entire races have been stricken from the face of the earth practically by clothes alone? Hittell, in his history of California, calls attention to the effect of civilization upon the Indians. When the Spanish padres, after converting the natives to Christianity, compelled them to wear clothing, they began to die off with pulmonary troubles.

The same disaster overtook that once hardy and prolific race, the aborigines of Tasmania, whose fate affords a most significant object lesson in clothing. Not a soul is left, and history here again tells the story of the disastrous effects of smothering the skin unduly. The Tasmanians were enabled to withstand most of the evils of civilization; they got on very well in spite of rum, tobacco, and all manner of abuses at the hands of the invaders, including massacres even, and still throve and multiplied; but when, at last, the encroachments of civilization compelled the use of clothing, they began to decline rapidly, and as with the natives of California, chiefly with pulmonary diseases.

In view of facts like these, to which a volume more could be added from the writer's case-books, proving the harmfulness of excess of clothing, the immediate benefits derived from removing the surplus, and from the employment of the air-bath, it is not difficult to explain the wonderful successes at the sanitarium in Veldes, Austria, where consumptives and other deeply diseased patients are made to spend most of the daylight hours naked in sunshine or (warm) rain; light and air in profusion directly in contact with the skin, appropriate diet, and wisely directed exercise, give them for the first time in their lives a fair chance for a "natural cure."

Says the sanitarium chef: "There is no life without air; no health without light. We not only breathe through our lungs, but also through our skin, which contains millions of minute blood-vessels thirsting for oxygen, and millions of nerves thirsting for light.

. . The light of the sun favors the change of matter; in other words, the processes of life. Another beneficial

influence of the air-bath lies in the constant changes of sunlight and shade, heat and cold of the atmosphere, by which the skin is stimulated—a stimulus that does not remain confined to the surface of the body, but is extended, through the nerves, to the remotest internal organs and tissues. Thus, in opposition to the common drug system which makes the stomach the scapegoat of its efforts, the physico-hydriatic system effects its cures principally through the skin. Leaving the internal organs undisturbed, and allowing them to perform their functions in peace. or to repair damages themselves without interference from drug poisons, the alternate application of heat and cold on the surface of the body produces a powerful effect, not only on the skin, but through the skin upon the whole organism in its remotest parts.

The vitality of every molecule is raised, the strength of the individual increased."

Evidently we have lost sight of the suicide question; but that was merely the text, or, shall we say, the pretext, for an article aiming to prove that it is not the natural heat of summer that causes suicides or other manifestations of disease; but rather the artificial heat produced by excess of clothing that plays the mischief. And, then, to think of the myriads of immortal souls doomed eternally to a heat vastly more trying than that of the worst torrid wave on earth, from constantly breaking the commandments, damning a condition that is very largely in their own power to remove! Of all stupid sacrifices, the most absurd, as it seems to me, is that of wearing two suits of clothes in warm rooms or in hot weather, when both the law and the prevailing fashion in dress, to all outward appearance, at least, can be satisfied with the single outer suit, speaking for males; and a rational compromise is practicable in feminine attire.

154 Tremont Street.

[How about the cleanliness of this suggestion? Wouldn't it be more sensible or more hygienic to dispense with the outer suit?-Ed. GAZETTE.]

HACHISH IN THE OLD

TESTAMENT.*

DR. C. CREIGHTON contributes an extremely interesting article to a recent number of Janus on the indications of the hachish vice in the Old Testament. The use of hachish, the disreputable intoxicant drug of the East, like that of opium, the respectable narcotic, is of unknown antiquity. In the Old Testament there are some half dozen passages where a cryptic reference to hachish may be discovered and in two at least of these passages the allusion is made easy by the use of a significant

