though her disposition was kind. The mouth was seldom closed; profuse lachrymal secretion as well as of saliva, the eyes nearly always suffused with tears; the teeth were prematurely decayed, and the case, altogether, presented a very discouraging aspect.

She was an only child. The father and mother appeared to be healthy, and could assign no cause whatever for the attacks. They had applied for a number of years to several different physicians, some of whom they supposed were homoeopathic, but with little or no benefit.

The peculiar characteristic of the attacks coming only in the night after sleeping, directed me to Lach., the 2° and 5 of which were given, but no permanent improvement was noticed. Cina, Puls., Bell., and Gels. were also fairly tested, with variable success, when it occurred to me that this might be owing to some latent trouble in the system, which, for want of a better name, we will call psora; so on the 7th day of January last I gave her three powders of the cm. of Sulph., to be taken four hours apart. Improvement set in in two days, and the attacks did not return for four weeks, when, owing to eating some mince-pie, two slight spells returned, but no medicine was given, as I wished to let the Sulph. exhaust its action. For sixty-two days no medicine of any kind was given, when she took a few powders of Merc. 5 for a cold and sore throat. During all this period, of nearly three months, she had only five light nervous spells, more like a fright than a convulsion; but on the nights of the 5th, 6th, and 7th of April, she had an attack each night; on the 8th, two more powders of Sulph.em, were again given, since which the paroxysms rarely return, and never unless brought on from overindulgence in indigestible food; the predisposition, however, is still there, and this even time may not eradicate.

Now there may be nothing particularly instructive about this case, or surprising that it should be relieved by so high a potency, but the wonder is that such a class of symptoms should be removed by Sulph., when so few of them appear in the provings. Shall we say if they are not found there they should be? This would not be favorably received by our writers on Materia Medica, and yet I am strongly inclined to the opinion that some of the most reliable symptoms published as pathogenetic are

wholly clinical. For instance, in Hering's Condensed Materia Medica, under the head of Lycop., we read: "Pneumonia, with raising of mouthfuls of mucus at a time, of a light rust-color, stringy, and easily separated." Now what prover of this drug has ever noticed this? Where, indeed, did Dr. Hering find this symptom? It does not appear in any previous work on Materia Medica, but some two years before Dr. Hering's book was published, I stated in an article on pneumonia, published in the Investigator, that the keynote of Lycop., in pneumonia, was "raising whole mouthfuls of mucus at a time, of a light rust-color, stringy, and easily separated."

The language here, you will perceive, is the same, word for word. I do not say that Dr. Hering ever saw my article; perhaps he had noticed, as I had, this symptom cured by Lycop., and we casually described it in the same words. I am not very tenacious about knowing where the Doctor got it; it is enough for me to know that it is reliable; and yet, it does seem to me we should have some way to distinguish between a symptom cured and one produced by a drug.

Sulphur has epilepsy, with stiffness; child jumps, starts, and screams fearfully; wakens with a start and screams; but this child did no such thing; "worse in the morning, or after midnight," but this patient was no worse in the after than in the fore part of the night; " painful dryness of the eyeballs and lids," but in this case, there was profuse lachrymation most of the time.

If, then, it be asked, why Sulphur was given, I can only say that it being the great antipsoric remedy, and that so many children, like Gloucester, "come into the world half made up," we can, in chronic diseases at least, scarcely go amiss in prescribing it.

APPENDIX.

DISCUSSION.

SECOND DAY-MORNING SESSION.

DR. LEWIS BARNES, of Delaware, O. Mr. President: I wish to say a word about one of the cases reported here where the treatment was stated.

The pa

I was puzzled to know what cured in that case. tient, it seems, was cured by some attenuation of Sulphur, while there were no symptoms in the case indicating Sulphur as it is laid down in the books. Now I wish to inquire by what principle or by what law the cure was made? Certainly not by the homoeopathic law as we find it in our books, because the symptoms of the case cannot be found in the provings of Sulphur. What kind of a homoeopathic report is that to bring here? You ask, then, "Why did the case get well?" I answer, that you do not know that it was on account of the Sulphur given. To illustrate: A lady once sent to me for medicine; she had a severe disease, but it would be heterodox to mention its name here, as only symptoms are admissible. She had severe sharp cutting pains in her chest, impeding respiration. I sent a medicine which I will not name, as it did no good. Within twenty-four hours she sent for me in great, haste, as she felt no better. found her in great suffering, and I at once threw out the medicine, and in a tumbler of clean water I prepared the same medicine. I then sat down beside her bed, taking one of her hands in mine, while I placed my other hand upon her forehead, and I began to talk as pleasantly as possible. In five or ten minutes her pain was gone, nor did it return that day or night. Now what cured that lady? It was simply the effect of mind upon matter and upon mind, and this effect was more powerful than medicine. It may have been the effect of mind that cured the Sulphur case and all the others. Our reports of cures are often very weak. Allow lawyers to argue on the point according to evidence, and you will find few cures proven. There is one thing that I like in these reports, and that is the absence of the usual blatant

I

formula about the patients going unsuccessfully through the hands of half a dozen other physicians, with which many of our reports are garnished.

