In the treatment Dr. Brooks seemed to have done all that could be suggested under the circumstances. The treatment must be supporting. Quinine and tincture of the chloride of iron with brandy, are among the most useful remedies; morphia, chloral and bromide of potassium to control pain. Salicylic acid and its soda, with baptisia, play an important part. Tincture of iodine and potass iodide may be employed.

The apartments should be kept well ventilated and attention to the most scrupulous cleanliness. Abscesses evacuated and washed out with sulphate of zinc, chloride of zinc, bichloride of mercury (1-2000), carbolic acid, or packed with boracic acid; strong creosote solutions and solutions of the chlorides have been recommended as injections into the nostrils, and gargles, as also the nitro-muriatic acid. Though, withal, we must say that the treatment in bad cases is extremely unsatisfactory.

"CARE IN REPORTING CASES."

The Journal of Reconstructives says "that a correspondent, alluding to some cases recently published in THE AMERICan Medical JourNAL, makes the following important suggestion:

Articles produced in medical journals are very potent either for good or evil, especially in cases of emergency. Professional men should bear this fact in mind, and confine themselves to true statements in the description, treatment and result of cases. Whether from a desire to draw comments from others, experienced, thereby receiving valuable instructions, or from a thirst for notoriety by striking awe into the readers with the details of some wonderfully complicated case, the bold and original treatment and happy results, I know not; be that as it may, cases are frequently overdrawn and misrepresented with dire effects."

We are certainly thankful for a suggestion of this kind and we hope to profit by it; but, in return, might we not suggest to the suggestor that he be a little more careful to tell what he means by the suggestion. People obtuse in intellect are not apt to take anything to heart until it is known wherein they have made false statements, overdrawn, or misrepresented. Critics should exercise "care in reporting cases." I hope, however, that our correspondents will exercise due care in reporting their cases. While we want brevity, as

suggested in Postal Brief by Dr. Collins, let the statement be sufficiently clear to be well understood, and don't overdraw or misrepresent. It is becoming known that this Journal is not the mouthpiece of a single individual, but of the profession-the whole medical profession. Those who dont want to hear from all sources can order us to stop the Journal, for we are going to fight it out on this line.

AN UNJUST AND UNGENEROUS INSULT TO PHYSICIANS AND PHARMACISTS.

Editor of the AMERICAN MEDICAL JOURNAL.-We want to ask your opinion on the following extract from Dr. E. R. Squibb's paper read before the New York State Medical Association, and published in the January number of the Ephemeris, on "The Relations of Physicians to their Medical Supplies."

Dr. Squibb says: "There are a large number of physicians who, for both therapeutics and materia medica, depend largely--if not mainly upon the traveling salesmen and their pamphlets and lists, and on the advertising pages of the medical journals. The relations of this class to their supplies is most simple and most favorable. They come in very direct and very close contact with the sources of their supplies, and have much less trouble than any other class of artisans. With others smarter, more ingenious and more plausible than they, to think for them, and then to apply vigorous mercantile principles to their wants thus suggested for them, they have the least practicable amount of thinking for themselves to do, in regard to their remedies and the novelties of the day, and therefore, as they argue, more time to think of and study out their cases. To this class the ready-made prescriptions in the form of beautifully colored and coated pills, or palatable solutions and mixtures, do not appeal simply as gratifying various degrees of laziness, or indisposition to think for themselves, but they present themselves as true labor-saving devices, skillfully prepared for the overworked ability to use them, and as giving more time for the higher and more scientific reaches of the profession."

We trust the importance of the principle at stake will lead you to notice this insult upon the intelligence of physicians.

The tendency of such articles as this is obviously to ridicule physicians who look to the advertising pages of medical journals for information regarding medical preparations.

Dr. Squibb also seeks to create the impression that the advertising pages of medical journals are not the proper channels for manufacturers of medicines to use for conveying to physicians information regarding their products. He thus directly strikes a blow at the rights of manufacturers and at the legitimate source of income to medical journals, which we think should not be submitted to without protest.

The doctor is evidently seeking to gore somebody, and, if we can understand his language, the thrust is aimed at physicians, pharmacists and editors; and, as to medical journals, we never thought but that they were entirely proper mediums of communication between the manufacturer and the physician.

ON ANTISEPSICS WE SEEM TO DIFFER.

In the E. M. Journal, of February, is an article on the "Status of Microbes Surgically Considered," by Professor A. J. Howe, M. D. We always like the terse style of the professor, and on the subject of microbes we believe he is in the main correct. Outside, however, of the microbian theory we have more use for antiseptics than he. We use them more to prevent decomposition of organic fluids than to destroy microbes, which we are inclined to think are generally innocent.