word in the Hebrew text. This word is designedly mistranslated in the Vulgate and in the modern versions it is confessedly unintelligible. The first passage is Canticles v. I. “I am come into my garden, my sister, my spouse: I have gathered my myrrh with my spice: I have eaten my honey-comb with my honey: I have drunk my wine with my milk." In the Hebrew text the phrase in Italics reads "I have eaten my wood wood (yagar) with my honey (Debash)." St. Jerome in the Vulgate translated the Hebrew word meaning "wood" by favum or honey-comb; whilst the LXX adopted a similar license by translating the passage "I have eaten my bread with my honey." The term yagar, however, is employed in many other places in the Old Testament and always in the sense of wood, forest, planted field, herbage, or the like, and when real honey-comb is meant the Hebrew word is either tzooph or nohpheth. The meaning, therefore, of the passage in Canticles is clear enough in its aphrodisiac context: "I have eaten my hemp with honey," and this is still the elegant way of taking hachish in the East. The meaning of yagar (wood) in association with debash (honey) is made clear by I. Samuel xiv., 27, when Jonathan dipped the point of his staff into "honeywood," and, merely tasting the honey, his eyes were enlightened. The one passage refers to the aphrodisiac effect of hachish,

the other to its bellicose or furious effect.

*Reprinted from The Hospital.

The correct exigesis of I. Samuel xiv, 2545 is of great importance not only for understanding Jonathan's breach of a certain taboo but also for the whole career of his father Saul, ending in his deposition from the kingship through the firm action of Samuel, and the pitiable collapse of his courage on the eve of the battle of Gilboa. The theory is that both Saul and Jonathan were hachish eaters: it was a secret vice of the palace while it was strictly forbidden to the people: Saul had learned it of the Amalekites: it was this vice and not his disobedience in saving captives and cattle alive, which was his real transgression and the true ground of his deposition at the instance of the far-seeing prophet. No true statesman would have taken action on account of a merely technical sin of disobe

dience: the disobedience was real and vital, but the substance of it had to be veiled behind a convenient fiction. One great object of Jewish particularism was to save Israel from the vices that destroyed the nations around; and Samuel appears in this respect as the first and greatest of the prophets, the prototype censor morum.

The incident related in I. Sam. xiv. arose during a raid upon the Philistines in which Jonathan distinguished himself by the number of the enemy he slew, but at the same

time broke a certain law or taboo for which he was afterwards put upon his trial and condemned to death. We are told that previous to the slaughter of the Philistines

66

all (they of) the land came to a wood and there was honey upon the ground. And when the people were come into the wood, behold the honey dropped; but no man put his hand to his mouth, for the people feared the oath. But Jonathan heard not when his father charged the people with the oath; wherefore he put forth the end of the rod that was in his hand and dipped it in an honey-comb (yagarah hadebash) and put his hand to his mouth, and his eyes were enlightened." The Vulgate again translates the Hebrew words signifying "honeywood" by the misleading term honey-comb though the Syriac version gives a more intelligible account in the words Et sylvas in

gressi essent, essetque mel in sylva super faciem agri, flueretque mel: expressing not inaptly a field of hemp with the resinous exudation upon the flower stalks which would flow or run by heat. Indeed, Churrus is collected in Central India during the hot season by men clad in leather, running violently through the hemp fields. The soft resin adheres to the leather, and is subsequently scraped off and kneaded into balls. The whole incident in the Old Testament is obviously dramatized or made picturesque: the growing field of hemp, the men passing through it, Jonathan dipping the end of at rod or staff into the resin upon a stalk as he passed by. The real meaning is that Jonathan was a hachish eater, and the effect upon Jonathan on this occasion was that he ran amuck amongst the Philistines.

The evidence that Saul was a hachish eater is not so direct as in the case of Jonathan. There is not a hint of it until after the incident of the forbidden honey, but in the inquiry which followed it is significant that in the trial by lot Saul and Jonathan are ranged together on one side and the people upon the other. The violent antipathy of Samuel towards Agag leads to the presumption that this king had corrupted Saul, for the Amalekites were the tribe of Arabs who were engaged in the carrying trade between the Arabian Gulf and Lower Egypt or the Mediterranean. They had in their hands the trade in gold and spices and drugs: probably the same Arabs among whom the name of Hachashin was found in

the medieval period, and from whom the Latinized name of assassini was brought to Europe by the returning Crusaders. The appearance of David as a harper to soothe Saul when he was possessed of an evil spirit also points to the use of hachish, for Dr. Moreau ("Du Hachish et de l'Aliénation Mentale") has shown that the only kind of mental alienation influenced by music is that due to intoxication by hachish. The sudden throwing of the javelin at David whilst he played before the king is a very graphic representation of the ungovernable fits of temper which hachish pro

duces, whilst the most significant and the most pathetic symptom of all is Saul's failure of courage on the night before the battle of Gilboa.

