narrated in the fourth lecture are capital. We cannot, however, agree with Dr. Russell in rejecting the claim of "rheumatic gout" to a separate place in nosology. Undoubtedly cases often occur in which true gout (i. e. excess of uric acid) and true rheumatism (i. e. excess of lactic acid) are present in one and the same individual. Such a sufferer appears to have been the patient now under consideration. But we are persuaded that large hospital or dispensary practice will present many cases which are neither rheumatism nor gout, nor a combination of the two; but, while owning near kindred to both, have characteristic features of their own. It is rather curious that Pulsatilla, which did so much for the case before us, has in our hands proved the leading remedy for "rheumatic gout" in general. Of the remaining case, one of "Rheumatic Ophthalmia," we can only echo Dr. Russell's own words, that "it is by no means a striking illustration of the curative power of our remedies."

Precisely the reverse may be said of the cases of "chronic rheumatism" contained in the fifth lecture. We wish that

all our cases of this disease would get on so well.

Reserving the sixth lecture till the last, we come now to the seventh and eighth, which are upon epilepsy. The former contains a very good account of the modern pathology of the disease, as investigated by Brown-Séquard and Schroeder Van der Kolk; the latter reviews the various forms of treatment in vogue for it in the old school, and the few medicines which bear a specific relation to its symptoms. Among these Belladonna is deservedly ranked highest. We notice a curious inconsistency in the remarks upon Hydrocyanic acid. Dr. Russell considers this drug a "pure sedative;" and asks "Have we sufficient evidence of its action when given much diluted? I mean as we are in the habit of prescribing our medicines. Will the millionth of a drop produce any effect? We know that a pure stimulant is annihilated by dilution, as in the instance of alcohol. May it not be the same with a pure sedative?" Now in the second lecture (p. 103), Dr. Russell tells us that the poison of serpents "seems to act as a pure sedative, and depresses

vitality." And one of these serpent poisons-Naja-is a very favorite medicine of Dr. Russell's, and is given by him usually in the 2nd dilution. In the remarks upon Arsenicum, Dr. Russell's curious assumption that infinitesimals may act antipathically and homoeopathically at one and the same time, peeps out again. "It is further to be observed," he writes, "in regard to Arsenicum, that it produces intermittent fever, and Dr. Brown-Séquard has pointed out that the conditions of ague and epilepsy are reciprocally antagonistic. For these reasons, as well as on the ground of having seen it do good, I am disposed to press this medicine on your attention."

The two lectures on asthma we think the best of the whole series. In the first, a theory of the nature of this malady is put forth, which explains better, as we think, than any other, its remarkable phenomena. This theory considers an exalted state of the respiratory sensibility, rather than any mechanical obstruction by bronchial spasm, to be the essential cause of the paroxysmal dyspnoea. Dr. Russell points out that we have no evidence in the asthmatic paroxysm of carbonization of the blood, which could not but obtain were the entrance of air really hindered to the extent the dyspnoea would imply. At the same time we think Dr. Russell hardly justified in denying (if he does deny) that bronchial spasm exists. The wheezing of asthma is pathognomonic, and wheezing can only be produced by constriction of the bronchial calibre, or increase of the bronchial mucus. The latter is often absent; hence the wheezing must be referred to the former.

We think that confusion is introduced by styling every kind of dyspnoea "asthma." Hence we object to the term "chlorotic asthma" as applied by Dr. Russell to the dyspnoea which troubles anæmic girls, and which seems dependent on the state of the blood and heart. Again, we suspect that in many cases of so-called "bronchitic asthma" the dyspnoea is caused by emphysema rather than by any nervous disorder. This at least appears to be the cause of the dyspnoea which accompanies winter cough, and which so often remains un

improved while the cough amends. We may mention in passing, that we have found Nitric acid in the 2nd dilution do more good than any other remedy in this malady, whose sufferers throng our hospitals and dispensaries every winter and spring.

The two concluding lectures are on "fever," mainly devoted to an account of the recent epidemic of typhus in London, as observed in the Homœopathic Hospital. They are full of interest in every way, and as they appear for the first time in the present volume, make it indispensable even to those who already possess the other lectures in the Annals.