Dr. Howe asserts that "a state of sepsis cannot be freshened or sweetened by the use of those agents which delay the putrefactive process." We take this proposition to be a little bold. We sprinkle salt on meat to prevent decomposition, and we are told that the professor is peculiarly fond of the savory ham, and pickled pork. We wonder how he would take to an old ham, in mid-summer, without the briny antiseptic? Why do we use charcoal on fetid and gangrenous parts? The answer is, to sweeten the fluid, and to retard decomposition. It will not do to pick out one or two antiseptics, show their imperfections, and sweep the rest by wholesale. Perhaps this is the way St. Patrick killed all the snakes in Ireland, but in our country snakes dont die so readily.

Again, Professor Howe lays down the proposition that " an open wound does better than one which is sealed." The general

teaching on this subject is that a subcutaneous wound has chances of healing more kindly than an open wound. Would the professor have us convert a simple fracture into a compound one? Would he cut the tendons in talipes and torticolis, leaving the wound open? Would he leave the abdominal walls unsealed in laparotomy? I expect to hear next the theory advanced that canned fruit keeps better when the top is off and the seal broken. But perhaps the doctor don't mean all he says, or that his remarks are to be taken with some unknown reserve.

The processes of repair in the body are based upon the material we call lymph. Lymph may be organizable or unorganizable. If the body is strong, vigorous and healthy, the organizable lymph is predominant. If it be weak and feeble, the power of organization weakens in the same ratio. Organizable or plastic lymph is therefore the basis of repair; unorganizable or compuscular lymph resolves into pus and is therefore the basis of purulency. Either of these processes are exceedingly delicate and require the greatest The duty of the surgeon is to protect them and aid them. He shields the process of organization to prevent the action of external irritants, and in the first intention this effort is to prevent any retrograde changes. This is accomplished better under the skin, or when the skin is broken under an artificial sealing. It don't matter whether we believe in microbes or not, these are facts well borne out by surgical experience.

care.

In open wounds the unorganizable lymph resolves itself into pus, this pus is still in the chain of purposes. As long as it is sweet it is harmonious to the tissues and cannot act as a poison. It tends to shield the granulations and to keep them moist and healthy. One step more and pus takes a downward course, becoming rancid. That which just before was engaged in repair is now a virulent poison. Here the surgeon stands guarding this delicate element to prevent its disintegration. It is done by anteseptic dressings, by his zinc, by his carbolic acid, by his iodoform, bi-chloride of mercury, etc., and by hermetically sealing, so far as it is in his power. Thus pus is kept pure, and when its purpose is gone, it is carried off by drainage tubes and absorbent cotton. Thus sepsis is prevented, and therefore a closed wound does better than an open one. This is the testimony of nearly the entire surgical world. Who shall inveigh against it?

BOOK NOTICES.

THE ECLECTIC FAMILY PHYSICIAN. By John M. Scudder, M. D., Professor of the Principles and Practice of Medicine in the Eclectic Medical Institute; Author of the "Eclectic Practice of Medicine; “Diseases of Women and Children; "Materia Medica and Therapeutics; " "The Principles of Medicine;" "Specific Medication;""Specific Diagnosis; ""The Reproductive Organs and the Venereal; ""The Use of Inhalations," etc. Twentieth edition. Price, half morocco, $4.00; leather, $5.00

The author says: "This work contains all of medicine that a family should know. It is anatomy, physiology, hygiene, practice, materia medica, surgery and obstetrics. It is concise, plain and correct and will not lead to household drugging."

A copy of this work has been sent us for review, and we cannot but give our own convictions. Whilst this book contains much information useful to the common reader and to families, we must express serious doubts as to the propriety of putting such a book upon the market. The author says "the work contains all of medicine that a family should know." We believe this to be a great mistake. "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing;" and this adage is no truer anywhere than in medicine. It is a cunning way of saying, buy my book, and don't buy any other, for this is all you need. Possibly the reader would differ with the author on this proposition. The last sentence in the quotation deserves a notice, viz.: “It is concise, plain and correct, and will not lead to household drugging." The experience the profession has had in books of family practice teaches just to the contrary. Family medicine not only leads to drugging, but this leads to drugging of the most dangerous character. I know little difference between this kind of business and the vending of patent medicines. If authors of such books would confine themselves to innocent drugs, it would not be so bad; still, these are often given by the ignorant, and time taken up in their use until it is too late for the physician to save the case with more potent and better directed drugging.

This book does not stop with the innocent drugs, but places in the hands of the unlearned and unskillful such agents as veratrum, aconite, belladonna, etc., telling little of their power, and telling