The claim of to a place among the sciences. (John C. Morgan, A. O., 1876, p. 17.) The scientific aspect of. (N. E. M. G., vol. XI., p. 69.)

Its name and relation to medicine. (C. Wesselhoeft, Brit. Jour., January, 1876.)

Dr. Dudgeon's words are:

"We do not assume the name objected to; it has been bestowed upon us, and most inappropriately, for it refers only to a part of our practice.

"The sole difference between you and us is, that we are medical men who hold ourselves free to avail ourselves of all the resources of therapeutics, including homoopathy, while you profess yourselves free to avail yourselves of all the resources of therapeutics, except homoeopathy. Having always felt that the names 'homœopath and allopath' were nicknames, we shall only be too happy to abandon them. Cease to call us homoeopaths, acknowledge our right to practice medicine according to our judgment, throw open your hospitals and dispensaries to the competition of all, without distinction of medical creed, and yon will see a rapid extinction of homœopathic journals, hospitals, societies, and directories."

The case is well put by Dr. Dudgeon in saying that we claim the right to avail ourselves of all therapeutic resources, while our opponents do not. But to say that we enjoy all therapeutic resources, including homœopathy, naturally conveys the impression that it occupies a very inferior position in our practice, worthy to be mentioned last among therapeutic resources, and the Lancet is not slow to take advantage of the phrase.

Our opponents know well enough that we have always made use of other therapeutic means; we have freely made use of surgery and anæsthetics; have always used antidotes to poison as any rational being would have used them, and have freely acknowledged every other possible way of using medicines, but were in the main satisfied that the principles known as those of homoeopathy were not only correct, but that they answered the therapeutic purposes of every-day practice better than other methods, for the exceptional use of which, however, we always claimed. the right to be sure, not the exclusive monopoly, which we might without injustice accuse our opponents of claiming, who call themselves "rational" and "regular" while they dispute our modest title.

Every man of sense and taste hates shibboleths and partisan watch words. Science and patriotism leave such phrases to charlatans and politicians.

When Hahnemann called the Galenian principle of contraria contrariis "alloopathy" he meant no offense; neither did he, nor do we, intend to pin our last hope to the name of homeopathy, by which its originator simply intended to express a distinction between his and the Galenian maxim. If those of different practice from ourselves disavow that ancient principle which Hahnemann rejected, we certainly are no longer justified in calling them allopaths, and we will never do so again if we can help it, and if they don't practice that way. On the other hand, they shall have the privilege of calling us homeopaths, or not, if they want to. But they should bear in mind, if they can, that, while we are ready to abandon that name for a more appropriate one, which we are ready to accept even from our opponents, we shall fasten the stigmata of "quacks," "exclusive dogma," "falsehood," "fraud," upon those who so wantonly indulge in these epithets.

Grant each man absolute liberty of conscience, say we. There are those who choose to practice homeopathy exclusively. Let them do so; who dares object? Let those who choose include any other method or principle in their manner of prescribing drugs; they have a perfect right, and no one shall condemn or abuse them, or, like the man in the Vatican, hurl anathemas at others because they dare to be free in practice. Condemn those only who profess to practice homeopathy exclusively or partially, but who do neither.

Give up the name, if you please; who cares? But those who imagine that a principle is to be surrendered with an

objectionable name are much mistaken; for we shall still claim the liberty of publishing clinical cases of cures performed according to the maxim similia similibus with all sorts of doses; and of cases cured with simple, single medicines.

Notwithstanding much annoyance, the late "trial" of our colleagues in Boston has been fruitful of some experience, not the least of which was that we had allowed ourselves to fall into the same error which now proves to be the weak point of the old school medical societies, and which will surely lead to their decline. They demand of their candidates that they shall practice according to certain dogmas, or, in the words of Boston Medical and Surgical Journal (loc. cit.), "to sign an agreement to do certain things;" and not to do certain others, namely, to recognize or to practice homœopathy introduced by a famous and honored German physician, whom they odiously place in one category with the scum of quackery such as can only emanate from their own New England-and Boston in particular-spiritualism and Thomsonism.

