at least as far as it cometh within the compass of our art. But when upon trial he shall find the contumaciousness of the disease, which frequently deludeth his best care and industry, he will find reason of acknowledging the goodness of God, who hath dealt so bountifully with this nation, in giving the kings of it, at least from Edward the Confessor downwards, (if not for a longer time) an extraordinary power in the miraculous cure thereof. This our Chronicles have all along testified, and the personal experience of many thousands now living can witness for his majesty that now reigneth, and his royal father and grandfather: his majesty that now is, having exercised that faculty with wonderful success, not only here, but beyond the seas in Flanders, Holland, and France itself. The king of this last pretends to a gift of the same kind, and hath often the good hap to be alone mentioned in Chirurgical books, as the sole possessor of it, when the French themselves are the authors, yet even they, when they are a little free, will not stick to own the kings of England as partakers with him in that faculty; witness the learned Tagaultius, who in his institutions takes notice of king Edward's faculty of doing the same cure, and the continuance of it in his successors. Italy as well as France hath made the like acknowledgments in the book of Polydore Virgil, who reciting the gift given to Saint Edward the Confessor, doth subjoin these words: Quod quidem Immortale munus quasi hæreditario jure ad posteriores Reges manavit: nam Reges Angliæ etiam nunc tactu, ac quibusdam hymnis, non sine ceremoniis, prius recitatis, strumosos sanant. "Which immortal gift hath been derived as it were by an hereditary right to the latter kings; for the kings of England even now also do cure the Struma by touch, &c."

Indeed, if historians of our nation be diligently compared with the French, we shall find that the French kings had this gift later than ours. Dupleix a most diligent writer of that history, deriving it no further than Philip the first, and Lewis the gross; saying, that before their times no man had that power: whereas we on the contrary meet with the general acknowledgments of all our writers of the same miraculous power in Saint Edward's time, which were enough for this Controvery: and not only so, but with strong surmises, that this miracle was ancienter; it being notorious in the days of Malmsburiensis, who lived not long after his reign, that it was then disputed, whether the cure of the Evil were a peculiar reward of the King's Holiness, or

rather a Hereditary Faculty attending the English Crown. Which gift, that it was not taken away upon our departure from the Church of Rome, we have not only our daily experience to testify, but also the confession of Doctor Harpsfield, a great divine of the Romish persuasion; who, after he hath, in the Ecclesiastical History of England, described at large the miracle wrought by the Confessor, doth add, Quam strumosos sanandi admirabilem dotem in posteros suos Anglorum Reges, ad nostra usque tempora transfudisse & perpetuâsse, merito creditur. "Which admirable faculty of curing the Struma, he is justly believed to have transmitted to his posterity, the kings of England, and to have continued it amongst them to those times in which he wrote." And when Bishop Tooker would make use of this argument to prove the truth of our church, Smitheus doth not thereupon go about to deny the matter of fact; (nay, indeed both he and Cope acknowledge it) but he rather chuseth first to retort upon him the Protestant argument against miracles, which they will not allow to be the necessary mark of a true church, because they may also be performed by infidels. But withal he himself, who is not willing to let go so specious an argument from his own church, finds another solution of the difficulty, attri buting it to the great goodness of God, and the great Grace of Saint Edward, Quod nec in indigna hærede defecerit, that the gift did not fail in an unworthy successor; such as he calleth queen Elizabeth: and adds, that she did perform that cure, non virtute propriâ, sed virtute signi crucis; not by her own virtue, but by virtue of the sign of the cross, which she made at the time of healing; as if the sign of the cross, by whomsoever made, were sufficient to work a miracle. What would he now say, were he living, and had seen it done by three generations of kings without the sign of the cross. But it is not my business to enter into divinity-controver sies: all that I pretend to, is, first the attestation of the miracles; and secondly, a direction for such as have not opportunity of receiving the benefit of that stupendous power. The former of these, one would think, should need no other proof than the great concourse of strumous persons to Whitehall, and the success they find in it. I myself have been a frequent eye-witness of many hundreds of cures performed by his majesty's touch alone, without any assistance of chirurgery; and those, many of them, such as had tired out the endeavours of able chirurgeons before they came thither. It were endless to recite

