6

school, and Bahr calls attention to the frequent occurrence of asthma among the symptoms of slow poisoning by this substance. In the Deutschen Klinik of 1857, he writes, three cases of iodine asthma are recorded, which are of considerable interest; the asthma set in after a protracted use of the drug, whereas an acute intoxication with iodine never causes asthma.' It is possible, therefore, that homoeopathy is at work in this piece of therapeutics, in which case it will behove us to avail ourselves thereof.

"Lastly, I would direct attention to aurum as causing a marked dyspnoea which has not yet been studied and utilised." In looking through Dr. Hughes' work we miss certain important medicines, or find them noticed in too slight a manner, in our opinion. For example, in treating of chronic bronchitis, Dr. Hughes says nothing of arsenic, except in quoting Dr. Meyhoffer, as recommending this medicine "if emphysema is present," and once in a list of remedies advised by Dr. Jousset. Now, we think it is a mistake that arsenic is not put prominently forward as one of the chief remedies in chronic bronchitis. Undoubtedly it is markedly useful when emphysema is present, but as Dr. Hughes writes, the student would not suppose that it was a remedy of particular value in chronic bronchitis. Dr. Hughes again mentions it when treating of emphysema, but this is not sufficient.

Again, in treating of diarrhoea, not only are the medicines. recommended too few in number in proportion to the importance, variety, and frequency of the complaint, but such a medicine as arsenicum is not even named, except as among the remedies in the chronic form. We are aware, and we noticed the fact in reviewing the author's Pharmacodynamics, that Dr. Hughes considers that as arsenicum causes inflammatory irritation of the bowel, and as ordinary acute diarrhoea is not inflammatory, this medicine is therefore not suited to other than unmistakably inflammatory cases. This is carrying theory and pathology too far, and putting into the back-ground the value of symptomatology. We do not agree with Dr. Hughes' theoretical views on this subject, since all diarrhoea is the result of such a state of irritation of the mucous membrane of the intestines, that mere "functional" diarrhoea is but a mild form of what in a severe case amounts to inflammation, while if symptoms are to be of any value at all, those of arsenic point in the strongest manner to a particular form of diarrhoea, whether mild and " functional," or severe. We hoped Dr. Hughes would have at least mentioned such a difference of opinion, even though he could not agree with it. The practical result of the arsenical treatment in properly indicated cases, however mild, refutes the theoretical objection which Dr. Hughes has against it.

No. 1, Vol. 23.

D

Again, in the chapters on Diseases of Women, actaa, which, from our experience, takes a high place, is hardly mentioned.

In treating of bronchial affections, the absence of a chapter or a section on the treatment of "cough," with indications, is a great want to a beginner. Often a patient has what one may term a bronchial or laryngeal catarrh, when the symptoms and physical signs are such as to prevent us dignifying the complaint by the name of laryngitis or bronchitis, and when the choice of the remedy depends almost solely on the character or type of cough. Any one, then, looking up Dr. Hughes' work for assistance on this point, will find himself without information. If we remember aright, a section was devoted to this in the first edition, and we think it a pity that Dr. Hughes has omitted it in the present one.

But while finding some faults with the work, we again repeat that, taken as a whole, Dr. Hughes has accomplished his aim most satisfactorily, and produced a work which cannot fail to be a great help to both the beginner in homeopathy and to the busy practitioner.

We therefore cordially advise every student of our system to possess himself of the book, and every practitioner to have it in his library, to refresh his memory when too busy to look up any larger and fuller treatise.

Natrum Muriaticum as Test of the Doctrine of Drug Dynamization. By JAMES COMPTON BURNETT, M.D. (Glasgow), Fellow of the Royal Geographical Society. London: E. Gould & Son. THIS is a most charming little work, but its small size is no criterion of its value, as we consider it one of the most important contributions to homœopathic literature which has appeared for a long time. The doctrine of the dynamization of medicine by trituration is, as we all know, one of Hahnemann's theories which he promulgated to explain the power of infinitesimal doses of substances which, in the crude state, are inert or nearly so, as curative agents. In the present day, it is the fashion to consider it one of the "errors of the great master, and very few men are found to express their belief in it, or to do other than permit it to be laughed at. It is a theory which is very difficult of proof, on account of the many sources of fallacy which may present themselves in the investigation.

To the solution of this question Dr. Burnett addresses himself. He begins by stating in the most unbiassed and philosophical manner the elements in the enquiry which are necessary for attaining an indubitable result, and he keeps clearly before his mind, and points out to his readers, the various sources of error

possible in drawing a conclusion. As the medicine which affords the best means of testing the truth of the doctrine of drug dynamization, he chooses natrum muriaticum, which, as common salt, is an article of our daily food. He brings forward 25 cases of cure of maladies of long standing, by means of the 6th centesimal trituration. These cases are admirably recorded, and most of them are completely convincing not only as to the cure, but as to the nat. mur. being the only means of the cure. In all of these cases, salt was a part of the daily diet, and, in one case, an extra teaspoonful and a half had been taken for a year, on a friend's recommendation. We should like to have quoted one or two of these cases, but we should thereby be doing injustice to Dr. Burnett, since it is not one case, or two, that will carry conviction, but the collective array of evidence.