The writer of this article, though in no manner connected with the so-called “trial,” watched its progress with much interest, and was soon forcibly impressed with the inconsistency of the position of our societies, who, by further retention of such sections of their by-laws, placed themselves on an equal footing with their intolerant opponents, who, with their reliance on their numerical strength, shrank from no measure of injustice, however flagrant.

Now that our integrity and firmness of principle were at stake, it was time to correct the error; and at the meeting of the Massachusetts Homœopathic Medical Society of October 9th, 1872, the author offered the following amendment to the by-laws, namely, to strike out the clause requiring of candidates that they should practice medicine in accordance with the maxim "similia similibus curantur," and to insert in its place:

"This Society demands for itself absolute liberty in science, and hence requires of its applicants for membership no creed or confession of medical belief, but only the expression of a willingness to act for the furtherance of its declared objects."

These objects, which had not been defined at all in the old "Constitution and By-Laws," it was now time to designate distinctly, as they are expressed in this clause:

"Since homoeopathy aims at the improvement and reformation of the art of healing by medicines proved by every

means that promises to enlarge the knowl edge of the laws governing the action of drugs, this Society hereby declares its object to be

"The development of the Materia Medica by proving of drugs upon the systems of men and animals.

"The administering of medicines, thus proved, to the sick, in accordance with the formula similia similibus curantur.'

"The encouragement of special studies and reports calculated to improve its members in the collateral branches of medicine."

This amendment was unanimously adopted at the subsequent meeting, April 9th, 1873. In the same year similar bylaws were adopted by the Boston Homœopathic Medical Society; and in June, 1874, by the American Institute of Homœopathy at Niagara Falls.

The effect of this is, in the first place, to express most distinctly the object of the society, and to define the reasons and purposes of its existence. And secondly, the status of the members was also defined. It places homoeopathists where they should have stood before, upon a declaration of principles like those expressed by Dr. Dudgeon, that we hold ourselves free to adopt and perfect homoeopathy along with every other branch of medical science, to the study and perfection of which all respectable physicians are invited.

Homœopathy, or what we still imply by that name, was purposely made prominent among the objects of the society, but it excludes nothing that experience does not prove to be objectionable. It is still imperfect; our provings, though voluminous, are imperfect, and our manner of applying medicines requires numerous tests and much research.

The object of the society was, therefore, defined as above to prevent, if possible, too great differences in the discussions, for which the field is sufficiently ample.

What is homoeopathy but a branch of medical science, and of therapeutics more particularly? It is but one method of applying medicines in disease, different from, though not necessarily excluding, other methods. We do not deny their usefulness; we do not deny that medicines can be applied, in the case cf diseases, upon other principles. All we claim is, that we desire for the present to develop this one principle of applying drugs as medicines. It is of so great a scope, it has already proved to be of vast general applicability, and promises still greater development and success, that many physicians find other methods quite superfluous.

As all other branches of medical science have subdivisions or specialties, therapeutics are also advantageously divided. Surgery is separated into innumerable specialties, some of which require a life-time for their acquisition, some but a few hours. It is common to find societies formed for the special purpose of developing and perfecting these subdivisions. There are otological and ophthalmological societies; there are organizations devoted to the improvement of obstetrics, the diseases of children, etc. The members of each special organization are usually also members of some sentral or general medical society.

The homoeopathic method of treating diseases is a specialty in therapeutics, but it is one permitting of so extensive an application, involving so inexhaustible an amount of material and research, that it overshadows other methods of applying medicines, though possibly it may not prove to be of universal applicability. Why should not therapeutics have its specialties as well as surgery? Why cannot we practice the specialty of applying medicines according to a certain maxim and method?

