanditat, Participialeinschachtelungsmethode," &c. Where 
 in the world are such terms to be found ? Why is no refer- 
 ence given ? We cannot remember having read anything 
 of this kind. And if some blockhead did ever write such 
 nonsense, what right has he to lay it at the door of the 
 whole homcEopathic community ? 
 
 In his description of the homoeopathic practitioners, 
 Rigler alludes several times to the Sanitatsrath Dr. B. 
 Hirschel (p. 33 and 75). Dr. Hirschel has played a con- 
 siderable part in the history of homoeopathy. He sought 
 to harmonise homoeopathy v/ith university medicine, and 
 he also opposed Hahnemann's extreme dilution of medi- 
 cines. He founded and edited for twenty years the Zeit- 
 scJirift fiir JiomoopatJiiscJie Klinik ; it ceased to appear 
 not long after his death in 1873. Anyone who is
 
 do not read the author's book. 351 
 
 " thoroughly " acquainted with the history of homoeopathy 
 must be aware of these facts. 
 
 Rigler thus addresses Hirschel in the year 1882, 2.e., nine 
 years after his death : " I can assure this esteemed author, 
 with whose Hterary productions I have unfortunately been 
 forced to occupy myself, that I have with very great self- 
 denial acquired the most thorough knowledge of homoe- 
 opathy and its historical development." In his ignorance 
 and excitement he does not even leave the dead at rest. 
 
 With regard to Hirschel's literary productions, we have 
 already (p. 335) heard the opinion expressed by an allo- 
 path on one of his works. He is, besides, the author of 
 the History of Medicine, Vienna, 1862, two editions, and 
 of the History of Brozuiis System, which is thus reviewed 
 in faiius, a journal devoted to the history of medicine 
 (1846, I., p. 871):— 
 
 The author's plan of writhig the history of the medical systems of 
 recent times can only be welcorrjied — especially when it is carried out 
 with such great industry, such careful study of authorities, and, as a 
 rule, with such clear judgment as is here displayed. The author is 
 already known to us by various historical works .... I repeat that 
 this work is a valuable contribution to the special history of medical 
 systems .... We can only wish for the continuation of this under- 
 taking. 
 
 Rigler has been " unfortunately obliged to occupy him- 
 self with Hirschel's literary productions." 
 
 In order to convict all Hahnemann's adherents of a 
 want of earnest conviction, he mentions the sad case of 
 a " homoeopathic" doctor, who recommends medicines in 
 allopathic doses, and adds that Hirschel recommended 
 emetics for croup. He of course suppresses the fact that 
 Hirschel is speaking of very exceptional cases, and that the 
 great majority of homoeopathic practitioners disapprove 
 of this part of Hirschel's practice, as may be seen in all 
 homoeopathic works, and in the treatment of homoeo- 
 pathists. Besides, what is proved by such individual cases ? 
 
 An allopath is now practising in Berlin who draws two 
 pounds of blood from consumptive patients at one sitting,and 
 who in five months deprived some of these wretched creatures 
 of eleven pounds of blood, and brought about their speedy
 
 352 Riglcrs ''Mirror of Trut/r 
 
 death. It Is undoubtedly true that Professors of Medicine 
 have committed the most glaring mistakes both in diagnosis 
 and treatment that would have been disgraceful to tiros 
 in medicine. What would the allopaths say if such indi- 
 vidual cases were used as proof against the whole old school 
 profession ? And we might confront them with many such 
 cases. If homoeopaths are such wretched quacks and im- 
 postors, how is it possible that their number increases all 
 over the world from year to year ? How, indeed, can we 
 explain the existence of a homoeopathic literature, counting 
 as it does its thousands of volumes ? 
 
 At present four medical homoeopathic journals appear in 
 Germany; of these, the Allgeineine Jiomdop. Zeitung\va.'s> been 
 published regularly since 1832. This is the oldest of all the 
 surviving medical journals in Germany ; one sheet of print 
 appears every week, and there are now 107 complete 
 volumes, which all testify to the earnest conviction of 
 homoeopaths ; not to mention the numerous other periodi- 
 cals and treatises."* 
 
 Such facts certainly deserved to be mentioned, especially 
 in a treatise in which, as Rigler expressly affirms, p. 45, 
 " The mirror of pure and unvarnished truth is held up to 
 the reader." 
 
 Rigler appends to his book three pages with the names 
 of works, all of which he has not however read — as for 
 example the works of Bahr, Kafka, Sorge, &c., which are 
 important for judging of the convictions and earnest study 
 of the homoeopaths, and to the contents of which he does not 
 so much as allude, or even mention their authors' names in 
 the text. In this way the author might have given a list 
 
 ■^ That homcEopathy has its disreputable parasites is true, and is 
 much regretted by its adherents. But they are no more able to pre- 
 vent this than the allopaths are to hinder the shepherds, old wives and 
 such like, from dabbling in physic. If we consider that every homoeo- 
 pathic practitioner in Europe, without exception, was previously an 
 allopath, that in Germany there are as yet no public schools for 
 homoeopathy, that every homoeopath is his own teacher and must 
 gradually emancipate himself from the crude allopathic therapeutics 
 he has been taught at college, then it must be admitted that the 
 number of pseudo-homoeo-paths is very small.
 
 proves to he a disto7'ting glass. 353 
 
 of works referred to by him twenty times as long. Usually 
 authors only mention those books which have really been 
 consulted by them, and the contents of which they have 
 utilised for their own work. Rigler is an exception to 
 this rule — an author who goes to work in a truly original 
 manner. This mode of procedure produced the effect which 
 might be expected from it. 
 
 The Hamburger NacJiricJiten writes : " Rigler has used 
 for his purpose the whole literature for and against homoeo- 
 pathy — the titles are cited in the appendix." 
 
 The PJiarmaceiitische Zeitwig (1882, No. 35) declares 
 that : " Rigler, in writing his work, has made use of the 
 whole existing homoeopathic literature." His readers 
 imagine, and they are pardonable in doing so by Rigler's 
 way of going to work, that he had studied the whole 
 literature in question carefully, and was giving the result 
 of his arduous studies in his " Mirror of Truth." 
 
 After this investigation of Rigler's knowledge and his 
 motives in writing this book, we will allow him to give 
 us an account of the origin of homoeopathy and the 
 characteristics of Hahnemann. This account is most de- 
 lightful. 
 
 We see Hahnemann wandering about the country with a 
 wife and eight children. He is seeking a livelihood for 
 himself and his family. He has vainly tried to earn his 
 bread by chemistry and literature. At last dire necessity 
 urges him into crime ; he becomes a wretched impostor and 
 charlatan. He is actuated by the vulgarest avarice ; stay ! 
 he has hit upon a plan. He determines to call homoeo- 
 pathy into life ! 
 
 As a beginning, there appeared in Hufeland's yi^/z/v^i^/, in 
 1796, an article by Hahnemann which, however, as Rigler 
 discovers with the assistance of Karsch, "was taken, though 
 without acknowledgment, from Cullen's work and from 
 other sources, a matter to which we will afterwards return." 
 Besides that, Hahnemann wrote : u^sailapiiis in the Bal- 
 ance, The Medicine of Experience, and De Viribns ITedica- 
 vientoruiii. Sec. These three works form the groundwork of 
 homoeopathy.
 
 354 Hoiu to write the biography 
 
 " The only task now left to the inventor," Rigler con- 
 tinues (p. 32), quoting Karsch's words, " was to spread 
 abroad his doctrine in order to pose as a reformer and, if 
 possible, as a new Messiah of medicine. If he should be 
 successful in this he had gained his end, and he did 
 succeed, ' for it is not only children who can be fed with 
 fairy tales.' — Lessing, Nathan, III., 6." 
 
 Hahnemann's pharmacology is the " most fabulous ever 
 presented to mankind." " The ideas proper to a lunatic 
 asylum, which the most shameless of the shameless has 
 dared to throw in the face of common sense ; he has tried 
 to palm off his frivolous rubbish on mankind, and, alas ! 
 even this most insipid absurdity has found friends and 
 supporters." 
 
 Page 45 : We say, then, Hahnemann has no importance for scien- 
 tific medicine, or possesses only this negative interest, that he was 
 the founder of a well-organized system of quackery, which he decked 
 out with the tinsel of sham learning in order to dazzle mankind. 
 He invented a pretended system of medicine, based on ridiculous 
 hypotheses and ingenious lies, which makes it possible for any 
 one who is sufficiently devoid of all critical sense to earn for 
 himself without trouble, if not external advantages, at least the 
 reputation of a benefactor of suffering mankind. This is his work, 
 which immortalizes him. The unclean spirit of pride and calumny 
 was the foundation on which he erected, under the influence of 
 external necessity and avarice, a temple of deceit and falsehood 
 such as history offers no other example of. By this means Hahne- 
 man, with insolent hand, injured not only science, but also the 
 entire system of culture; and everyone who cares for the progress 
 of the human intellect, everyone who is interested in the triumph 
 of truth and in the welfare of mankind, must fight with us against 
 this demon who has covered our age with disgrace. 
 
 In order that the desired effect may be indelibly impressed 
 on the reader, these charges are recapitulated on p. 46, and 
 he is invited " to look through them again." 
 
 With ever-increasing vehemence the reader is repeatedly 
 assured that Hahnemann invented homoeopathy from the 
 basest and most sordid motives. This would seem enough 
 to dispose of Hahnemann, But he has not been suffi- 
 ciently condemned : — 
 
 Page 47 : If the well-read Hahnemann omitted to state whence he 
 derived this science, and even impudently laid claim to originality, 
 
 I
 
 of an inconvenient hero. 355 
 
 history here again convicts him of falsehood. The central idea of 
 homoeopathy is not derived from Hahnemann, but from Theophrastus 
 Bombastes Paracelsus. 
 
 Rigler has discovered this, and he raises the veil with an 
 unsparing hand. Schultz is his witness, and he appeals to 
 his work (comp. above, p. 300). Rigler writes his name 
 without a " t." It is the same Schultz who afterwards 
 called himself " Schultz-Schultzcnstein," and under this 
 name wrote, among other works, the book, Life — Health — 
 Disease — Cilvc (2nd edition, Basle, 1873). In this he proves, 
 on page 187, that the cellular theory is not German, but 
 French in origin, and that " those are utterly mistaken 
 who look upon it as the outcome of German industry." It 
 was first enunciated by the French flower painter, Turpin — 
 Schultz discovered this, too — and "his doctrine was repeated 
 
 by Schleiden, Schwann, and others Turpin's part has 
 
 only been played over again in Germany." 
 
 Page 2S9 : He pronounces his opinion that medicine in 
 Germany is " a scientific electuary, comprised of cells and 
 tissue changes." 
 
 Certain people, then, had better keep on good terms with 
 Rigler. Were he to seek for the truth about them he 
 might pass them before him in the same " mirror of truth " 
 which he has been cruel enough to direct against Hahne- 
 mann, 
 
 Hahnemann's merits are once more clearly, plainly, and 
 comprehensively represented : "Hahnemann strove to break 
 through the necessary limits of science ; to change medicine 
 into child's play by means of lies and absurdities ; to weaken 
 and to libel both German physicians and the whole medi- 
 cal art ; to represent the sources of medical knowledge as 
 worthless and objectionable ; and, finally, to introduce the 
 disgraceful traffic in secret remedies into the practice of 
 medicine. In order to carry out the travesty to the end, 
 Hahnemann did not omit to call attention to the beauty 
 and worth of the German language, but, nevertheless, we 
 miss these painfully in his writings, and encounter all 
 sorts of crudities and the most unheard-of barbarisms." 
 
 Stieglitz {I.e. p. 89) had admitted that " Hahnemann was
 
 35^ Medical iconoclasm. 
 
 master of the art of writing clearly, decidedly and power- 
 fully." Stieglitz was, therefore, mistaken. 
 
 The following is the solemn conclusion of this remarkable 
 chapter : — 
 
 Notwithstanding all this, posterity erected a bronze statue to Hahne- 
 mann, the vilest of quacks and impostors, in the very centre of 
 Germany, " in grateful recognition of his immortal teaching and of 
 his invaluable services to medicine." And a German town suffers this 
 disgrace ! Where is the German love of truth, the German sense of 
 right and feeling of shame? Awake! throw this false idol down 
 from its beggarly throne, and save culture from further destruction ! 
 
 It is (according to Rigler) only because of their love of 
 gain, and their desire to plunder their confiding patients, 
 that the homoeopaths insist on themselves dispensing their 
 medicines. His remarks do not suffice to refute the strong 
 arguments in favour of all doctors, allopathic or homoeo- 
 pathic, dispensing their own medicines — surely a self- 
 evident right — which Sorge brings forward in the pamphlet 
 we have already mentioned. Rigler does not allude to this 
 — does not even mention it in his " complete literature " of 
 homoeopathy. At the end of his book Rigler, quite un- 
 expectedly, makes a sensible proposal. The homoeopaths 
 should be allowed to dispense themselves those remedies 
 Avhich are found to contain no medicine discoverable b}- 
 chemical analysis, taste, smell or colour {i.e., perhaps 
 beyond the 3rd or 4th decimal, or beyond the 2nd cen- 
 tesimal dilution) ;* but if they wish to give stronger doses, 
 as I in 10, they should prescribe these " in the regular way." 
 When Hahnemann was prohibited from dispensing his 
 medicines, he addressed a representation to the authorities 
 at Leipzic, in which he pointed out the inconsequence 
 involved in this prohibition : — 
 
 I only use doses that are so small that they are imperceptible to the 
 senses and to chemical analysis. The extreme minuteness of the 
 doses of simple medicinal substances in this new system removes all 
 possible suspicion of any injury from the size of a dose of medicine 
 administered to the patient. The beneficial effect and great curative 
 
 * Certain substances can e^•en be detected by chemistry in the 
 Tou^uijth and by spectral analysis in the proportion of i to 
 1,000,000,000.
 
 A glimmer of sense. 357 
 
 power of such small doses depends upon their mode of selection for 
 the appropriate cases of disease, which is peculiar to homoeopathy, of 
 which ordinary medicine knows nothing. The apothecary, unable to 
 understand this, ridicules the idea of doses so small that they cannot 
 be detected either by the senses or by the best chemical analysis. 
 If the apothecary, jealous as he is of the new system, can find neither 
 medicine nor poison in the remedies of the true homoeopathic practi- 
 tioner that could be injurious, surely the State need alarm itself less 
 about the remedies given by homoeopathy than about the trade of the 
 apothecary, who unhesitatingly sells the very same remedies to any- 
 body — in a million times greater amount — only limited by the prohi- 
 bition to sell arsenic, corrosive sublimate, opium and a few other 
 substances to strangers. 
 
 Rigler discusses this representation of Hahnemann (p. 38) 
 and indicates the source correctly, but without quoting 
 verbatim. Hahnemann's words are only given to the reader 
 either distorted or out of their proper connexion, other- 
 wise Hahnemann might not appear in the desired light, and 
 so Rigler would not have been able to add (at least, not with- 
 out losing all claim to be believed even by the most good- 
 natured reader) the following remark : " The authorities 
 did not allow themselves to be hoodwinked by such sophis- 
 tries and cunning devices." Are the sophistries and cun- 
 ning devices to be found in Hahnemann or in the united 
 apothecaries and allopaths ? Rigler (p. 144) makes exactly 
 the same proposal which had been made by Hahnemann, 
 under the delusion that he is thereby annihilating homoeo- 
 pathy. He calls sophistry and cunning in one place what 
 he himself suggests in another. If such a proposal were to 
 receive the force of law it would be of great service to homoeo- 
 pathy. For what was the object of the numerous petitions 
 of the homoeopaths ? What is even now one of their most 
 ardent wishes ? The carrying out of Rigler's proposal. 
 What was it that drove Hahnemann from his home in 
 Leipzic, with his wife and children, when an old man ? The 
 lack of such an arrangement has exposed, and still exposes, 
 the homoeopaths to numerous intrigues and chicaneries. 
 But the majority of combatants do not agree with Rigler on 
 this point. They see further into the matter, and will not 
 consent to such a proposal. They will look on with 
 pleasure while Rigler decries and abuses homoeopathy,
 
 358 " A^o case — abuse opposite coiniscl." 
 
 but beyond that they will not follow him. He lays 
 about him with such blind impetuosity that his blows fall 
 on his own adherents and, with the phlebotomizing Simon, 
 he exclaims : " The world is given over to folly," quite 
 forgetting that the world still adheres to allopathy. 
 
 To show the spirit with which Rigler's work is imbued, 
 we quote some of the epithets which he bestows on Hahne- 
 mann and the homoeopaths: Hahnemann — p. 25: "Dealer 
 in secret remedies," " charlatan of the basest kind" — p. 27: 
 "medical vagabond," "adventurer" — p. 28: "liar," "cheat," 
 "pickpocket," "braggart" — p. 34: " the old rat-catcher" — 
 p. 35: "sly and unprincipled liar and deceiver" — p. 36: 
 "the most shameless of the shameless" — p. 40: "grand 
 master of lying" — p. 42: "prince of lies" — p. 52: "the 
 most miserable of all charlatans and impostors," "false idol 
 on a beggar's throne" — p. 57: "this pitiable wretch" — p. 
 64: " arch-father of lies." 
 
 Homoeopathy — p. 16: "castle on the sand" — p. 38: 
 " deception " — p. 41 : " absurdity, lies " — p. 45 : "a pretended 
 system founded on the most absurd hypotheses and cleverly 
 invented lies," "a fabric of deceit and lies" — p. 46: "a 
 demon that is a disgrace to our century" — p. 47: "charla- 
 tanry" — p, 51 : " child's play made up of lies and folly" — 
 p. 54: "tissue of absurdity and lies" — p. 59: "miserable 
 trash and nonsense" — p. 19: " this pest was introduced 
 into Russia, 8z:c." — p. 70: "refuge for rogues and charla- 
 tans" — p. 75: "flagitious game," "impudent, miserable 
 crime " — p. 84: " fool's play," " the dunghill of homoeopathic 
 practice" — p. 85: " repulsive and absurd rubbish" — p. S6: 
 " miserable filth of the most pitiable superstition." Cer- 
 tainly an out-spoken writer ! 
 
 He thus speaks of lay hom.ceopathy — p. 99: " the height 
 of homoeopathic harmfulness in all its viciousness " — p. loo: 
 " shameful deception " — p. 102: "this wild absurdity," " de- 
 ception," " superstition," " system of lies," " the invasion by 
 the pest of a region hitherto free" — p. 109: "madness" — p. 
 133: " castle on the sand " — 146: "homoeopathic imposture," 
 "charlatanry, destructive nonsense," " lies " — p. 150: "dis- 
 honour of the medical profession," " disgrace of the age." 
 
 I
 
 How not to zvritc Jiistory. 359 
 
 Homoeopathic practitioners are — p. 61: "traitors to 
 science" — p. 67: "the whole lot transcends the master in 
 infamy and trickery" — p. 70: "fools, rogues, charlatans, 
 lunatics, mountebanks" — p. 75: "we should have no mercy 
 on Hahnemann and his adherents — they are a disgrace to 
 truth and science ; no words are too strong to designate 
 their shamelessness " — p. 'jZ : " there are patients who lack 
 common sense, and there are doctors who are homoeopaths" 
 — p. 16: "they drag the science of medicine through the 
 dirty mud of the most pitiful superstition." 
 
 We only give here a few specimens of Rigler's fluenc}-. 
 If we wished to exhaust this topic it would be necessary 
 to reproduce half of Rigler's treatise. " Remembering the 
 ridendo dicere vemni, I have taken infinite pains to avoid 
 all bitterness and harshness," says Rigler in his preface. 
 
 We might suppose that a book of this kind, made up of 
 misrepresentations and expressions of personal ill-feeling, 
 larded with falsehoods, deserves no respect. If a Frenchman 
 were to undertake to describe Germany and German life, 
 and were to do it thus: Endless, desolate, barren tracts ex- 
 tend over the whole country. The climate is always severe, 
 cold and rainy, and oats is the only grain that ripens. The 
 whole nation suffers from want, and barely subsists on the 
 remains of the milliards stolen from us. Their food consists 
 chiefly of oat cakes and potatoes, of which they consume in- 
 credible quantities, so that their bodies are swollen out like 
 frogs. Their national drink, beer, contributes to this defor- 
 mity, and gives their noses a potato shape and a red hue. 
 Their brain is constantly muddled by their unlimited con- 
 sumption of this brown alcoholic fluid, which increases their 
 natural rude and awkward behaviour. Their houses are 
 wretched huts, ornamented only with clocks stolen from us, 
 which, however, often change their owners, because the Ger- 
 mans are unable to overcome their propensity to confound 
 mcuiu and titiini. Lying and deception prevail to such an 
 extent among the whole nation, from the highest to the 
 lowest, that it is almost impossible to find any one whom 
 one can trust. (In illustration, he would relate a quantity 
 of utterly unfounded facts, and distort the words of the
 
 360 The whole allopathic school 
 
 Germans themselves). If any one dares to speak French 
 in the street, all eyes are at once directed on him, and he 
 meets with hostile and furious glances. The most import- 
 ant towns are Berlin, Spandau, Kasscl, and Breslau. Berlin 
 is situated in Brandenburg, Spandau in Pomerania, Breslau 
 in the East, and Kassel is the capital of Westphalia. This 
 is the true condition of Germany, presented to us in the 
 mirror of pure and unvarnished truth. 
 
 Should we consider it worth while to refute such a 
 Frenchman ? We should be astonished at such impudent 
 distortion of the facts. We should almost compassionate 
 the ignorance and want of good taste of the readers who 
 should approve of it ; and we should remark, with satisfac- 
 tion, that such absurdities could never be perpetrated in 
 Germany. Just so is it with Rigler. He is only worth 
 noticing (and this is our only reason for having dwelt on 
 him so long) because the allopathic criticism of his book 
 has given us a convenient means for forming a judgment of 
 allopathic knowledge and opinion with regard to homoeo- 
 pathy. 
 
 The reception of his book by the allopaths is, therefore, 
 interesting and important, as it shows us what the allopaths 
 consider the proper mode of combating homoeopathy. We 
 are met with this remarkable fact : — 
 
 The whole body of allopaths is in full concurrence with 
 Rigler's treatise, and not a single voice is raised to ex- 
 press the very least dissent from him. Rigler's book and 
 Rigler's conduct were most favourably noticed by all allo- 
 pathic reviewers. Rigler was even praised to the skies for 
 his conduct of the contest. 
 
 Here are some specimens from among the mass of 
 criticisms, of which some even surpassed their Rigler in 
 virulence ; they all express their great satisfaction with the 
 book — a sufficient proof of their knowledge and of the 
 spirit that animated them. 
 
 The Berliner klin. Wochenschrift, 1882, p. 338, writes : 
 
 " Dr. Rigler, who is well known as one of the most 
 energetic opponents of the homoeopathic delusion, draws, in 
 this work, from authentic homoeopathic sources, viz., the
 
 delights to honour its champion. 361 
 
 works of Hahnemann and his disciples, a picture of the 
 inept absurdities which this monstrosity, begotten of filth 
 and milk-sugar, has produced." 
 
 " We must express our thanks to the author who has 
 taken the trouble to work his way through the wilderness 
 of materials, and has presented his sum-total in a form 
 which makes its perusal a real pleasure, in spite of a melan- 
 choly feeling it cannot fail to inspire. We recommend it 
 to be circulated as widely as possible, and hope it may open 
 the eyes of the public on the subject of the ' like-sufferers,' 
 as Herr Rigler translates the word homoeopath, and their 
 false doctrine." 
 
 The Deutsche mediciniscJie Wochenschrift, 1882, p. 565, 
 begins : " It would be a sad sign of the times if a work such 
 as Rigler's were now, as happened in the days of Bleekrode, 
 Gmelin and Stieglitz, to serve the purpose of inaugurating 
 a struggle of reason against the superstition and folly of 
 those dabblers in medicine who call themselves homoeo- 
 paths." The days of Bleekrode ! The struggle of reason 
 against superstition and folly ! Who was Bleekrode ? How 
 and when did he attack the " superstition " and " folly " of 
 homoeopathy ? Bleekrode wrote : Commentat. medic, in- 
 aiigitr.^ pat'S prioi% sis tens Palceolog. reg. therap. Siuiilia 
 Siinilibns curantur ; Groningai, 1835. The attempt was 
 made in this work to represent the siinilia similibus as an 
 old principle known even to the ancient Jews. The Bible 
 and the Talmud were examined ; the old Chaldjeans and 
 ^Ethiopians were appealed to ; then came Hippocrates and 
 the Greeks, Galen and the Middle Ages. With regard to 
 Paracelsus, he says, p. 102, after having spoken of siinilia 
 siinilibiLS and the small doses : — 
 
 Si vero ad Paracelsum spectes, plane hisce contraria inveniemus. 
 Paracelsus enim arte sua signata, anatomica et magica, in medica- 
 minum vim inquirebat, licet nonnullis in casibus ejusmodi remedia 
 laudaverit, uti arsenicum [this is the only remedy, according to this 
 indication, which Bleekrode mentions in connexion with Paracelsus, 
 comp., p. 89] cujus vis medicatrix ipsi innotuit symptomatum simili- 
 tudine, quje ex actione in sanum hominem sequuntur. 
 
 Page i2T),et seq., it is mentioned that Fr. Hoffmann and 
 Albrecht von Haller expressed themselves in favour of the
 
 362 TJie pi'opJtets brougJit out to airse 
 
 testing of medicines without, however, carrying out the 
 practice. Page 125 : — 
 
 Ita inter multos Greding, Ludwig, Storck,* ideo laudabant narcoti- 
 corum in neurosibus, mania, paralysi, &c., usum, quia haec a sano con- 
 sumta ipsum iisdem moi^bis tegrum redderi solent. Etiam specificorum 
 indicatio inde deprompta fuit, quia remedia haec sanis in eodem 
 organorum systemate morbum excitant. Ita cantharidum usum 
 laudarunt in organorum uropoeticorum morbis, quia haec organa 
 hisce eadem ratione segrescunt. Aloe et sulphur ha2morrhoidibus 
 laborantibus porrigebantur, quia in organa abdominalia vires suas 
 exserunt. Plura hujusmodi exempla addi possunt, etiam fusius ab 
 Hahnemanno indicata. INIulta etiam exstant exempla remediorum ad- 
 hibitorum, de quibus non dubitandum est, quin a sanis consumta 
 eandem symptomatum seriem produxissent, quae morbum deter- 
 minavit ; sed haec a posteriori ita visa sunt sese habere, quippe 
 quEe empyrica ratione vel periculi faciendi causa tentata sunt. 
 
 After Bleekrode has briefly sketched the history of the 
 origin of homoeopathy he gives his opinion, founded on 
 observations at the sick bed, and often quotes the illustrious 
 Hufeland and Kopp (the clarissimus vir), whose stand- 
 point he adopts : p. 143 : — 
 
 Eadem quippe regula similia similibus curantur, quje hujus syste- 
 matis est fundamentum, aliquando probabiliter Methodus Therapeu- 
 tica Medicinje Rationalis erit, quemadmodum nostra aetate nonnulli 
 jam preesagire inceperunt. 
 
 He then seeks to determine the limits of the use of 
 homoeopathy. He does not doubt the efficacy of Hahne- 
 mann's remedies, but blames, with justice, his fondness for 
 systematising and other things which had been condemned 
 by Hahnemann's adherents ten years before. He thus 
 gives his opinion of Hahnemann : — 
 
 Vir celeberrimus et acutissimus, qui semper magna cum sagacitate 
 in Uteris versatus et praeterera de arte chemica optime meritus. 
 
 These are the " days of a Bleekrode !" and such his attack 
 on " superstition and folly." 
 
 Stieglitz and Gmelin certainly rejected homoeopathy. 
 We have seen that Stieglitz said in 1835 that homoeo- 
 pathy would soon die out, and its adherents would re- 
 turn to allopathy, in thankful remembrance of the services 
 
 * We have seen that Hahnemann cites these authors.
 
 2ingratcfully proceed to bless. 363 
 
 it renders (the bleedings, emetics, and purgatives of 
 those days). We know, too, how a homoeopathic physi- 
 cian came to occupy Stieghtz's position as physician in or- 
 dinary to the King of Hanover, and that the king assured 
 him by letter that the results of homoeopathic treatment 
 had been more favourable than the results of his former 
 physician's treatment. Gmelin reproached the hom.ceo- 
 paths severely for rejecting bleeding and emetics. He 
 admitted, however, the worth of much of the system, e.g., 
 the proving of medicines, and pointed out the defects of 
 the old system in this respect. 
 
 The placing together of the names of Bleekrode, Stieglitz 
 and Gmelin, as is done here, gives (from reasons that excite 
 the amusement of any one acquainted with their writings) 
 another proof of the absolute ignorance of the allopaths, and 
 astonishes one at the positiveness with which they speak of 
 a matter, the existence of which is, indeed, in the highest 
 degree unpleasant and disagreeable for them, but as to the 
 nature and history of which they are either grossly ignorant 
 or deceived. It is a remarkable coincidence, that in Haser's 
 History (1881, p. 797), the same three names are placed 
 together. We need only throw a glance at this page and 
 the chapter on " the criticism of Hahnemann's doctrine," 
 and these same three names meet our eyes. Gmelin is one 
 of the few opponents who own that homoeopathy has been 
 attacked with base weapons.* It would hardly, then, have 
 been superfluous if the writer in this periodical, who speaks 
 with the assumption of superior knowledge, had shown that 
 he possessed at least a superficial acquaintance with the 
 works to which he refers. 
 
