Page images
PDF
EPUB

ing the managers of existing hospitals (which are, of course, in the hands of allopaths) to give up some wards for the practice of Hahnemann's method. We may mention that the action of Dr. Kidd in the case of Lord Beaconsfield presented the most telling argument against entertaining the proposal of the petitioners in Tasmania. Here is how it reads in the speech of one of the opponents:

"Dr. Kidd found the earl very ill; he sent for the Queen's physician, Sir W. Jenner, to consult with. He promptly refused, as the bulk of the profession would have done. Dr. Kidd then applied to Dr. Quain, and that doctor, before consulting with the homoeopathic physician, asked how Lord Beaconsfield was being treated; and when he was informed that he was not being treated homoeopathically, he consented to confer with Dr. Kidd.”

It will be long before Dr. Kidd's half-hearted adhesion to homœopathy will cease to exercise a baneful influence on the acceptance of homoeopathy by the prejudiced person. Unfortunately Dr. Kidd is regarded as an exponent of homoeopathy, which is an entire mistake, and his halting between two opinions and his practice thence resulting are looked upon as common to the disciples of Hahnemann, which they are not. But it is difficult to disabuse the public of an idea that has once got into their heads, and we may expect that for a long time to come, when we are advocating the advantages and scientific character of homoeopathy, we shall have Dr. Kidd and his treatment of Lord Beaconsfield thrown in our teeth.

Dr. Richardson's Work on Obstetrics.

PROFESSOR WILLIAM C. RICHARDSON has returned from a vacation trip in the mountains of Colorado much rested and improved in health. He writes:-"I am busy at a revised edition of my work on obstetrics, and will be thankful to any of your readers for obstetrical hints of any kind. I want to make this new edition a credit to the school; it will be much enlarged, elegantly printed and bound, and up to the times on all points; in fine, a practical and complete work on obstetrics, a companion

volume to Ludlam on Diseases of Women, and Duncan on Diseases of Children.

"Send any hints or suggestions to WILLIAM C. RICHARDSON, M.D., 721, Chestnut Street, St. Louis, Mo."

Modest Merit.

Ar the banquet given on the 20th of November last to welcome the medical officers of the Egyptian Expedition, Sir William Jenner, Bart., K.C.B., Physician-in-Ordinary to the Queen, was in the chair, and in proposing Her Majesty's health he managed most ingeniously to pay himself a back-handed compliment, as seen in this extract from his speech as it appears in the Medical Times and Gazette of 25th November:

"Her confidence is given without stint. There is no backthought. Confidence is entirely given to those who merit it, for she will be as clear to see the want as she is to appreciate the merit."

"back

One cannot say of this passage that there is no thought" in it. It is as clear as a syllogism. It is just as though the illustrious orator had said :-" Her Majesty is a consummate judge of merit. She only gives her confidence to those who merit it. She has given me her unstinted confidence for many years. Ergo, I am a person of merit." Or thus:-" Her Majesty is clear to perceive a want of merit. She withdraws her confidence when this want exists. She has never withdrawn her confidence from me. Ergo, there is no want of merit in me."

Evidently Sir William is anxious that his own good opinion of himself should be shared by others; perhaps if his merits had been less transcendant he might have displayed this anxiety in a less glaring manner.

208

BOOKS RECEIVED.

Old-school Medicine and Homœopathy. By J. W: DOWLING, M.D. New York: Hurlburt. 1882.

Hæmorrhoids. By W. JEFFERSON GUERNSEY, M.D. 1882. Supra-pubic Lithotomy. By W. TOD HELMUTH. New York: Boericke and Tafel. 1882.

The Springs and Baths of Kissingen. By Dr. HERMANN WELSCH. 2nd edition. Kissingen, 1880.

Third Annual Report of the Society for the Prevention of Blindness. December, 1882.

Annual Report of the Homeopathic Hospital, Melbourne. 1882. Revue Générale d'Ophthalmologie. Tom. ii, No. 1.

The California Homœopath.

Revista Homeopatica Catalana.

The Calcutta Journal of Medicine.

Boletin Clinico del Instituto Homeopatico de Madrid.
The Medical Counselor.

Rivista Omiopatica.

Revue Homœopathique Belge.

The Monthly Homeopathic Review.

The Homœopathic World.

The Hahnemannian Monthly.

The American Homœopathic Observer.

The North American Journal of Homœopathy.

The New England Medical Gazette.

El Criterio Medico.

L'Art Médical.

Bulletin de la Société Méd. Hom. de France.

Allgemeine homöopathische Zeitung.

New York Medical Times.

Homœopathic Journal of Obstetrics.
The Medical Call.

[blocks in formation]

THE

BRITISH JOURNAL

OF

HOMEOPATHY.

THE ACTION OF DRUGS UPON THE EYE.

By Dr. HUGHES.

LECTURE IV.

THE first of our still remaining list of eye medicines is

Rhus,

[ocr errors]

under which name I include the " venenata as well as the "toxicodendron "kind of sumach.

The specific irritation which these plants exert upon the skin is naturally displayed also on the conjunctiva, and Hahnemann's pathogenesis includes many symptoms, objective and subjective, of inflammation of this membrane. They have no very distinctive characters; and, possessing as we do so many excellent remedies for catarrhal ophthalmia, Rhus has hardly been required or employed in its treatment. It is otherwise, however, with ophthalmia scrofulosa. The phlyctenulæ which characterise this affection are very like, if they are not identical with, the vesicular eruption it developes upon the skin; it is indeed no uncommon thing to find their presence associated with some amount of general eczema of the face. When this is so, Rhus takes precedence of all other remedies in strumous ophthalmia; VOL. XLI, NO. CLXV.-JULY, 1883.

and even without such indication may often do good service in it, when there is great photophobia, tendency to œdema and chemosis, and when (Drs. Allen and Norton say) there is a profuse gush of tears on opening the spasmodically contracted lids. You will find testimonies to its value, put forth from homoeopathic and from old-school sources, collected by Dr. Dudgeon in his article on the drug. Its lachrymation is very acrid, and this quality is noted by Dr. Dunham as belonging to all the fluids and secretions of the body under the influence of Rhus. I was led by the presence of such a symptom to give it in a case of recurring gouty ophthalmia, to the very great relief and general improvement of the patient.

The erysipelatous inflammation set up in Rhus poisoning does not fail to show itself in the eyelids, and the plant naturally finds successful employment in phlegmonous inflammations of this part. I cannot, however, agree with

Drs. Allen and Norton in considering such a condition analogous to the palpebral symptoms which accompany inflammations of the deeper structures of the eye, as orbital cellulitis, and suppurations of the uveal tract. Its value in such conditions must stand on its own merits, and their testimony to it is very strong. It is the remedy, with them, for orbital cellulitis. "Some alarming cases of this disease," they say, "occurring in our own experience, have been promptly arrested by this drug. In one case one eye was entirely lost, and had been operated upon with a view of providing free exit for the suppurative process, and the disease was making rapid and alarming progress in the other eye. Rhus 1 speedily arrested its progress." Again they write: "Its grandest sphere of action is to be found in suppurative iritis, or in the still more severe cases in which the inflammatory process has involved the remainder of the uveal tract (ciliary body and choroid), especially if of traumatic origin, as after cataract extraction. As a remedy in this dangerous form of inflammation of the eye it stands unrivalled, no other drug having as yet been found equal to it in importance in this serious malady."

In favour of this power of Rhus over acute suppurative

« PreviousContinue »