Dr. Burnett does very valuable service in proving conclusively, 1, that infinitesimal doses (the 6th cent. trituration) have a marked curative action; 2, that natrum muriaticum in this minutely divided condition is a remedy of great value, even though in the crude form it may be taken as part of the daily food; and 3, he goes a long way towards proving the truth of Hahnemann's assertion, that the trituration of drugs which are inert in the crude form as therapeutic agents, have, by means of this process, a new power developed for cure.

To throw a bright light on these three points, especially on the two latter, is a work of the highest importance in these days of medical scepticism, and we congratulate Dr. Burnett on his masterly production. The thoroughly philosophical tone, the quiet, unbiassed argument, and the quaint pithy style of the writer, gives this book a charm which we have seldom experienced before in the perusal of a medical work.

We advise every one of our readers to possess themselves of it, on account of the treat they will have in perusing it, but still more, that their minds may be opened to hear how much of "latter-day" evidence can be thrown on a most difficult question by an earnest mind ever open to receive the truth, however unlikely it may seem.

NOTABILIA.

FOUNDATION AND OPENING OF A HOMEOPATHIC HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN IN VIENNA.

Ox Nov. 4, 1878, a memorable event took place in the beautiful city on the Danube. On that day the "Lebenswarthische homœopathische Kinderspital" was formerly opened.

It is

situated in the densely populated district of Mariahilf, and is said to surpass anything of the kind either in the old world or the new. It is entirely due to the magnificent generosity of one man, whose name is thus writ large in the history of humanity; the name of our noble colleague is Surgeon-General Dr. Johann Taubes, Chevalier de Lebenswarth.

'Dr. Von Lebenswarth has spent 10,000 florins (£1,000) on the building, and it is entrusted to the care of the Sisters of Mercy of Gumpendorf, a suburb of Vienna. At the opening he handed the sum of 80,000 florins (£8,000) to the Lady Superior of the order, as an endowment for the hospital.

It is intended" for the gratuitous care and treatment of sick children between the ages of 1 and 12, the offspring of poor labourers or artisans, without any distinction as to religion." The treatment is to be " strictly in accordance with the homœopathic method of cure, and the institution is also to advance homeopathy."

The physician must be "an experienced homeopath, a doctor of medicine and of surgery, and be acquainted with the latest advances in medicine; he must also be "bound to treat the sick children strictly and exclusively according to the homeopathic method of healing."

Present physician, Dr. Ed. Huber; assistant physician, Dr. Ign. Klauber.

It is also Dr. Lebenswarth's intention to found an exhibition for young Vienna medical graduates, of the annual value of 500 florins, to afford the means to such to study homœopathy at the Gumpendorf hospital.

Dr. Von Lebenswarth is in his 77th year, and still hale and hearty; in handing over the institution to the trustees, he said: May God grant His blessing upon it," to which we say a heartfelt Amen, and may His blessing be also upon its noble founder.

BRITISH HOMEOPATHIC SOCIETY.

THE fourth ordinary meeting of this Society will take place on Thursday, the 2nd of January, 1879, at seven o'clock.

The debate on Dr. J. WILDE's paper on The Use of Aperients by Homeopaths will be resumed. After which a paper will be read by W. DEANE BUTCHER, Esq., of Reading, entitled Pharmacodynamics.

HOMEOPATHY IN THE COLONIES.

In the leading article of this month we notice briefly the fact of the advance of homoeopathy in the Colonies, and the position which homoeopathic practitioners are there making for themselves. Of this we have now the pleasure of giving some details, and first of Adelaide.

There Dr. Allan Campbell has attained a most important position. Professionally, we believe, his practice is very large; but what is more interesting to the homoeopathic world is the high and important standing which he and the two other homeopaths have attained as professional men in the opinion of the community, and the absence of prejudice evinced by the public of Adelaide, and, we may say, by the allopathic section of the profession. His homœopathic views have not prevented Dr. A. Campbell being elected a Member of the Board of Health, of the Council of Education, and of the University Council of Adelaide. We have before us the first report of the Children's Hospital, and a report of the laying of the foundation stone of the hospital. The Acting Governor and Chief Justice took the chair, and was supported by all the leading men in the Colony. The site of the hospital alone cost £2,500, and the actual expenses amount to £3,000. This important institution, the first of its kind in the province, owes its existence mainly, as we see it stated in the local papers, and in the speeches at the opening ceremony, to the zealous efforts and influence of Dr. Allan Campbell. Our readers will be still further gratified to learn that of the six medical officers of the hospital, three are homœopaths, one of them being Dr. Allan Campbell. Quite lately, Dr. Allan Campbell has been honoured by the conferring of the highest dignity the Colony can give. At the last election of Members of the House of Legislature (the Upper House), Dr. Allan Campbell was requested to stand as a candidate, the voters numbering 230,000, and Dr. Campbell was returned second at the poll, the first being the Mayor of Adelaide. He now bears the title of the Honourable Allan Campbell. Such a fact requires no comment, as showing the magnificent professional and social position earned for himself by our distinguished confrère. It is interesting to know that no handle for opposition was made by his old school brethren, or by anyone else, of his homoeopathic views. The only allusion to this in the public prints was in the Adelaide Punch, in which is a clever cartoon of the four candidates as figures in an old bas-relief, in which Dr. Campbell is drawn as holding below his arm the Materia Medica Pura! We congratulate Dr. Campbell, and feel proud of our colleague and his honours. We trust that he may find opportunity presented by