 The same DeiUsche medicin. WocJienscJirift continues : — • 
 
 Every one, be he an adherent or an opponent of homoeopathy, 
 knows what a cut-purse principle incorporated itself in the person of the 
 inventor of homoeopathy, the adventurer who neglected no means of 
 gaining a practice ; every one knows and abhors the tricks by means 
 of which this kind of quacks seek to maintain their g-round. . . . 
 To this subject belongs, besides the damning biography of the arch- 
 impostor, the critical contribution to the sincerity of the conviction 
 
 * L.c, p. 247.
 
 364 SiiJ'cly nozv the State will 
 
 of the more recent homceopathic practitioners [which we have dis- 
 cussed above], which shows how they endeavour, in their wretched 
 stammering way, to profit by the pathological discoveries of medicine, 
 and how they treat the fools who fall into their hands non-homoeo- 
 pathically if they desire it. 
 
 The reviewer reaches a high pitch of excitement, such as 
 no adherent of a system protected by the State and sup- 
 ported by the majority would fall into if he were convinced 
 that he was waging a just war with fair weapons. The 
 .accusation that the homoeopaths treat their patients allo- 
 pathically if they wish it, is as old as homoeopathy, and 
 would, if it were true, easily prove the quackery of the 
 whole business. For this reason it is constantly repeated. 
 Occasionally accusations such as these are publicly made, 
 but they have repeatedly been shown to be groundless. 
 The term " charlatan " would certainly be indelibly stamped 
 on a medical man who acted thus. 
 
 With regard to the strength of conviction of the homoeo- 
 pathic practitioners, we refer these gentlemen to their 
 <;ha,mpion, Gmelin, who says, I.e. p. 246 : " Homoeopathic 
 
 physicians are enthusiasts Its disciples would 
 
 lay down their lives in defence of the new doctrine." 
 Ever)^ one who has to do with homoeopathic practitioners 
 becomes more and more firmly persuaded of the unshak- 
 able strength of their convictions, and sees that they have a 
 pleasure in exercising their profession such as the allopaths 
 for a long time have ceased to possess. 
 
 This paper thus alludes to the liberty possessed by the 
 homoeopaths to dispense their own medicines ; this right 
 was conceded to them in Prussia, subject to a State exam- 
 ination which, with all the rights appertaining to it, is open 
 to every medical man : 
 
 The struggle to acquire the right of dispensing medicine by homoeo- 
 pathic practitioners forms a page in the history of Prussia which will 
 excite in our posterity a feeling like that with which we read of the 
 making of gold, of werewolves and of the trials of witches — a feeling 
 made up of incredulous wonder and a sense of indignant shame. 
 
 It is then emphatically asserted that it is the duty of the 
 State " not to expose its citizens to be injured by the homoeo- 
 pathic fraud, not to allow them to become the prey of this 
 mode of treatment or permit the flagrant piracy of dispen- 
 
 1
 
 put dozuii that horrid JiomccopatJiy ! 365 
 
 sing their medicines by practitioners. Many thanks are 
 due to Rigler .... greatest care .... purity of language 
 . . . calmness in carrying out his train of thought, &c. . . . 
 If he tries to make this odious theme somewhat more 
 enjoyable to himself and his readers by the use of strong 
 language and sarcasms, who will seriously blame him ? '^ 
 This periodical suggests to the Prussian government that 
 " if it would only read this concluding chapter we should 
 not have long to wait for an alteration of this condition," 
 i.e., dispensing of medicines. " This monograph [Rigler's] 
 is a contribution to the re-organisation of the laws relating 
 to medicine." If, on the one hand, it is impossible to 
 preserve one's gravity when Rigler, with his glaring perver- 
 sions of truth, is represented as the " re-organiser of the 
 laws relating to medicine ; " on the other hand, we can 
 hardly understand how such a work can be recommended 
 to a Government which ought to consist of calm and im- 
 partial men, as the material from which its decisions are to 
 be formed. It is the work of a man who had been con- 
 victed and punished for publishing about his homoeopathic 
 colleagues the most glaring falsehoods suggested by per- 
 sonal irritation and party feeling, and who, instead of con- 
 fessing the injustice of his charges, repeats and exaggerates 
 his former misstatements in this very work. 
 
 Another medical journal expresses the following opinion 
 of Koppe's and Rigler's works : — 
 
 The appearance of these two works is eminently well-timed. The 
 first of the two points out clearly and calmly the absence of scientific 
 method in the system ; the second [Rigler] draws his sharp sword 
 against falsehood with the fire of just indignation. We can give this 
 praise to both works, that they are characterised by historical truth- 
 fulness and scientific treatment of a subject which suggests so much 
 that is absurd and ridiculous that it would appear to be very difficult, 
 satyram nan scribere. In his chapter on liberty of dispensing medicines^ 
 Dr. Rigler throws much light on the disadvantageous effects of Hahne- 
 mann's system on the public welfare. 
 
 The organ of the united German medical societies, the 
 AcrztlicJics Vereinsblatt fiir Daitschhind expresses (1882, p. 
 118) the opinion that — 
 
 Rigler's historico-critical treatise will occupy a prominent position 
 among the works which ha\c hitherto been written on homoeopathy and
 
 366 A trap to catch allopaths. 
 
 the homoeopaths. The first part — Samuel Hahnemann — a biographical 
 sketch — deals a blow at the constitution of homceopathy from which 
 its Coryphsi will find it difficult to recover. He proves that the Divine 
 gift of homoeopathy was an invention brought about by the pressure of 
 necessity and perfected by speculation. This is historic truth, related 
 by Rigler in a manner at once so cutting and yet so pleasant that this 
 one chapter gives permanent value to the whole work. 
 
 After having lauded this work in all its parts, the allopaths 
 are informed " that Rigler has furnished material which will 
 enable physicians to become thoroughly acquainted with the 
 subject, and thus to put themselves in a position to contri- 
 bute towards the final settling of this question. Rigler con- 
 cludes with an energetic appeal to physicians to rouse them- 
 selves and manfully combat this mischievous system," as if 
 the allopaths had hitherto looked on quietly and in childish 
 innocence at the inconvenient spread of homceopathy.* 
 
 If a homoeopath had wished to prove to the world 
 how profound was the ignorance of the allopaths on the 
 subject of Hahnemann and his doctrines, he could not have 
 set about it more skilfully than Rigler has done. He has 
 involuntarily laid a snare for allopathy. One allopath after 
 another has eagerly entered the net, and a number of politi- 
 cal papers have joyfully followed suit — a fact worth noting. 
 Out of the large draught of fishes in Rigler's net we call atten- 
 tion to two remarkable specimens. One is the organ of the 
 apothecaries, the central organ for the trade and scientific 
 interests of pharmacy, the PharniaceiLtische Zeitiing.'\ The 
 satisfaction of the apothecaries with Rigler's work appears 
 still greater than that of the doctors. With much joy 
 their central organ gives long extracts, quoting conscien- 
 tiously all Rigler's strong expressions, and praises them 
 greatly. These extracts arc continued through five num- 
 bers, each occupying several columns. The mood of the 
 apothecaries becomes so cheerful that a satirical poem on 
 Hahnemann, written at the beginning of this century, is 
 
 * In 1 88 1, Rigler was fined heavily for calumniating the homoeo- 
 paths, and the Editors of the IVochenscJn'ift and Vcrciiisblati were 
 also fined for publishing Rigler's calumnies, which may perhaps 
 account for the extreme bitterness of these champions of " scientific " 
 and "rational" medicines in 18S2. — [Ed.] 
 
 t 1883. Nos. 38, 41, 42, 45 and 49.
 
 Anii-hovKropat/nc tvit. 367 
 
 re-published in No. 45, and in number No. 49 the following 
 skit is reproduced : — 
 
 Oh that I were a homceopath ! Would that I could believe in 
 Hahnemann's theory! But I cannot. I will at once state why. I 
 have read a great deal about homoeopathy, and I find that though the 
 theory is good, the practice is bad. One day I was suffering from 
 diarrhoea. Well, I said to myself, here is a good opportunity for 
 testing homoeopathy. What is the cause of my illness? Sour plums. 
 Then sour plums ought to cure me. They nearly killed me. I cannot 
 believe in the like-by-like system. If I did I would erect a monument 
 in the middle of a town like a drinking fountain ; round it I would place 
 basins with pipes- leading to a reservoir, and above every basin I would 
 write the words, " Stranger, let your tears fall here." When the re- 
 servoir was filled with tears I would evaporate them to dryness and 
 would dissolve every grain of the salt thus obtained in a gallon of 
 water, and would put the solution in 2-drachm phials, and sell it as 
 " Dolorin, a cure for every grief," at a high price. Every homoeo- 
 path is invited to make use of this idea. I have not yet taken out a 
 patent for it. 
 
 The reference to Rigler's book is accompanied by the 
 following remarks : — 
 
 The fact, apparently', is incontrovertibly established by Rigler that 
 both Hahnemann and the other heads of the school were gross char- 
 latans. About the year 1830, homoeopathy had been almost com- 
 pletely abandoned by the German doctors, but the aristocracy and 
 the clergy took it up. The science of pharmacy was degraded by 
 granting the right of dispensing to homoeopathic doctors. The wild 
 desire for freedom of dispensing was the war cry of Hahnemann's 
 adherents. Dispensing by the practitioner became a wretched trade, 
 which, however, had advantages both direct and indirect, and on that 
 account, therefore solely from love of gain, was firmly adhered to. 
 Hahnemann amassed heaps of gold and lived in great luxury. Is it 
 to be wondered at if, under such circumstances, homoeopathy finds 
 enthusiastic adherents, both among doctors and non-professionals. 
 The history of homceopathy forces on the philosopher the sad reflec- 
 tion that every speculation on the folly of mankind, if undertaken with 
 the necessary boldness, has the prospect of material success and 
 imitation. 
 
 If the apothecaries write and print such views for a large 
 circle of readers, we can safely infer by what spirit they are 
 animated towards homceopathy, even if other more tangible 
 proofs did not come under our notice every day. By such 
 criticisms they show us with how much confidence homoeo- 
 pathic doctors can prescribe homceopathic medicines from 
 allopathic drug-stores.
 
 368 We persecute JiomccopatJiy because 
 
 Another catch of Rigler's is the Wiener viedicin. WocJien- 
 schrift. According to this (1882, p. 1199), the allopaths 
 " ought to be heartily grateful to Riglcr for expending so 
 much labour and care on the study of so worthless a sub- 
 ject." Homoeopathy is " a speculation on the credulity, 
 the superstition and the stupidity of a large portion of 
 mankind," and does not require any knowledge from its 
 adherents. " This is the reason of the popularity of 
 homoeopathy with its medical adherents." The grossest 
 misrepresentations of Rigler in his descriptions of Hahne- 
 mann and homoeopathy are extracted, and the opinion is 
 expressed that Rigler's condemnation is the result of a 
 thorough study of homoeopathic literature. 
 
 With regard to the " ease with which a knowledge of 
 homoeopathy is acquired " as opposed to allopathy, which is, 
 as this journal believes, or at all events asserts, the chief 
 reason of its attractiveness, the writer seems to forget that 
 the homoeopaths have to follow the same course of study, 
 to pass the same examinations as the allopaths, and that, in 
 order to obtain the right of dispensing medicines, they have 
 besides to pass an examination in chemistry, in pharmacy 
 and in homoeopathic therapeutics ; that the homoeopaths 
 have to learn much more than the allopaths, and that there- 
 fore the knowledge of therapeutics possessed by every true 
 homoeopath exceeds that of the allopaths. But setting all 
 this aside, the time required for mastering allopathic thera- 
 peutics is only a fraction of that required for homoeo- 
 pathic therapeutics. 
 
 Quinine in fever ; morphia, chloral-hydrate in pain or 
 sleeplessness ; iron in chlorosis ; salicylic acid in rheu- 
 matism of every kind, &c. ; these can be taught in a very 
 short time to any non-professional. Neither is it difficult 
 to master the ordinary mode of mixing medicines. The 
 task of the homoeopathic doctor is not so easy ; he has to 
 choose in individual cases among a much larger number of 
 remedies, and must be more accurately acquainted with the 
 effects of medicines and their employment ; this requires a 
 peculiar, diligent and uninterrupted study and careful note- 
 taking. Anyone lacking zeal in this particular can never 
 be a good homoeopath, though no one can prevent him
 
 our ozvn system is indefensible. 369 
 
 calling himself a " homceopath." Only an earnest and 
 assiduous student can become a good homoeopathic thera- 
 peutist who will never resort to the allopathic custom of 
 giving quinine as a remedy for fever or even for ague, 
 who treats scrofulous inflammation of the eye only by 
 internal remedies prepared homcxaopathically, and who in 
 diphtheria never employs external medicines, &c., &c., but 
 who in all cases gives medicines only in homoeopathic doses, 
 and with all this obtains results which enable him to con- 
 template allopathic persecutions with the tranquillity of a 
 good conscience. Anyone who acts otherwise, either has no 
 right to the name of homoeopath, or is still in a transition 
 state, or has prematurely brought his studies to an end, a 
 condition of affairs which is largely due to the want of 
 homoeopathic hospitals and teachers. Even salicylic acid 
 in cases of rheumatic anthritis and mercury in appreciable 
 quantities in syphilis can be replaced by Hahnemann's 
 preparations, and better results will be obtained, with a 
 complete absence of injurious after effects. 
 
 If we have often had occasion to notice that the most 
 bitter opponents of homoeopathy were those whose thera- 
 peutic treatment was least successful at the sick bed, and 
 who were the least confident of their power to cure, this 
 periodical, which joyfully, gratefully, and " with all its heart " 
 adopts Rigler's mis-statements, furnishes a further proof of 
 our assertion. This same Wiener medic. Wochenblatt, while 
 under precisely the same editorship, expresses the following 
 views on allopathic therapeutics :— * 
 
 What is praised by one is ridiculed by another. What one doctor 
 dares not give in small doses is given by another in large doses, and 
 what is praised by one as something new is considered by another as 
 not being worthy of being rescued from oblivion. The favourite 
 remedy of one is morphia ; another treats three-fourths of his patients 
 with quinine ; a third expects favourable results from purgatives ; a 
 fourth from the healing power of nature ; a fifth from water ; one 
 blesses, another curses mercury. In a short period of time the treat- 
 ment by mercurial inunction flourished, was set aside, and then 
 came into repute again; it was looked upon as buried, funeral orations 
 
 * 1867, No. 5.1, p. 6S1. 
 24
 
 370 A too candid friend. 
 
 were pronounced over it, and then it was disinterred, and lately its 
 praises have again been sung by enthusiastic admirers. And such 
 things happen within a few decades in the self-same " school,'' under 
 the sway of the same infallible therapeutic despot, girded with the 
 sword of triumphant science. 
 
 Further on, this same periodical, which has always per- 
 secuted all who thought differently from itself, gives the 
 following criticism of its own allopathic materia medica.* 
 
 Above all we must here allude to that gross fraud which the high 
 priests of science impose on their disciples, although neither they nor 
 the majority of medical men beheve in it. I mean the fables of the so- 
 called pharmacodynamics, of the niateria medica This newer 
 
 pharmacology, which is taught at the Universities, and about which 
 large volumes are written which students are obliged to learn almost by 
 heart, belongs, in virtue of at least nine-tenths of its contents, to the 
 region of fables and fairy tales, and is a survival of the old belief in 
 magic. The numerous announcements of newly-discovered remedies 
 which, in all the journals, are recommended by the apothecaries and 
 provided with testimonials as to their infallibity by doctors, show that 
 pains are being taken to extend the empire of magic and super- 
 stition. 
 
 RETROSPECT. 
 
 Let us briefly recapitulate the history of the opposition 
 offered to homceopathy. When Hahnemann first intro- 
 duced his method of treatment to notice, he was well known 
 throughout all Germany and abroad as an excellent chemist. 
 The pharmaceutists honoured in him a zealous promoter 
 of the apothecaries' art, and when the names of the most 
 illustrious in this branch were mentioned, Hahnemann's 
 was not omitted. He enjoyed a high reputation as a 
 scholar, and was regarded by the medical profession as one 
 of the most esteemed representatives of their art, to whom 
 they owed many important contributions tending to per- 
 fect the science, as was frequently and unreservedly ad- 
 mitted. By his lively, impetuous temperament, by his 
 desire to remedy acknowledged evils, and by his vast 
 schemes for overthrowing the whole system of medicine 
 
 * 1872, No. 44, p. 1 1 13.
 
 Hahneviann's reform a. revolution. 371 
 
 and building it up anew on the foundation of his prin- 
 ciples, which he held with the whole strength of his con- 
 viction, he was involved in a life and death struggle with 
 almost the whole medical world. He attacked medicine 
 on its weakest sides, and declared without circumlocution 
 on every occasion that he considered the treatment of its 
 practitioners more dangerous than the disease itself The 
 old school felt that the foundations of their therapeutics 
 were shaken, and sought to maintain them by every 
 possible means. They had to justify the greater part of 
 what had been their medical practice hitherto in order 
 to maintain their reputation, and to answer this cardinal 
 question, whether their labours had tended to preserve 
 and lengthen men's lives or to destroy them. The strife 
 was bitter, as must be the case when the ground on 
 which the attacked party stands is insecure. 
 
 Many medical men, however, looked upon Hahnemann's 
 attacks on the wretched system of treatment according to 
 all sorts of illusory theories, on the irrational bleeding, on 
 the violent purgatives, on the complex prescriptions, as 
 being partially, at least, well founded. Several among them 
 approved of his earnest attempts to obtain a firm, natural- 
 historical basis for medical treatment, and to banish conjec- 
 ture, superstition and speculation from medicine by simple 
 prescriptions, by strict individualisation, by careful attention 
 to the preparation of medicines, by the proving of medicines 
 on the healthy organism, by their use according to fixed 
 principles, and by the most careful observations taken at 
 the sick bed. This recognition of his merits is expressed 
 and thankfully acknowledged in many places, but Hahne- 
 mann is constantly exhorted not to set up this method 
 as the universal and only true system. But he remained 
 unmoved in his own opinions, and thus became one-sided 
 in his views, and was guilty of errors which laid him 
 open to the attacks of his opponents. 
 
 A great hindrance in the way of an understanding 
 being arrived at was the practice of bleeding, which the 
 opponents of Hahnemann clung to as an article of religious 
 faith. His rejection of bleeding exposed Hahnemann to
 
 372 Snnilia similibtis — tit for tat. 
 
 the most bitter attacks and the most reckless accusations. 
 The class of his opponents favourable to bleeding has 
 now almost disappeared, but the slanders and abuse which 
 they hurled in blind fury against their dangerous enemy 
 have remained, have been inherited and added to by a 
 subsequent race of opponents. 
 
 At first all his opponents spoke in high terms of Hahne- 
 mann's previous services ; but at the end of the second and 
 beginning of the third decade of this century, works appeared 
 containing no allusions to his previous services, and dwelling 
 on the weak points of his doctrines all the more forcibly. 
 His mode of preparing medicines, arrived at after long and 
 laborious investigations, served as a butt for ridicule, and 
 was eagerly employed to convict him of folly. 
 
 None of his bitterest opponents dared at first to term 
 Hahnemann a charlatan. They still preserved a certain 
 amount of decency, and recognised the psychological im- 
 possibility that a man who had during twenty years given 
 such obvious proofs of unflagging industry, of an earnest 
 striving after truth, who enjoyed the friendship of the most 
 highly esteemed men, could suddenly turn into a vulgar 
 charlatan, and employ himself during forty years and more 
 of his life in basely deceiving his suffering fellow-creatures 
 who had sought his aid in their distress. This class of his 
 opponents was at least logical, and said that his mind had 
 become enfeebled. 
 
 Gradually, however, Hahnemann's previous services were 
 consigned to oblivion, and now it was sought, by perversions 
 and misrepresentations, to represent him as an impostor, a 
 charlatan and a swindler. His adherents met with the 
 same fate. " I have repaid him with full measure for his 
 attacks on the profession ; and if he has not lost all sense 
 of truth, he must own that I have, at least in this respect, 
 fully grasped the sense of his similia siuiilibiis cnrentiir, 
 and have treated him according to true homoeopathic prin- 
 ciples," exclaims one ardent opponent of Hahnemann and 
 defender of bleeding,* with a sense of gratified vengeance. f ' 
 
 * Even in threatened phthisis. 
 
 t Simon, tJm/ ^/tv //(V//., Hamburg, 1833, p. 8.
 
 Eteigiions les Imnicres. 373 
 
 The apothecaries, who feared danger to their very ex- 
 istence from homoeopathy, lent their zealous support to the 
 allopaths, and assiduously characterised homoeopathy as a 
 " fraud." But this did not hinder them from attempting 
 to bring homoeopathy within the sphere of their privileges. 
 
 The great advance in the medical auxiliary sciences by 
 the physiological school, which apparently intensified the 
 current that ran counter to the homoeopathic tendency, 
 now took place, and gave rise to the idea that homoeopathy 
 was a hindrance to the physiological development of 
 medicine. Professors at the universities who occupied 
 themselves with homoeopathy were turned out, and young 
 doctors were imbued with a hatred of everything connected 
 with homoeopathy. Its opponents employed all the organs 
 devoted to the interests of the majority in order to repre- 
 sent homoeopathy as mere folly and imposture. 
 
 The homoeopaths busied themselves with the develop- 
 ment of their system, but yet found time to reply in nu- 
 merous works, wherein they set forth the real character 
 of their therapeutics, but they omitted to furnish a history 
 of the development of homoeopathy, nor did they care to 
 refute the gross misrepresentations which were propagated 
 in ever increasing numbers, until they, in course of time, 
 grew to the most monstrous dimensions. 
 
 It can be incontrovertibly proved that every opponent 
 has been guilty of misrepresentation or error — of ignor- 
 ance and mendacity — in his representation of homoeopathy. 
 There is no exception to this. 
 
 Hahnemann and the homoeopaths were generally at- 
 tacked with passionate recklessness, and the object of their 
 opponents was gained by making homoeopathy appear to 
 be a farrago of rubbish. 
 
 It is only accidentally that every now and then a physician 
 gets a glimpse of the true nature of homoeopathy, and he is 
 astonished to perceive the obstructions which the allopaths, 
 in their blind infatuation, have opposed to truth. If he, then, 
 recognises the gross error of the opponents of homoeopathy ; 
 if he seeks to ascertain the real essence of the system ; if he 
 grasps its truth, and if he possesses the energy to defend it
 
 374 Alhnnons les feux. 
 
 publicly, he is furiously persecuted on all sides, and is 
 driven out of the medical body and avoided like a plague- 
 stricken creature, and that quite regardless of the evidence 
 he may have given of honest striving after truth ; he has 
 committed a mortal crime and is condemned off-hand.* 
 
 Owing to such a remarkable state of affairs, we are im- 
 pelled to investigate the therapeutics taught in our universi- 
 ties, and see if it is really such a crime to be discontented 
 with the present system and to look for something 
 better. 
 
 * A few words respecting the allopathic efforts to stifle and put 
 down homoeopathy in other countries besides Germany, may be per- 
 mitted here. 
 
 In Great Britain, various medical men of greater or less eminence 
 in the old school have written books and articles in journals against 
 it. The most conspicuous of these polemical authors are Sir J. Y. 
 Simpson, Sir J. Forbes, Sir B. Brodie, Dr. C. J. B.Williams, Dr. Bris- 
 towe. Dr. Bushnan and Dr. Routh. 
 
 Simpson's work is elaborate and unfair ; Forbes's first article in 
 h\s Ulcdical Review \s ostensibly judicial and moderate in tone. He 
 there says : " Whoever examines the homoeopathic doctrines as 
 enounced and expounded in the original writings of Hahnemann and 
 by many of his followers, must admit, not only that the system 
 is an ingenious one, but that it professes to be based on a most formid- 
 able array of facts and experiments, and that these are woven into a 
 complete code of doctrine with singular dexterity and much apparent 
 fairness." 
 
 Eleven years later, in Nature a7id Art iti Disease (p. 250), Forbes 
 speaks of homoeopathy as "a system utterly false and despicable" ; 
 the violent attacks made upon him by his allopathic brethren on ac- 
 count of his first article, may perhaps have had something to do with 
 this remarkable change of opinion. 
 
 Dr. Bristowe's address on homceopathy at the meeting of the 
 British Medical Association, in 1S81, is written in a calm and 
 judicial spirit, and displays the unique quality of speaking of the 
 adherents of Hahnemann's system as though they were entitled to 
 professional courtesy, and might be considered to be honest as well 
 as well-educated men. The writings of Williams and Brodie show 
 that their authors know nothing about the system they attacked. 
 Bushnan's work attempts to unite the conflicting parts of quasi- 
 candid examination and unreasoning abuse. Routh's work is an attack
 
 Cosi fan iutti. 375 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Medicine as it is nozv tanght in the Universities. 
 
 In Germany the minds of scientific physicians were still 
 enveloped in the mists of natural philosophy, while the in- 
 ductive method of research was already firmly established in 
 England and France. In England, John Hunter (1728 — 
 1793) I'^ad, by his intelligent researches, brought to light 
 many scientific facts, and had especially striven to prove 
 that in inflammation the phenomena of the disease follow 
 physiological laws. 
 
 on homoeopathic statistics, which he proves by elaborate tables to be 
 infinitely superior in the results obtained to those of the allopaths, but 
 which he concludes must be false chiefly, as it seems to me, because 
 they do show this superiority. His argument is like this : Homoe- 
 opathy is false. Allopathy is true. A false system must be less suc- 
 cessful in the treatment of disease than a true one. These statistics 
 show a much greater success in the treatment of disease in homoe- 
 opathic than in allopathic hospitals, " argal " the homceopathic 
 statistics must be cooked. 
 
 The warfare against homoeopathy in this country was not con- 
 fined to literature. The power of the majority was exerted against 
 the heterodox minority in other ways. Black was refused the fellow- 
 ship of the Edinburgh College of Physicians ; Henderson was forced 
 to resign his Clinical Professorship ; Horner and Reith were turned 
 out of their hospitals; coroner's inquests (presided over by allo- 
 pathic medical coroners) were used oppressively against homoeo- 
 pathic practitioners ; Colleges and Universities fulminated anathemas 
 against any of their members who should practise the hated system. 
 Candidates were rejected by examiners if they would not abjure 
 homoeopathy. Societies expelled homoeopathic members, and even 
 their own allopathic members who met homoeopathists professionally. 
 Articles against homoeopathy were frequent in the medical periodicals, 
 but no reply was allowed, nor would these periodicals admit any adver- 
 tisement of a work on homoeopathy unless it was against it, and they 
 even refused to advertise a work of any sort written by a homceo- 
 pathist. Every place and post of honour and emolument was withheld 
 from homoeopathists. In short, the whole hostile armoury that was 
 used against homoeopathy in Germany was employed against it here 
 with the exception of the apothecaries' weapon, for no law exists in 
 Britain preventing a medical man giving his own medicines, or if such 
 law is on the statute book, it has long been obsolete. 
 
 In the United States of America, the bigoted practitioners of the
 
 '^^'jG Hoist wit J I their oivn petard. 
 
 In France, Bichat (1771 — 1802) was the first who, 
 although not free from some mistaken theories, sought to 
 direct medical research to facts, and strove to give an 
 anatomical basis to medical science : " Observer la nature, 
 rassembler beaucoup de faits, prendre leur ensemble pour 
 
 principes Qui sommes nous pour nous detourner de 
 
 cette voie?" "What is the use of observation," he says 
 afterwards, " if we do not know the seat of diseases ? " 
 
 Among the clinical authorities, Broussais (1772 — 1838) 
 was one of the first who sought to localise diseases, and 
 strove to refer them to anatomical changes. He fell into 
 the error of referrincf most diseases to an inflammation — a 
 
 old school bou nd themselves together in an Association, whose chief 
 object was to "boycott" the homoeopaths. They formed a " code of 
 ethics " for this purpose. Under this code, the Massachusetts homoeo- 
 paths were expelled from the State Society ; an allopathic physician 
 of New York was expelled from his society for purchasing goods at a 
 homoeopathic drug-store ; another physician was expelled for assisting 
 a homoeopathic practitioner in a difficult labour case, said homoeo- 
 pathic practitioner being his own wife ; Dr. Bliss, a Washington allo- 
 path, was excommunicated for serving on a Board of Health with a 
 homoeopath; Dr. Cox was expelled for consulting with the excommu- 
 nicated Dr. Bliss ; Dr. Van Valzah was dismissed from his lecture- 
 ship in Jefferson Medical College for trying to save his life with 
 homoeopathic medicine after his allopathic physicians had given 
 him up. The existence of this Association, whose bond of union is 
 hatred of homceopathy, has produced complications and difficulties in 
 connexion with the projected International Medical Congress, whereat 
 the allopaths throughout the world, who promised themselves a de- 
 lightful holiday trip to Washington, are grieving, and the homoeopaths 
 everywhere are laughing. A British medical periodical (T/ic Medical 
 Times) remonstrates with this American Association for their treat- 
 inent of the homoeopaths, which reminds us of Satan reproving sin. 
 
 In France the old school does not seem to have the same opportu- 
 nities for exercising oppression on their reforming brethren enjoyed 
 by their colleagues in Germany, England and America, but when a 
 chance occurs we find it as zealously seized on as we could desire. 
 Thus, on the 4th January, 1856, the Anatomical Society of Paris ex- 
 pelled, on account of homoeopathic publications, Drs. J. P. Tessier, 
 Gabalda, Frddault and Jousset, and in the same resolution of expulsion, 
 in order to add insult to injury, this high-minded society included the 
 name of a member who had just been condemned by the tribunals for 
 some infamous crime.
 