what I myself have seen, and what I have received acknowledgments of by letter, not only from the several parts of this nation, but also from Ireland, Scotland, Jersey and Guernsey. It is needless also to remember what miracles of this nature were performed by the very blood of his late majesty of blessed memory, after whose decollation by the inhumane barbarity of the regicides, the reliques of that were gathered on chips, and in handkerchiefs, by the pious devotees, who could not but think so great a suffering in so honourable and pious a cause would be attended by an extraordinary assistance of God, and some more than ordinary miracle: nor did their faith deceive them in this point, there being so many hundred that found the benefit of it. If his dead blood were accompanied with so much of virtue, what shall we say of his living image, the inheritor of his cause and kingdom? Whom though it hath pleased God to deliver out of those dangers that overwhelmed his royal father; yet it was with so long an exercise of afflictions, that though (God be thanked) he be not now like to encrease the catalogue of martyrs, yet he may well be added to the number of confessors. This we are sure, the miracle is not ceased.

But since matter of fact itself is, in such difficult cases as these, liable to exception; I shall take notice of the evasions, that obstinate and incredulous men have used, to avoid so great a notoriety of experience. But since it cannot be denied that many go away cured, some will impute it only to the journey they take, and the change of air; others to the effects of imagination; and others to the wearing of gold.

The first of these is easily confuted by the hundreds of instances that are to be given of inhabitants of this city, who certainly could meet with little change of air, or indeed of exercise, in a journey to Whitehall. The second is as readily taken off by the examples of infants, who have been frequently healed, though they have not been old enough to im agine any thing of the majesty, or other secret rays of divinity, that do attend kings, or do any other act that way to contribute to the cure. The third hath more of colour in it, because many that have been touched, have upon loss of their gold felt returns of their malady, which upon recovery of that have vanished. But in this case also we have many evidences of the contrary.

For his majesty's royal father in his great extremity or poverty had not gold to bestow, but instead of it gave silver, and sometimes nothing, yet in all those cases did cure; and

those that were cured by his blood, wore no gold.

Now whereas upon the loss of the gold some have found damage; I would know, whether any of them were relieved by the wearing any other gold than what the king gave them. This is certain, that many that lost their gold continued sound; and whereas others did not, it may rather be imputed to secret providence, which would give the persons concerned that obligation of being mindful of their benefactor.

But since the infidelity of many in this fantastical age, and the want of opportunity of others, doth deprive them of this easy and short remedy; and, since it is not necessary that a disease, which is cured by miracle, should be remediable by no rules of art: I think it will not be amiss, if I do here give an account of what Nature and Art have supplied towards the relief of mankind, in one of the most obstinate diseases that I know: in the doing of which, though I think I shall say as much as those have said that have preceded me in this employment, (it may be, something more;) yet I must needs profess that what I write, will do little more than show the weakness of our ability, when compared with his majesty's, who cureth more in any one year, than all the chirurgeons of London have done in an age. However, that this attempt may not seem to want precedent, give me leave to tell you, that it is no more than the French king's chirurgeons have done before me, or than old Mr. Clows did in queen Elizabeth's days, and all other general writers in chirurgery have done more or less. Withal, as feeble as our art is, this Treatise will shew you that it is not altogether ineffectual; and though the difficulty of cure will sufficiently appear, yet the possibility will also be made out in many remarkable instances.

It is scarcely necessary to add to this extract. If by our separation however, from Great Britain, we have unfortunately lost the chain of this prerogative, we at least have it made up to us, by the wonder-working nostrums--panaceas and catholicons, which have of late sprung up amongst us for the cure of Scrofula!