We believe that the determination of our rights in professional communities, by liberating the constitutions and by-laws of societies from errors, by throwing open our doors to all well-accredited physicians, will strengthen our position immensely. We feel that we have taken a step in advance of our opponents, who in their own cramped exclusiveness, which they forget to expel with us, can no longer offer successful resistance.

The free acknowledgment of our errors has always strengthened our position. Scientific errors are abandoned as soon as they are proved to be untenable. All we ask for is logical demonstration and scientific proof.

Conversion to, of Dr. Felix Audry, former Chief of Clinical Medicine of the Faculty of Medicine of Paris. (Trans. fr. La Revolution Medicale, by Jno. L. Coffin, N. E. M. G., vol. XI., p. 330.)

In the light of common sense. (Dyce Brown, H. W., vol. XI., p. 44.)

On the history of the internal development of. (Dr. Lorbacher, A. H. Z. 93, p. 4.)

The conditio sine qua non necessary to settle the point of controversy of Von Gruzewski, and the views of Drs. Lippe, of Philadelphia, and Schüssler, of Oldenburg. Illustrated by showing the action of Arnica in suppuration, Silicea in enchondromas, and Thuja on the connective tissues. (Von Grauvogi, A. H. Z. 92, p. 27.)

A vital question for, is that there may always be had medicines properly prepared. (A. H. Z. 92, p. 181.)

Address of President Bokody on the natural philosophy of the method of. (A. H. Z. 93, p. 89.)

- Pathology and. A short study. (J. Kafka, A. H. Z. 93, p. 193.)

vs. Allopathy in the Michigan State prison. (J. B. Tuttle, N. E. M. G., vol. XI., p. 237.)

Not sectarianism. (F. B. T. Money, H. W., vol. XI., p. 547.)

The social position of. (H. W., vol. XI., p. 131.)

In Mexico. A paper. (E. M. Hale, M. I., vol. IV., p. 356, '76.)

Wanted only. (C. Pearson, M. I., vol. III., p. 70, '76.)

Symptoms as related to. A paper. (T. F. Pomeroy, M. I., vol. IV., p. 41, 1876.) Progress of. (A. Lippe, H. M., Dec., 1876.)

Schusslerism vs. A paper. (A. C. Cowperthwait, M. I., vol. IV., p. 76, '76.)

Is Homœopathy governed by principles or opinions? (A. Lippe, H. M., Feb., '76.) The highest evolution in medicine. An article. (T. F. Pomeroy, M. I., vol. III., p. 223, '76.)

Materia Medica.

How best to study and ap ply. (A A. Fahnestock, M. I., vol. IV., p. 59, '76.)

Primary and Secondary Symptoms of Drugs. Defined and distinguished. In proceeding to consider the problem of the therapeutic value of primary and secondary symptoms I shall first refer to the views of older authors on the subject. Secondly, it will be necessary to answer the question as to what is actually meant by primary and secondary symptoms, to illustrate the subject by several experiments, and to compare the results with the arrangement of symptoms in our usual materia medica. After having determined whether a division of symptoms into primary and secondary is possible, and, having defined and classified toxical phenomena, I shall endeavor to point out what portion of the pathogenetic drug effect may serve to guide us in the selection of remedies. (T. F. Allen, N. A. J., May, '76; E. M. Hale, and C. Wesselhoeft, N. A. J., Aug., '76.) -As guides in determining the dose. (E. M. Hale, H. W., vol. XI., p. 93.)

H. W., vol. XI., p. 378.)

The Female Brain and Science. (M. I., vol. IV., p. 45, 1876.)

Sexual Excesses and their Influence upon So-
ciety. (H. R. Arndt, C. M. A., p. 120, 1876.)
On Hahnemann's Citations from Authors.
A Reply to Dr. Lippe. (Richard Hughes,
C. M. A., p. 308.)