 Therapeutic ineptitude of pathological theories. 
 
 0// 
 
 gastro-enteritis — which he tried to cure by means of vene- 
 section and the apphcation of numbers of leeches ; by this 
 means he and his scholars and adherents made away with 
 some thousands of human beings, and, finally, with himself 
 The " anatomical school " which was developing itself at 
 this period went to work very thoroughly. Those diseases 
 for which no anatomical substratum could be found in the 
 dead body, e.g., neuralgias, were simply ignored. Percus- 
 sion and auscultation were brought to perfection by Cor- 
 visart and Laennec. Corvisart employed Auenbrugger's 
 percussion, and Piorry introduced the plessimeter ; Laennec 
 invented the stethoscope and taught its use. This method 
 
 In all the behaviour of the partizans of the old school towards their 
 colleagues of the homoeopathic school, what strikes us most is the 
 total absence of that courtesy and forbearance that should charac- 
 terize the controversies of members of a liberal and learned profession, 
 and which is to be found in their disputes and discussions about other 
 subjects. On what other points of medical opinion would the par- 
 tizans of one side consider it decent or becoming to call their oppo- 
 nents impostors, swindlers, quacks and liars, to expel them from their 
 societies, to refuse all professional intercourse with them, to defraud 
 them of their diplomas, to bar them from defending their views in the 
 periodicals, to harass them with coroner's inquests 1 And yet all these 
 things have been done by medical men to colleagues of equal social 
 rank and education, only because these colleagues held other views on 
 the selection and administration of medicine in disease. It is a 
 curious and unprecedented fact that though the school of traditional, 
 and, as it likes to call itself, " rational " medicine, assailed homoeopathy 
 with a bitterness and rancour that has no parallel in the mode of its 
 reception of other systems and other opinions, it has at the same 
 time gradually abandoned almost all the methods of treatment which 
 Hahnemann denounced, and which it declared to be essential, indis- 
 pensable, " sheet-anchors," and so forth. Where are now its lancets, 
 leeches, cupping-glasses, setons, issues, actual cauteries, blisters, 
 emetics and mercurial salivation? Thanks to Hahnemann, the school 
 of traditional medicine has now abandoned its traditional methods, 
 and may say with Sganarelle : " Cela c'tait autrefois ainsi ; mais nous 
 avons chang^ tout cela, et nous faisons maintenant la m^decine d'une 
 m(fthode toute nouvelle." Any one who should bleed now as Hahne- 
 mann's opponents bled and persecuted him for not doing the like, 
 would be denounced as a dangerous lunatic by that organ of allo- 
 pathic physic which still retains the name of the instrument of 
 bleeding — The Lancet. — [Ed.]
 
 3/8 Qjiot homines tot seiitenticu. 
 
 of investigation was universally accepted in France and 
 England, while it was but partially adopted in Germany.* 
 
 These French ideas were transplanted by the new Vienna 
 school to Germany. Rokitansky, "the father of modern 
 German medicine," as he was called before the adoption 
 of the cellular pathology, brought about the reception of 
 pathological anatomy and developed it; and Skoda and 
 other stook up and taught the physical modes of investi- 
 gation. The changes effected by disease were observed, 
 but what was the cause of them? Where did they arise? 
 The impetus to pathological processes was given by de- 
 rangements of the fluids. In what did these chemical 
 changes consist? This was not discovered, and the thera- 
 peutic point of attack was wanting. This was the period 
 of nihilism, when it was " scientific " to scoff at the cura- 
 tive power of medicines. With regard to the development 
 of pathological alterations, in 1850 and still later people 
 believed in free cell formation on a structureless base 
 " from free blastema," when a generatio sequivoca had 
 already been rejected in other branches of science. The 
 exudation theory was of great importance in accounting for 
 the occurrence of morbid processes. 
 
 Natural philosophy constructed out of disease a special 
 organism, and some of its adherents supposed it to have roots 
 which penetrated the organism and which enabled it to grow 
 and flourish. The natural philosophers encouraged the 
 study of the natural sciences, and in this direction the 
 French school was not without influence. 
 
 Kieser, Ph. von Walther and Dollinger were adherents 
 of the school of natural philosophy ; and Schonlein was a 
 pupil of the two last; Schonlein founded "exact clinical 
 research." Johannes Miiller furnished a firmer and broader 
 basis for physiology. 
 
 Virchow was a pupil of Schonlein and Miiller. The 
 following is an abstract of his teaching, stated as far as 
 
 * J. H. Kopp. Aerztliche Bcmerkt(noen^ vera?ilasst durch etne Reisc 
 in Deutschland tend Frankreich, Frankfurt A/M. Also A, Miihry, 
 Darstellungeii nnd Ansichtcn ztir Verglcicliii77g dcr Medicin in Frank- 
 i'cich, England iind Deutschland. Hannover, 1836.
 
 Virchozos cellular doctrine. T^yg 
 
 possible in his own clear words : — The human organism is 
 composed of simple minute components called cells, which 
 again may be considered as elementary organisms, for each 
 of these cells possesses inherent vitality and energy, and its 
 power is founded on its peculiar arrangement. The human 
 body is not, therefore, a unit in the strict material sense of 
 the word, but is rather multiple, a sort of federation or state. 
 The single cell within a tissue is not nourished but it nourishes 
 itself, i.e., it absorbs for its own use from the nutritive fluids 
 in its neighbourhood that which it requires. Its nourish- 
 ment, therefore, both in quantity and quality, is a result of 
 the energy of the cell, and is naturally dependent upon 
 the quantity and quality of the nourishment within its reach. 
 It is by no means obliged to absorb into itself all the 
 nourishment that flows around it. Just as a single cell of a 
 fungus or an alga extracts from the fluid in which it exists 
 just so much and just such kind of material as is necessary to 
 maintain its life, so the tissue cell in the middle of a com- 
 pound organism has elective faculties, in virtue of which it 
 rejects certain substances and accepts and utilizes others. 
 This is nutrition in the cellular sense. It is not one single 
 power that rules the organism, but its energy depends on 
 the co-operation of various powers. These powers are de- 
 rived from the individual elementary organisms — the cells. 
 Even the most striking unity in human life, the spiritual ego, 
 is not a fixed but a variable quantity. If, in spite of this, 
 the human organism appears to us to be a unit, this is owing 
 to three circumstances : ist. The arrangement of the vascular 
 apparatus and of the blood circulating in it is on a connected 
 system prevailing through the whole body, which causes a 
 material interchange of the stuffs and a certain dependence 
 of the individual parts on the blood. 2nd. We possess in 
 the arrangement of the nervous system, with which are 
 connected man's highest functions of intellectual activit}-, a 
 network of branches traversing the whole body and concen- 
 trated in the great central masses of the brain and spinal 
 cord. 3rd. The stamp of unity is given to the body by the 
 co-ordination of the innumerable cells. Such tissue co- 
 ordinations are, e.g., the muscles and the glands. Each of
 
 380 Virchozu's cellular doctrine. 
 
 these arrangements, each of these so-called organs, is a 
 multiple made up of numberless elementary organisms. 
 The nervous system and the blood vessels also are made 
 up of these cellular elements. Every conception of the or- 
 ganism must therefore be superficial, external, so to speak, 
 which does not take account of the elements of which it 
 is composed. If such a conception at first sight appears 
 a breaking up of the body, a disintegration of the manner 
 of regarding it, further reflection shows that these innumer- 
 able elements are not placed side by side by chance ; they 
 belong to one another on account of their common origin 
 from a simple basic element, and this community of origin 
 causes a certain inherent resemblance and relation of the 
 elementary parts to one another, such as we observe among 
 the descendants from a common stock. They also belong 
 to one another because their existence is interdependent, 
 because the life of one cannot — or can only for a short 
 time — be sustained without that of the others. They are 
 also held together by mutual needs. Just as the vessels or 
 the blood and the nerves influence the other tissues, so they 
 are influenced by them in their turn. Hence a mutual in- 
 fluence is produced which may, according to circumstances, 
 be either beneficial or the reverse to the whole. 
 
 The study of diseases must, therefore, be preceded by a 
 knovrledge of those parts from which all the activit}' of 
 the body is derived, i.e., of the cells. Disease is an 
 alteration of the cells. This change takes place according 
 to fixed laws, the same laws as those underlying healthy 
 function. Therefore disease is no foreign existence causing 
 mischief in the body ; disease is only unregulated vital 
 activity. Every morbid symptom, every morbid structure, 
 has its physiological prototype, and it is impossible for 
 a pathological form to arise of which the elements are 
 not repetitions of normal processes. The development 
 of the foetus and of the egg may be referred to the same 
 fundamental principles which regulate its subsequent 
 course of life and the morbid disturbances. The diseased 
 structures are distinguished from the normal ones by the 
 irregular mode of their origin and occurrence. This irre-
 
 VircJiozifs cellular doctrine. 381 
 
 gularity either consists in the fact that a structure is pro- 
 duced at a point where it does not belong, or at a time 
 when it ought not to be produced, or in a degree that departs 
 from the normal type of the body ; so that it is just as 
 possible to discover the elements of cancer in a normal 
 organism as those of pus. The diseased structures do not 
 alwa)-s correspond to one single physiological tissue ; thus, 
 for example, a cancer, like a gland, contains cellular ele- 
 ments in alveoLx or canals, surrounded by a stroma of 
 connective tissue supplied with blood vessels. All patho- 
 logical tissues are produced continuously from physio- 
 logical tissues. 
 
 Blood cannot be looked on as a whole in contradistinc- 
 tion to other parts, it is not a constant, independent fluid 
 on which the mass of the remaining tissues is more or less 
 directly dependent. This is the mistaken view of humoral 
 pathology, which, as regards most of its principles, rests 
 on the hypothesis that changes which have taken place in 
 the blood are more or less lasting. In the doctrine of 
 chronic diseases it was usual to represent the change 
 of the blood as being continuous, and even as being 
 transmitted and maintained by heredity from generation 
 to generation. Blood, as such, does not transmit dys- 
 crasia. The blood is not an independent fluid, regen- 
 erating itself from itself, but a fluid tissue, which is in a 
 state of constant dependence on the other parts. Every 
 lasting " dyscrasia " depends upon a permanent accession 
 of injurious substances from certain points (foci), though 
 these localizations are not found everywhere. Every last- 
 ing alteration in the condition of the circulating fluids 
 must be derived from individual organs or tissues. There 
 is no such thing as a dyscrasia in which the blood 
 lastingly transmits special changes. There are two 
 categories of dyscrasic conditions — according to whether 
 anomalous morphological components are contained in 
 the blood, or v/hether the deviation is rather chemical 
 and exists in the fluid parts. As a rule, morphological 
 dyscrasias do not go on without chemical dyscrasias, and 
 vice versa. The question what the infectious substance
 
 382 Virchozus cellular doctrine. 
 
 actually is, whether it is connected with cellular elements 
 or peculiar organisms, or whether it is purely chemical, 
 is a difficult one, and nowhere is rash generalisation 
 more dangerous Ihan here. With regard to the thedry of 
 dyscrasia, it is shown that either substances enter into the 
 blood which influence injuriously its cellular elements, and 
 disturb them in their functions, or that substances are 
 brought to the blood from some definite point, whether 
 from outside or from some organ, which, from the vantage 
 ground of the blood, affect the other organs injuriously. 
 Finally, it may happen that the components of the blood 
 are not regularly replaced. 
 
 No permanent dyscrasia is possible except by means of 
 
 some new influence brought to bear upon the blood from 
 
 ,some central focus. It follows as a consequence of this 
 
 that it is important in practice to find out the local origin 
 
 in all cases of dyscrasia. 
 
 By means of the study of pathological and pharmaco- 
 dynamical phenomena we are driven by necessity to admit 
 the existence of certain affinities between certain substances 
 and certain tissues, relations which can be referred to 
 chemical qualities, in consequence of which certain parts 
 are more fitted to draw certain substances from the sur- 
 rounding parts, and thus, also, from the blood. Certain 
 substances which enter the blood can induce changes in 
 certain parts of the body, by being taken up into them in 
 virtue of the specific attraction of special tissues to special 
 substances. In almost all cases specific relations exist 
 between the irritable parts and the irritant substances. 
 In all tissues we find that the function depends on the 
 minute change of the contents of the cell or the proto- 
 plasm, which probably consists in a slight chemical change 
 in the molecules. 
 
 Virchow himself recognises that his theory splits up 
 the body into a complexity of cells ; he seeks to keep 
 them together by their " reciprocal action ;" but this is 
 not sufficient to explain the organic processes. If we look
 
 Recrudescence of the vital force. 383 
 
 at the harmonic movements in the concrete individual, 
 whether vegetable or animal, the transmission of the 
 qualities of parents — even to the slightest peculiarities — 
 which are transplanted from generation to generation ; 
 the constantly recurring properties of different genera and 
 species developing themselves from a small cell ; if we 
 consider the regular processes of growth which seem to 
 be prescribed to the original cell and maintained within 
 the individual until its final extinction, we are obliged to 
 accept the hypothesis of a transmissible principle of unity 
 which causes the activity of the organism. This funda- 
 mental force can only be a component part of common, 
 natural forces. It was formerly called the " vital force," 
 and everything was referred to it that could not be other- 
 wise explained. By this means an insuperable obstacle 
 vvas placed in the way of scientific knowledge, which was 
 soon, however, torn down by the inquiring human mind. 
 A school of iatro-mechanists and iatro-chemists arose who 
 made the processes of the organism fit in witli the chemical 
 and physical views of the period. These attempts in the 
 primitive state of this science led to the most crude views, 
 which were not satisfying. The conception of a vital 
 force was again introduced, but as it was believed that 
 scientific investigations could not flourish under the empire 
 of the vital force, this has been recently vehemently 
 opposed, and everyone was condemned who accepted the 
 idea of such a fundamental force. Physiologists rushed 
 into the opposite extreme. 
 
 In order to maintain this stand-point they went to work 
 in a very radical manner ; everything was simply ignored 
 or denied that did not fit in with the system. Physiology 
 puts on one side the discussion of the forces which excite 
 the originating cells to the development of the individual, 
 although this question ought to be the very first. To 
 satisfy the requirements of this system the truth of vital 
 magnetism was long denied. Virchow persisted, up to a 
 recent period, in calling it a false science. Recently mag- 
 netism has suddenly become " scientific," and has intruded 
 itself into university knowledge, and, notwithstanding
 
 384 Chemical changes in the molecules 
 
 Heidcrhain's* efiforts, refuses to be suppressed. The medical 
 faculties scornfully denied a fact they were not acquainted 
 with, and which they refused to investigate because it did 
 not fit in with their science. They closed their eyes wil- 
 fully in order to maintain their own system. 
 
 It is the same with the reception of a fundamental force. 
 We are certainly justified in not giving a cordial reception 
 to the idea of a vital force, because it is apt to become 
 associated with mysticism ; but we are not justified in 
 simply rejecting it altogether. This is a fault on the part 
 of University medicine which has been a chief cause of 
 their therapeutic fallacies. The abstract term " irritation," 
 has been adopted from Virchow, although it has a wider 
 signification. " The cell Is acted on by an irritatant." This 
 is an expression that means nothing, but which is daily 
 used without any distinct idea being apparently connected 
 with it. 
 
 A second great mistake from which orthodox medicine 
 suffers is, that it is at variance with itself, there is a diver- 
 gence between doctrine and practice. It says : " In all 
 tissues we find the function principally depending on the 
 minute alteration in the contents of the cell or the proto- 
 plasm, which makes it probable that it depends on a 
 chemical change in the molecules." It would be more in 
 accordance with facts if we were to say : " the energy of 
 the cells is influenced by a movement of chemical mole- 
 cules." Whether it is not rather a daring thing to refer 
 the whole activity of man, the world of his thought and 
 feeling, his memory, &c., to chemistry alone, need not be 
 considered. At all events, according to this view it is 
 the principal object of investigation to become acquainted 
 with the chemical changes. The physical anatomical ap- 
 pearances are primarily the result of chemical processes. 
 Investigation must occupy itself first with chemical pro- 
 cesses and then proceed to consider pathological anatomy. 
 Instead of this the reverse takes place. The physical altera- 
 tions of the cells form the chief object of investigation, 
 
 * Dcr sog. thicr. Magnctis)mts^ Leipsic, 18S0.
 
 the cmtse of morbid processes. 38 5 
 
 and, incidentally, a certain amount of attention is given to 
 chemistry. 
 
 Soon after the appearance of the cellular pathology, phy- 
 sical theories forced themselves into the foreground of 
 therapeutics, because investigators were constantly con- 
 sidering the anatomical form of cells and cell groups. Up 
 to that time the effect of iron in chlorosis, for instance, had 
 been explained by the fact that it supplied a constituent 
 that was deficient in the blood ; now the untenability of 
 this theory was proved, and the action of iron was referred 
 to the tonic properties of this metal, and the effect of steel 
 baths was appealed to in confirmation. 
 
 A chance discovery of Virchow's, that ciliary move- 
 ments are excited by alkalis, was sought to be applied to 
 therapeutics, and it was triumphantly used to explain the 
 beneficial effects of mineral waters ; the alleged discovery 
 of the paralysing effect of carbonic-oxide gas upon the 
 nucleus of the red corpuscles (according to the present view 
 there is no such nucleus) was brought forward, and raised 
 hopes that other excitant physical agents might be dis- 
 covered to act on other cell groups. 
 
 It was Virchow himself who chiefly called attention to 
 pathological anatomy, and this is easily explicable by his 
 especial line of study. He thus himself principally con- 
 tributed to make his theory unfruitful for therapeutics. 
 He did not hesitate to maintain that chlorosis was re- 
 ferrable to " defective structure of the heart and large 
 arteries."* According to him " chlorosis " is incurable, and 
 only a temporary benefit can be attained. If Virchow had 
 been a practical physician he would never have made this 
 statement, or would at least have confined it to certain 
 cases. It is, however, characteristic, and we need not be 
 surprised if a tendency to chronic coryza is referred to the 
 anatomical structure of the nose. 
 
 Do the anatomical views of pathology agree with the 
 investigations of the physiologists ? What does the physi- 
 ologist teach? With all organs he tries to discover, among 
 
 * Ucbcr die Chlofose. Berlin, 1S72, p. 3. 
 25
 
 386 Thc7'ape2itics vmst be founded on 
 
 other things, the influence of the nerves on their functions, 
 and investigates with the greatest minuteness the chemical 
 processes which come into play in the body. Take for 
 example the functions of the spleen, the pancreas and the 
 liver. In the last, for instance, account is taken of the 
 chemical composition of the bile, of the connexion of the 
 constituents of the bile with those of the blood, of the 
 changes that take place in it in certain states of activity 
 of other organs, when certain nerves are irritated, and of 
 the chemical changes attending it in the faeces, urine, blood 
 and saliva. Cells are hardly mentioned. 
 
 What is the pathological method of procedure? The 
 greatest importance is attached to the physical changes of 
 cells, little attention is paid to the influence of the nerves, 
 and chemistry occupies a comparatively subordinate posi- 
 tion. 
 
 Here, then, there is a most obvious want of harmony in 
 the methods of investigation, and this is the fault of the 
 pathologists. They themselves say that chemistry is pri- 
 mary and physical phenomena secondary. According to 
 their own theory, then, they direct their attention to the 
 results of the disease, not to the disease itself " There is 
 a great gulf in the medical art between knowledge and 
 practice," as Virchow says of allopathy. When such a 
 method of investigation is pursued, it would be remark- 
 able if the case were otherwise. 
 
 If there is any prospect, which we doubt, of founding 
 a system of therapeutics on our imperfect physical and 
 chemical knowledge, a greater prominence must be given 
 to chemistry than has been the case hitherto. Certain 
 attempts have been made in this direction, and here we 
 must mention the name of the late lamented Beneke, who, 
 however, did not meet with much attention, especially as 
 his efforts had no therapeutic results, because he, too, 
 started from too crude notions. More recently Baumann, 
 Brieger and E. Salkowsky (these two last under Frerichs 
 and Virchow) have obtained valuable results. The work of 
 Salkowsky and Leube, Die Lchre vom Ham, Berlin, 1S83, 
 deserves to be mentioned with approval.
 
 a knozukdge of minute chemical changes. 3 8/ 
 
 These ^are only the efforts of individuals, they are not 
 general; investigations are not conducted methodically. 
 Then we have the search for " nitrogen," " phosphoric acid," 
 " sulphuric acid," &c., indeed we never feel sure that one of 
 these substances will not crop up in any book we may 
 happen to be reading. 
 
 How can such coarse experiments give us an insight into 
 the chemical movements of the organism ? Such attempts 
 might be sufficient to discover the value of some article of 
 food, but not to determine the nature of the complicated 
 chemical processes in the organism. Such " investiga- 
 tions " disgrace our knowledge, and show that we are very 
 far from a right appreciation of the importance of chemistry. 
 This is also shown by the fact that even now there are no 
 special professorships of pathological chemistry, which are 
 just as important for medicine as professorships of patho- 
 logical anatomy. 
 
 We seldom or never find among the writings of the 
 allopaths the report of a disease with a satisfactory diag- 
 nosis, and yet they receive adequate assistance from the 
 State for their investigations in every direction. If the 
 anatomical changes present have been, as far as possible, 
 ascertained, " scientific " requirements are supposed to be 
 satisfied ; if the urine has been tested for albumen, su- 
 gar, and " nitrogen," everything has been done. We might 
 expect from orthodox medicine, which is so amply pro- 
 vided with means, the establishment of a chemical, in 
 addition to an anatomical diagnosis, which should make 
 an accurate chemical analysis of all the secretions of the 
 body, such as urine, faeces, saliva, expectoration, sweat, 
 and also if possible the exhalations, and, in the case of 
 animals, the blood, with strict regard to the amount of the 
 ingesta, the temperature and moisture of the air, the state 
 of the barometer, &c., and we should thus enlarge our 
 knowledge of the chemistry of the body in a manner cor- 
 responding to the present state of science. 
 
 Thus, for example, in patients suffering from fever the 
 urine ought not to be merely analysed for nitrogen in order 
 to calculate from this the amount of urea ; but the other
 
 3 88 TJie zvagoii-axle theory of disease. 
 
 nitrogeiious constituents, crcatinin, xanthin, hippuric acid, 
 &c., should also be considered. Private medical practitioners 
 can only carry out such investigations with the greatest 
 difficulty ; but in hospitals, with the aid of assistants, they 
 could at least be undertaken in each form of disease. 
 Future generations will smile at the perfunctory manner in 
 which we make our diagnosis. 
 
 A glance at the text books of general pathology will show 
 us the onesidedness of allopathic vievv-s. The best known 
 are those of Uhle and Wagner, of Samuel and of Cohnheim. 
 In all three, chem.istry is treated in an extremel}' step- 
 motherly manner. The well-known results of chcmico- 
 pathological investigations are seldom if ever mentioned. 
 
 If medicine is treated in such a fashion, the crudest 
 ideas concerning the operations of the organism must 
 prevail. Professor Jiirgensen imparts the following in- 
 struction to his pupils : " The axle of a wagon, by the 
 concussions it is perpetually subjected to, graduall}- be- 
 comes crystalline, and its weight-bearing power is lessened. 
 In the same manner the construction of an originally 
 povv-erful constitution maj' be gradually disintegrated by 
 the labour of life."* 
 
 If a university professor, whose duty it is to instruct 
 future physicians in the physiological bases of medicine, 
 and to* encourage his students to reflect upon the natural 
 processes of the organism—if such a man plants such 
 crude, mediaeval iatromechanical ideas in their young 
 heads, hastens, indeed, to publish such doctrines and 
 spread them far and wide, the mere mention of such a 
 fact suffices to characterise allopathy. Jiirgensen's analogy 
 of the wagon axle-tree should be kept constantly before 
 the eyes of the allopaths as a warning. 
 
 Jurgensen, in his anti-homoeopathic essay, says : " As 
 long as the arrangement of our studies makes it possible 
 for the young doctor, who has learnt without having been 
 taught to think, to enter into practice with the scantiest 
 amount of knowledge, so long will it be likely that he will 
 
 * Sanwilung ]:Jin. J'ofir.^ von A'olkmann. No. 6i, p. 4S2.
 
 Bacterial therapeutics. 3 89 
 
 soon desert into the ranks of our opponents." Jiirgensen 
 may rest assured that as long as such wagon-axle con- 
 ceptions are taught there is not the slightest danger of the 
 young physician accepting homoeopathy. 
 
 Latterly, the wildest therapeutic hopes have been 
 founded on the interesting discoveries of bacteria in the 
 seat of various diseases. The bacteria certainly form a 
 very seductive point of attack for the operations of the 
 physician. The indications lie patent to the view, and the 
 therapeutic treatment is very simple. Hitherto, however, 
 the results have not been commensurate with the expecta- 
 tions. In no internal disease, according to the allopathic 
 view, is the point of attack on the bacteria more con- 
 veniently situated than in diphtheria. Nevertheless, the 
 results of the allopathic treatment of this disease are pitiful. 
 In Berlin alone, 2000 children die annually from it, which 
 is a large proportion, notwithstanding the confessedly un- 
 hygienic surroundings. 
 
 The antiseptic treatment of wounds with carbolic acid is 
 cited as an admirable example of the importance of killing 
 bacteria. But there is a concurrence of facts connected with 
 this subject which ought not to be disregarded. Among 
 other things, the temperature is said to be lowered by car- 
 bolic acid ; * further, it has been observed that carbolic 
 acid and other antiseptics will prevent the escape of the 
 white corpuscles, and therefore they will arrest the progress 
 of inflammation and the formation of pus. It is further 
 manifest, from the researches carried on by the sanitary 
 authorities, that carbolic acid in an oleaginous solution 
 will not destroy bacteria, and yet physicians refuse to 
 subordinate their practice to theory, and believe in an anti- 
 septic action of carbolized oil, although oil in itself is not a 
 suitable dressing for wounds. 
 
 It is also worthy of observation that even the much 
 vaunted antiseptic iodoform, even in large quantities, is not 
 able to arrest the decomposition of albumen. Greater at- 
 tention should be given to the chemical action of the 
 
 * Szhmi^^s Jahrbiichcr, Vol. CXCIV., p. 23:
 
 390 Transformation of bacteria. 
 
 aromatic compounds on the production of urea in fever 
 and inflammation. 
 
 The observations of Rosenberger* and others that septic 
 poison free from bacteria can excite the same infective 
 phenomena as that containing bacteria, have an important 
 bearing on the bacteria question ; indeed, specific sep- 
 ticaemic bacteria make their appearance in the organism " 
 which has been infected without bacteria. These sep- 
 ticsemic bacteria thus developed were, according to Rosen- 
 berger, produced from the fissiparous fungi present in the 
 normal organism. Of course these assertions require 
 confirmation. 
 
 Buchner has observed the transformation of innocent 
 into poisonous bacilli in the hay and splenic fever bacilli, 
 and in spite of the denial of Koch this is confirmed by 
 other observers. 
 
 That a hurtful substance introduced into the body is 
 able to increase the number of bacteria normally existing 
 in it, has been established by Rossbachf by his experi- 
 ments on the effects of papayotin. By introducing this 
 substance into the circulation an extraordinary large 
 number of micrococci is developed in the blood even in 
 one to two hours. This discovery, which has been con- 
 firmed by subsequent experiments, affords experimental 
 proof of the fact that a poison, itself free from organisms, is 
 able to increase the lower organisms pre-existing in the 
 body with astonishingly greater rapidity than can be done 
 by an actual infection. 
 
 Rossbach justly draws the conclusion " that in true in- 
 fection the chemical poison or ferment present along with 
 the inoculated organisms is not unimportant." We may 
 add that it is of far more importance than the bacteria, 
 which are only the carriers of the poison, and that this is 
 capable of existing without them. 
 
 The hereditary transmission of syphilis is a proof of this. 
 This disease may also be transmitted through parasites. A 
 single spermatozoon is sufficient for conception. This one 
 
 * Centralbhiiif. d. med. Wiss. 18S2, p. 65. 
 t Ibid.^ p. 8r.
 
 Germicides the only true medicines. 39 1 
 
 seminal animalcule is the carrier of the syphilitic virus, as 
 well as of many other things. The virus appears to be 
 structureless in this case, and indeed, must be infinitel}- 
 small in quantity. 
 
 It is also important to note that the extent and intensity 
 of a morbid process are not always proportional to the num- 
 ber of the bacteria present. It would be rash as yet to 
 pronounce a decided opinion respecting the importance of 
 bacteria with regard to hygiene ; it is, however, certain that 
 they will not have the important bearing upon therapeutics 
 which allopaths expect from them. The results hitherto ob- 
 tained are in the highest degree unsatisfactory. Nevertheless, 
 the attempts in this direction occupy a prominent position. 
 Many have gone so far as to appraise the therapeutic value 
 of medicines according to their ability to kill bacteria, and 
 to deny all medicinal action to substances which are not de- 
 structive of bacteria. 
 
 Bacterial therapeutics, which played such an important 
 part in the Medical Congress of 1S83, is the pendant to the 
 earlier chemical theories before spoken of We are as much 
 dazzled nowadays by the discovery of bacteria as our pre- 
 decessors were formerly by the great advances in chemistry 
 caused by Lavoisier's discoveries. Over-hasty attempts 
 were made to utilise them at the sick bed, which were even 
 shared by Alex, von Humboldt. Deficiency and excess of 
 oxygen were the causes of disease, and there were corres- 
 ponding drugs which were to cure by promoting the pro- 
 duction or the absorption of oxygen. There was a germ of 
 truth at the bottom of these views. 
 