To the Editors of the Esculapian Register. Gentlemen,

In a late number you have given us the etymology of the word Apothecary --as I have in the course of my reading

met with a different view, I herewith send it you, for insertion, if it meet your approbation. MEDICUS.

In a memoir recently published by the late Samuel Pegge, esq. F. S. A. and intituled, "Anecdotes of the English Language," the author has the following observations upon

the word Apothecary. "Henry Knighton, who lived about 1393, had the word Apothecarius, Dr. Johnson says, from Apotheca, a repository; and that it means a man whose employment is to keep medicines for sale. In Greek Aroon. Chaucer, who wrote before the introduction of Greek, writes, 'Pothecary.' Chaucer died in 1400. (N. B. Greek known in England 1453.) In the Liber Niger Dom. Reg. Angliæ, temp. Edward IV. who reigned from 1461 to 1483, it is written Poticary. Steven's Dictionary has Boticario, and derives it from Bote, a gallipot. Botica is a shop in Spanish, (French bouteque), but emphatically the shop of an apothecary. The A may be our article, which use has added to the word,

together with the article an, which is a pleonasm. Per contra, we have appellatives, which by withdrawing a letter from the word per aphoresin, in the article, has absorbed it, as from an aaranga, we have formed an orange. Avanna, we call a fan, which should be termed an œvan; from Abeli, we say a lily; so by dropping the A entirely, we have made saffron from assafran, all from the Spanish. Not content to say a Boticario, or Anglicé, Boticary, but we must double the article, and say, an Aboticary. Junius calls it vocabulum sumptum ex Græco, but adds minus commodé; and refers us to Vossius, lib. i. de Vitiis Sermonis, c. 32. Apothecaries anciently sold wine and cordials. "The Emperor is somewhat amended, as his Policarie saith." bookseller, who keeps a shop (a Bibliotheca) might as well be called a Bibliothecary. Perhaps the Policary or Boticario was so called, to distinguish him from the itinerant medicine monger. In the comedy of the Four P's, by J. Haywood, published 1569, one of them is the Poticary; and I never heard that he was arraigned by the critics, for pseudography. They are the Poticary, the Pedlar, the Palmer, and the Pardoner. Mr. Nares says, that Poticary is very low; and so it is to our ears at present. You might as well say, that periwig is Greek, from pt circum (Græcé), and wig Anglicé; whereas it is only unfortunately a corruption of the French peruque. The Boticario (or Poticary) was perhaps to the Quack, who carried his medicines about for sale, as the Stationer or shop-keeper was to the hawker and pedlar.”—Univ. Mag. 4.

p. 361.

To the Editors of the Esculapian Register. Gentlemen,

Variations from the general course of the arteries are frequently met with, but I do not recollect ever to have heard of a case precisely similar to the one of which I there been from any cause a necessity purpose giving you a description.-Had for an operation, there is no doubt but that it would have embarrassed the ope. rator, and as the same deviation may again occur, the knowledge of so great an anomaly may prevent that embar rassment, and enable the surgeon to pur sue his operation with that certainty of success which can only be the result of a correct knowledge of the general situation of the parts as well as an intimate acquaintance with the deviations of those parts from their natural course.

The subject was a man about 30 years of age, well made, and of a common size. The arteries came off from the arch of the aorta in their usual manner, but the right subclavian instead of passing over the first rib at the accustomed place, mounted up in the neck about two inches, and then forming an irregular segment of a circle passed down under the clavicle at the humeral extremity where it immediately divided into two great branches, both of which passed down along the internal edge of the biceps muscle to the bend of the elbow. Here, one of them divided into the radial and ulnar arteries which were distributed in the ordinary way.

The other pursued its course between the radius and ulna, forming the interosseous artery. The humeral artery of the left side divided into two branches about the middle of the arm, and these without any other deviation were distributed in the common manner.

RENNEJ.

EXTRACTS From the “ Introductory Statement” in the 1st number of the Phrenological Journal, published quarterly at Edinburgh.

