Page images

calculus being the cause successful in curing it by simply surgical and local treatment?

True, not every case of pyorrhea, when brought to the notice of the dentist, is accompanied by salivary or serumal deposit, but nine patients out of ten of these will tell you that the beginning of their trouble was tartar upon the teeth. Why is it not found there now? Because some systemic change has taken place by which these salts are no longer a product of the saliva.

"The foe though gone, his track is here,
Behold the wound where thrust his spear."

Dr. Ingersoll. Perhaps I may as well here as anywhere else correct a statement which has got into the journals a number of times, and recently from Dr. Eawls, of Kentucky, in the Ohio State Journal, on the subject of pyorrhea alveolaris. I have been quoted as saying that the cause of pyorrhea alveolaris is the gathering of sanguinary calculus on the roots of the teeth. Any one who will read my paper, published in the Ohio State Journal, on the formation of sanguinary calculus, will find that I distinctly stated that it is never the cause of ulceration, but uniformly the result of it.

Dr. Friedrichs. I would like to inquire whether any of you have ever seen a considerable deposit of salivary calculus without its producing any irritation or pyorrhea? One or two cases have come under my eye,—one in which there is a considerable deposit. The subject is an Englishman, who would not allow any dentist to touch his teeth. He said they had been in that condition for the last twenty-five years, and I could not see that there was any inflammation produced by the deposit, as his gums below the deposit appeared in a normal condition.

Adjourned to 8 P. M.

(To be continued.)


The New York Odontological Society held its regular meeting, Tuesday evening, October 13, 1885, in the parlors of the New York Academy of Medicine, No. 12 West Thirty-first street.

The President, Dr. William Jarvie, in the chair.

President Jarvie delivered the following address: Gentlemen: It seems but proper that at this meeting of the New York Odontological Society, marking as it does a new era in its history, your president, in calling the assembly to order, should say a few words regarding its past, and his hopes and anticipations for its future.

On the evening of Thursday, May 30, 1867, Drs. Francis, Northrop, Carr, Hurd, Perine, Home, and Burgh met at the residence of the first-named and organized this society, the avowed object being u to cultivate closer professional relations among its members; to extend their knowledge of the arts and sciences bearing upon dentistry; to maintain a high standard of excellency in dental art; to interest and instruct the public in dental hygiene, and to secure a higher appreciation of the aims of the dental profession."

The membership of the society was quite small, but it was composed of men thoroughly imbued with the principles they had thus avowed, and they set themselves earnestly at work to carry them out. They divided themselves into committees or sections, very much as the New York Academy of Medicine is organized to-day, one of these devoting its time to research in the direction of dental pathology and therapeutics; another to dental anatomy and Physiology; another to dental histology and microscopy; another to dental chemistry and metallurgy; another to operative dentistry; and still another to dental education and literature, these committees or sections reporting the results of their investigations from time to time to the society.

During the first five years of the society's existence the papers read were all prepared by the members; thus confining the work and its influence largely within its own membership, which was small, never up to this time exceeding twelve or thirteen.

In June, 1872, Dr. Norman W. Kingsley, of New York, prepared a paper describing a case of compound fracture of the inferior maxilla and its treatment, which was the first paper read before the society by one outside of its own membership. Since then, however, the list of dentists who have contributed papers to the society is very large, embracing as it does the name of almost every one of ■eminence in the profession in this country, and the names of many who are practicing in Europe. Among them I might mention the late Prof. Eobert Arthur, of Baltimore; the late Prof. T. B. Hitchcock, of Boston; the late Prof. J. H. McQuillen and Prof. T. L. Buckingham, of Philadelphia; Prof. J. E. G-arretson, Louis Jack, W. G. A. Bonwill, C. N. Peirce, J. Foster Flagg, and E. T. Darby, of Philadelphia; G-. T. Moffatt, L. D. Shepard, Thos. H. Chandler, E. S. Niles, Thomas Fillebrown, and J. T. Codman, of Boston; Geo. H. Cushing, M. S. Dean, A. W. Harlan, and T. W. Brophy, of Chicago; Edward Maynard, Washington; G. Y. Black, Jacksonville, 111.; S. PCutler, Memphis; Chas. E. Butler, Cleveland; H. S. Chase, St. Louis» S. B. Palmer, Syracuse; J. E. Line, Kochester; Chas. S. Tomes, J. Smith Turner, C. Spence Bate, Thomas Fletcher, Geo. W. Field, W. H. Waite, and H. C. Quinby, of England; G. N. Winderling, of Milan; Madame Hirschfeld, Berlin; and the list would not be complete were I to leave out the names of our New York friends, W. H, Atkinson, J. B. Bich, D. EL Groodwillie, James E. Dexter, Louis Elsberg, C. Fayette Taylor, and Carl Heitzmann.

This list of names is so long and so imposing that it would seem as though the contributions of our active membership had indeed been small in comparison; yet when I call your attention to the very able and learned papers read by such as our own Abbott, Bodeeker, Bogue, Bronsor, Brockway, Carr, Clowes, Dwinelle, Dodge, Francis, Howe, Ives, Kingsley, Lord, Marvin, Payne, Perry, and Baymond, you will realize that our resident is indeed an active membership.