 Yet, just as we now smile at the nai'vetc of such physio- 
 logical conceptions, shall we some day smile at the present 
 attempt to found a bacterial therapeutics, which does not 
 hesitate to attribute the efficacy of cold baths, in part at 
 least, to their effect upon the growth of bacteria, as appears 
 from the reports of the Medical Congresses. 
 
 Parasitism, upon which a large proportion of the allo- 
 paths now place all their hopes in spite of its signal failure, 
 shows how little confidence they had in their former thera- 
 peutics ; it further demonstrates that they do not understand
 
 392 Killing izvo birds zvith one stone. 
 
 how to appreciate Virchow's beautiful doctrine and, indeed, 
 that they have no clear conception of its importance. 
 
 The gist of his doctrine, which no one has ever before 
 expressed with such conviction and supported by such 
 proofs, and from which Hahnemann himself started, is 
 this : — Disease is a physiological process. The inference 
 is: Study the forces which move the healthy organism and 
 are inherent in it, search for the substances with which 
 they are bound up, and make use of these forces for the 
 cure of diseases. 
 
 The bacterial craze disregards these fundamental rules, 
 for it regards the processes in the body as of no account ; 
 it simply kills the parasites and so cures the patient, unless 
 the latter is killed first ; for it cannot be doubted that an 
 agent capable of killing the bacteria would also kill the 
 bacteria's host or seriously injure him. 
 
 We observe that in typhus, scarlet fever, measles, &c., the 
 body develops forces which subdue the disease together 
 with the bacteria ; the true physiological method of cure 
 would be to stimulate and reinforce these forces in morbid 
 processes. 
 
 Virchow's theory, which for more than twcnt}' years 
 formed the basis of orthodox medicine, so much so that 
 Virchow was called " the father of German medicine," has 
 lately been to a great extent abandoned. Whereas it in 
 former years completely dominated the views of all the allo- 
 paths, and the latter confidently anticipated that it would 
 effect a beneficial development of medicine and loftily de- 
 spised all who thought otherwise, a decided opponent to it 
 appeared at the Congresses of Naturalists and Physicians 
 in Munich in 1877 and in Cassel in 1878. Klebs boldly 
 attacked Virchow in Cassel, without for a moment denying 
 the latter's great services to medicine: "The central idea 
 of the whole cellular theory," Klebs declared, " is quite 
 undemonstrated, and is indeed extremely improbable." In 
 the doctrine of the independent activity of the cell, there 
 lay concealed vitalism, which is untenable. 
 
 A special cell-force, ^vhich resents injuries and carries on a kind of 
 war with the enemy — a cellular vital force — does not exist We
 
 Cellular pathology of no therapeutic value. 393 
 
 cannot recognize the autonomy of the cells as a morbid principle 
 
 Metaplasia of the cells, as described by Virchow, does not occur 
 
 Cellular pathology has not inquired why this or that element should 
 get beyond bounds. 
 
 The most important task of medicine is not fulfilled by the cellular 
 pathology ; the latter neglects everythmg antecedent to cellular 
 changes, and has not succeeded in giving us a knowledge of those 
 morbid processes in which cell-changes do not occur or come on at a 
 later period. 
 
 For this reason cellular pathology can develop no rational — i.e. 
 scientific — therapeutics based on a knowledge of the course of the 
 morbid processes Amicus Plato, major amica Veritas ! 
 
 We here see an allopath and an admirer of Virchow 
 convinced that his doctrine has been of no service to 
 rational therapeutics, a fact of great significance when we 
 recall the great expectations founded upon it, and the sub- 
 lime contempt expressed by thorough-going partisans of 
 Virchow for all who differed from them. 
 
 Physical investigations are of the greatest importance to 
 surgery. We observe daily with satisfaction the benefits 
 of the great progress it has made, although the application 
 of the same ideas to the province of internal medicine have 
 had a most detrimental action. 
 
 Hygiene has also made great and most beneficent pro- 
 gress. 
 
 All the more lamentable is the condition of therapeutics. 
 It is evident from what has been said that allopathic treat- 
 ment, which disregards the active forces, must be merely 
 symptomatic and mechanical. E very-day experience con- 
 firms this. 
 
 In his Handbuch der KrankJieiten des chylopoctischeii 
 Apparaies* Leube attributes the beneficial action of Karls- 
 bad, Marienbad and Tarasp to their supposed property of 
 accelerating the evacuation of the injurious contents of the 
 alimentary canal, and deduces therefrom that enough water 
 must be introduced into the diseased bowels to produce 
 many watery stools. 
 
 We imagine ourselves transplanted to the last century 
 after we read such stuff. Here are the same crude and 
 coarse ideas respecting the process of cure as were enter- 
 
 * I. 2nd Edit., p. 77, Leipzic, 1878.
 
 394 Saivation in the stoniacJi-pinnp. 
 
 tained by the old defunct physicians with their stases, 
 obstructions and impure humours. Even on theoretical 
 grounds, every physician must see that if this were the case 
 every purgative would have as good an effect, even if the 
 most superficial observation did not suffice to show him 
 that these mineral waters have a beneficial effect even in 
 doses too small to purge, and that constipation during a 
 course of the waters does not interfere with the cure, and 
 that if the waters are taken in moderation better results 
 are obtained than if the large quantities necessary to 
 establish diarrhoea are taken, and the organism is by this 
 means overloaded and weakened. 
 
 The same chimney-sweep ideas are held in connexion 
 with the stomach-pump. This instrument, which is cer- 
 tainly useful in very rare cases, is abused to an extent 
 which shows how dissatisfied the allopaths are with the 
 results hitherto obtained by them in affections of the 
 stomach. Limited at first to dilatation of the stomach and 
 gastric ulcers, it soon became employed in all chronic dis- 
 eases of the stomach. Zeal was carried to such a pitch 
 that a certain physician complained loudly because his 
 name was not mentioned in connexion with the stomach- 
 pump, though he was one of the first to advocate its use 
 in all cases of catarrh of the stomach. Leube boldly as- 
 serted* that : " The immense progress made by clinical 
 medicine in this century is shown in this " — the use of the 
 stomach-pump. 
 
 This commendation had hardly been uttered, when voices 
 were gradually raised to expose the error into which medi- 
 cal men had so generally fallen, and by one after another 
 this proof of "the immense progress" of allopathy was con- 
 signed to the lumber-room of exploded doctrines. 
 
 If the theory of the action of the stomach-pump were 
 correct, every cold in the head should be rapidly cured by 
 blowing the nose frequently and physiolog}- would be 
 naught. 
 
 We can excuse the mistakes of individuals, but when 
 
 * Die Magejisonde, Eriangen, 1S79, p. Si.
 
 Narcotics and anti-pyretics. 395 
 
 wc find the whole profession holding a view quite opposed 
 to physiology like this, we cannot but believe that their 
 entire therapeutic principles have no foundation on physi- 
 ology. 
 
 The same is the case with regard to the pneumatic appa- 
 ratus, without which no " scientific " consulting-room was 
 complete. At the present time it only plays a subordinate 
 role and is only used by a few physicians. 
 
 The treatment of pain and sleeplessness, which are so 
 frequently combined, by morphia or chloral hydrate, shows 
 how one-sided and symptomatic is the allopathic method of 
 treatment. 
 
 In the majority of febrile affections the therapeutic eye 
 is fixed exclusively on one manifestation of the process, 
 on one partial phenomenon of the disease, that is on the 
 fever. For some years past quinine is the great remedy 
 for all the various morbid processes combined with fever ; 
 it is the great febrifuge. 
 
 For a period salicylic acid ran it hard ; latterly, however, 
 it has been more and more confined to the treatment of 
 rheumatism, but even with regard to this disease, in spite 
 of the tens of thousands of observers, they are not yet, after 
 so many years, in a position to indicate precisely the cases 
 for which it is suitable. It cannot be doubted that sali- 
 cylic acid is a great gain to allopathic therapeutics in the 
 treatment of this disease, though the allopaths, by their 
 immoderate doses, seem to render doubtful the utility 
 of this remedy. 
 
 Before quinine, digitalis had been brought into fashion as 
 the febrifuge par excellence, by Traube and Wunderlich. 
 Quinine, also, is again dethroned, and new usurpers are 
 making their appearance which will obtain the empire 
 over all the fevers. A professor of Erlangen has brought 
 on the tapis as the newest, and therefore of course the best 
 febrifuge, oxychinolinmethylhydrure. This drug, which 
 for the sake of brevity he calls kairin, " is able to bring 
 down the temperature to the normal without any evil re- 
 sults,"* Therefore this wonderful remedy must be able to 
 
 * Berlin, klin. Wochenschrift^ 1882, p. 681.
 
 396 Give several vicdicines at once, 
 
 cure the most various pathological processes depending 
 upon the most various morbific causes. 
 
 As long as the universities are wedded to the delusion 
 that one remedy directed to one manifestation can arrest 
 the morbid action, no valuable achievements are to be 
 expected from them. 
 
 Daily experience gives sufficient proof of the super- 
 ficial and one-sided symptomatic treatment of university 
 medicine. 
 
 Another fault that still adheres to ordinary practice, is 
 that of mixing various drugs. Virchovv, who has never, 
 like so many of his colleagues, despaired of therapeutics, 
 gives the allopaths the sensible advice with regard to the 
 action of drugs, only to trouble themselves about the 
 " what " and not the " how." Hence he appeals to ex- 
 perience, but he might very well have added the warning 
 of old Professor von Wedekind, given in 1828.* 
 
 Physicians may, while continuing their practice of administering 
 mixtures, attain in course of time to grey, even, God willing, to white 
 hair, but they will never gain any experience. But if the example of 
 the homoeopaths is able to induce us to give less medicine, to change 
 our remedies less frequently, and never to mix them without special 
 reasons, we shall, by careful observation, some day come so far that 
 we shall, without boasting, possess more practical experience than is 
 now unhappily the case ; with what satisfaction shall we then be able 
 to regard the absurdities of the homceopaths. 
 
 The virulence of their attacks show that the satisfaction 
 over the " absurdities " of the homoeopaths is not great, but 
 all the greater is the mania for mixtures, as the allopa- 
 thic prescriptions daily show. This is shown not less by 
 the works on prescription-writing, especially that of Wal- 
 denburg and Simon, in which, according to the assurances 
 of the preface, the " best prescriptions" are given ; and, in 
 fact, they are almost all long and what the chemists call 
 " beautiful " prescriptions, prettily arranged for the use of 
 medical practitioners. How much these prescriptions are 
 used, is shown by the number of editions through which 
 the book has run; a new one appeared in 18S3, edited 
 
 * Hufel. Jown., Vol. LXVL, St. 6, p. 4.
 
 pei'Jiaps one may hit the mark. 397 
 
 by a physician named Ewald and an apothecary named 
 Liidecke.* The prescriptions are just as long and beauti- 
 ful as ever. 
 
 The best " authorities " are devoted to the practice of 
 giving complex mixtures, which, as Hahnemann told them 
 so often nearly a hundred years ago, always goes hand in 
 hand with quackery. Though now-a-days it is considered 
 necessary to brand Hahnemann as a charlatan, this one 
 merit they should allow him and they might imitate the 
 simplicity of his medicines, for without that exact observa- 
 tion is impossible. They are, however, still far removed 
 from this goal. The most illustrious physicians mix four 
 or five drugs together " scientifically," and thus ally them- 
 selves with the quacks ; and these are the teachers of the 
 rising generation of medical men. 
 
 In order to excuse the practice of compounding, they 
 refer to the composite character of plants and mineral wa- 
 ters. These, however, are quite definite, unalterable com- 
 pounds of various substances, and have been proved as 
 a whole, and may thus be regarded as individual medicines. 
 The compounder capriciously mixes various drugs, one for 
 each symptom, and is under the delusion that each in- 
 gredient of the inixture retains its peculiar action and will 
 reach its proper address like the letters in the Post Office, 
 or he imagines that one remedy will " correct " the other. 
 
 The allopaths, at least some of them, give certain drugs, 
 of whose effect they feel certain, simply, as morphia, 
 quinine, salicylic acid (salicylate of soda), and mercury, 
 and thus, as regards some medicines, they already ap- 
 proach the teachings of the great Hahnemann, as they 
 do also in their disuse of blood-letting and the "evacu- 
 ating: method." 
 
 * In the Preface they speak of " Rademacher's long prescriptions,"' 
 which shows that they know nothing about Rademacher's therapeutics, 
 and do not even know the contents of the book they edit. In it Rade- 
 macher's prescriptions are given, and they are among the very shortest 
 it contains. This is another proof of the fri\-olous manner in which 
 allopaths judge of things not belonging to their orthodox system, and 
 of which, on that account, they are quite ignorant.
 
 398 Usual doses much too large, 
 
 It is true that they still change their remedies too often 
 and do not allow them to exhaust their full action, and 
 they also commit the still greater mistake of giving them 
 in immoderate doses, thus complicating the natural with an 
 artificial disease. 
 
 But a true " rational " scientific allopath is never at a 
 loss; thus the Aer::tlicJies Intelligenzblatt recommends in tlic 
 dangerous injuries to the hearing produced by salicylic 
 acid — not, indeed, a diminution of the dose and to pay par- 
 ticular attention to the peculiarities of individual cases, in 
 order to ascertain where it is suitable — but the adminis- 
 tration of secale cornutum in order to diminish the hyper- 
 aemia and paralysis of the vaso-motor nerves ; it, however, 
 adds that the addition of this drug often produces nausea, 
 retching,* and even vomiting. Another widely-read paper, 
 the Deutsche Medi::inalzeititng,^ considers this discovery of 
 such importance that it gives it to its circle of readers with 
 an approving introduction. 
 
 In order to carry out the requirements of " science," 
 morphia should be added to counteract the retching and 
 vomiting of the secale, and it would certainly also be 
 " rational " to counteract the " collateral effects " of this 
 dearly beloved morphia, by giving its antidote atropia by 
 way of a corrigens. 
 
 In such a state of " science," it will not be superfluous to 
 glance at some of the " collateral effects " of the allopathic 
 remedies. 
 
 Quinine, in medicinal doses, produced gastralgia, pa- 
 ralysis, epileptic fits, deafness, amaurosis, and in twelve 
 cases death-t 
 
 A child six years old, suffering from ague, was given two 
 doses of 3 grs. of quinine, one at two and the other at 
 five p.m. An hour after the last dose it became hot and 
 restless and was seized with convulsions, followed by 
 mydriasis and blindness. It died in three hours. 
 
 A man of thirty years of age, suffering from ague, but 
 
 * No. 3, 1S83. t Deutsche Medizinalzeitung, 1S83, p. 511. 
 
 X "ScA-wnidisJahrbiichcr. Vol. LXVL, p. t6S.
 
 they sovictinies kill the patient. 399 
 
 otherwise healthy, took in the space of twenty and a half 
 hours, 52 grains of quinine. An hour and a half after the 
 last dose, he was seized with restlessness, trembling, ir- 
 regular and shallow breathing, mydriasis, blindness and 
 convulsions. Guersent quotes similar observations by 
 Trousseau and Giacometti in the Diet, de Med., vol. 26, 
 art. Qjtinquina. 
 
 When quinine was given to dogs the following symp- 
 toms were produced : restlessness, vomiting, diarrhoea, 
 convulsive movements in the muscles, staggering gait, 
 paralysis of the limbs, vascular excitement, accelerated 
 pulse, difficult breathing, immovable and dilated pupils, 
 loss of sight, convulsions, coma, twitchings, dyspnoea and 
 death. 
 
 The necroscopies showed " accumulation of blood in 
 the lungs resembling red hepatisation ; " " congestion of 
 the vessels of the brain and its membranes, also, occasion- 
 ally, of the liver and kidneys;" "patches of congestion in 
 the stomach and intestines;" "the spinal cord more or less 
 congested." 
 
 " The poisonous effects of quinine on dogs agree with 
 those produced by it on man." 
 
 Dr. Bazire dosed himself to death with quinine, and his 
 wife was rendered deaf and blind for a considerable time 
 by taking "^y^ drachms within a short time. Kriquet saw 
 death result, on two occasions, from much smaller doses, 
 and Recamier from 2 ounces taken in 4-grain doses. The 
 author thinks that doses of ^ to i drachm would be fatal 
 nine times (?) out of ten.* 
 
 After 3// drachm of hydrocyanate of quinine, the following 
 effects were observed : " great heat of the whole body, red- 
 ness and swelling of the face, hard and full pulse, twitchings, 
 redness of the conjunctivae, widely-dilated pupils, salivation, 
 stammering, convulsions of the upper extremities, embar- 
 rassed respiration, anxiety, profuse sweating on the chest, 
 incontinence of urine and emission of semen in a strong 
 man, aged 27," who could with difficulty be saved. 
 
 ■^ Schm\(}i\:s Ja/irdiichcr, Vol. LXIIL, p. 16.
 
 400 Quinine not absolutely Juxruiless. 
 
 After y^ drachm of sulphate of quinine amaurosis came 
 on, and after 3/^ drachm violent hsemorrhage from the 
 rectum.* 
 
 A woman, aged 33, experienced violent cerebral symp- 
 toms, with convulsive movements, from i^ grain of 
 quinine, and a repetition of the dose brought on the same 
 symptoms. Three other similar cases are mentioned.! 
 
 After medicinal doses of 6 grains to i drachm common 
 effects produced were : Heaviness and sense of fulness, 
 confusion of head, difficulty of hearing, deafness, delusions 
 of vision, vertigo, occasional delirium, in rare cases menin- 
 gitis and convulsions, still more rarely general collapse.! 
 
 On giving it to three healthy colleagues, i to li hours 
 after doses of 9 to 12 grains of quinine, there resulted: 
 redness of the face and ears (especially the lobes), sense of 
 fulness and ringing in the ears, as also great injection of 
 the vessels of the malleus — signs, probably, of congestion 
 of the lab}Tinth.§ 
 
 By experiments on animals, the fact has been established 
 that quinine produces great hyperaemia and ecchymoses of 
 the mucous membrane lining the internal ear, exudations 
 and destructive processes in the labyrinth, great injection 
 of the meningeal vessels and ecchymoses in the brain. 
 
 We not unfrcquently meet people com.plaining of deaf- 
 ness after the administration of quinine. An allopath con- 
 firms this in the Berliner klinische WoeJienscJirift (i88r, p. 
 726), where he declares " that he has interrogated people 
 worthy of credit, who asserted that they had become deaf 
 in consequence of the administration of large doses of 
 quinine." The symptoms of quinine-deafness are there 
 described in detail, and bleeding, mercurial ointment, and 
 tincture of iodine are recommended as remedies. 
 
 In consequence of an observation of Hardy, that sudden 
 death has followed the administration of quinine in large 
 doses in typhus, Labordcli undertook physiological experi- 
 
 '•^ Schmidt^s Jnhrb. Vol. XVI 1 1., p, 292. J Ibid, LXXXL, p. 1 57. 
 t Ibid, Vol. LXXVIL, p. 308. § Ibid, \o\. CLXXIV., p, 294 
 
 l| Ibid, Vol. CXCIX.,p. 122.
 
 Pathogenetic effects of quinine. 401 
 
 ments by giving large doses of quinine to rabbits and dogs. 
 Soon after the injection the force of the contractions of the 
 heart increased, and this was followed by weakening of the 
 heart's action ; on renewing the dose the heart's action was 
 again increased ; finally, its force was greatly diminished 
 and trembling movements of it supervened. 
 
 " This effect of quinine on the heart, in predisposing 
 morbid states, explains the cases of sudden death in typhus 
 and allied fevers through syncope or paralysis of the heart 
 and respiration."* 
 
 Besides quinine, salicylic acid has become a fashionable 
 allopathic remedy, and we see it prescribed in doses of 3 or 
 even 5 drachms (salicylate of soda). Prof. X.-f- who tried 
 0.05 to O.io gramme doses of salicylic acid several times a 
 day in the diarrhoea of children states : " In most cases in 
 which it was given, sooner or later severe inflammation of 
 the kidneys set in, not seldom accompanied with uraemia 
 and ending fatally. More or less serious collapse was also 
 a common result of its administration." 
 
 He further speaks of the injurious effects of salicylic acid 
 in febrile affections, and the following case is narrated : 
 Febrile symptoms made their appearance in a child of five 
 months, the " probable cause of which was inflammation of 
 vaccine vesicles, three of which existed on each arm and 
 which had suppurated." To bring down the fever salicylic 
 acid was prescribed, 15 grains in three doses, to be taken 
 at short intervals ; the child resisted so lustily that only 
 8 or 10 grains could be given. It immediately became 
 restless, cried loudly, tossed about, &c. 
 
 * Physiological experiments by Dumdril, Demarquay and Lecointe, 
 with doses of 1 5 to 30 grains of quinine, caused, first, a decrease of 
 the temperature by some tenths of a degree, and then a rise of 1.3 to 
 2.2" (Schmidt's Jahrb., Vol. LXXI., p. 288). In two dogs {Ibid, Vol. 
 LXXVL, p. 21), after the introduction of 15 to 30 grains of quinine the 
 temperature rose from 1.5 to 2°. In the same periodical (Vol. LXXVI I., 
 p. 358) there is a report of the "quinine fever," in the manufactory of 
 Zimmer in Frankfurt o. M. In one case there occurred a tertian 
 ague, p. 359 : " according to Zimmer the fever comes on with extreme 
 heat or with icy coldness of the whole body, very like an ague." 
 
 t Schmidt's >/^/-&., Vol. CLXXIII., p. 161. 
 26
 
 402 Toxic effects of salicylic acid. 
 
 As a consequence of the medicine, the mucous mem- 
 brane of the mouth and fauces was eroded as if from the 
 action of lunar caustic ; the child was unable to swallow, 
 and any touch on the mouth, the cheeks and the pharynx 
 appeared to be painful. The child's breathing became 
 much distressed, and it died of the effects of the salicylic 
 acid, as was shown by the cadaveric section (Ibid). 
 
 Vertigo, ringing in the ears, even deafness and dyspnoea 
 are mentioned in allopathic works as results of the admin- 
 istration of salicylic acid. 
 
 Bride,* e.g., observed complete deafness after salicylic 
 acid; he found the semi-circular canals of this deafened 
 person completely filled with masses of connective tissue of 
 various thickness. 
 
 In the Berliner Jdinische WocJieiischrift, 1883, p. 241, 
 it is stated that a lady, after the second dose of one 
 drachm of salicylate of soda, was seized with alarming 
 dyspnoea. Nevertheless the dose was repeated, and violent 
 dyspnoea returned to such a degree that the on-lookers 
 expected her death momentarily ; other symptoms were : 
 giddiness, noise in the ears, systolic heart murmur, weak- 
 ness of the heart, intermittent pulse and dimness of vision. 
 
 Prof. Y.f gave a girl of seventeen, who was suffering 
 from rheumatism, at first 2^, then 3 drachms of salicy- 
 late of soda daily. Death ensued on the fourth day. 
 According to the report of the post-mortem examination, 
 the Professor himself said : " There can be no doubt that the 
 fatal issue must be attributed to the salicylate of soda." 
 He, at the same time, adduces a number of cases from 
 medical literature, in which toxical effects were caused by 
 medicinal doses of salicylic acid. 
 
 A third drug which has long been fashionable with the 
 allopaths is chloral hydrate. The allopaths thus describe 
 its " collateral effects." 
 
 That large doses of chloral hydrate may cause serious poisonous 
 symptoms and even death is shown by a great number of observations 
 
 * Deutsche Medizinalzeitung, 1883, p. 511. 
 t Berliner Idin. Wochenschrift., 1882, p. 709.
 
 Fatal results from chloral hydrate. 403 
 
 made on patients .... It can be confidently asserted that several 
 people have been poisoned by it in doses within the limits of approved 
 medicinal doses.* 
 
 This remark is made by Husemann, who gives the 
 hypnotic dose of choral hydrate as 7 to 30 grains (see his 
 A rzneiinittellehre, 1875). 
 
 Another authorf says : 
 
 We can, unfortunately, adduce a number of cases which show that 
 even chloral hydrate has dangerous and undesirable collateral effects. 
 It cannot be maintained that in all these cases impure chloral hydrate 
 was given. 
 
 A minute account of the cases of poisoning follows. 
 
 Further on the following statement is made :;]: " Numerous 
 other examples of the poisonous effects of chloral hydrate 
 might be quoted." A number of cases is given where the 
 patients were brought to the brink of the grave by the ordin- 
 ary doses of this substance, and only with difficulty saved. 
 
 We also find the report of seven fatal cases following 
 the administration of chloral hydrate to patients who were 
 not suffering from mortal diseases. Death resulted in the 
 case of a woman whom it was intended to slightly nar- 
 cotise by it for the extraction of a tooth ; she was given 
 55 grains, and died very soon afterwards. The same hap- 
 pened in the case of a vine-grower of forty-three years of 
 age, " almost instantaneously," and a notary, aged forty- 
 eight years, died in a quarter of an hour after a dose of i ^4^ 
 drachm; a woman expired after taking i^ drachm in the 
 space of three hours. 
 
 " A young lady, twenty years of age, enjoying good 
 health in other respects," was given 25 grains of chloral 
 hydrate for dysmenorrhoea. At ten o'clock at night she 
 took this dose, and, after a period of excitement, fell asleep 
 to awake in eternity. In spite of every assistance she was 
 a corpse next morning (Ibid). 
 
 A young man and another patient are mentioned who 
 suffered the same fate (Ibid). 
 
 * Schmidt's Jahrb., Vol. CLI., p. 97. 
 t Ibid, Wo\. CLI 1 1., p. 140. 
 X Ibid, Vol. CLV., p. 146.
 
 404 Allopathic remedies sovietimcs 
 
 A number of striking cases will be found in the Bayr. 
 drztl. Intdligenz-Blatt, 1872. Bd. 19. 
 
 In the Congress of Physical Investigation at Freiburg, in 
 1S83, the fact was acknowledged that " literature contains 
 the accounts of many cases in which large doses of chloral 
 caused speedy death directly by paralysis of the heart and 
 blood vessels : the patients fell into a faint, with lowering 
 of the temperature, and could not again be roused." The 
 same speaker also enumerated the symptoms of chronic 
 chloral poisoning : derangements of digestion, skin affec- 
 tions, flushings of the face and head after small quantities 
 of stimulants, great congestion of the conjunctiva and 
 fundus of the eyes, excited action of the heart, impairment 
 of nutrition, severe pains in the limbs and slight psycho- 
 pathic disturbances. He concluded by describing an attack 
 of fully developed mania in a patient who had been taking 
 morphia and chloral for asthma. 
 
 If these facts do not suffice to enable us to judge of 
 the value of allopathic remedies, plenty of further materials 
 of a similar kind will be found in other volumes of this 
 same periodical. 
 
 We could also cite numerous examples to show that 
 morphia, chlorate of potash, digitalis, iodine, mercury, &c. 
 in the hands of the allopaths have proved destructive to 
 health and life. What immense quantities of that per- 
 nicious drug, mercury, are taken into their bodies by our 
 unfortunate fellow-creatures! Its ravages are often more 
 dreadful than those of the disease. Accidental and arti- 
 ficial cases of mercurial poisoning have shown that inflam- 
 mations and ulcerations of the mucous membrane, extensive 
 cutaneous ulcerations, caries of the teeth, diseases of the 
 bones going on to ulceration, inflammatory and destructive 
 processes in the lungs, haemoptysis, &c., are brought on by 
 it. The carelessness of the allopaths induces them to give 
 this injurious metal in incredible quantities. To rub in 2^^ 
 ounces of mercurial ointment within ten to fourteen days 
 is quite a common event. 
 
 The circumstance that the same poison does not act with 
 the same virulence on all people, and may be taken by some
 
 the reverse of femedial. 405 
 
 without immediate injurious results, causes the allopaths 
 to forget with what dangerous poisons they are working, 
 though the great observer, Hahnemann, has shown that 
 such perilous doses are unnecessary. 
 
 Schmidt's JaJirbiicher^ gives complete information con- 
 cerning the collateral effects of the much-used chlorate of 
 potash. This drug may produce cerebral inflammations, 
 gastro-enteritis, inflammation of the kidneys and death, as 
 was shown twenty years ago, and as has been fully confirmed 
 by post-mortems in recent years. A great many cases arc 
 quoted in which, to be sure, death was generally owing to 
 having taken more than the prescribed doses of this drug, 
 but the liberal manner in which it is prescribed by the allo- 
 paths was the chief cause of the catastrophe. At all events, 
 we have here again a proof of the injurious effects of the 
 allopathic doses furnished by the allopaths themselves. 
 
 In the same way examples could be easily given of 
 atrophy and albuminuria caused by allopathic doses of 
 iodine, and also of the injuriousness of digitalis and many 
 other drugs habitually prescribed by allopaths. Instead of 
 diminishing, allopathic doses seem to be increasing coinci- 
 dently with their crude and symptomatic conceptions. In 
 1855 it was possible for Virchow to say in his Handbook of 
 Special Pathology and Therapetitics^ that " chronic poison- 
 ings by means of morphia, or substances containing it, 
 fortunately occur so seldom in Germany that they pos- 
 sess little clinical interest." Now, however, special works 
 are written on Morphia Poisoning, The Treatment of 
 MorpJiia-Patients, and prospectuses distributed of " Insti- 
 tutions for the treatment of patients suffering from morphia 
 and nervous complaints," as if the morphia disease were 
 a natural morbid process. All cases of morphia disease 
 may be referred to an allopathic initiative. 
 