Of the remaining lecture " On the Dose and the Alternation of Medicines" we have left ourselves little space to speak. The doctrines enunciated as regards the dose are as liberal as we could desire. Dr. Russell's own practice shows that he, while believing that homoeopathic remedies act best in infinitesimal doses, prefers the lower dilutions (1-3) of the scale. His conclusion regarding alternation is that "when we adopt the system, it should be done under protest." This is not very satisfactory; but in truth this whole question needs farther investigation than the three pages allotted to it by Dr. Russell can be said to afford.

We have now run through these lectures; but before we take leave of them we must repeat that expression of our high appreciation of them with which we began. They are a credit to our school, and so much clear gain to our cause. They exhibit the classical homoeopathic treatment of several leading forms of disease in a manner at once attractive and instructive. We know of no better book to put into the hands of inquirers from the allopathic ranks. And we recommend all our students and young practitioners to make themselves masters without delay of its suggestive thoughts and practical teachings.

Treue Bilder aus dem Leben der verewigten FRAU HOFRATH JOHANNE HENRIETTE LEOPOLDINE HAHNEMANN, geb. KÜCHLER, zur richtigen Anschauung gegen die beispiellose Geschichtsverdrehung in der Biographie universelle ancienne et moderne.' Berlin, Reichardt, 1865.

True Pictures from the Life of the late MRS. JOHANNA HENRIETTA LEOPOLDINE HAHNEMANN, née KücHLER, to serve to correct the unexampled perversion of History in the 'Biographie universelle ancienne et moderne.' Berlin, Reichardt, 1865.

THE author of the biography of Hahnemann in the French work alluded to in the title-page of this little book, while writing in a strain of high eulogy with regard to the illustrious founder of homoeopathy, has fallen into what the family of the great departed consider to be most flagrant errors in respect to the temper and conduct of the first Madame Hahnemann. The desire to vindicate their venerated parent from the aspersions of the French biographer is the cause of the appearance of this little volume.

The first passage in the biography objected to is where the narrator, after describing the sacrifices made by Hahnemann in relinquishing a lucrative practice when he became convinced of the injurious character of the prevalent modes of treatment, goes on to say "the miseries of his altered state were increased tenfold by the bitter reproaches of his wife and daughters at his having sacrificed the realities of life for dreams and chimeras."

As a contrast to the unappreciating Xantippe of the first marriage, the French biographer describes the heroine of the second marriage as a lady "distinguished by the charms of her mind and the unusual extent of her acquirements. She went to Coethen to consult Hahnemann; she appreciated

and admired him, and this admiration resulted in a marriage which filled with happiness the old man's latter years."

The author of the "True Pictures" shows, from the testimony of several disinterested witnesses, of members of the family, and of the letters of Hahnemann himself, that the picture drawn by the biographer of the unhappiness of Hahnemann in his first marriage is a pure fiction; that, on the contrary, nothing could exceed the affectionate and confiding disposition of the first wife, who, without a reproach, though may be not without many regrets, sacrificed her own fortune and shared with her husband the adversity he voluntarily chose, in preference to continuing the practice of an art which he sincerely believed to be of positive injury to his fellow-creatures.

Just as Captain Dalgetty discovered the disguised Argyll by the eulogistic terms in which the latter talked of himself, so our author fancies the French biographer can be none other than the second Madame Hahnemann, or some one writing under her immediate inspiration, for no one else, he shrewdly imagines, would draw such a favorable picture of her.

We have no wish to speak ungallantly respecting any lady, but as it is of great importance and greater interest to every homœopathist to ascertain all the circumstances connected with the life of the founder of the new school of medicine, we consider that we are justified in inquiring minutely into the truth of the asseverations of the French biographer respecting the claims to our unqualified admiration of the second wife of the departed sage.

The facts positively known with respect to Hahnemann's second marriage and his career in Paris are these:

His first wife died on the 31st March, 1830. In 1835 Mlle. Mélanie d'Hervilly, an artist, of what eminence we are unable to ascertain, came to Coethen, and after a courtship, of what duration we are not informed, was married to Hahnemann, then in his eighty-first year. The date of the marriage contract being 14th January, 1835, would seem to show that the courtship was not tediously prolonged.

After the wedding Hahnemann executed a will (see our