During the past eleven years three unusually large meetings or congresses of dentists have been held under the auspices of the society. They were productive of much good, bringing together as they did the ablest men in the profession, from various parts of the country, for the full and free discussion of the different subjects brought before the meetings. Bach of these meetings seemed to instill new life and vigor into the society, and they have been the means of inspiring many to venture into new fields of original investigation. I trust we may have more of them.

Up to the close of 1873 the society did not undertake the publication of any of its proceedings. During 1874 the recording secretary prepared a synopsis of the discussions, which, together with the papers read, were published in Johnston's Dental Miscellany. Since December, 1874, all of our discussions have been reported verbatim, carefully revised, and, with the papers read, published (with the exception of one year) in the Dental Cosmos. At the close of each year the transactions of the society as published have been collected and bound in a volume, and copies sent to all our members, and to the various dental libraries. These volumes, as you all know, have been eagerly sought for and read, and the fact that they are so frequently quoted from as authority leads us to infer that they are valued highly for their contents.

I said in the beginning of my remarks that this evening marked a new era in the history of the society. Heretofore the society has always held its meetings (with the exception of the congresses before referred to) at the residences of its members, the society believing that up to this time it was for its best interests to do so. We have had in this way an opportunity of observing the manner of the arrangement and mode of fitting up of various offices; we have seen various plans of lighting operating-rooms; the different instruments and appliances in use; and last, but not by any means least, there has been a certain cosy, fraternal, home-like, and social atmosphere pervading our meetings that has recommended itself strongly to many. But the time has come, so the majority of our members think, when larger accommodations are needed, where all can meet on a common plane; where some can exercise a greater freedom of utterance in the discussions than they feel like giving vent to in a friend's house, and where all can share alike the burden of expense.

This brings us to the present of the society. What shall be its future? Much as the society has accomplished, brilliant as is its record, strong as it stands this evening, honest, earnest, hearty work must be done in the future to sustain it. We need a library filled with every work useful for reference. We need a cabinet filled with specimens. We have waited for both, because we have heretofore had no abiding place for either. The cause of our being without them no longer existing, let the want be supplied speedily.

How shall our meetings be made more interesting and instructive? Bring here the record of your histological research; the record of the pathological conditions you meet with; your treatment and its effect; your new instruments and appliances; your interesting cases of office practice. Come each one with thoughts intent upon the subjects announced for discussion, and give voice to them. Let this be truly a mutual-benefit society, each one contributing in some way to the general fund of instruction.

And now, fellow-members, I appeal to you to keep up the standard of this society, whose reputation and whose work is dear to the hearts of all of you, not for any narrow aim or selfish end, but that through our efforts the standard of professional attainments may be raised, and the sphere of usefulness of our profession extended, that through it suffering humanity may be the better and more quickly relieved.

Gentlemen, as I have already said, we meet for the first time in a new home, and we are proud to have with us this evening the honored president of the New York Academy of Medicine, Dr. A. Jacobi, who will now address you.

Dr. A. Jacobi. Mr. President and G-entlemen: A few months ago, when delivering an inaugural address before the IsTew York Academy of Medicine, I invited the numerous medical societies of the city to recognize the Academy building as their natural headquarters. Since that time, besides the academical sections which belong here, a number of scientific societies have convened here regularly, thereby giving proof of their kinship, not only by similar studies and equal tendencies, but by availing themselves of the same halls. To-night I have the pleasure of greeting here the representatives of dental medicine and surgery, which longer than any other special department has kept separate from general medicine. Why was that so?

Like medicine in general, dentistry has a single great aim, viz., to cure disease or to prevent it. In its first beginning medicine consisted of a number of devices, rules, and means to restore health, collected nobody cared from what source. After a long time only it became a physical, intellectual, and moral necessity to prevent disease as well as to remove or relieve it. Thus, the practice of medicine preceded its science for hundreds, perhaps for thousands, of years. Necessity was the mother first of gathering plain experience, and but afterwards of "invention" and of more profound thinking. We all know that genuine scientific research is but the product of comparatively modern times; but also that there is no investigation ever so subtle and apparently remote from practical utilization but serves at last the aim of medicine,—that is, prevention or cure. Thus, medicine consists legitimately of two parts, viz., art and science. The former was perfected to a certain extent before the latter had any opportunity to develop. The former was, as I said, a requirement, a necessity; it served both the public and the experts. It cured the sick; it gave the physician prominence, reputation, and reward. Pure science and purely scientific work cannot accomplish the same results for their priests unless society has progressed beyond its most pressing physical needs, and until for the universal drudgery in behalf of the body is substituted a high degree of general intellectual culture.

I take it that what I said of medicine in general is particularly adapted to that branch of the healing art to which you, gentlemen, are giving your more or less undivided attention. The field of labor of the early dentist was a very limited one. Not only was the part of the human body to which he administered a very narrow one — the very type of a special and specialistic province,—but his services were very uniform and simple. For a long time the art of the dentist was that of extracting teeth, no matter whether performed in the public market-place, or in later periods in the barber's workshop. The art of preserving and beautifying is of comparatively recent origin, and requires as its foundation a good deal of knowledge, acquired by patient study, undertaken with a scientific spirit. Fortunately, to-day both medicine in general and all its special branches combine'both science and art, each of them subservient to and perfected by the other.

Knowledge in regard to teeth was first descriptive; general anatomy cared for them as for any other organ; comparative anatomy paid most attention to skull and teeth. I remember very well that when I was quite young I had to learn by heart the number, Vol. xxvii—47.

« PreviousContinue »