 We must not forget that these substances, which exert 
 such an energetic action on the body, are given to patients 
 whose systems are already weakened by disease, that the 
 
 * Vol. CLXXXVIL, p. 14, and CLXXXVIII., p. 12. 
 t Vol. II., p. I, p. 291,
 
 4o6 Dangerous doses often prescribed. 
 
 sick organism is thus additionally burdened with a medi- 
 cinal disease, and the task imposed on it of overcoming the 
 medicinal in addition to the natural disease. 
 
 In the Allgemeine ArzneiverordmmgsleJire^ we read that 
 " Liebermeister in high fever gives pills containing 0.005 
 gramme veratrin, one every hour, till nausea or vomiting is 
 produced, for which four to six pills usually suffice." 
 
 Such prescriptions remind us of the " science " of the 
 last century. And this is the treatment pursued by a pro- 
 fessor who imparts to so many young physicians their 
 therapeutic principles. Older physicians copy these pre- 
 scriptions, and are thus able to adduce the best authority 
 for their treatment should it turn out disastrously. 
 
 In Nothnagel and Rossbach's Handbuch der Ar::nei- 
 mittelleJire we read : t " Children have died from the effects 
 of 0.00 1 gramme of morphia" — the quantity calculated to 
 be contained in the opium administered to them. We are 
 therefore advised not to administer opium to very young 
 children. A given dose of opium, however, is said in the 
 same work to have an action equivalent to two-thirds of 
 its weight of morphia. 
 
 Professor Seitz recommends, in Niemeyer's TherapieX 
 for catarrh of the stomach and diarrhoea in infants, 2 to 5 
 drops of tincture of opium in 8 ounces of decoction of salep, 
 a teaspoonful every two hours. Niemeyer's book is in the 
 hand of every practitioner, and all young physicians go to 
 it for their therapeutic wisdom. A book so widely read re- 
 commends opium in a dangerous dose ! 
 
 Physiology teaches us that the amount of stimulation is 
 by no means proportional to the intensity of the stimulus. 
 A stimulus liberates a number of forces whose magnitude 
 cannot be estimated by the commercial weight of the agent 
 administered. 
 
 Besides the mischief which allopaths do by the size of 
 their doses, their treatment is also inconsistent with the 
 teachings of physiology. Their therapeutic rule, " much 
 
 * By Ewald and Liidecke, Berlin, 18S3, p. 687. 
 
 t Berlin, 1S78, p. 611. 
 
 X Tenth Edition, 1S79, P- 54--
 
 Allopathic treatment of pneiuiionia. 407 
 
 helps much," which is specially illustrated by their endea- 
 vour to cure disease by killing the bacteria supposed to 
 cause it, is entirely unphysiological. 
 
 If we examine in detail allopathic therapeutics, we shall 
 find full confirmation of these assertions. Let us glance at 
 their treatment of pneumonia, not because we think it 
 specially suitable for deciding on the value of a method of 
 treatment, on the contrary, we consider it utterly unsuitable 
 for this object, but because the allopaths are fond of ap- 
 pealing to this disease to demonstrate the excellence of 
 their system. 
 
 Liebermeister and Jiirgensen are the great coryphc-ei of 
 the par excellence " rational " treatment, and as such 
 they received the thanks of the Congress at Wiesbaden. 
 Moreover, Jiirgensen spoke of the recent great advances in 
 allopathic therapeutics, and of the great benefit which 
 would be reaped by our descendants. We are therefore 
 interested to know how he treats pneumonia. He lays 
 down his principles in Volkmann's Sanunhing klinischer 
 Vortrdge, 1872, No. 45. 
 
 According to him, the physician must keep his eye on 
 the heart and on the fever. " Pneumonia patients die from 
 failure of the heart," p. 326. The cause of the weakness of 
 the heart is the exudation. We would therefore suppose 
 that the process going on in the lungs must be attacked, 
 but no ! Jiirgensen says we must attack the cardiac weak- 
 ness and the fever, that is to say, the consequences of the 
 disease. For this purpose he advises cold baths and 
 quinine: "When the fever is high i% drachm of quinine 
 may be given to an adult, or 15 grains to a child, under 
 a year old — always in a single dose." 
 
 Jiirgensen is "strongly of opinion that these are very far 
 from being the extreme limits for quinine. I know that 
 such large doses will appear dangerous to many ; my in- 
 structress is experience. Only fools fight against facts.
 
 408 Only fools fight against facts, 
 
 Those whose object it is to restore the sick to health must 
 not treat them according to traditions, but when they are 
 once certain in their own minds what is best to be done 
 they will not hesitate to do it." We detect in this the 
 didatic tone of the professor. With enviable coolness he 
 •calls his experience " facts," and stigmatises as " fools " 
 those who do not agree with him. 
 
 " Not unfrcquently" vomiting follows the administration 
 of quinine. If it comes on soon, the dose must be re- 
 peated, and " when there is periculum in mora we should 
 not hesitate, but should rather give too much than too 
 little." Moreover, the patient, after taking the quinine, 
 should keep the mouth open " in order to get rid of 
 the excessive secretion of saliva," and thereby " perhaps 
 • obviate" the vomiting. 
 
 " Tartar emetic and veratrin lower the temperature at the 
 expense of the heart, both induce collapse." 
 
 In Niemeyer's Therapic* veratrin is strongly recom- 
 mended. " We must, however, bear in mind," says Pro- 
 fessor Seitz, " that the desired effect can only be attained 
 by the administration of doses large enough to produce of 
 slight toxic effects — -vomiting, diarrhcea, great prostration." 
 Veratrin is nevertheless recommended, for diarrhoea; vomit- 
 ing and great prostration are only " slight " phenomena 
 to the scientific physician. We are therefore actually re- 
 commended to induce these " slight " toxic effects, other- 
 wise " the desired effect will not be attained." 
 
 Seitz maintains (/.<;.) that digitalis should be " exten- 
 sively employed " in pneumonia, and Jurgensen states that 
 *' Every one who has had much experience with digitalis, 
 and has given it in effective doses, must have observed 
 that the collapse following its administration has coincided 
 with the defervescence," p. 336. 
 Prof. Husemannf writes : 
 
 While some decades ago hardly a case of pneumonia was conducted 
 to a favourable or a fatal issue without the administration of digitalis 
 
 * Edited by Prof. Seitz, 1874, I., p. 197. 
 t Arz7ieimettellehrc, 1S75, ^'-j P- 9-°-
 
 biU what ai'e facts ? 409 
 
 with or without nitre and tartar emetic, the use of preparations of 
 digitalis is now becoming much less frequent. 
 
 This drug- is now greatly superseded by quinine. Jiir- 
 gensen prefers quinine " because it does not affect the 
 heart injuriously." Only fools fight against facts, never- 
 theless we venture to quote the opinions of other men, 
 with whom Jiirgensen may fight it out. Schmidt's JaJir- 
 biichcr^ quotes a number of experiments on dogs, showing 
 that quinine, in doses of ^O grains, has a depressing effect 
 on the heart's action, and, in the same work we read :-f- 
 " Its poisonous effects on dogs agree with those on human 
 beings." On page 401 further observations on the action 
 of quinine are detailed, according to which much smaller 
 doses than those given by Jurgensen produced highly in- 
 jurious effects, and here young and old physicians are 
 advised to give such large doses in such a dangerous 
 disease. 
 
 If there is sleeplessness in a case of pneumonia, morphia 
 and chloral hydrate are the panaceas. Jurgensen gives 
 chloral hydrate in doses of i ^ to 2 drachms. 
 
 We have just seen that l ^ drachm of chloral hydrate, 
 and indeed even i scruple has caused death in diseases 
 not of a serious character. Jurgensen recommends doses 
 up to 2 drachms. With what ideas are the young phy- 
 sicians of to-day turned loose upon suffering humanity 
 by such professors ! 
 
 Jurgensen writes on page 340, with regard to the diet of 
 pneumonic patients : " In every severe case, I insist upon 
 the patient taking strong beef tea once or twice a day in 
 table-spoonfuls, with one to two eggs. Also a quantity of 
 milk, which is to be determined separately for each case, 
 according to circumstances." Besides this, alcoholic drinks 
 play a prominent part. In certain cases this may be ad- 
 visable. Dogmatism is, however, here out of place, the 
 patient should not be imperatively required to eat under 
 all circumstances. If this is done the physician will dis- 
 
 * Vol. LXXXI., p. 155 and 156. 
 t Vol. LXIIL, p. 16.
 
 410 SananUir in libris, 
 
 order the patient's stomach and aggravate his malady. 
 Milk is a two-edged sword. In many healthy people it 
 causes catarrh of the stomach ; nevertheless, it is theoreti- 
 cally easily digested, and it is frequently prescribed with- 
 out sufficient caution. 
 
 Before recommending milk the physician should always 
 inquire whether the patient could take it when he was 
 well, and prescribe it or not accordingly. But this is 
 playing too humble a part ; we issue our commands and 
 they must be obeyed. 
 
 To combat the cardiac weakness : Port wine, madeira, 
 sherry, champagne, hot grog made with brandy, rum, or 
 whisky, strong coffee or tea, camphor and musk — here we 
 have Brown over again, though the words sthenia and 
 asthenia are not used. On pages 345 and 346 Jurgensen 
 holds forth on the subject of venesection. We are only 
 interested in noting that it is again found to be indicated 
 at the present day. 
 
 If dyspepsia occurs during convalescence, cinchona and 
 iron are prescribed : " We begin with one pill, and increase 
 the number proportionately to the degree of dyspepsia 
 present," p. 349. This is beyond all doubt " scientific." 
 The more intense the disease the more ferocious the 
 attack, the weaker the stomach the stronger the dose. 
 Much helps much! 
 
 " If absorption is slow, I cannot sufficiently urgently 
 recommend oleum terebinth, to your notice," twelve drops 
 six times a day! 
 
 This is the only remedy alluded to for this state, and 
 Jilrgensen cannot sufficiently urgently recommend it. We 
 cannot believe that this professor has ever tried the effect 
 of twelve drops of this drug six times a day on his own 
 healthy body, otherwise he would certainly not prescribe 
 it for debilitated patients in such doses. 
 
 How far in advance of these physicians was Hahnemann 
 in this respect ! 
 
 Where absorption is slow, the stomach is usually in such 
 a condition that it will not tolerate the twelve drops of 
 turpentine six times a day. " But in that case we can
 
 morumtiir in led is. 411 
 
 give quinine and iron," an allopath would rejoin. This is 
 true enough, therefore " rational " medicine from prudential 
 motives must add to the oil of turpentine iron and quinine. 
 Nephritis is not an infrequent complication of pneumonia, 
 but Jiirgensen does not mention it ; it is well-known that 
 oil of turpentine causes symptoms of irritation of the 
 kidneys. Jiirgensen should not have omitted to mention 
 this circumstance to his pupils when he recommended oil 
 of turpentine. 
 
 At the commencement of his essay, Jiirgensen says 
 that the patient and not the disease must be treated, and 
 wherein does this individualisation consist? The degree 
 of intensity of the disease must be observed and a stronger 
 or weaker dose given accordingly. 
 
 The proof of the propriety of this therapeia is afforded 
 by statistics which show a mortality of 12 per cent. Later 
 accounts* give a mortality of 12.7 per cent. The statistics 
 given by Professor Hasper of the treatment of cholera by 
 venesection are, however, still more favourable, viz. : out of 
 100 treated for cholera by bleeding, one died ! Jiirgensen 
 appeals to his hearers. This was also done by the advocate 
 of bleeding, Professor Bischoff.t The latter treated 197 
 " inflammations of the lungs," only ten of whom died, i.e., 
 5 per cent, of these ten, four had phthisis, and three died 
 " in consequence of errors in diet." " In 26, moderate 
 antiphlogistic measures, either alone or combined with 
 leeching, sufficed ; in all the others (not excepting the peri- 
 pneumonia notha of Sydenham), venesection, regulated in 
 amount by the degree of violence of the inflammation, was 
 practised, and, indeed, in some cases repeated three to six 
 times, and leeches were often applied in addition." " All 
 his hearers were witnesses of these results." 
 
 A remarkable event happened to this same Professor 
 Bischoff afterwards in Vienna, which had an entirely " un- 
 scientific" issue. In the first comparative trial of homoeo- 
 pathy, three cases of pneumonia were taken. One was left to 
 
 * Jiirgensen, Croupose Pneumonie. Tubingen, 1883, p. 257. 
 
 t Ansichien iiber das bisher. Heilverfahren. Prague, 1S19, p. 129.
 
 412 Comparative trial of hoinceopathy. 
 
 nature, the second was treated "scientifically," and the third, 
 homceopathically. The last became convalescent in five or 
 six days ; the scientific patient was confined to bed for many 
 weeks, and nature was very slow in restoring the third. 
 This was the result of chance, says Simon,* and he adds : 
 
 I say, si fabula vera, for I can hardly believe that a comparative 
 therapeutics can be made in such a futile manner. How can three 
 cases treated in different ways decide anything? Many thousands of 
 cases treated during many years would be required, and also exact 
 observations under the most various conditions and in the most 
 diverse individuals. 
 
 Who will not admit the truth of this ? We must, how- 
 ever, ask where have these thousands of observations — 
 required in order to judge of homoeopathy, which are 
 necessary according to the allopaths themselves, in order 
 to decide the question — been carried out ? 
 
 If Jiirgensen were as imprudent as his late colleague 
 Bischoff, we are very much afraid he might encounter a 
 similar mischance. 
 
 Jiu'gensen says on p. 333 : — 
 
 My experience justifies me in asserting that in pneumonia the direct 
 abstraction of heat is permissible. I am fortunate enough to be able 
 to adduce the important testimony of Liebermeister, whose mortality 
 with purely anti-pyretic treatment was reduced from 24.4 per cent, to 
 S.8 per cent. 
 
 We should like to know how these 24 per cent, who died 
 were treated. Major's dissertation,! quoted by Jiirgensen, 
 unhappily gives no information on this point. It states, 
 pp. 3 to 5, that from 1839 to 1867, in the Basel Hospital, 
 24.4 per cent, of " true acute pneumonias " died. The pro- 
 portion remained the same during each decade ; indeed, 
 between 1863 and 1868, of 200 hundred pneumonia cases 
 54 died. I.e., 27 per cent! 
 
 We saw above, on p. 220, that in the first experiment of 
 Dietl, 20 per cent, died under venesection and tartar emetic, 
 while only 7 per cent, died under dietetic treatment. Later, 
 in 1852, Dietl, who had been violently attacked, published a 
 
 * Antihom. Archiv^ 1834, Vol. II., p. 127. 
 
 t Ueber die Behandling der acutett croiiposcn Pneumonie, Basel, 1S70.
 
 Victims to allopathic science. 413 
 
 further series of experiments.* He treated 750 expectantly; 
 69 died, i.e., 9.2 per cent. In this instance no selection was 
 made, but all cases of pneumonia were counted, even if it 
 were only a complication of some other complaint. 
 
 By these statistics we are forced to the following reflec- 
 tion : among the 24.4 per cent, who died, 15 per cent, were 
 victims to science. 
 
 Further: The results of the " purely anti-pyretic 
 method" are of no value as proofs of its success, and the 
 " weighty authority of Leibermeister " is, after all, only a 
 feather-weight. The only thing affected by it is a diminu- 
 tion of the number of sacrifices to " science." 
 
 ^^gQ 332 : Jilrgensen confesses that the cold bath may 
 be the direct cause of death. The other measures of this 
 clinical instructor are also acknowledged to be dangerous. 
 His own statistics, in the face of the obviously danger- 
 ous character of his treatment, cannot be adduced in his 
 favour ; besides, they are less favourable than those of 
 Dietl. 
 
 For this reason it is not permissible to imitate Jiirgen- 
 sen's dangerous experiments. 
 
 In 18S2 there met in Wiesbaden the ^'Congress for In- 
 ternal Medicine" the object of which is to rescue internal 
 medicine from being absorbed by surgery and the speci- 
 alists, and to protect the idea of the unity of the human 
 organism from the threatened disruption and disintegra- 
 tion. The president, Frerichs, energetically repelled all 
 dictation by pathological anatomy, chemistry and experi- 
 mental pathology, and maintained that everything must 
 be decided by individual judgment and experience. The 
 proceedings of this Congress might well be looked forward 
 to with intense interest, for pretty nearly all the members 
 of the allopathic world who have any claim to be considered 
 authorities took part in it. 
 
 * Schmidt's /<;/«-/'., Vol. LXXVL, p. 30.
 
 414 Individual judgviait and experience , 
 
 We were told all kinds of things we did not want to 
 know, but no mention was made of what it was essential 
 to know, viz., what methods of investigation should in 
 future be adopted ; we were only told that every one 
 must be guided by "his own individual judgment and ex- 
 perience." 
 
 If we examine the reports of the proceedings more 
 closely we shall find them interesting, as giving us a glimpse 
 of some of the modern allopathic ideas and achievements. 
 
 The order of the day on the third occasion of its meeting 
 was " Anti-pyretic methods of treatment." 
 
 That such a theme should be put forward in such a manner 
 shows conclusively the superficial symptomatic and unphy- 
 siological nature of the treatment of the modern allopathic 
 school. Liebermeister, in fact, only speaks of the " fever " 
 which must be combated by cold baths, quinine or salicylic 
 acid. What the morbid process may be upon which the 
 fever depends does not seem to be of the slightest conse- 
 quence. The only thing to be attended to is the degree 
 of the fever. 
 
 Riess says he will not waste words upon " the evi- 
 dence in favour of the usefulness of an anti-pyretic treat- 
 ment of fever," because he is sure that the majority of 
 his audience have long been convinced on this point. 
 Absolutely nothing is said about the cause of the fever ; 
 it is quite a secondary matter what the disease is which 
 produces the fever. 
 
 He proceeds to speak of anti-pyretic treatment in 
 general, " of the danger of the febrile elevation of the tem- 
 perature," not of the character of the morbid process, with 
 which the sentence immediately following is in naive con- 
 tradiction : " It is evident that there is no parallelism 
 between the height of the temperature and the intensity of 
 the disease." In proof of this he gives some instances of 
 relapsing fever and typhus. We confidently expect the 
 only logical deduction from this : therefore not the fever, 
 but the morbid process, must be the point against which 
 our treatment must be directed. But instead and in spite 
 of this, he recommends quite in a general way " internal
 
 the physician's oily sure guide. 415 
 
 anti-pyretics," and especially salicylic acid, together with 
 cold baths. According to Riess, salicylic acid acts better 
 than the quinine recommended by Liebermeister. " The 
 treatment of typhus is the best test of the value of anti- 
 pyretic remedies." In typhus,* where there is inflam- 
 mation and ulceration of the intestinal canal, doses of i^ 
 drachm of salicylic acid are recommended. Let the reader 
 refer to the effects of salicylic acid mentioned above on 
 pages 401-402. He has also employed the salicylic acid 
 treatment in pneumonia and phthisis. Here, again, the 
 anti-febrile method of treatment is spoken of in quite a 
 general manner. In conclusion, Riess says that the para- 
 site theory will not abrogate symptomatic therapeutics, and 
 vv'ill certainly not diminish the importance of " anti-pyretic 
 treatment." 
 
 Jiirgensen is not satisfied with salicylic acid ; it takes 
 away the appetite and produces disagreeable cerebral 
 symptoms. In severe typhus he gives " light Bordeaux 
 wine up to two litres a day." The baths must be given quite 
 cold — the colder the better. " But the public do not take 
 to these cold baths, it is said. Last year I treated the only 
 child of a fellow practitioner in a severe attack of typhus. 
 Father and mother gave the child cold baths, and they 
 both admitted that the cold baths of only four minutes' 
 duration were a real boon to themselves and to the child." 
 He also agrees with Brand, who holds the view that the 
 great abstraction of heat prevents the further develop- 
 ment of the typhus-germ in the body, and Liebermeister 
 thinks the same. We cannot help asking ourselves whether 
 the complex human organism is to be regarded merely as 
 an incubating stove for parasites, without any reactions 
 caused by the character of the disease and the individuality 
 of the patient? Jiirgensen concluded by speaking quite 
 generally of " anti-pyresis," " at the head of which the cold 
 water treatment must always be placed." 
 
 * We may remind our readers that what we call typhoid or enteric 
 fever is usually spoken of in Germany as "abdominal typhus,'' or 
 
 curtly, " typhus."— [Ed.J
 
 41 6 Un enfant terrible. 
 
 Curschmann is also in favour of cold water, but he 
 prefers quinine to salicylic acid. 
 
 Binz discusses the question whether the anti-pyretic 
 treatment can be considered a causal treatment, whether it is 
 able to kill the fever-poison in the organism. He answers 
 it in the affirmative. Salicylic acid diminishes the dura- 
 tion of rheumatic arthritis to as many days as it formerly 
 lasted weeks. (Whether his whole audience believed him 
 is not reported.) This can only be explained by supposing 
 that it destroys the poison of the disease. The same 
 happens in the treatment of syphilis with mercury. Binz 
 spoke afterwards of the earlier views of the Vienna school. 
 " It said : We are not able to cure a disease ; the patient 
 is only an object for observation, and it is at most a 
 triumph for us if we can verify our diagnosis on the dis- 
 secting table." 
 
 Binz enacts here the part of the enfant terrible of the first 
 Congress for Internal Medicine. 
 
 Gerhardt is " fully convinced " that the anti-pyretic treat- 
 ment is the greatest advance made in the whole domain of 
 internal therapeutics. 
 
 At the Congress of Physical Investigators at Freiburg in 
 1883, Licbermeister says emphatically: "The anti-pyretic 
 method has justly been called one of the greatest advances 
 which have been made in therapeutics in recent times," but 
 he speaks of the method itself as "expectant — sympto- 
 matic." This expression will be regarded 50 years hence 
 very much as we now-a-days regard the paeans of praise 
 that used to be sung to the glorification of venesection." 
 
 To return to the Wiesbaden Congress. Seitz observed 
 that it would be interesting to discuss the question how 
 much anti-pyresis was able to effect in different febrile dis- 
 eases. Here at last we meet with a physician who at least 
 thinks individualization necessary, though he, too, speaks 
 of anti-pyresis generally and not of the morbid process. 
 
 Riihle was emphatically of opinion that the anti-pyretic 
 method had spread routine treatment among the " medical 
 public." "This had had an injurious effect on our scientific 
 position which it should be our task to regain."
 
 Indebtedness of medicine to the ivater-c2ircrs. 417 
 
 We willingly subscribe to this opinion ; but by bringing 
 forward and discussing in such a manner themes like 
 " anti-pyretic treatment," routine, not science, is honoured. 
 It is not science. Fifty years ago the peasant Priessnitz 
 possessed science of this description. Neither is it science 
 when Riihle recommends the administration of calomel in 
 typhus in order to " excite the liver, which is used as a 
 depot by the typhus poison, to energetic action, in order 
 that at the same time a portion of the injurious matter may 
 be removed." We seem to be listening to a disciple of 
 Maximilian StoU in the year 1782, not to a professor of 
 internal medicine at a Medical Congress in 1882. 
 
 Liebermeister defends himself from the imputation 
 of routine. " The anti-pyretic method was on the pro- 
 gramme for to-day, and that is why we have discussed it 
 only." This fact, we repeat, is amply sufficient to justify us 
 in designating the allopathic a routine treatment. When 
 Liebermeister adds that this method is not used in the 
 treatment of syphilis, this far-fetched justification is com- 
 pletely against himself He proceeds to say that they (the 
 allopaths) would be happy to treat typhus, scarlet fever, and 
 other diseases with specifics, " but for the present that is, 
 alas ! only a pious wish." The same is the case with regard 
 to the parasitic theory. " We should like very much, only 
 we cannot." There is a very good reason for this, Binz and 
 his quinine and salicylic acid notwithstanding. The allo- 
 paths are searching just where nothing is to be found. 
 
 This characteristic discussion was concluded by re- 
 peated expressions of satisfaction that there was a perfect 
 unanimity on this subject, and that this proved the unity 
 of opinion among them on therapeutic questions. But this 
 unanimity was only with respect to the treatment by cold 
 water. Who was it that introduced the systematic employ- 
 ment of cold water? The laymen Oertel and Priessnitz, 
 more especially the latter, who treated patients in this 
 way many years ago, and was on that account attacked by 
 the allopaths in the manner peculiar to them, with which 
 the reader has already been made sufficiently acquainted. 
 If it had not been for these two la}-men it is very doubtful 
 
 27
 
 41 8 IV hen doctors do agree 
 
 whether there would have been this wonderful unanimity- 
 over which there was so much jubilation. 
 
 We should have therefore expected that this Congress 
 would have paid their debt of honour to these laymen, 
 considering the vile manner in which they had formerly 
 been attacked by the allopaths, and that they would at 
 least have said a few words in grateful remembrance of 
 these men to whom they were indebted for their present 
 unanimity. 
 
 We may remind our readers that this was not the first 
 allopathic medical congress in which uniformity of opinion 
 concerning therapeutic measures prevailed. The same 
 unanimity was repeatedly observed fifty years ago, in just 
 as numerously attended allopathic assembUes, namely, 
 when the employment of bleeding in cholera was held to 
 be scientific and necessary (see above, p. 246). 
 
 The means of judging of the value of a therapeutic 
 method will be supplied by the answer to this question : 
 What is the termination of a morbid process if left to itself 
 without any interference by medical art? This question 
 was answered on a large scale by Dietl 33 years ago, who 
 had a mortality of 9 per cent, under dietetic treatment in 
 the same disease in which the " anti-pyretic " treatment 
 showed a mortality of 12 per cent., z>., 3 per cent, more 
 than the expectant treatment. 
 
 If, when diseases in general are considered, these num- 
 bers may require some alteration, which will certainly not be 
 to the advantage of orthodox physic, they still furnish very 
 remarkable material on which to form our judgment. Con- 
 temporary allopathic therapeutics lies under the same 
 ban of symptomatic treatment as did bleeding. Suppose 
 we have a patient suffering from pneumonia ; he is gasping 
 for breath and feels stabs as from knives, due to the accom- 
 panying pleurisy, at each cough, at each respiration. He 
 prays for relief. We open a vein, the blood flows, and 
 all at once the picture changes — the stabbing pains are 
 ameliorated, the breathing freer, appetite gradually returns. 
 The physician who, in the opinion of the ignorant, has 
 saved the patient from death by his energetic interference
 
 iJieir Jinanhnity is luondcrfiiL 419 
 
 receives looks of gratitude from his patient, who, if he had 
 been let alone would have recovered his health in a short 
 time, but now perhaps will pine away, having received from 
 his "saviour" the impetus which will throw him into pul- 
 monary consumption. 
 
 The physician only attended to one symptom, and 
 recklessly directed his efforts to its removal. He over- 
 looked the fact that all the patient's strength should be 
 husbanded in order to overcome the disease, and that 
 every new source of weakness should be carefully warded 
 off from the patient, who was already sufficiently weakened 
 by the disease. The symptom was kept in view, but the 
 actual disease overlooked ; the symptom, the result of the 
 disease, was combated instead of acting directly on the 
 proximate cause of the symptom, the focus of the disease, 
 and thus the morbid process was involuntarily promoted. 
 
 Those who advocate " anti-pyresis " labour under the 
 same mistake. The results of diseases, fever and cardiac 
 weakness, are the points of therapeutic attack. In order to 
 attain their object they are obliged to set up a new, alien 
 drug-disease, in addition to that naturally present. Quinine 
 is said to strengthen the heart ; we have just seen that in 
 the course of the action of quinine this increased activity 
 is followed by a state of depression, which after a fresh dose 
 again goes off, but afterwards gives place to still greater 
 weakness. By such and similar treatment the diseased 
 process does not pursue its course alone, but is reinforced 
 by an artificial disease; and yet the "first authorities" 
 among the allopaths meet and congratulate themselves on 
 the " great advance " made in therapeutics by the introduc- 
 tion of the anti-pyretic treatment, which has sent more 
 human beings to the shades below than would have gone 
 if nature had been left to herself! 
 
 Can we have any respect for such " science ? " Is it a 
 crime to turn one's back on such and similar plans of treat- 
 ment, or to seek for something better than this miserable 
 unphysiological therapeutics ? 
 
 The inexplicable phenomena of animal-magnetism were, 
 till recently, denied and declared to be " unscientific " by
 
 420 Gi'atititdc not a medical virhie. 
 
 the universities. There was perhaps not present at the 
 Congress a single medical man, who, a few years previously, 
 would not have called any man who was convinced of the 
 existence of this remarkable power, a mystic, an ignoramus, 
 an unscientific enthusiast, a duped impostor, &c. 
 
 If we wished to enumerate all the opprobrious epithets 
 applied to Mesmer, the simplest way would be to mention 
 those that had not been applied to him. 
 
 In Wiesbaden several physicians spoke of animal magne- 
 tism and its therapeutic value without meeting with any 
 opposition. Thus the truth was acknowledged of what, 
 from prejudice and arrogance, had been rejected for many 
 decades ; here, at all events, we see progress. 
 
 Whom have we to thank for this ? The itinerant magnetiser 
 Hansen. It is demonstrable that it was owing to his public 
 appearances that a repetition of his experiments was first 
 undertaken in " scientific " circles. Hansen was assailed 
 during his tour by innumerable and virulent insults, the 
 instigators of which were directly or indirectly the allopaths. 
 If no public reparation is due to Hansen, at all events the 
 manes of the physician Mesmer should be considered. But 
 we shall look in vain for the confession of past errors or 
 the expression of gratitude to unorthodox physicians from 
 the adherents of " scientific medicine." 
 