"A few words, once for all, on the terms of phrenology, cannot have a more suitable place

than this. They have been laughed at, until they have become the very stalest pleasantry, we take it, in present currency. It would seem, therefore, not an unfit time to examine them seriously. Of these THIRTY-FOUR laughter-moving terms, will it be credited, by those who have laughed at them till they can laugh no more, that TWENTY-FIVE,-Compounded in the same manner, and with precisely the same sense and meaning,-are peaceful occupants of Dr. Samuel Johnson's Dictionary, where they have never occasioned a smile!-NINE, then, remain to be justified; 1st, These were, like other new technical terms, necessary to express a meaning for which there were no words in Johnson's Dictionary; 2d, They are, with one Greek exception, compounded of English words, either in Johnson's Dictionary, or in very current usage, and of the termination ness or ty, the value of which is known to every school-boy. The eight words are, adhesive, acquisitive, constructive, ideal,—all four in Johnson;-amative, concentrative, combative, and secretive, the four last in use, though not in Johnson's Dictionary. Greek derivative is philoprogenitiveness (or the animal propensity to cherish offspring), as legitimate, at least, as many terms in mineralogy, and still more in botany, or any other new Greek terms for any other new science, art, matter, or thing, which is best expressed by a Greek word, and, above all, which there is no determination to hunt down. It is time the public should know, that not one of these terms has been shewn, by the most bitter enemy of phrenology, to be either illogically compounded, or unphilosophically employed. They have merely been laughed at-as very long names!-(Edinburgh Review, No. xlix.) This is not the only instance of sheer babyism which we shall bring home to our manly opponents.

The

Of associations for the cultivation of Phrenology the first was instituted in Edinburgh in 1820; which place, as it produced the most inveterate enemies, has, by a sort of redeeming compensation, furnished some of the most zealous friends of the philosophy of Gall and Spurzheim. The Phrenological Society, the first volume of whose transactions was lately published, consisted, at first, of a very few members, who have been the objects of more bad wit than any of their fellow-citizens. The members of the institution have since increased to above eighty in number, among whom are many professional and scientific gentlemen, and several eminent artists.

This ex

ample has been followed by the formation of

a phrenological society in Philadelphia, to which a complete set of casts was sent from Edinburgh; and last winter a phrenological society was formed in London.

In France many men of science and letters have yielded to the evidence, and adopted the principles. Among the most celebrated s Blainville, professor of comparative anatomy in the College du Plessis, who, in his lectures, states the evidence of the principles of phrenology as not subject to doubt; and Geoffy St. Hilaire, also a name well known to the scientific world, as an author, a member of the Institute, and one of the most distinguished professors at the Jardin des Plantes, ges nearly as far. The necessary consequence is, that the French public have ceased to make merry with the subject, and phrenology is respectfully treated by them as a science; the only satirists being English, who, at Blinville's lectures, distinguish themselves by a sneer when the professor comes to that part of his course.

The formal attempts at refutation have been fewer than, from the prevalent diposition on the subject, might have been boked for; but the reason lies in that unifom and signal defeat which has overtaken, and will ever await the imbecility of speculative reasoning when opposed to an extensive and well-established induction. The best proof of this is the far-from-enviable situation in which the reputations of the regular antiphrenologists have been left by their success hitherto, in the controversy. With an insignificant exception or two, therefore, public disputation has been scrupulously shunned.*

The task of the phrenologist, is nevertheless, a hard one. His arguments go for nothing because of his opponents' want of ideas. He must furnish ground on which his arguments will take hold-like the mariner who should be tasked first to make his anchorage and then to cast his anchor. This want of ideas is secretly not a little painful to the anti-phrenological disputant himself, and not the less so, that it is generally perfectly apparent to the rest of the company. We have seen some salutary warnings on this head. While the

"It behoves the world to know that, notwithstanding all the noise made by the opponents of phrenology, they have not yet pointed out one single fallacy in one single fact published by the phrenologists. Of this statement we challenge contradiction, with better proof than a priori argument."