surely well to look around for light when the path is darker and more devious than the untrodden tracks of a vast forest, and when the guides are occupied in interminable feuds about the track which shall be followed.

I have shared in these aspirations. It was with feelings towards my seniors bordering upon reverence that I commenced my professional career; I sat at the feet of the most eminent teachers in Europe, and listened to their instructions with respectful attention; when they were obscure, I attributed their obscurity to my misapprehension of their meaning; when they were inconsistent, I laboured to reconcile them; when they were dogmatic, I tried to believe them. It was not till I had faithfully followed many masters, and diligently studied many systems, that I reluctantly came to the conclusion that the masters were zealous but mistaken, and that the systems were ingenious but fanciful, and little better than pleasing dreams.

I was thus driven to join the ranks of those who rely upon experience alone, and have no theory whatever; and from being energetic in my procedure, addicted to bleeding, and all the forms of what is called active treatment, I became sceptical and cautious. For seven years I used the lancet only once, and that once I afterwards regretted. I tried to make useful observations. If medicine could not be theoretically advanced, I hoped it might be practically improved.

a

When, therefore, Hahnemann was held up to me as sage," and his system as "perfect and complete," I felt incredulous and despairing; and when urged to undertake the study of the novelty, I had little heart for the work. The call of duty, however, once more prevailed, the resolution was taken, and the work was commenced. The results are now in my reader's hands, and are commended to the attention of an unbiassed mind.

1 Dr. Dudgeon's Preface to his Translation of the 'Organon,'

He will see that, in my opinion, Hahnemann is very little of a sage, and his system very far from being perfect and complete; but he will also see that I have found some useful truths which have rewarded the research,-truths which have been buried in speculations, defaced by intemperate language, and almost converted into errors by indefinite expansion and excessive exaggeration. These are grains of gold which have turned up in the diggings, and I have striven to wash away from them the sand and the dirt.

1

The

One of these truths is none other than a law of healing. It is known and confessed that, up to the present hour, physicians have had no law of healing to guide them. majority of physicians would, I think, acknowledge with Professor Simpson, that a "law in therapeutics, applicable to all diseases, would constitute the greatest imaginable discovery in medicine." If, therefore, such a discovery has been made, it is worthy of the closest attention of all medical practitioners. This discovery, often noticed since the days of Hippocrates, but never clearly understood, I have endeavoured to exhibit in the simplicity of naked truth; and in this form I trust it will possess more attractive charms than it has hitherto done under the adornment of hypothetical clothing. I have laboured to give it an exact definition, and to restrict it within its legitimate limits.

It is true that in doing so I have gone counter to the current of homœopathic writers up to the present moment. This current sets strongly in the direction of indefinite amplification, both in respect to the principle and to the small dose. If the adoption of Homœopathy by the intelligent members of the medical profession be the object to be desired and aimed at, I think the efforts of these writers are made in a wrong direction. The thing needed by the profession was expressed

'Simpson's 'Homœopathy,' p. 238.

by Sydenham, two centuries ago,—“ a methodus medendi, fixed, definite, and consummate." It seems to me that labour directed towards the attainment of this object is more likely to be rewarded by gaining the attention of thoughtful practitioners than any other.

Since this volume was printed, I have read Dr. Geddes Scott's address at the meeting of the Congress of Homœopathic practitioners, in London, on the 30th of May last. He is one of the ablest writers on Homœopathy in England. It is worthy of notice that Dr. Scott, in his address, goes even beyond Hahnemann in the extent of his application of the principle of Homœopathy. "It seems to me," he says, "the great curative law indicated by Hahnemann throws a flood of light and guidance over questions unconnected with medicine, but analogous to it in the single feature of aiming to correct permanently some evil, or, in still more general terms, to effect some permanent change of mode without interfering with the permanence and identity of being. Let it be once thoroughly understood and heartily received in all its varied forms, and in all the modes by which it may be expressed, whether it be regarded as the expulsive power of a new affection,' or as the result of reaction, or as the fundamental explanation of the force of habit, and let it be brought with honesty and intelligence into all the regions of morals, politics, and education, and if I err not, it will appear that the very same ray which guides us in our dealings with the sick, will also guide us in our efforts to instruct the ignorant, to raise the fallen, to emancipate the oppressed, and to regulate the free.” 1

I have been struggling to ascertain what is precise and definite, and feeling comfortable only when I could answer any question which might come before me, with "yes" or "no." Dr. Scott has been delighting himself by contemplations on

1 'British Journal of Homœopathy,' July 1856, p. 360.

the vast and the indefinite, and has been trying to see, not the extent to which our sun illuminates and governs its own planetary system, but whether it can throw any light into other systems which have other suns to irradiate the surface and guide the movements of the bodies which belong to them. I admire his talents, and respect his labours; but there is a time for everything, and I doubt the wisdom of pursuing such a train of thought at the present moment.

Another truth which has presented itself in this enterprise is the power of drugs in minute doses. This truth is not a corollary of the law of Homœopathy. The facts which prove the truth of the principle do not prove the efficacy of the small dose. Some may therefore receive the one and reject the other; may own and adopt the principle, while they hesitate to acknowledge, or are unwilling even to try, the effects of such small quantities of drugs. The law is worthy of study, and will well reward any labour bestowed on it; the dose also is worthy of a trial, and will, if I mistake not, astonish and delight every unprejudiced mind that condescends to observe it. The results of my inquiries upon this subject will be found in the Essays. I will confine myself in this place to the following observation :

A large number of cases of both acute and chronic disease, of a more or less serious nature, some of them highly dangerous, which have had no medication except that of the small dose, have got well in my hands, during the last seven years. This is an undeniable fact, and one of these two consequences follow, either they have got well by the vis medicatrix naturæ alone-in plain English, have got well of themselves, or, the small doses of drugs have aided in curing them. I am charged by my medical colleagues with credulity and folly for believing the latter alternative; to my mind it argues a greater amount of credulous assent to acknowledge faith in the former.

I have seen an almost immediate change follow the admi

nistration of the dose; I have observed that a small dose of one medicine has been followed by improvement in the symptoms, when a similarly small dose of another medicine has not been so followed; I have found that the small dose of the same drug is followed by amendment in similar cases, when small doses of other drugs are not followed by a similar amendment; so that not any small dose, but only the small dose of the appropriate remedy is followed by the recovery of the patient; and I have observed these facts so often, that it is impossible for me to doubt, whatever may be the opprobrium of acknowledging my belief, that there is power and efficacy in the small doses I have given.

Other truths have resulted from this inquiry which will be found explained and illustrated in these Essays.

I have also read with attention what has been written against the new method, and have replied to such statements as seemed to deserve notice. I see that Sir Benjamin Brodie now refers to an article written by him in the 'Quarterly Review,' fourteen years ago, for his refutation of Homœopathy. The article is called "Brandy and Salt-Homœopathy -Hydropathy," and will be found in the number for December, 1842.2 I will briefly notice this article here.

It seems to me a good maxim in controversy, to commence with some proposition in which both parties are agreed-some common ground upon which both are standing; in this way the steps in the diverging lines can be readily traced, and accurately defined. Sir Benjamin starts from this platform,— "important practical knowledge derived from the only true source of all knowledge-observation and experience." investigation, the results of which are given in this volume, was undertaken upon the same basis,-that medicine is a science of observation and experiment, and that no statements 1 In a letter printed in the 'Medical Times and Gazette,' May 10th, 1856. 2 Quarterly Review,' vol. lxxi, p. 84.

The