 Both the Congresses for Internal Medicine, that of 18S2 
 and that of 1883, bear witness to the restless diligence and 
 profound spirit of inquiry which prevail at our universities ; 
 but we are rudely awakened from the feeling of joyful ad- 
 miration with which we follow the interesting investigations 
 and deductions when we come to the subject of thera- 
 peutics. 
 
 The crudest conceptions of the processes going on in the 
 organism seem to be made the basis of the plan of treat- 
 ment. 
 
 Thus a physician gives, at this Congress, the advice to
 
 The cramming treatment of consumption. 42 1 
 
 consumptives " to eat as much as possible." " The chief task 
 of the medical man in the treatment of consumption is to 
 stimulate the patient's appetite by every device known to 
 cookery." The same adviser approves of the plan adopted 
 by other physicians of introducing food into the stomachs of 
 tuberculous patients by means of the stomach-pump. No 
 sensible physician would entertain the idea that a consump- 
 tive patient must eat as much as possible. A truly rational 
 physician will inquire into the condition of the digestive func- 
 tions, and carefully regulate the food in accordance with the 
 digestive powers and the character of the disease, giving 
 the advice, not to starve, but also not to eat if there is no 
 appetite ; because to do so, especially in the case of a 
 debilitated person, is the sure way to derange the stomach, 
 and because our life is maintained by what is assimilated, 
 not by what is eaten. But the allopathic axiom is " much 
 helps much." What a pitiable state of allopathic thera- 
 peutics is revealed by the assertion that the main business 
 of the medical art is to make consumptives eat as much as 
 possible. And to force down nourishment with the stomach 
 pump ! Its employment in a consumptive patient already 
 weakened by the disease, could not fail to produce serious 
 derangements of the stomach. The most ignorant peasant 
 would not act upon such crude principles when fattening his 
 geese by cramming them, and yet in this case he has a 
 healthy stomach secreting normal gastric juices from a 
 healthy body to deal with. It would not be easy to find a 
 peasant who would cram a sick goose with food in order to 
 restore it to health. 
 
 The general agreement upon the subject of anti-pyretic 
 treatment, about which there was so much mutual con- 
 gratulation in 1882 fell to pieces in 1883, when the treat- 
 ment of diphtheria was discussed. 
 
 Gerhardt says, " Chlorate of potash is a pure matter of 
 faith held by few persons," and he recommends papayotin 
 and chinolin. His next statement is remarkable : " I can- 
 not refrain from mentioning my own experience that the 
 employment of a strong solution of carbolic acid seems to 
 keep up diphtheria, and I have seen cases rapidly recover
 
 422 Divergent views on diphtheric therapeutics. 
 
 when the carboHc acid that had till then been employed 
 was discontinued." 
 
 This opinion is not without significance when we reflect 
 that for many years the orthodox treatment has been such 
 an employment of carbolic acid through the entire course 
 of the disease, and that it has been enforced upon young 
 medical men on theoretical grounds, and has been so 
 generally adopted that the great majority of physicians 
 have practised it and do still practise it, though not quite 
 to such an extent as before ; and when we remember that 
 the greatest reproaches were cast upon the homoeopaths 
 for their neglect of this treatment. 
 
 Heubner assailed the treatment of diphtheria by local 
 applications, though this was regarded as one of the most 
 important measures by the allopaths since the first appear- 
 ance of the disease, and was and is employed by the 
 majority of doctors ; he maintains that the organism must 
 be disinfected by the administration of internal remedies. 
 The ordinary drugs, according to Heubner, did not at all 
 fulfil this object, " I recall to mind the disastrous trials of 
 chlorate of potash, pilocarpin, oil of turpentine, &c." 
 
 Jiirgensen was of opinion " that all impurities should be 
 removed," but not by means of coarse caustics ; all general 
 disinfection was useless; the indication was "to fortify the 
 system as much as possible." 
 
 Heubner replies: "What Jiirgensen says is certainly 
 very rational, but it is expectant therapeutics which, as has 
 been shown, cannot effect very much ; " nevertheless it is 
 " very rational." 
 
 Leube confesses that for ten years he has cauterised 
 strongly at the commencement. 
 
 Gerhardt says that by producing anaemia of the mucous 
 membrane by the application of cold, the soil is rendered 
 less favourable for the growth of the morbid organisms. 
 As, however, according to Heubner, the author of the 
 prize essay on diphtheria, the organisms are dispersed 
 through the whole body, it follows that the whole body 
 of the patient would have to be packed in ice for twenty- 
 four hours.
 
 IrraUonal treatment of rational doctors. 423 
 
 In short, treatment more grotesquely v^aried was never 
 suggested by a party of neighbours and gossips assembled 
 round a sick friend on a Sunday afternoon than was re- 
 commended at this Congress by the foremost allopathic 
 " authorities," except that the proposals of the former would 
 not be nearly so injurious as the privileged " modes of 
 treatment." 
 
 If we pass in review the remedies recommended for diph- 
 theria alone during the past 15 years, from assiduous cau- 
 terization with nitrate of silver and insufflation of sulphur 
 to papayotin and chinolin, we shall obtain an interesting 
 insight into allopathic practice. Every year fresh remedies ! 
 First one drug and then another comes into fashion, and on 
 the introduction of each new remedy, the old ones, however 
 much they may have been commended, are contemptuously 
 rejected, and all the bad results ascribed to them. 
 
 How irrational is it to apply caustics ! We think it ne- 
 cessary to preserve from mental excitement patients who 
 are dangerously ill, as its injurious effect is well known ; 
 and yet a wretched child who does not understand the 
 object of the treatment, is thrown into paroxysms of terror 
 two or three times a day, so that it cowers in its bed and 
 regards with apprehension every one who approaches it. 
 If a healthy child, or even a grown man, were kept in such 
 terror for days and nights, we should see what baneful 
 effects such treatment would have upon them. 
 
 Again we ask : Is it a crime to reject such "science?" 
 Is it not rather the duty of every medical man to inquire 
 whether there may not be something better than what the 
 universities are able to offer? Is it not clear that there 
 must be here some important external hindrances which 
 prevent medical men from learning a better wa}-, and from 
 refraining from participation in the therapeutics of such 
 representatives of science ? 
 
 Is not the existence of these external hindrances made 
 still more apparent, when we observe how every now and 
 then even the followers of allopathy themselves express in 
 decided terms their dissatisfaction with the present state of 
 therapeutics, as is well shown by the extract given above 
 from the Wien. medic, Wochcnschrift, at p. 369.
 
 424 Letting the cat out of the bag. 
 
 In Volkmann's Saninilang kliiiischer Vorinige, another 
 allopathic critic says (1878, No. 139): "When they [the 
 allopathic school] attempted to substitute for the old a 
 new, exact, so-called rational system of therapeutics based 
 upon strictly physiological or anatomico-pathological foun- 
 dations, they inevitably made a fiasco." , , . . " The 
 Vienna school, acting in a decidedly logical manner, was 
 compelled to confess that there is not and cannot be a 
 therapeia resting on a scientific basis." . . . , " Every 
 plan of treatment has, in a short time, had to give place to 
 another." 
 
 On p. 18 this allopath concludes that the results of the 
 allopathic therapeutic investigations have been " almost 
 entirely negative and of a disheartening character."* 
 
 * I may be allowed to say a few words with respect to the state of 
 orthodox medicine in this country. All that the author says about 
 the uncertainty of therapeutics, the frequent changing of medicines, 
 the giving of mixtures, and the prescribing according to imaginary 
 pathological conditions in Germany, is applicable to most of the 
 medical practice of Britain ; but there are certain differences in other 
 respects which deserve to be noted. Thus the bacteria-craze does 
 not seem to have taken such hold of the medical mind in this country 
 as it has in Germany and France, except in the domain of surgerj', 
 but even there it seems to be dying out. The antiseptic treatment, 
 which Lister borrowed from Ddclat and pushed to such extreme 
 lengths, has certainly done some good by introducing greater atten- 
 tion to cleanliness as regards surgical instruments, and care in the 
 dressing and after-treatment of wounds, but its exaggerated employ- 
 ment which at first took the medical world by storm, is now mani- 
 festly declining, and " Listerism," so-called, has been completely 
 abandoned by some of our most eminent and successful surgeons. 
 The anti-pyretic treatment by ice-cold baths in cases of elevated tem- 
 perature has been but little used in this country, though quinine, 
 salicylic acid and kairin are extensively employed to cause defer- 
 vescence. The stomach-pump treatment, which for a time found such 
 favour in Germany, is little practised here. Under the influence of 
 Ringer, who has exhibited wonderful powers of research — in homoeo- 
 pathic literature — and has "conveyed" many of our medicines and 
 methods into allopathic therapeutics, a kind of bastard homoeopathy 
 has attained a certain amount of assent among our orthodox medical 
 brethren, and has met with much commendation from the periodical 
 organs of medical orthodoxy ; so that Ringer's book, which is to a
 
 Hoiv to vc7'ify our diagnosis. 425 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 Since the foundation of homceopathy, the point of hostile 
 attack has been constantly shifted. At first it was opposed 
 by Brown's adherents, the natural philosophers, chemical 
 theorists, the crude views of the advocates of bleeding 
 and purgatives, which would not now be defended by any 
 " scientific physician." 
 
 Then appeared the anatomical and that after the Vienna 
 school, which, as was stated by a professor at the Medical 
 Congress of 1882, held that : "We are not able to cure a 
 disease, the patient is only an object for observation, and 
 it is at most a triumph for us when we can verify our 
 diae[:nosis on the dissectingf table." 
 
 great extent a rccliaitffe of homoeopathic treatment modified to meet 
 the prejudices of old-school practitioners, has rapidly passed through 
 ten editions, and we can hardly take up an allopathic prescription with- 
 out seeing how niuch its construction has been influenced by Ringer's 
 second-hand homoeopathy.' Desultory attempts are occasionally made 
 to rehabilitate the old and discarded method of bleeding, but these 
 have met with little encouragement even from the periodical which 
 takes its name from the instrument of venesection. England still 
 retains its partiality for purgatives of the strongest kind, and if these 
 are not prescribed by the profession with such a liberal hand as 
 formerly, they are enormously consumed by the population. Medi- 
 cines which allay pain and cause sleep are also in great vogue. A 
 sure way to fame and fortune seems to be to invent some new pur- 
 gative water, pill, powder or lozenge, or to introduce some new 
 hypnotic or anti-neuralgic, and the most convincing evidence of the 
 mischief caused by the incautious use of these dangerous remedies, 
 seems to have no effect in diminishing their popularity. Experimental 
 physiology is as popular here as it is in Germany, and is pursued with 
 unwearying zeal in spite of obstructive Acts of Parliament and not- 
 withstanding the insignificant gains to therapeutics that have hitherto 
 resulted from it. The whole medical profession is persuaded that its 
 labours will ultimately prove of immense value to therapeutics. But 
 here as elsewhere these labours have been almost exclusively in a 
 wrong direction. Experiments with drugs on mutilated dogs and cats, 
 on rabbits' eyes and enucleated frogs' hearts, can throw little or no 
 light on the therapeutic value of drugs on man, and yet we see big 
 books published with attempts to found a therapeia on such unsuit- 
 able data, though Hahnemann's Fragmeiita, which shows how drugs
 
 426 All medical systems have opposed 
 
 This school was forced to give way to that of cellular 
 pathology, on which it was sought to build a cellular thera- 
 peutics. With what pleasing expectations were the founda- 
 tion stones laid ! but its basis was unsound, and at the 
 Science Congress of Kassel in 1878 it was stated that 
 " the most important task of medicine, therapeutics, is 
 not advanced by cellular pathology." Biology, too, which 
 some hoped would be ingrafted on the minds of medical 
 men through the cellular doctrine, has had very little 
 effect. 
 
 At present bacteria are relied upon to draw the thera- 
 peutic cart out of the mud. In the Congress for Internal 
 Medicine of 1883, it was stated that there are only four 
 remedies capable of destroying bacteria, — quinine, iodine, 
 mercury and salicylic acid. " These facts have not, how- 
 ever, been ascertained by methodical scientific research, 
 but by crude empirical methods." " The idea would be 
 
 should be tested, was published in 1805. When our physiologists 
 make their experiments on the human subject they are unable to 
 utilize the results in consequence of their obstinate refusal to make 
 use of the only key that makes them available for therapeutics. But 
 if their own school can make no use of their labours for want of this 
 key, they are eagerly seized upon by the homoeopathic school which 
 possesses this key, and at once incorporated in its materia medica. 
 And thus the Jorgs, the Bockers, the Harleys, the Ringers, the 
 Murrells and the Bruntons have the mortification of seeing that while 
 their achievements in medicine-proving are useless to their own 
 school, their value to homoeopathic therapeutics is warmly acknow- 
 ledged by the partizans of Hahnemann's great truth. Sic vos non 
 "jobis is perhaps poor consolation to offer, but it may be a comfort to 
 them to reflect that their labours are not altogether lost, which they 
 would be were there no homoeopathic school to profit by them. 
 
 But in spite of the fruitlessness of their researches to the thera- 
 peutics of the dominant school, the experimental physiologists are 
 believed in, not only by the medical profession, but, it would seem, by 
 all scientists, so that for medical men the surest road to admission to 
 the select precincts of the Royal Society is the reputation of having 
 practised vivisection on an extensive scale, though the result of all this 
 loss of time, labour and humanity may be nil or misleading, or the 
 promulgation of some conclusions which arc contradicted or upset by 
 the next experimental physiologist.
 
 Jioinceopathy and have perished. 427 
 
 dreadful," says one speaker, " if the lapse of several 
 thousands of years were necessary in order to discover 
 four more such remedies." 
 
 Therefore the Congress unanimously decided a search 
 for bactericidal remedies should be made. It is not 
 necessary to be a prophet in order to foresee that this 
 mode of searching for medicines will be valueless to 
 internal therapeutics. The allopathic principle, " much 
 helps much," gains great support from these endeavours, so 
 that there is every reason to anticipate that the allopaths 
 will attack the diseased human body with strong, pro- 
 foundly-acting medicines still more " energetically " than 
 before. 
 
 Daily experience shows that the investigations instituted 
 by orthodox medicine vastly increase the knowledge and 
 the power of the physician. This advance depends partly 
 on hygiene and partly on the development and extension 
 
 On the whole we may say that at the present time the adherents of 
 old physic are not so antagonistic to homceopathy in Britain as they 
 seem to be in Germany and elsewhere. We do not now meet with 
 the same virulent and vulgar abuse of Hahnemann and his adherents 
 as we observe in the anti-homoeopathic writings of our German col- 
 leagues. The liberal spirit shown at the International Medical Con- 
 gress in London in 1881 contrasts favourably with the conduct of the 
 old school in America, and altogether homoeopathy has attained in 
 Britain a pleasanter modus vivendi with allopathy than it seems to 
 enjoy in the Fatherland, which is strange when we consider that 
 Germany was the fountain-head of the great therapeutic reformation, 
 and that German medicine has had almost a generation longer to 
 adapt itself to the new order of things than we have had. Perhaps 
 the old saying, " the nearer the church the farther from grace," may 
 find an illustration here. Still here, as in Germany, much remains to 
 be done before homoeopathy can enjoy the position in general medi- 
 cine to which it is entitled ; for its practitioners are still excluded from 
 all the prizes and emoluments of the profession, from almost all the 
 medical societies and to a great extent from professional intercourse 
 with their otherwise-thinking colleagues. The conspiracy of silence 
 with regard to homoeopathy is strictly carried out in most of the 
 periodicals, whether medical or literary, and if we are no longer 
 openly persecuted, we are treated as une qiumtite negUgeable, or only 
 received on sufferance.- — [Ed.J
 
 428 TJiro7igJi Jiointwpathy alone 
 
 of mechanical treatment, which latter, however, threatens 
 continually to overstep its limits. 
 
 The condition of allopathic internal medicine is tho- 
 roughly unsatisfactory to the physician. This coarse symp- 
 tomatic treatment, this use of remedies which endanger 
 both health and life, this unphysiological method, can- 
 not but dishearten every thoughtful physician. Where 
 can any sure help be found ? The more zealously we 
 penetrate into the matter the more we feel the want of 
 firm ground under our feet, and the greater is the number 
 of contradictions which confronts us. What long lists of 
 medicines are recommended in all diseases without any 
 precise differentiation of them! The endless recommen- 
 dations of remedies dance like ignes fatui before the in- 
 vestigator ; they appear and disappear, come into fashion 
 and then go out of fashion. 
 
 All these different therapeutic systems and schools have 
 waged war with homoeopathy, have attacked it with the 
 most unworthy weapons, have prophesied its downfall, and 
 have themselves come to a disastrous end ; but homoeopathy 
 stands firm, secure through its therapeutic results. Fashion 
 does not prevail in homoeopathy as in the opposite camp. 
 The same remedies which Hahnemann used are still em- 
 ployed according to the same indications as before, though 
 perhaps they are given with more precision, in consequence 
 of the careful observations of many zealous and laborious 
 medical men. Holding fast by the old proved remedies 
 does not prevent the reception of new medicines, given in 
 homoeopathic preparations and doses. But the medicines 
 of homoeopathy are not subject to the caprices of fashion. 
 
 Here the exact sphere of action of each drug is dis- 
 coverable, and if any one wishes to introduce a new remedy 
 into therapeutics, the homoeopaths require first a careful 
 proving on the healthy organism and then an accurate 
 description of the cases of disease in which it is used with 
 advantage. Anatomical diagnosis is made use of as a 
 help, but it is not sufficient for them. " There are no 
 remedies for names of diseases," they say.
 
 can therapeutics be advanced. 429 
 
 Homoeopathy contains a treasure of valuable experi- 
 ences, the outcome of the most careful observations ; but 
 the form under which they are offered at first excites the 
 repugnance of the physician who has been educated allo- 
 pathically (and we have all been brought up as allopaths), 
 and this repugnance can only be overcome by earnest 
 professional zeal. 
 
 But if we have once gained a deeper insight into it, all 
 trouble is well rewarded by the results obtained at the sick 
 bed, and the physician who was beginning to despair of 
 therapeutics takes a pleasure in his profession which richly 
 repays his labours. Here is a field in which the physician, 
 by zealous study, can develope his therapeutic usefulness 
 without being confused and disheartened by therapeutic 
 contradictions. 
 
 Homoeopathy has existed for more than seventy years, 
 thousands of medical men practise it, millions of laymen 
 are attached to it, and made enthusiastic by its success in 
 the treatment of disease. The adherents of this system go 
 on increasing in spite of enormous external hindrances. 
 A large number of periodicals is published in all civilized 
 languages exclusively devoted to this subject; its literature 
 numbers thousands of volumes. 
 
 And it is attempted to upset such an established system 
 of medicine by misrepresentations, by abuse, by denuncia- 
 tions, and by all sorts of unworthy odious machinations ! 
 A foolish enterprise ! 
 
 Abandonment of their pernicious arrogance and of their 
 blind respect for authority, self-knowledge and improve- 
 ment of their own obvious faults, are what is required by 
 the allopaths, and for this vulgar vituperation is a very 
 poor substitute. When they have put their own camp in 
 order they will cease to marshal their forces in order to 
 attack Hahnemann's system, they will joyfully receive and 
 assimilate its important and everlasting truths. 
 
 History will then recall the remarkable circumstance 
 that the truth in therapeutics was discovered by medical 
 practitioners who received no State-support, and that the 
 universities which were established in order to search out
 
 430 Ecce qiiam bomnn et juciindiun 
 
 truth trampled upon this truth for many years, and wan- 
 dered in the pernicious paths of therapeutic error. 
 
 Legislators whose medical counsellors are all allopaths, 
 should weigh well the following facts : — Homoeopathy is a 
 power that must be reckoned with, since it has already 
 millions of zealous adherents in Germany alone. If the 
 allopaths had not been exclusively listened to, if the 
 homoeopaths had been admitted to free competition, the 
 empire of the bleeding and purging therapeutics would 
 soon have come to an end ; the lives and health of many 
 citizens which have, under the present conditions, fallen a 
 sacrifice to allopathy, would have been preserved. 
 
 They should not permit themselves to be guided ex- 
 clusively by allopaths who represent homoeopathy as the 
 enemy of science and of scientific investigation. Allo- 
 pathic therapeutics is a pseudo-science, a science of the 
 same sort as the phlebotomizing therapeutics. The allo- 
 paths of that day, with similar emphasis, called their 
 treatment " scientific " and " rational," while they des- 
 troyed their fellow-creatures who regarded them as their 
 saviours. 
 
 At present, too — as we saw above — health and life are 
 too often sacrificed to allopathy. Is it always to be like 
 this? Or does anyone suppose that the allopaths will, of 
 their own accord, abandon their barbarous treatment in 
 the coming centuries ? Those who indulge this hope know 
 little of the history of medicine. 
 
 Let homoeopathy be admitted to free competition, let a 
 position corresponding to its importance be given it in the 
 hospitals, which the public will thankfully and exten- 
 sively avail themselves of, and let the condition be at- 
 tached that only medicines in homoeopathic preparations 
 shall be used, and that the occasional use of allopathic 
 methods shall alv/ays be specially recorded. This would 
 not be giving free licence to the ideas of a fantastic 
 dreamer in a field where an earnest spirit of investigation 
 should be at work for the preservation and restoration of 
 the chief blessing of mankind. Homoeopathy cannot be 
 seriously compared with " sympathy and moonshine cures,"
 
 Jiabitare fratres in wiuni ! 43 1 
 
 notwithstanding the efforts of its opponents to establish its 
 relation to these absurdities. 
 
 Those medical men who leave all to nature, the " na- 
 ture doctors," ought to have an opportunity given them of 
 demonstrating their right to exist, that is, if they can show 
 a sufficient number of adherents among the public. An 
 institution in which doctors had an opportunity of ob- 
 serving the healing powers of nature would be of great 
 importance. Physicians would then have a tertium com- 
 parationis to enable them to estimate the value of the 
 results obtained by their own peculiar treatment. So 
 much misfortune would not have befallen mankind through 
 medical men, if an opportunity had been given them of 
 observing the action of the vis medicatrix natura;. 
 
 The Universities ought to have gratefully received the 
 offer of the " nature doctors " and their adherents. The 
 fact that they scornfully rejected it throws no favourable 
 light on their belief in their own powers. 
 
 The dispensing of medicines by the practitioner — this 
 natural right of all medical men of whatever way of think- 
 ing — of which the allopaths make the freest use, in spite 
 of the privileges of the apothecaries, in their employment 
 of subcutaneous injections, ought to be allowed in the 
 case of homoeopathic medicines, the genuineness of which 
 in the present state of analytic knowledge it is impossible 
 to control. The allopathic apothecaries are the natural 
 enemies of homoeopathy, they have given proof upon proof 
 that they ardently wish for the overthrow of this system, 
 which they openly denounce as quackery ; some even cheat 
 the public who want homoeopathic medicines, and hold 
 it no sin to give their customers simple spirit instead of 
 medicine. Some governments force the homoeopaths into 
 a disastrous dependence on their arch-enemies, and compel 
 them to get their prescriptions dispensed by such hostile 
 persons, who look upon it as a matter of no importance 
 whether they are prepared well or ill. Is it not then a 
 most just and fair demand that the homoeopaths should 
 be allowed to dispense their own remedies beyond the 
 third or fourth decimal potency?
 
 432 Fiat jiLstitia^ mat ccchun ! 
 
 Any Government which seeks to put in practice the 
 reasonable proposals we have just made will, indeed, raise 
 a storm of indignation in certain quarters, but will confer a 
 lasting benefit on mankind, and will both deserve and re- 
 ceive the thanks of the more enlightened of their contem- 
 poraries and of future generations.
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Ahelard and Hdoise, Hahnemann's trans- 
 lation of, 165 
 
 Aconite, Hahnemann's large doses of, 
 117; his early therapeutic uses of, 1 18 ; 
 powerless extracts of, 142 
 
 Adelung's friendship for Hahnemann, 153 
 
 Adulterations of chemicals commonly 
 practised, 9, 10 
 
 Adulterations of dn/gs, Hahnemann's 
 work on, 21 
 
 /Esculapius, Hahnemann compared to, 
 
 273 
 
 ^sadapms in the Balance, by Hahne- 
 mann, 86 
 
 Ague, bark in, Cullen's theory of, 103 ; 
 
 caused by quinine, 401 
 Alberti said to be the author of homoe- 
 opathy, 308 
 
 Albrecht's account of Hahnemann, 158; 
 testimony to Hahnemann's great know- 
 ledge, 164, 165 
 
 Alchemists, 2 
 
 Alkali pneum, 288 
 
 Allgenieiner Anzeigei; history of, 178 ; 
 used as a professional organ by physi- 
 cians, 179; Hahnemann's contribu- 
 tions to, i8c : on the treatment of 
 homoeopaths, 251 ; favourable to spread 
 of homoeopathy, 2S3 
 
 Allopathic treatment by homoeopaths, 
 alleged, 364 
 
 Allopathy, Hahnemann on, 213, 229 ; 
 therapeutics of, easily learned, 368 ; 
 sad account of, by its friends, 369, 370, 
 424 _ 
 
 Aloes in hemorrhoids, 362 
 
 Alteratives, Hahnemann's opinion of, 77 
 
 Amatus, complex prescriptions of, 79 
 
 America, homoeopathy in, 277 ; attempt 
 to boycott homoeopathy in, 375 ; the 
 code of ethics in, 376 ; persecutions 
 in, 376 ; probable failure of Inter- 
 national Congress in, 376 
 
 Amusement, Hahnemann on, 61 
 
 Andral's trial of homoeopathy, 315 
 
 Annesley's alleged success with bleeding 
 in cholera, 240 ; shown to be false by 
 himself, 241 
 Antimony, large doses given by Hahne- 
 mann, 117, 120 
 Antipyretic treatment of pneumonia, 
 412, 418 ; laudation of, 414 ; sympto- 
 matic character of, 419 ; typhus, the 
 test of, 415 
 Apoplexy said to be caused by neglect of 
 
 venesection, 214 
 Apothecaries, Hahnemann on the, 139 ; 
 ignorance of the, 141 ; Hahnemann's 
 arraignment of the, 143 ; guild of the, 
 144; desirable qualities in, 196; irri- 
 tation of, at homoeopaths being al- 
 lowed to dispense their meolicines, 
 367 ; abuse homoeopathy, 373 ; power- 
 less in Great Britain, 375 ; the enemies 
 of homoeopathy, 430 
 Apothckerlexicon, by Hahnemann, 32-38 
 Appreciation of Hahnemann by olol- 
 
 school doctors, 168-171 
 Archiv, anii-hoiucvopathic, 285 
 Archiv, Stapfs, appearance of, 189 
 Areometer, Hahnemann's improved, il 
 Arsenic, poisoning by, Hahnemann's 
 work on, 15-18; supposed composition 
 of, 15 ; Hahnemann's tests for, 16 ; in 
 ague, Hufeland objects to, loS ; 
 Hahnemann's reason for not recom- 
 mending, 123 ; Hahnemann's small 
 doses of, 122, 127 
 Attacks of the allopaths on homoeopathy 
 caused by their anxiety for the public 
 weal, 261 
 Attomyr's derivation of *' rational," 213 
 Auenbrugger's percussion, 377 
 Augustin on homoeopathy, 274 
 Australia, homoeopathy in, 277 
 Austria, treatment of cholera in, 245 ; 
 suppression of homoeopathy in, 251 ; 
 313, 314 ; mesmerism forbidden in, 
 
 334 
 
 Austrum, a supposed new metal, 289
 
 434 
 
 Index. 
 