DIFFERENT WAYS ANIMALS HAVE OF TAKING BATHS.

ONE has only to see a cat making her toilet with her paw soaked with saliva, a fly conscientiously washing his hands on the window pane, an elephant giving himself hygienic shower baths, a monkey looking for his fleas, to realize that the sentiment of cleanliness is very widespread among animals. This sentiment, however, is not universal. Some animals show marked evidences of uncleanliness, and evidently prefer to have their skin covered. with dirt. For certain of them it may be said that they have a reason for violating the most elementary laws of cleanliness.

The larva of the masked reduvius envelops himself in dust both in order to escape his enemies and also in order to be able to approach the insects upon which he feeds without being observed. For him the dust is "a wall-colored coat," such as the cutthroats wore in the middle ages.

The frog fish covers himself with mud and sea weed in order to swim unperceived over the bottom of the sea. Thanks to the ribbon-like appendages with which his nose is provided, he attracts the little fish of the vicinity who, not seeing the hidden jaws, approach without fear and are swallowed

whole.

Many of the ruminant and pachydermatous animals have the habit of rolling in the mud and seem very much pleased with the crust of earth which covers their skin. This protective mantle is, in fact, very useful to ward off the attacks of parasites. The eland, the buffalo, the bison and the rhinoceros take these mud baths, and they are indeed no more repugnant or useless than those which Frenchmen take at Dax and Barbotan.

A large number of birds dig down into

the dust and cover themselves with it with evident pleasure and several mammals do the same thing. Here is how Dr. Ballion explains the instinct of these animals who powder. It is to be remarked that those species to which the contact of water is repugnant have the habit of rolling on the earth. From this he infers that these two agents, so opposite in appearance, water and dust, have from the hygienic point of view similar results. As to the motives which lead the animal to these two things. they differ in various cases.

Among these motives there is the desire to scratch, which is felt among many animals. Thus we may explain the love which horses, dogs, donkeys and camels have of rolling themselves on the earth. As far as the neck and sides of the body are concerned, they have the resource of rubbing themselves against a tree or a wall, but for the centre of the back they have no chance except by rolling on the ground. It is very interesting to see the intense pleasure which they derive from this exercise.

Another effect of these exercises is to free the superficial skin from the excessive sweat and sebaceous matter which is a burden and makes the hairs stick together. This is notably the case with the rodents, such as the rats, who are most enthusiastic · dust bathers, giving themselves up to its exercise at least once a day. M. Lataste, the French naturalist, has observed this habit among those funny little kangaroolike animals, the jerboas. In captivity if they have sand in their cages their coats are superb, but if they have no opportunity to powder themselves it sticks together in tufts and has a very mean appearance.

The donkey when lying on his side shows. great skill in gathering up dust with his tail and scattering it over his stomach. It is there that the perspiration gathers, and doubtless the donkey's intention is to relieve himself of this.

The oxen obtain similar results by different methods. During the summer heat they toss into the air with their horns heaps of dry grass and they also kick up the earth

with their fore legs so that it falls on their back. They act with such violence when doing this that they sometimes become invisible in the midst of the thick cloud which they raise.

When the animals are maddened by parasites they roll in the dirt in order to remove these minute enemies. The elephants after their bath roll in the dust and take earth in their trunks and powder their bodies carefully with it. It is generally known that birds have the dust habit. They are generally afraid of water and they replace it by dust as a cosmetic. While they are setting and compelled to remain immovable for a long time they are greatly troubled by parasites. Finally they feel an irrepressible desire to free themselves of the plague. Instead of bathing in the nearest pond as other species would do they take a dust bath. bath. Among the dust birds are all the chicken family.