Pathology as related to Therapeutics. (M.
H. Slosson, C. M. A., p. 332.)
Medicine in the Sixteenth Century. A paper.
(R. N. Tooker, M. I., vol. IV., p. 38.)

The Physiological Livery. (Ad. Lippe, C. M.
A., pp. 211, 164, 259, 375.)

Medicated. (H. W., vol. XI., p. 244.) Alcoholic Medication, an article against. (J. J. Griffith, M. I., vol. III., p. 165, 1876.) Thuja and the Hydrogenoid Constitution. (H. Goullon, Jr., N. A. J., Nov., 1876.) Tabulated Statement of the cases treated for the year 1875 at the General Homœopathic Clinic in Leipzig:

Whole number treated.....
Number of new cases.
New cases cured....

2843

2563

898

16

improved died....

214

13

1134

1429

acute cases chronic "

Then follows a list of the diseases treated. (A. H. Z. 93, p. 105.)

vol. XI., p. 563.)

Construction of Hospitals. (D. H. Beckwith, C. M. A., p. 243.)

The Anti-Quackery Law. Who may and who may not practice medicine in California. (N. E. M. G., vol. XI., p. 278.)

Etiological Remarks on Domestic Diseases. (Schelling, H. K., vol. XXI., pp. 57 and cont.)

Physician or Homœopath? (R. E. Dudgeon,
B. J. of H., April, 1876, p. 243.)
Research in Medicine. (British Jour., July,
1876.)

On the Selection of the Remedy. (Thomas
Simpson, Brit. Jour., April, 1876.)
The Administration of Drugs. (Alfred K.
Hills, Tr. N. Y. S., 1876-7, p. 95.)
Individualization. (A. Korndorfer, H. M.,
June, 1876.)

Individualization vs. Generalization. (E. W.
Berridge, H. M., Feb., 1876.)
Therapeutical Abuses. (G. S. Jeffery, C. M.
A., p. 407.)

Key Notes Atmospheric Influences and Drug Affinities. (L. P. Foster, M. I., vol. III., p. 357, 1876.)

Therapeutics, the Foundations and Boundaries of Modern. A paper. (Dr. Sharp, M. I., vol. IV., p. 85, 1876.)

Cases Illustrating Chief Curative Sphere of Hepar Sulph. (Wm. Bryce, British Jour., July, 1876.)

Clinical Uses of Grindelia Robusta and G. Squamosa. (E. M. Hale, N. A. J., Nov., 1876.)

The

laid on the ground upon his back, his arms
fully extended backward and outward, a
firm roll of clothing being placed beneath
the false ribs, so as to throw their anterior
margin prominently forward. The tongue
being held forward by an assistant, the op-
erator faces the patient, kneels astride his
abdomen, and places both hands so that the
balls of the thumbs rest upon the anterior
margin of the false ribs, the four fingers
falling naturally into the four correspond-
ing intercostal spaces on each side.
elbows of the operator being then planted
against his sides, he has but to throw him-
self forward, using his knees as a pivot,
and the entire weight of his trunk is brought
to bear upon the patient's false ribs. If, at
the same time, the fingers of the operator
grasp and squeeze the false ribs toward
each other, these combined actions crowd
the false ribs upward and inward, produc-
ing the greatest possible motion of the di-
aphragm and displacement of the contents.
of the pulmonary air cells. The operator
then suddenly lets go and returns to the
erect position on his knees, when both the
rushing in of air and natural elasticity of
the ribs at this part cause instant return to
their normal position. This, repeated with
proper rhythm and frequency, constitutes
the entire process. (O. M. and S. R., Sep-
tember, 1876, p. 282.)

Facal Residue of Milk Digestion.
1. The albuminous material of the moth-
er's milk is entirely absorbed.
2. The so-
called milk detritus is not undigested case-
in, but principally fat, and very probably
remnants of intestinal epithelium. 3. The
fat is not all absorbed, as is the case with
the albumen, but a portion leaves the in-