 \ 
 
 Autenrieth on itch-sequclce, 70, 71, 341 
 Avarice, Hahnemann's alleged, 287, 354 
 
 Bacilli, transformation of one kind into 
 
 another, 390 
 Bacteria the alleged cause of many 
 diseases, 389 ; produced by papayotin, 
 390 ; the killing of, the test of a true 
 medicine, 391 
 Bacterial therapeutics, 391, 392, 426 
 Bakody's successful treatment of cholera, 
 249 ; made professor of homoeopathy 
 in Buda-Pesth, 255 
 Baldinger, praise of Hahnemann's Laho- 
 rant by, 24 ; laments the ignorance of 
 physicians, 57 ; recommends Hahne- 
 mann's first medical book, 64 
 Balogh, J. von, flowers of rhetoric by, 
 
 250 
 Balogh, P. von, abused by Kovats, 254 
 Bark, Hahnemann's first proving of, 103, 
 
 104 ; duration of action of, 114 
 Baumann on pathological chemistry, 386 
 Baumes, system of, 52 
 Baumgarten, action against, 231 
 Bavaria, law against homoeopathy in, 279 
 Bazire, killed by quinine, 399 
 Becker, principium inflammabile of, 1,2 
 Beddoes, treatment of consumption by, 
 
 51 
 
 Belgium, number of homoeopaths in, 277 
 
 Belladonna, Hahnemann's large doses of^, 
 117; small doses of, 123; in scarlet 
 fever, Hahnemann's early doses of, 
 129 ; preventive of scarlet fever, 236 
 
 Beneke on pathological chemistry, 386 
 
 Bergmann on tartar emetic, 23 
 
 Berlin, grant of funds for homoeopathic 
 hospital in, 318 
 
 Bernhard on itch, 69 
 
 Bernstein, laudation of Hahnemann by, 
 75 ; prophecies the downfall of homce- 
 opathy, 272 
 
 Bertholet supports Lavoisier, 5 
 
 Bichat strives to give an anatomical basis 
 to medicine, 376 
 
 Bile, Hahnemann's experiments with, 20, 
 132 
 
 Binz on the Vienna school, 416 ; on saly- 
 cylic acid in rheumatism, 416, 417 
 
 Bischoff, testimony to Quarin's friendship 
 for Hahnemann, 152 ; praise of Hahne- 
 mann by, 168 ; on homrcopathy, 187, 
 200 ; treatment of cholera by, 246 ; 
 refusal to test homoeopathy by, 310 ; 
 success of, in pneumonia, 41 1 ; com- 
 parative trial of homoeopathy by, 411 
 
 Black refused fellowship of Edinburgh 
 College, 375 
 
 Bleeding, Hahnemann's employment of, 
 67 ; in nervous fever, Frank on, 67 \ 
 Hahnemann's denunciation of, 68, 371, 
 Hufelar.d blames homceopaths for not» 
 196 ; the sheet-anchor of medicine, 
 Bischoff, 200 ; Puchelt, 201 ; Hein- 
 roth, 201 ; Wedekind, 202 ; Groos, 
 202 ; Miickisch, 203 ; Fischer, 204 ; 
 Hufeland, 207 ; Simon, 207 ; Zeroni, 
 208 ; Riecke is sure homceopaths will ^ 
 return to, 210; Gmelin, 211; Win- 
 disch, 215 ; Broussais, 217 ; protests of 
 homceopaths against, 217 ; Kriiger- 
 Hansen opposed to, 217 ; Bontekoe 
 opposed to, 218; reasons for, 218; 
 in pneumonia, Dietl's cases of, 220 ; 
 in cholera, 237-246, 418 ; wonderful 
 success of, 241, 286; deaths ascribed 
 to neglect of, 262, 282 ; palliative relief 
 from, 418 ; unsuccessful attempts to 
 rehabilitate, 425 
 
 Bleekrode, his work on homoeopathy, 
 361 ; on Paracelsus, 361 
 
 Bliss expelled for serving with a homce- 
 opath, 376 
 
 Blisters do not throw off peccant humours, 
 
 76 .. , 
 
 Blood, ideas concernmg composition of, 
 50 ; Haller's, 50 ; Blumenbach's, 50, 
 51 ; Kapp's, 51 ; Virchow's ideas con- 
 cerning the, 381 
 Blue aqua fortis, 9 
 
 Blumenbach on composition of blood, 
 50, 51 ; approval of judicial torture by, 
 66 ; account of Harvey's discovery by, 
 
 304 
 Bock performs p.m. of Schwarzenberg, 
 
 187 
 
 Bonomo, discovery of itch-mite by, 69 
 Bontekoe, substitutes tea for bleeding, 
 
 218 
 Borax, varieties of opinion regarding 
 
 composition of, 289 ; pneum proved to 
 
 be, 288 
 Borbonium, a supposed new metal, 289 
 Boswell's dose of ambra, 120 
 Bouvard's treatment of Louis XHL, 259 
 Boyd's success from bleeding in cholera, 
 
 241 
 Brand on antipyretic treatment, 415 
 Bride, or the action of salycylic acid on 
 
 the ear, 402 
 Brieger on pathological chemistry, 3S6 
 Bristowe, on homoeopathy, 374 
 Britain, number of homreopalhs in, 277 ; 
 
 state of medicine in, 424 
 Brodie, experiments on the blood of, 237 J 
 
 on homoeopathy, 374 
 Brodowicz recommends bleeding in cho- 
 lera, 246
 
 Index. 
 
 435 
 
 Broussais, sanguinary treatment of, 217 ; 
 
 his doctrine of gastro-enteritis, 377 
 Brown's system, 45, 53, 69 ; Hahne- 
 mann's appreciation of, 95 ; adherents 
 
 of, oppose homoeopathy, 424 
 Bruce, the traveller, 133 
 Bruckenthal, Hahnemann's appointment 
 
 by, 152 
 Brueckmann's attack on Hahnemann, 
 
 293 ; Hahnemann's reply to, 295, 296 
 Bruguiere's thesis on similia, 308 
 Brunnow's account of Hahnemann, 156- 
 
 158 
 Buchner observes the transformation of 
 
 bacilli, 390 
 Bucholtz praises Hahnemann's work, 18 
 Burmann wants the State to forbid 
 
 homoeopathy, 278 
 Burrell's success from bleeding in cholera, 
 
 241 
 Busch's treatment of consumption, 51 
 Bushnan on homoeopathy, 374 
 
 Cadet supports Lavoisier, 5 
 
 Camphor, Hahnemann's large doses of, 
 
 118 
 Canada, homoeopathy in, 277 
 Cantharides resolve morbid humours, 76; 
 
 in urinary affections, 362 
 Carbolic acid, germicide and anti-pyretic 
 
 action of, 389. 
 Caries, Hahnemann's treatment of, 63 
 Cascarilla pronounced superfluous, 102 
 Case against homoeopathy, a trumped up, 
 
 214 
 Caspar's refutation of Eigenbrodt, 311 
 Caustic, lunar, black colour of, ascribed to 
 
 copper, 23 
 Cavendish opposes Lavoisier, 5 
 Cavour, last illness of, 259 
 Cellular pathology, Virchow's, 379-382 ; 
 
 of no therapeutic value, 393 
 Censors of the press prohibit homoeopathic 
 
 publications, 251 
 Cesalpino said to be the discoverer of the 
 
 circulation, 305 
 Chamomile, febrifuge power of, 1 15 
 Change of medicine too frequent, 196, 
 
 398, 
 Charge, trial of homoeopathy by, 316 
 Charlotte, Princess, death of, 261 
 Chemical changes the cause of morbid 
 
 processes, 3S4 
 Chemical terms, Lavoisier's, 5 
 Chemical therapeutics of Baumes and Gir- 
 
 tanner, 52 
 Chemistry, in Hahnemann's youth, 2 ; 
 
 uselessness of, to therapeutics, 133 
 China, homoeopathy in, 277 
 
 Chloral hydrate, fatal effects of, 402, 403, 
 
 404 
 Chlorate of potash, collateral effects of, 
 
 405; in diphtheria, 421 
 Chlorosis, action of iron in, 385; Virchow 
 
 denies the curability of, 385 
 Cholera, pathology of, 235; bleeding the 
 only remedy for, 235, 238; emetics 
 advised for, 236; list of remedies re- 
 commended for, 237; Loder objects to 
 bleeding in, 239; small bleedings of no 
 use in, 239; Corbyn's success with bleed- 
 ing in, 240; Hasper's statistics of, 240; 
 Scott on, 240; Annesleyon, 241 ; Krli- 
 ger-Hansen on, 242; Sachs on, 242; 
 Kieser on, 243; Von Rein on, 243; 
 Brodowicz, Wawruch, Obersteiner, Bis- 
 choff, Wirer on, 246; Szots, Sterz, 
 Hufeland on, 247; superiority of ho- 
 moeopathy in, 248; at London Homoeo- 
 pathic Hospital, 248, 321; the water- 
 cure in, 337 
 Cholerills, the germs causing cholera, 242 
 Chronic Diseases, Hahnemann's, 137 
 Ciliary movements excited by alkalies, 385 
 Cinchona, Hahnemann's large doses of, 
 
 119 (see Bark) 
 Clarus aol vises homoeopathy to be tested 
 in a hospital, 185; proposes impossible 
 conditions for such a trial, 316; signs 
 report of Schwarzenberg's p.m., 187J 
 medical censor at Leipzic, 251 
 Classification of diseases, Hahnemann's 
 
 objections to the, 1 16 
 Cleanliness, Hahnemann on, 62 
 Clinical instruction in universities, de- 
 ficiency of, 57 
 Coal, Hahnemann advocates use of, 12 
 Coethen, Hahnemann at, 155; Duke of, 
 
 Hahnemann's protector, 155 
 Cohnheim's pathology, neglect of chemis- 
 try in, 388 
 Cold bath treatment of pneumonia, 407 
 Collateral effects of medicines, 398 
 Colledge insists on bleeding in cholera, 
 
 241 
 Colombia, homoeopathy in, 277 
 Columbus's egg, 80 
 Combustion, spontaneous, explanation of, 
 
 49; Lie big's refutation of, 49 
 Conium, Hahnemann's large doses of, I17 
 Consumption, cramming treatment of, 421 
 Contradictory opinions of medical authori- 
 ties, 102, 103 
 Contraria contrariis, 105, 135 
 Converts to homoeopathy, fate of, 373 
 Copper, Hahnemann's mode of adminis- 
 tering, 126 
 Corbyn's success with bleeding in cholera, 
 240
 
 436 
 
 Index. 
 
 Coroner's inquests employed to annoy 
 
 homceopaths, 227, 375 
 Corvisart introduces percussion, 377 
 Cousin supports Lavoisier, 5 
 Cox expelled for consulting with Bliss, 376 
 Craw's success from bleeding in cholera, 
 
 241 
 Crell, defence of phlogiston by, 6, 7; An- 
 
 nalc7i of, 18; on the composition of 
 
 borax, 2S9 
 Crystallization, Hahnemann's analysis by, 
 
 13 
 
 Cullen's Materia Medica, Hahnemann's 
 translation of, 65, 103; theory of action 
 of bark in ague, 103 
 
 Curschmann on anti-pyretic treatment, 
 416 
 
 Dahlberg thinks it possible that water is 
 earth, 2 
 
 Damerow, sees signs of decay in homoe- 
 opathy, 273; denies that Paracelsus 
 taught homoeopathy, 302 
 
 Daniels testifies to Hahnemann's merits, 
 
 75 
 
 Darkness, HomaopatJnc vjorks of, 190 
 
 Deafness after salicylic acid, 39S, 402; 
 after quinine, 400 
 
 Death of homoeopathy announced, 281 
 
 Declat, the real author of Listerism, 424 
 
 Demachy's Procedes CIiiDiiques, 8-12 ; 
 Hahnemann's translation of, 8; Struve's 
 translation of, 8 
 
 Demachy's Art da Vinaigner, Hahne- 
 mann's translation of, 39 
 
 Demachy's Distillateur Liqitoriste, trans- 
 lated by Hahnemann, 39 
 
 Demarquay's experiments with quinine, 
 401 
 
 Dempster's success from bleeding in 
 cholera, 241 
 
 Devil, Hahnemann likened to the, 191 
 
 Diagnosis should be verified on dissecting 
 table, 416, 425 
 
 Diet, inattention to, by allopaths, 195 
 
 Dietl opposes bleeding, 219; comparative 
 treatment of pneumonia by, 220, 412, 
 418 
 
 Digitalis the febrifuge par excellence, 395, 
 408 
 
 Dilutions, Hahnemann's mode of making, 
 128 
 
 Dioscorides, untrustworthiness of his ma- 
 teria medica, 98 
 
 Diphtheria, varied treatment of, 421-423 
 
 Dispensatory, Edinlmrgli, Hahnemann's 
 translation of, 81 
 
 Dispense medicines, Hahnemann asserts 
 the right of physicians to, 144, 430; 
 
 Hufeland on the right to, 193; Fischer 
 
 on, 196; Rigler on, 348 
 Distillation, Hahnemann's'improved mode 
 
 of, II 
 Doellinger an adherent of the natural 
 
 philosophical school, 378 
 Doesdorff's friendship for Hahnemann, 
 
 153 
 
 Dollfuss defends phlogiston, 5 
 
 Dolorin a cure for every grief, proposed 
 manufacture of, 367 
 
 Domestic medicines, indebtedness of old 
 physic to, 98 
 
 Doses, large, Hahnemann's denunciation 
 of, 126 
 
 Doses, small, Hahnemann's denunciation 
 of, 119; Hahnemann commences to 
 give, 121, 123, 124; sensitiveness of 
 diseased organism to, 129; Hahne- 
 mann's defence of, 130 
 
 Dropsy, different kinds of, 114 
 
 Druggists, adulterations and falsifications 
 of, 140 
 
 Drugs, impurity of, 139 
 
 Dumeril's experiments with quinine, 401 
 
 Duration of homceopathy, allopathic 
 opinion of the probable, 270 
 
 Dynamism, Hahnemann's, 136 
 
 Dyscrasia, production of, 381; chemical 
 changes the cause of, 381; local origin 
 of, 382 
 
 Earth, three kinds of, i 
 Eigenbrodt's report on homoeopathic 
 hospitals, 311; refuted by Caspar, 311 
 Eisenmann on psora, 341 
 Electricity, views concerning composition 
 
 of, 52, 53 
 Electuary, Hahnemann disapproves of 
 
 the, 125 
 Elias on homceopathy, 204; rejoices over 
 
 the speedy extinction of homoeopathy, 
 
 272; wants facts against homceopathy, 
 
 310 
 Ennemoser on mesmerism, 333 
 Epilepsy, Hahnemann's belief of cura- 
 bility of, 292 
 Epileptic patient, Hahnemann's letter to 
 
 the father of an, 292 
 Epsom and Glauber salts, comparative 
 
 analysis of, 23 
 Erastus approves sini. siiii., 300 
 Erdmann's condemnation of Trinks's 
 
 treatment, 223 
 Erlangen, Hahnemann graduates at, 153; 
 
 Hahnemann's thesis at, 153, 343 
 Erxleben on composition of electricity, 
 
 52 
 Eschenbach on Hahnemann s wine test, 
 29
 
 Index. 
 
 437 
 
 Eschenmeyer's admiration of Hahne- 
 mann, 170; on homceopathy, 209; on 
 mesmerism, 333 
 
 Esenbeck on mesmerism, 333 
 
 Ewald's ignorance of Rademacher, 397 
 
 Examination of the patient, Hahne- 
 mann's, 113 
 
 Experience, Medicine of, Halinemann's, 
 177 ; condemnation of, 178 
 
 Experience, sciences of, 133 
 
 Extracts, Hahnemann's mode of pre- 
 paring, 126 
 
 Fabbroni's Wine Manufacture, translated 
 by Hahnemann, 39 
 
 Fashion in medicine, Hahnemann's con- 
 tempt for, 76 
 
 Fickel, the homoeopathic impostor, 342 
 
 Fire, nature of, 7 
 
 Fischer, criticism of Hahnemann's first 
 essay by, 173 ; on homceopatliy, 194, 
 197, 204 ; regrets to hear of homoe- 
 opathic cures, 206, 320; wants the 
 State to suppress homceopathy, 279 
 
 Fleischer complains of the ingratitude of 
 those who would test homoeopathy, 
 
 3.17 
 
 Fleischmann's homoeopathic treatment of 
 
 cholera, 248 
 Fletcher's estimate of Hahnemann's work, 
 
 171 
 Foerster says homoeopathy is despised 
 
 out of Germany, 275 
 Fontana on snake poisons, 237 
 Forbes, Sir J-, his estimate of Hahne- 
 
 man's genius, 171 ; on homoeopathy, 
 
 374 
 
 Fourcroy supports Lavoisier, 5 ; wine- 
 test of, 27 
 
 Fragmenta de virihus medicainentorzini , 
 Hahnemann's, loi, 177 
 
 France, homoeopathy in, 277 ; persecu- 
 tion of homoeopaths in, 376 
 
 Francis I., treatment and death of, 256 
 
 Frank on bleeding in nervous fever, 67; 
 on the treatment of other diseases, 68; 
 on the itch, 70 
 
 Fredault expelled from Anatomical So- 
 ciety, 376 
 
 Friedheim prefers bleeding to homce- 
 pathy, 311 
 
 Fritze on venereal disease, 64 
 
 Froriep's testimony to Hahnemann's 
 genius, 170 
 
 Fuchs on the composition of borax, 289 
 
 Gabalda expelled from Anatomical So- 
 ciety, 376 
 
 Galen, persecution of, 304 ; the alleged 
 originator of homoeopathy, 308 
 
 Galileo's recantation, 80 
 
 Garnett's treatment of consumption, 51 
 
 Gartenlauhe, attacks on homoeopathy 
 ^ in, 322 
 
 Gendre, le, supports Lavoisier, 5 
 
 Gerhardt on diphtheria, 421, 422 
 
 Germany, number of homceopaths in, 
 277 ; fancy description of, by a French- 
 _ m-in, 359 
 
 Giacometti on toxic effects of quinine, 399 
 
 Girtanner's treatment of consumption, 51 ; 
 system, 52 ; description of medical 
 science, 56 
 
 Glauber salt prepared with alum, 9 
 
 Gmelin, testimony in favour of Lavoisier 
 of, 8; on homoeopathy, 21 1; re- 
 proaches homceopathy for rejecting 
 bleeding, 363 ; owns that homoeopathy 
 has been unfairly used, 363 
 
 Goenne's condemnation of Trinks's treat- 
 ment, 223 
 
 Goethe's opinion of homoeopathy, 257 ; 
 Hufeland s estimate of, 257 ; allopathic 
 treatment of, 25S ; on mesmerism, 335 
 
 Goettling on proportions of constituents 
 of Glauber salt, 14; decision in Hahne- 
 mann's favour of, 31 
 
 Gohier, Melanie d'Hervilly, Hahnemann's 
 second wife, 165 ; an artist, 344 ; her 
 affectionate care of Hahnemann, 344 
 
 Gravier's success from bleeding in 
 cholera, 241 
 
 Greding's use of narcotics in mania and 
 nervous affections, 362 
 
 Gren's chemical views, 3 ; opposes La- 
 voisier, 7 ; on oxygen, 8 ; unaware of 
 composition of white lead, 23 ; on 
 mere, sol., 31 
 
 Griesselich, account of Hahnemann by, 
 
 161, 162, 163; defence of Hahnemann 
 
 by, 299 
 
 Groh's denunciation of homoeopathy, 189 
 
 Groos, his admiration for Hahnemann, 
 
 169 ; on homceopathy, 202 
 Grosvenor, Lord R., moves for parlia- 
 mentary paper on cholera returns, 248 
 Guersent on toxic effect of quinine, 399 
 
 Haeseler, Hahnemann's father-in-law, 
 
 153 
 
 Haeser accuses Hahnemann of pla- 
 giarism, 306; rebukes the opponents 
 of homoeopathy, 342 ; on homoeo- 
 pathy, 343 ; calumniates Hahnemann's 
 second wife, 343 ; accuses Hahne- 
 mann of vanity and avarice, 345 ; 
 quotes Bleekrode, Stieglitz and Gmelin, 
 363
 
 438 
 
 Index. 
 
 Hahn, the first hydropathist, 338 
 Hahnemann, services to chemistry of, 
 1-14; first appearance as a chemist of, 
 8; learning of, 10, 17; v^oxVqw. Arsenic 
 Poisoning of, 15; chemical essays of, 
 18-20; on Aditltcraiions of Drugs, 21; 
 chemical accuracy of, 22; wine test, 24- 
 27; test for metals, 27; soluble mercury, 
 30-32; Apothekerlexicon, 32-38; trans- 
 lation of Demachy's Lahorant, 8-12; 
 translation of Demachy's Liqiiciirfabri- 
 canf,T,(); translation of Demachy's Vi7ie- 
 gar tnannfacture, 39; translation of 
 Fabbroni's Wine Manufacture, 39 ; 
 translation of De La Metherie on Pure 
 Air, 40; translation of Monro's Materia 
 Aledica, 40; translation of Edinburgh 
 Dispensatory, 41; translation of Cullen's 
 Materia Meciica, 65, 103; services to 
 chemistry acknowledged by distin- 
 guished chemists, 41, 370; as a phy- 
 sician, 42-58; services to medicine of, 
 58, 370; first medical work of, 59; con- 
 tempt for authority in medicine of, 59; 
 on folk's medicine, 60; on exercise, 60; 
 the founder of hygiene, 61; on amuse- 
 ment, 61 ; on the cold water cure, 62; 
 on baths, 63; treatment of ulcers, 63; 
 treatment of caries, 63 ; on Venereal- 
 Diseases, 64; non-restraint treatment of 
 insanity, 67; employment of bleeding 
 by, 67 ; views on itch of, 69 ; on elec- 
 tricity, 74; reputation as a physician of, 
 74> 75> 90> 370; as a medical reformer, 
 76; attacks on orthodox therapeutics of, 
 87; works of, 145-150; birth and 
 parentage of, 150 ; education of, 151 ; 
 first thesis of, 151; father of, 150, 151; 
 first wife of, 153, 158, 159, 160, 329; 
 in Hermannstadt, 153 ; wanderings of, 
 I53i 154; domestic life of, 157; reli- 
 gion of, 158; personal appearance of, 
 162 ; dislike of praise of, 162 ; dislike 
 of controversy of, 163 ; confidence in 
 the triumph of homoeopathy of, 164 ; 
 handwriting of, 164; second marriage 
 of, 166; removal to Paris of, 166; death 
 of, 166, 167; leaves Leipzic for Coethen, 
 187 ; silenced by the censor, 251 ; de- 
 scribed by Kovats, 253 ; calumnies re- 
 specting, 285 ; alleged avarice of, 287, 
 354 ; will of, 288 ; explanation of the 
 mistake about pneum, 290, 291 ; accused 
 of stealing his doctrine from other 
 authors, 300; degree of, how obtained, 
 343 ; number of medicines proved by, 
 347 ; first wife of, 350 ; second wife of, 
 344 ; on his right to dispense his own 
 medicines, 356 
 
 Hahnemann, Frederick, account of, 159; 
 reply to Hecker by, 183 
 
 Hale, recall of diploma of, 232 
 
 Haller's test for arsenic, 16 ; on proving 
 medicines, 331, 361 
 
 Hanak's abuse of homceopaths, 252 
 
 Hansen (Kriiger), testimony to Hahne- 
 mann's learning and skill of, 170 ; on 
 allopathic treatment of cholera, 242, 
 246; silenced by the censor, 251 
 
 Hansen the mesmeriser, 332 ; allopathic 
 abuse of, 420 
 
 Hardy's case of death from quinine, 400 
 
 Harlem, prize offered by Academy of, 7 
 
 Harvey, refusal of Aberdeen faculty to 
 continue his examination, 232 
 
 Harvey, persecution of, 304, 305 
 
 Hasenohrl (see Lagusius) 
 
 Hasper, treatment of cholera by, 237 ; 
 reasons for bleeding in cholera of, 239-, 
 411; cholera, statistics of, 240; on 
 Herrmann's homoeopathic treatment in 
 Russian hospitals, 313 ; asserts that 
 homoeopathy is injurious, 319 
 
 Hassenfratz a partisan of Lavoisier, 5 
 
 Hecker, commendation of Hahnemann's 
 mode of making extracts by, 35 ; tes- 
 timony of, to the value of Kaempfs 
 clysters, 45 ; on spontaneous combus- 
 tion, 49; attacks Hahnemann's first 
 homoeopathic essay, 172 ; attacks 
 Hahnemann's Organon, 180 ; replied 
 to by F. Hahnemann, 183; his idea of 
 simplicity in prescribing, 180 
 
 Heinroth on homceo):)athy, 201; on 
 proving drugs, 268; prophecies the 
 speedy extinction of homceopathy, 271; 
 reasons for refusing to test homce- 
 opathy, 310 
 
 Hellchorisni of the Ancients, Hahne- 
 nemann's, favourable notices of, 184 
 
 Hencke praises Hahnemann's work on 
 arsenic, 18 
 
 Henderson's conversion to homoeopathy, 
 323 ; ejection from clinical jDrofessor- 
 ship, 375 
 
 Hennecke's estimate of Hahnemann, 161 
 
 Henschel accuses Hahnemann of pla- 
 giarism, 306 
 
 Hering on Hahnemann's theories, 330 
 
 Hermannstadt, Hahnemann's residence 
 
 Hermbstiidt, sides against Lavoisier, 5 
 goes over to Lavoisier's views, 7; on 
 the composition of milk-sugar, 9; on 
 pneum, 290 
 
 Herrmann's treatment of cholera by 
 emetics, 247 
 
 Herrmann's homoeopathic treatment in 
 Russian hospitals, 312, 313 
 
 I
 
 Index. 
 
 439 
 
 Heubner on local treatment of diphtheria, 
 422 
 
 Hildebrand on the solution of mercury in 
 nitric acid, 30 
 
 Hindostan, homoeopathy in, 277 
 
 Hippocrates, simple treatment of, 79; 
 advocacy o{ sini. siin. by, ill; Hahne- 
 mann compared to, 273; accusations 
 against, 303; said to be the author of 
 homoeopathy, 305-307 
 
 Hirschel on mesmerism, 334; medical 
 works of, 351 
 
 Hoffmann, C. L., his system, 53 
 
 Hoffman, F., on bleeding in cholera, 238; 
 on proving medicines, 361 
 
 Hoffman, L., his system, 42 
 
 Holscher prophecies the speedy extinc- 
 tion of homoeopathy, 215 
 
 Horner's adoption of homcEopathy, 320; 
 persecution of, 321, 375 
 
 Homoeopathy, origin of, I; comparative 
 trial of, 41 1 
 
 Herz, a critic of orthodox medicine, 56 
 
 Hornburg, persecution and death of, 229 
 
 Hospital, homoeopathic, for children, es- 
 tablished by Prussian Government, 247 
 
 Huber's reply to Juergensen, 331 
 
 Hufeland, denunciation of abuse of 
 opium by, 55 ; neglects hygiene, 61 ; 
 on the itch, 71; on arsenic in ague, 
 108; testimony to Hahnemann's che- 
 mical knowledge of, 132; testimony to 
 Hahnemann's medical knowledge of, 
 169; modified approbation of Hahne- 
 mann's prophylactic of scarlet fever, 
 175 ; modified assent to the thera- 
 peutic rule of siiii. siin., 176; states 
 advantages and disadvantages of ho- 
 moeopathy, 192; blames homoeopaths 
 for not bleeding, 196; makes out ho- 
 moeopaths to be murderers, 207, 228; 
 on liberty, 252; on mesmerism, 334; 
 on psora, 341 
 
 Humboldt opposes disease-matter, 50; 
 testifies to the reality of magnetic cures, 
 333; thinks Lavoisier's chemical dis- 
 coveries will help therapeutics, 391 
 
 Hungary, treatment of cholera in, 246; 
 treatment of homoeopaths in, 254 
 
 Hunter on inflammation, 376 
 
 Husemann on the danger of chloral 
 hydrate, 402 ; on digitalis in pneu- 
 monia, 408 
 
 Ignatia, Hahnemann's large doses of, 120 
 Individualisation, Hahnemann's advo- 
 cacy of, 116; Juergensen on, 41 1 
 Infarctus the cause of all diseases, 43-45 
 Infinitesimal doses, powerful effects of, 
 194 
 
 Insanity, usual treatment of, 66; Hahne- 
 mann's non-restraint treatment of, 67 
 
 Insincerity of homreopaths, alleged, 364 
 
 International Medical Congress, probable 
 failure of, in America, caused by anti- 
 homceopathic bigotry, 376 
 
 Iodine a cause of atrophy and albumin- 
 uria, 403 
 
 Iodoform, unable to arrest the decompo- 
 sition of albumen, 389 
 
 Ipecacuanha, powerful effects of small 
 doses of, 194 
 
 Irritation, want of proper definition of, 
 
 384 
 
 Isopathy, not accepted by homoeopaths, 
 
 331 
 
 Itch, maladies following suppressed, 208 
 Itch insect, discovered by Bonomo, 69; 
 known to Hahnemann, 72, 73 
 
 Jahn, Fried., on the itch, 70; extinguishes 
 Hahnemann, 269 
 
 Jahn, Fried., on the itch, 70 
 
 Jahr's account of Hahnemann's death, 
 166, 167 
 
 Jani's modified assent of to prophylactic 
 power of bell, in scarlatina, 175 
 
 Jean Paul Richter's opinion of Hahne- 
 mann, 257 
 
 Jousset expelled from Anatomical So- 
 ciety, 376 
 
 Juergensen on homoeopathy, 329; doses 
 of fjuinine and chloral hydrate, 329 ; 
 says homoeopathy has never done any 
 good, 330; on isopathy, 331; accuses 
 Hahnemann of mesmerism, 332; al- 
 leges Hahnemann first appealed to the 
 lay public, 335; condemns bleeding in 
 pneumonia, 336, 340; favourable to hy- 
 dropathy, 336; on the psora theory, 
 340; wagon-axle illustration of, 388; 
 his treatment of pneumonia, 407-41 1; 
 on digitalis in pneumonia, 408; his 
 doses of chloral hydrate, 409; on anti- 
 pyretic treatment, 415; on diphtheria, 
 422 
 
 Kaempfs clysters, 43, 53 
 Kairin the latest anti-pyretic, 395 
 Kammerer on the vis medicatrix naturce, 
 
 299 
 Kant on mesmerism, 335 
 Karpfs flowers of rhetoric, 250 
 Karsch, Wonders of Honuvopatliy by, 
 
 324; denies Hahnemann's sincerity, 
 
 324; on tests for arsenic, 326; quoted 
 
 by Rigler, 354 
 Karsten sides with Lavoisier, 7; discovers 
 
 Ruprecht's chemical errors, 289
 
 440 
 
 Index. 
 