The chicken digs a hole in the powdery earth of the farmyard and lying on its side, its feathers sticking up straight, throws up with its claws and its beak clouds of dust which penetrate through the feathers to the skin. Then the chicken runs about with outstretched wings shaking the dust off.

MANY DISEASES DUE TO BAD

TEETH.

THAT bad teeth are the cause of many more troubles than mere toothache was explained in a paper on "Mouth Infection Due to Natural Teeth," recently read before the Philadelphia County Medical Society, by Dr. D. D. Smith, of Philadelphia. Contagion and disease, according to Dr. Smith, lurk in the human mouth. To septic conditions of the teeth many disorders of the stomach, the kidneys and the nervous system are due, while the most pernicious factors of lung infection are intrenched in the teeth.

"In addition to the toxins engendered amid stagnant accumulations perpetually

adherent in the mouth of consumptives," he said, "the sputum itself in appreciable quantity clings to the already infected tooth surfaces, increasing bacterial plaques and multiplying bacterial cultures in the mouth. Thus an endless chain of ever-increasing contagion revolves in foods and air, to the blood, thence to organs and tissues, to be deposited, it may be as initial infection or perhaps an augmentation of some pathological state already established; or it may return to the mouth in mucus or saliva, or in some inflammatory exudation, there to begin again its round of infection."

In 1894 Dr. Smith began a line of experimental investigation to determine the true source of tooth decay. Results from these experiments, carried forward on patients only, were all in harmony with the theory that caries of the teeth begins at some point on the exposed enamel surface, and that it is primarily due to the affinities of the surface of the teeth for the acids of the mouth. What seems indisputable proof of this theory is the fact that, if a devitalized or pulpless tooth, such a tooth as is conceded to be the subject of more rapid decay than one with a vital pulp in the same environment, be removed from a mouth in which resolution is rapidly taking place, and it be placed in water, alcohol or glycerin, or simply exposed in the air, all caries in that tooth is at once arrested.

The inevitable deduction from such an experiment is, that caries of the teeth is a result of mouth conditions; and this is in accord with clinical experience. Growing out of the experiments referred to and their results, Dr. Smith has developed a system of caring for the teeth diametrically the opposite of all former conceptions, theories and methods of practice; and whenever the system has found typical exemplification, whether in childhood, youth, middle life or old age, most favorable and satisfactory results have universally followed.

The treatment consists in enforced, radical and frequent change of environment for the teeth, and perfect sanitation of all mouth conditions. Experience having demon

strated that the most careful and painstaking are unable, with the agents commonly employed, as the tooth brush and dentifrice, toothpick and dental floss, soaps, so-called germicidal washes or other agencies, to effect this end, the plan of forcible and frequently renewed sanitation by an experienced operator has been instituted with great success.

The process consists in most careful and complete removal of all concretions, all calcid deposits, semisolids, bacterial placques and inspissated secretions and excretions which gather on the surface of the teeth, between them or at the gum margins. This is followed by thoroughly polishing of all tooth surfaces by hand methods (power polishers should never be used), not alone the more exposed labial and buccal surfaces, but the lingual, palatal and proximal surfaces as well, using for this purpose orange-wood points in suitable holders, charged with finely ground pumice stone as a polishing material. Treated in this manner, the teeth are placed in the most favorable condition to prevent and repel septic accumulations and deposits, and not less to aid all efforts of the patient in the direction of sanitation and cleanliness.

Maintained at intervals of about a month, this treatment is followed by immediate lessening and ultimate arrest of all inflammations and all inflammatory exudations from the oral tissues and complete eradication of the stagnant accumulations otherwise perpetually adherent on and about the teeth. Of the whole number of subjects under this monthly "prophylaxis treatment," all have shown some phase or state of general health improvement.

ONE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PEOPLE AND LOCOMOTIVES.

HERBERT N. CASSON.

WE feel impelled to appropriate from the N. Y. Journal this short, sharp and un