DR. F. R. McMANUS, of Baltimore. Mr. President: Some five or six years ago a gentleman came limping to my office, and said he had called on me simply to please his wife; that he had had lumbago for five years and had decided to take no more medicine. He was never easy except in clear weather. He had tried numerous doctors, but never a homœopathist. He had gone through the usual course of blistering and leeching, had used plasters, embrocations, etc., until finally, to please his wife, he came to me. After a careful study of the case I decided that Sulphur was the remedy, and I gave him one dose, which was followed by a daily powder of Saccharum lactis. He reported in four days, no better. I had given Sulphur 30, but I now gave two powders of the third.

In four days he returned and declaring himself no better, said he would take no more medicine, paid his bill and left. Six weeks later, while riding, I saw him walking upon the street and noticed that he did not limp; he asked me to walk with him, saying, "I've a great thing to tell you; I am cured of the lumbago!" He said that for three weeks he had had no pain, that he had taken nothing since taking my medicine, and was satisfied that he had recovered without medicine.

He said: "I was walking along one day about three weeks before, and suddenly discovered that I had no pain. I was thunderstruck! I bent forward and backward, but the pain was all gone. I went home and told my wife that after all I had done for my lumbago, it had at last vanished without medicine." I told him that I claimed the credit of the cure.

I state this case to do credit to the memory of Samuel Hahnemann, whose own child I claim to be in medicine, and to whom I give all the honor and credit.

I gave in eight days one dose of Sulphur 30th, and two of Sulphur 3d trituration, and the patient got well. I don't know whether he should thank me or not, but he followed my directions and got well. I was much interested in the case, and when, after the second prescription, he said he was no better, I might have been tempted to give another remedy; but I did not give it.

A few days before I left home I was called to one of the hotels to see a lady patient, a stranger, who was suffering intensely from a severe attack of bowel trouble. I gave her Mercurius vivus, and when I called that evening, finding her better, I gave no medicine. The next morning at three o'clock I was hastily summoned to her; she had been very ill all night, and had had

dejections every fifteen minutes through the night, with violent abdominal tormina. I gave a few powders of Mercurius corrosivus, and left Sac. lac. powders, to be dissolved in water and taken every half hour. I visited her at eight o'clock and could scarcely believe the evidence of my eyes, she was so much better. She said that the medicine in the water had cured her.

S. R. BECKWITH, M.D., of Cincinnati, insisted that those who called themselves homeopathists should adhere to that law of cure, and not cast doubts upon their medicaments when used in higher potencies than those in which the drug could be detected by the use of the microscope.

DR. Č. PEARSON: I wish to say a few words in defence of my paper. I think, had Dr. Barnes heard the paper read, he would have entertained very different views regarding it. He should remember that the case of which he speaks was not reported to show you the symptoms or the remedies used, but merely to state that the only way to proceed in such cases was to do as I did. We have the symptoms of Sulphur in our Materia Medica, and it should remove similar symptoms in patients. I said that as this child had been treated unsuccessfully for years by myself and others, I thought that there might be some latent taint of psora in its system, and thus I thought that the great antipsoric remedy, Sulphur, might so prepare the system that other remedies would become efficacious. I then gave three powders of Swan's one-hundred-thousandth of Sulphur, and the child commenced to improve after the first powder, and had no more spasms for three months, although before that it had been having from one to twelve every day for five years.

Now, Mr. President, it is useless for any one to talk about mental impressions curing that child, for they certainly did not, neither did they produce any change in its condition, and yet men who use low attenuations declare such to be the case. It may be possible for Dr. Barnes to cure by "laying on of hands," but I claim no such mesmeric power.

DR. A. KORNDORFER, of Philadelphia. Mr. President: I am of the opinion that an unfair advantage is being taken in this Association regarding the high potencies, and it is not right to throw doubt so freely upon their efficacy without better authority. I could corroborate Dr. Pearson were it worth while to consume the time, by stating scores of cases occurring in my own practice and in my clinics where cases are presented subjected to the worst hygienic treatment possible, so that little can be done. except by medicine.

The cases during Dr. Guernsey's clinics and since that time, prove it to be a fact that doses of a high potency given at long