 Kieser, a critic of okl-school physic, 56; 
 on cholera, 243; advice to sham doc- 
 tors, 243; on hleeding in cholera, 244; 
 prophecies the speedy extinction of 
 homceopathy, 270; an adherent of the 
 natural philosophical school, 378 
 
 Kiesselbach silenced by the censor, 251 
 
 Kirwan, theory of, 3; defends phlogiston, 
 5; takes the other side, 7 
 
 Klaproth smells phlogiston, 6; takes the 
 other side, 7; discovers Ruprecht's 
 chemical errors, 289; his diamond spar, 
 291 
 
 Klebs declares Virchow's cellular doc- 
 trine to be improbable, 392 
 
 Klockenbring, insanity of, Hahnemann's 
 cure of, 67, 154 ; large doses of tartar 
 emetic given by Hahnemann to, 120, 
 328 ; Karsch on, 327 
 
 Kluge prohibits Hahnemann's works, 251 
 
 Koeppe attributes homoeopathy to Alberti, 
 308 ; on homoeopathy, 342 ; laudation 
 ^ of, 365 
 
 Kolowrat's repeal of law against homceo- 
 pathy, 248 
 
 Kopp believes in 30th dilution, 210, 
 267 ; on homoeopathy, 263 ; character 
 of, 263 
 
 Kovats abuses homoeopathy, 253 
 
 Kranzfelder, an opponent of homceo- 
 pathy, 185 
 
 Kraus prophesies the speedy extinction of 
 homceopathy, 271 ; reveals the secret 
 of the spread of homceopathy, 283 
 
 Kriquet's case of death from quinine, 
 
 ,399 
 
 Kuechler, Henriette, Hahnemann's first 
 wife, 153; death of, 155, 156; con- 
 flicting accounts of, 158, 159, 160 
 
 Kuhn's persecution of Trinks, 223, 226 
 
 Laborde's experiments with quinine, 400 
 Labour, Brownian treatment of, 55 
 Laennec introduces the stethoscope, 377 
 Lagusius, treatment of Leopold H. by, 
 
 88-91 
 Landriani discovers composition of water, 
 
 5 
 
 Landsberg discovers Hippocrates to be a 
 homceopath, 305 
 
 La Plata, homoeopathy in, 277 
 
 Lassone's method of obtaining tartar 
 emetic, 23 
 
 Lavoisier, state of chemistry before, i ; 
 opposes phlogiston theory, 4 ; opposi- 
 tion to, 5 ; accused of plagiarism, 6 ; 
 wine test of, 28 ; execution of, 8 
 
 Lay origin of many medicines, 340 
 
 Lead, composition of white, shown by 
 
 Hahnemann, 22 ; Hahnemann's mode 
 
 of administering, 125 
 Lecomte's experiments with quinine, 401 
 Lehmann, Hahnemann's assistant, 156; 
 
 treatment of Leischke by, 225 
 Leiner on the composition of electricity, 
 
 53 . 
 Leipzic, Hahnemann at, 157 ; proposed 
 
 trial of homoeopathy at, 316 
 
 Leischke, case of, 225 
 
 Lenhardt, on the death of Leopold IL, 
 90-92 
 
 Lenhoscek, the Hungarian censor taboos 
 homcfiopathic publications, 249-251 
 
 Leopold H., treatment of last illness of, 
 88-91 ; autopsy of, 92 ; Karsch on, 325 ; 
 Rigler on, 349 
 
 Lesser appeals to posterity against 
 homojopathy, 212 ; calls Hahnemann 
 an ignoramus, 215 ; announces the 
 death of homreopathy, 274 ; finds 
 bleeding superior to homceopathy, 31 1; 
 on Wislicenus's public trial of homoeo- 
 pathy, 312 ; on psora, 341 
 
 Leube's humoral explanation of the ac- 
 tion of mineral waters, 393 ; his praise 
 of the stomach pump, 394 ; on diph- 
 theria, 422 
 
 Libels on homoeopaths, allopaths pun- 
 ished for, 365, 368 
 
 Lichtenstadt on mesmerism, 333 
 
 Liebermeister, his doses of veratrin in 
 fever, 406 ; his antipyretic treatment of 
 pneumonia, 412-414 ; on the anti- 
 pyretic method, 416, 417 
 
 Liebreich on homoeopathy, 342 
 
 Ling, the founder of medical gymnastics, 
 
 339 
 
 Link's appreciation of Hahnemann, 170 
 
 I^innasus on the itch-mite, 69 
 
 Lippich on homoeopathy, 254 
 
 Listerism, decline of, 424 
 
 Lockner on the nullity of homceopathy, 
 212 
 
 Loebel and Stifft, anecdote of, 255 
 
 London Homreopathic Hospital, treat- 
 ment of cholera in, 248, 321 
 
 Louisa, Queen, death by bleeding of, 
 
 35.0 
 Lowiz, on acetic acid, 3 
 Lucian, saying of, 345 
 Ludwig's use of narcotics in nervous 
 
 affections, 362 
 Luedecke, on prescribing, 397 
 
 Macht's nach ! 309 
 
 Macloughlin on treatment of cholera in 
 London Homoeopathic Hospital, 249, 
 
 I
 
 Index. 
 
 441 
 
 Magnesia from brine, Hahnemann's 
 mode of separating, 13 
 
 Major's treatment of pneumonia, 412 
 
 Mannsfcid accuses Hahnemann of steal- 
 ing from Paracelsus, 300 
 
 Marenzeller's homceopathic treatment in 
 Vienna hospital, 313 ; biography of, 
 314 ; letter of William IV. to, 314 
 
 Markus proposes bleeding for hospital 
 fever, 337 
 
 Massage, 339 
 
 Materia medica, Hahnemann's criticism 
 of the actual, 97 
 
 Mayntzer's reply to Juergensen, 342 
 
 Medicine, state of, in Hahnemann's 
 early days, 42 
 
 Medicine of Experience, Hahnemann's 
 
 Medicines, different actions of, 107 ; 
 
 Hahnemann's mode of preparing, 1 17 
 Meissen, Hahnemann's birthplace, 151 ; 
 
 freedom of, conferred on Hahnemann, 
 
 Melicher's refusal to accept conditions 
 for a homosopathic hospital, 318 
 
 Mercurial fever required to cure syphilis, 
 103, 118 
 
 Mercury, Hahnemann's soluble, 30-32 ; 
 Karsch on, 327 ; hurtful effects of, 
 
 4°4 . 
 Mesmerism, the practice of, attributed to 
 Hahnemann, 332 ; adopted by modern 
 German professors, 332, 420 ; history 
 of medical, 333 ; periodicals devoted 
 
 to, 333 
 
 Messerschmidt, homceopathic cures by, 
 194 
 
 Metherie, de la, on vegetable acids, 3 ; 
 opposes Lavoisier, 5 ; on Pure Air, 
 translated by Hahnemann, 40 ; on 
 borax, 2S9 
 
 Mexico, homoeopathy in, 277 
 
 Miasmatic diseases, 116 
 
 Mietau, offer to Hahnemann of a profes- 
 sorship at, 75 
 
 Mixtures of medicines, excuse for giving, 
 
 397 
 Mongaz supports Lavoisier, 5 
 Monro unaware of carbonic acid in white 
 
 lead, 22; believes Epsom and Glauber 
 
 salts to be identical, 23; complains of 
 
 uncertain strength of tartar emetic, 23; 
 
 Materia Medica of, Hahnemann's 
 
 translation of, 40, 104 
 Monstrosity, homoeopathy a, 275, 280 
 Monte Video, homoeopathy in, 277 
 Morgan, Vaughan, offer to St. George's 
 
 hospital of, 321 
 Morphia poisoning, frequency of, 405 
 Morveau on the light principle in phos- 
 
 phorus, 3; supports Lavoisier, 5; ar- 
 senic test of, 16 
 
 Most on homreopathy, 215 
 
 Mueckish on homoeopathy, 203; on prov- 
 ing drugs, 270; on rational medicine, 
 329 
 
 Mueller, principal of Hahnemann's 
 school, 151 
 
 Mueller, J., his physiology, 37S 
 
 Mueller, Moritz, account of the Trinks 
 trials by, 222, 224 ; persecution of, 
 
 233 
 
 Munk cannot conscientiously test homoe- 
 opathy, 311; on Andral's trials of ho- 
 moeopathy, 315 
 
 Muriatic acid, supposed composition of, 
 3; Hahnemann's new test for, 12 
 
 Musk, powerful effects of small doses of, 
 194 
 
 Naples, trials of homoeopathy in, 315 
 Narcotics, faulty preparation of extracts 
 of, 141; Hahnemann's method of 
 making extracts of, 141; great use of, 
 
 395' 425 
 Natural philosophy, its evil influence on 
 
 medicine, 97 
 Nature doctors, 430 
 Naumann's praise of Hahnemann, 169 
 Navier on the composition of arsenic, 15; 
 
 test for arsenic of, 16, 326, 327 
 Neumann, strange chemical notions of, I, 
 
 2 ; denies the existence of magnesia, 
 
 13 ; failure to find a sure test for 
 
 arsenic of, 15, 16; attempt to find a 
 
 soluble mercury of, 30 ; bad method of 
 
 preparing extracts of, 34 
 New Zealand, homoeopathy in, 277 
 Nicolai says Hahnemann is idiotic, 283 
 Niemeyer's therapeutics, 406, 408 
 Nihilism, the reign of, 37S 
 Nitric acid, impurity of, 9; Hahnemann's 
 
 improved mode of manufacturing, 12 
 Nolde's approval of Hahnemann's simple 
 
 practice, 174 
 Nostrum vending by physicians, 52, 179, 
 
 180 
 Nothnagel on fatal doses of opium, 40G 
 
 Obersteiner's treatment of cholera, 246 
 Oertel, the founder of hydropathy, 337 ; 
 
 attacked by the allopaths, 417 
 Olbers on mesmerism, 333 
 Ontology in medicine, 54 
 Opium, Hufeland's denunciation of the 
 
 abuse of, 55 ; Rossbach on fatal doses 
 
 of, 406 
 Organon, preface to second edition of.
 
 442 
 
 Index, 
 
 134-136 ; appearance of, iSo ; criticism 
 
 of, 181 
 Oxydes, discovery of, 6 
 Oxygen, discovery of, 4 
 
 Papayotin, a bacteria producer, 390 
 Paracelsus, a denouncer of orthodox 
 medicine, 98 ; said to be the inventor 
 of homceopathy, 300, 355; real doctrine 
 of, 302, 361 
 Parasites of homoeopathy, 352 
 Pareira-root in renal and vesical 
 
 diseases, 114 
 Paris, Hahnemann's removal to, 166 
 Parthenium, a supposed new metal, 289 
 Paternity, Hahnemann on, 160 
 Pathological anatomy, neglected by the 
 Brownians, 56 ; Rokitansky's develop- 
 ment of, 378 
 Patient, examination of the, Hahne- 
 mann on the, 112 
 Patin on Peracelsus, 303 
 Pearce found guilty of the manslaughter 
 
 of his brother, 227 
 Perfection already attained by old school, 
 
 211 
 Periodical to oppose homceopathy, 285 
 Periodicals, homoeopathic, in Germany, 
 
 277) 352 ; in other countries, 277 
 Persecuting fury of the allopaths, 234 
 Persecutions of the homoeopaths, 233 
 Pfaff on mesmerism, 335 
 Phlogiston, doctrine of, i, 2, 3 
 Phthisis, the cramming system in, 421 
 Physiological research, pursuit of, 425 
 Pierer on Hahnemann's new essay, 173 
 Piorry introduces the plessimeter, 377 
 Pitschaft on Goethe, 257 
 Place, de la, supports Lavoisier, 5 
 Ploucquet's quotation from Erastus, 300 
 Pneum, history of, 288-290 
 Pneumatic apparatus, transient favour of, 
 
 395 
 Pneumonia, Dietl's statistics of, 220 ; 
 bleeding used for, down to 1867, 221 ; 
 Juergensen's treatment of, 407, 411 ; 
 quinine in, 407 ; veratrin in, 408 ; 
 chloral hydrate in, 409 ; diet in, 409 ; 
 turpentine in, 410 ; antipyretic treat- 
 ment of, 412, 418 
 Poerner befriends Hahnemann, 152 
 Poisons are medicines, loi, 129 
 Pope, rejection of, by Edinburgh ex- 
 aminers, 232 
 Prescriptions, secundum artem, 79; 
 simple, Hahnemann's advocacy of, 86, 
 87, 94; composite, 54, 82-87, 97, 194; 
 simple allopathic, 397 
 Priessnitz the water-curer, 338; abused by 
 the allopaths, 417 
 
 Priestly's dephlogisticated air, 4; defends 
 phlogiston, 5 
 
 Professional courtesies, 57 
 
 Provers before Hahnemann, 99 
 
 Proving of drugs, 99, loo; Hahnemann's 
 loi, 104; and poisonings the source of 
 the materia medica, 100; allopathic 
 opinions of, 268; Heinroth on, 268; 
 Miickisch on, 270 
 
 Prussia, law allowing homoeopaths to 
 dispense their medicines in, 364 
 
 Prussian blue, search for the colouring 
 matter of, 2 
 
 Psora theor}', Hahnemann's, 138 ; re- 
 jected by his disciples, 138; professed 
 by many allopaths, 341 
 
 Puchelt's opinion of Hahnemann's talents, 
 168; on mesmerism, 334; on homoeo- 
 pathy, 183, 187, 201 
 
 Purgatives, great consumption of, in 
 England, 425 
 
 Quantity not always proportional to 
 effect, 131 
 
 Quarin, his influence on Hahnemann, 58; 
 his friendship for Hahnemann, 152 
 
 Quinine the fashionable antipyretic, 395; 
 poisonous effects of, 398; hydrocyanate 
 of, effects of, 399; amaurosis from, 
 400 ; deafness from, 400; action on the 
 heart of, 401; ague caused by, 401; in 
 pneumonia, 407 
 
 Quixote, Don, Hahnemann compared to, 
 283 
 
 Raab, Bakody's successful treatment of 
 
 cholera at, 249 
 Rademacher on Paracelsus, 301, 302; 
 
 alleged long prescriptions of, 213 
 Rapp, conversion to homoeopathy of, 
 
 323; persecution of, 323 
 Rational, Attomyr"s derivation of, 213 
 Rau on itch sequelce, 72 
 Recamier's case of death from quinine, 
 
 399 
 
 Reich's secret remedy for fevers, high 
 price paid for, 52 
 
 Reil's doctrine, 49 ; Hahnemann's criti- 
 cism of, 132 
 
 Rein's treatment of cholera, 245 
 
 Reith, turned out of Aberdeen Hospital, 
 
 375 
 Richter condemns allopathic treatment of 
 
 pneumonia, 220 
 Richter. (See Jean Paul) 
 Riecke on homrecpathy, 210 
 Riess on anti-pyretic treatment, 414 
 Rigler, lecture at the West Berlin Medical 
 
 Society by, 345; his unveracity, 346- 
 
 35 1; his work on homoeopathy, 349;
 
 Index. 
 
 443 
 
 his remarks on Hahnemann's first wife, 
 350; his mirror of truth, 352; praises 
 of, by allopathic journals, 353, 360-368; 
 his grotesque account of Hahnemann's 
 career, 353; his travesty of Hahne- 
 mann's doctrines, 354; abuses Hahne- 
 mann's literary style, 355; admits that 
 homoeopaths should be allowed to dis- 
 pense their medicines, 356; strong lan- 
 guage of, 358; punished for libel, 365, 
 .368 
 Ringer's bastard homoeopathy, 425 
 Rochel on homoeopathy, 254 
 Roeschlaub and Hufeland, 264 
 Rokitansky, the champion of patholo- 
 gical anatomy, 37S 
 Ronchi declares Hahnemann mad, 316 
 Roose on professional courtesies, 57 
 Rosenberger on septic poison, 390 
 Rossbach's experiments with papayotin, 
 
 390 ; on fatal doses of opium, 406 
 Rothamel's definition of cholera, 242 
 Routh's homoeopathic statistics, 375 
 Royal Society, vivisection surest passport 
 
 to, 426 
 Rudolphi on mesmerism, 335 
 Ruehle's humoral treatment, 417 
 Rummel on homoeopathy, 194; defence 
 
 of Hahnemann's originality, 301 
 Ruprecht, chemical errors of, 289 
 Russia, homoeopathy in, 277 
 Russian princess, fable of Hahnemann 
 and the, 286 
 
 Sachs likens Hahnemann to the devil, 19; 
 declares Hahnemann mad, 212; scien- 
 tific reason for treating cholera with 
 opium by, 243; his opinion of Kopp's 
 work, 267; says homoeopathy is dead, 
 273; wants the State to suppress ho- 
 moeopathy, 279; accuses Hahnemann 
 of misquoting Hippocrates, 305; scoffs 
 at a trial of homoeopathy, 311 
 
 Salicylic acid the great anti-pyretic and 
 anti-rheumatic, 395 ; deafness caused 
 by, 398, 402; toxic action of, in medi- 
 cinal doses, 401, 402 
 
 Salkowsky on the urine, 386 
 
 Saltpetre, Hahnemann's mode of refining, 
 
 23 
 
 Samuel's pathology, neglect of chemistry 
 
 in, 388 
 Sande, van der, work by Hahnemann 
 
 and, 21 
 Sander, says Governinent should suppress 
 
 homoeopathy, 281; says homoeopathy 
 
 was less successful than bleeding in 
 
 cholera, 319 
 Sapere atide, Hahnemann's first use of, 
 
 131 
 
 Satan reproving sin, 376 
 Sauvages, on bleeding in cholera, 238 
 Sax accuses Hahnemann of killing Prince 
 Schwarzenberg, 186; signs report of 
 autopsy, 187 
 Saxony disgraced by being the birthplace 
 
 of Hahnemann, 198 
 Scheele searches for the colouring matter 
 of Prussian blue, 2; opposes Lavoisier, 5 
 Schelling's natural philosophy, 46 
 Schenck on bell, in scarlatina, 184 
 Scherer's rebuke of Trommsclorff, 291 
 Scherf approves of Hahnemann's wine 
 
 test, 29 
 Schmit, article on cholera by, 249 
 Schoenlein, the founder of exact clinical 
 
 research, 378 
 Schreiber, treatment of Leopold H. by, 
 
 89 
 Schubert on mesmerism, 333 
 Schultz asks Government to forbid homoe- 
 opathy, 278; says Paracelsus invented 
 homoeopathy, 301, 355; alleges the 
 cellular theory to be of French origin, 
 
 355 
 Schuster on homoeopathy, 254 
 Schwarzenberg, Prince, case of, 186 
 Schwerdtner, on cold water treatment, 
 
 . 338 
 
 Science, allopathic, unscientific character 
 of, 419 
 
 Science, unscientific, 423 
 
 Scott, on bleeding in cholera, 240 
 
 Seitz, dangerous doses of opium of, 406; 
 on veratrin in pneumonia, 40S; on digi- 
 talis in pneumonia, 408; on the anti- 
 pyretic method, 416 
 
 Sentence passed on Trinks, Wolf, and 
 others, 226 
 
 Sganarelle on the change of practice of 
 physic, 377 
 
 Siebenhaar's account of the Trinks trial, 
 225 ; his praise of bleeding, 228 
 
 Similia similibus, 103, 104, 107, 108, 
 109 ; advocated by older authors. III ; 
 acknowledged by Hufeland, 176 
 
 Simon on homoeopathy, 207 ; considers 
 Hahnemann an ignoramus, 208 ; his 
 opinion of Kopp, 267 ; says homoeo- 
 pathy is nearly dead, 273 ; accuses 
 Hahnemann of imposition, 305 ; on 
 ALarenzeller's treatment in Vienna hos- 
 pitals, 313 ; on homoeopathy in Russia, 
 319 ; pays Hahnemann homoeopathi- 
 cally, 372 ; on Bischoffs trial of 
 homoeopathy, 412 
 
 Simple prescriptions, Hahnemann's re- 
 commendation of, 78 ; condemned, 
 183 ; approved, 209 
 
 Simpson, Sir J. Y., on homoeopathy, 374
 
 444 
 
 Index. 
 
 Single remedy, Hahnemann's recom- 
 mendation of the, no 
 
 Skoda, an advocate of bleeding, 219 ; 
 teaches physical modes of investiga- 
 tion, 378 
 
 Societies, scientific, of which Hahnemann 
 was member, 75 
 
 Soda from common salt, Hahnemann's 
 mode of obtaining, 19 
 
 Sorge, reply to Juergensen of, 342 ; reply 
 to Rigler of, 347 ; exposes his inaccu- 
 racies, 348 
 
 Specifics, the search for, 100, 106, 115; 
 different meanings attached to the 
 word, 100 ; the discovery of, a pious 
 wish, 417 
 
 .Speculative medical systems, Hahnemann 
 on, 95 . . 
 
 Sponitzer's objection to simple prescrip- 
 tions, 174 
 
 Spread of homoeopathy, 276 ; in Ger- 
 many, 276 ; reasons for, 282 
 
 Sprengel appreciates the value of mer- 
 curius solubilis, 32 ; on Hahnemann's 
 Venereal Diseases, 65 ; calls Hahne- 
 mann's attack on Leopold H.'s physi- 
 cians, "fanatical," 93; testimony to 
 Hahnemann's learning and skill, 170; 
 on Hahnemann's first homceopathic 
 essay, 173 ; denies that Hippocrates 
 taught homoeopathy, 305 ; his im- 
 partiality, 345 
 
 Sproegel's test for arsenic, 16 
 
 Stachelroth defends homoeopathy, 280 
 
 Stahl, on phlogiston, i, 2 
 
 Stapf, persecution of, 233 ; homoeopathic 
 treatment at the Berlin Charite, 312 
 
 State help, appeal for, 58, 278, 348, 365 
 
 Statue of Hahnemann, Rigler's abuse of 
 the, 356 
 
 Steffens, his system, 47 
 
 Stern's trials of homoeopathy at Miskoltz, 
 
 317 
 
 Sterz on emetics in cholera, 247 
 Stieglitz testifies to Hahnemann's intelli- 
 gence and knowledge, 170 ; testifies 
 to Sachs's talent, 212 ; says homoeo- 
 pathy is dead, 274, 362 ; succeeded 
 by Weber as physician to King of 
 Hanover, 274, 363 ; gives his reasons 
 for refusing to test homoeopathy, 31 1 ; 
 his account of Marenzeller's trials, 314; 
 declares that homceopathy is only as 
 successful as dietetic treatment, 319 ; 
 admits Hahnemann's literary skill, 355 
 Stifft, anecdote of, 255 ; his treatment of 
 Francis I., 256; gets homoeopathy sup- 
 pressed in Austria, 278, 315 
 Stoeller's sneers at Hahnemann's, 89 
 Stoerck treats Leopold H., 89; Hahne- 
 
 mann's defence of, 93 ; his use of nar- 
 cotics in nervous affections, 362 
 
 Stoll, his system, 43, 53, 417 
 
 Stomach-pump, the highest development 
 of therapeutics, 394 ; going out of 
 fashion, 394; in phthisis, 421 
 
 Sulphur in haemorrhoids, 362 
 
 Sulphuric acid, Hahnemann's new test 
 for, 12 
 
 Sycosis, one of Hahnemann's chronic 
 miasmata, 138 
 
 Symptoms, treatment of, Hahnemann's 
 condemnation of, 112; allopathic treat- 
 ment of, 395, 396, 414, 419 
 
 Syphilis, one of Hahnemann's chronic 
 miasmata, 138; transmission of, various 
 ways of, 390; antipyretic treatment not 
 applicable to, 417 
 
 Szot5, on bleeding in cholera, 247 
 
 Tartar emetic, Hahnemann's mode of 
 obtaining pure, by crystallization 23; 
 in pneumonia, Dietl's cases of, 220; 
 large dose of, in Klockenbring's case, 
 120, 328 
 
 Tessier, trials of homoeopathy by, 316; 
 expelled from Anatomical Society, 376 
 
 Therapeutics in Hahnemann's youth, 
 state of, 42 • 
 
 Thesatirits medicaminum, Hahnemann's 
 translation of, 8, 113, 114, 115 
 
 Thouret's test for lead, 28 
 
 Thucydides, principle of, 345 
 
 Tissot's denunciation of tobacco, 53 
 
 Toad, proving of, falsely ascribed to 
 Hahnemann, 347 
 
 Toeltenyi proposes publicity in order to 
 extinguish homoeopathy, 283; thinks 
 publicity has killed it in England, 
 France, and Germany, 284 
 
 Torture, judicial, Blumenbach's approval 
 of, 66 
 
 Transcendental school, the, 96 
 
 Traube on digitalis, 395 
 
 Treviranus on mesmerism, 333 
 
 Trials of homoeopathy, by its opponents, 
 308-311; public, by its adherents, 312- 
 321 
 
 Trinks, criminal process against, 222; 
 letter to Hufeland of, 233 
 
 Triumph of medicine, the, is to verify 
 diagnosis on dissecting table, 416, 425 
 
 Trommsdorff, praises Hahnemann's Apo- 
 thekerlcxicon, 37; testifies to the im- 
 purity of drugs in chemists' shops, 141; 
 denounces Hahnemann's unexampled 
 impudence, 290; denies the existence 
 of oxygen in oxyde of mercur)', 291 
 
 Trousseau on toxic effects of quinine, 399
 
 Index. 
 
 445 
 
 Turkish baths invented by a layman, 339 
 Turpentine in pneumonia, 410 
 Typhus, Brownian treatment of, 55; the 
 test of anti-pyretic treatment, 415 
 
 Ucay's precipitated mercury, 30 
 
 Uhle and Wagner's pathology, neglect of 
 
 chemistry in, 388 
 Ulcers, Hahnemann's treatment of, 63 
 Unanimity, wonderful, of allopaths, 418 
 Universities, number of, 57 ; neglect of 
 
 clinical instruction in, 57 ; medicine 
 
 as taught in the, 375 
 Urban 's estimate of Hahnemann, 169 
 
 Vaccination, a kind of isopathy, 331 
 
 Vandermonde supports Lavoisier, 5 
 
 Van Valzah deposed for taking homceo- 
 pathic medicines, 376 
 
 Variability of medical practice, 98 
 
 Vater, on bleeding in cholera, 238 
 
 Venereal Diseases, Hahnemann's, 64; cri- 
 ticisms on, 65 
 
 Venesection, Fischer's life saved by, 205 
 
 Veratrin, antipyretic action of, 406 
 
 Vetter"s Venereal Diseases, 65 
 
 Vienna, Hahnemann's residence at, 152; 
 homreopathic hospital of, 248 ; com- 
 parative trial of homreopathy in, 411 
 
 Vinegar, Hahnemann proves that oxy- 
 gen forms, 20 ; Demachy's work on the 
 manufacture of, 39 
 
 Virchow denounces mesmerism, 332 ; 
 cellular doctrine of, 379, 382 ; denies 
 the curability of chlorosis, 385 ; op- 
 posed by Klebs, 392 ; says morphia 
 seldom does harm, 405 
 
 Vis medicatrix naturoe, Hahnemann's 
 alleged denial of the, 296 ; proved to be 
 erroneous, 297, 300 
 
 Vital force, reintroduction of a, 383 
 
 Vogel, Goethe's physician, 258 
 
 Vogt's elements, 3 
 
 Vulpian's experiments with toad poison, 
 347 
 
 Wagner's friendship for Hahnemann, 153 
 Wagon axle theory of disease, 388 
 
 Waldenburg and Simon's work on pre- 
 scribing, 396 
 
 Walker, an adherent of the natural phil- 
 sophical school, 378 
 
 Water only transparent earth, i ; com- 
 position of^ discovery of, 7 
 
 Water-cure, the founders of the, 337 
 
 Wawruch's treatment of cholera, 246 
 
 Weber succeeds Stieglitz as physician to 
 King of Hanover, 274 
 
 Wedekind, his portrait of a doctor of his 
 time, 53 ; on the uncertainty of physic, 
 56 ; begs for government aid to protect 
 the physician, 58 ; testifies to Hahne- 
 mann's talent, 168 ; lauds bleeding and 
 purgatives, 202 ; on the psora theory, 
 341 ; composite prescriptions of, 396 
 
 Westrumb, on the composition of vege- 
 table acids, 3 ; maintains phlogiston, 7 ; 
 praises Hahnemann's method of distil- 
 ling, 39 
 
 Wichmann on the itch insect, 69 ; his 
 reasons for not writing short prescrip- 
 tions, 175 
 
 Widnmann on homoeopathy, 194 
 
 Wiegleb defends phlogiston, 6; com- 
 mends Hahnemann's test for arsenic, 
 18 
 
 W^ildburg prophecies the downfall of 
 homceopathy, 272 
 
 Wilde, Sir W., on the homreopathic 
 treatment of cholera in Vienna, 248 
 
 Williams, C. J. B., on homoeopathy, 374 
 
 W^indisch on homoeopathy, 215; says 
 homoeopaths are liars, 216 
 
 Wine test, Hahnemann's, 24; Wirtem- 
 berg, 25 
 
 Winterl's odd notions respecting metals, 3 
 
 Wirer's treatment of cholera, 246 
 
 Wislicenus, homoeopathic treatment in 
 the Berlin Hospital by, 312 
 
 Witzler's Horitccopatliy at its last gasp, 272 
 
 W^olf, condemnation of, 226 
 
 Wunderlich on digitalis as a febrifuge, 
 395 
 
 Zeroni on homoeopathy, 208 
 Zimmer, quinine manufactory of, 401 
 Zimmermann on Paracelsus, 303
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 JIIM131983 
 
 *'WITMfO tie 
 JAN 1 7 REClJ 
 
 >I33M2 
 mi Q Z QQ^ 
 
 Siomed/cal Library 
 
 Iiomedical Library 
 
 Fe^ 
 
 i\ur^ 
 
 BiomwJ SEP 
 
 BIOMED LIB. 
 OCT IRECB 
 
 ^.?. 
 
 ^^90 
 
 7 1983 
 
 Bio 
 
 2 WEEK 
 
 biomedical Library 
 medical Library 
 
 APR 1 5 1994 
 
 Rl cei VED 
 
 AU 
 
 -CI 
 
 1^^^ 
 
 IB 
 
 pun 04 1988 
 
 REC'D 
 
 315 
 
 ^'•wj!"iv:)-jo-^' 
 
 \L!FO% 
 
 P3 -r- 
 
 31^