answer to Dr. Glover. It approximates very closely to it; the difference being merely this.—In the one case the result is said to be due to exhaustion from over-excitement. Certain substances it is presumed have the power of causing a greater development than usual of nervous energy, so much so that after their use a corresponding amount of weakness ensues. If the stimulation have been excessive, the weakness resulting may amount to palsy, and every degree of weakness may be rendered permanent by frequent repetitions of the original stimulus. In the other case two forces are supposed, one inherent in the medicament or in the morbific cause, another in the nervous system, and the phenomena are explained on the supposition of the prevalence now of one, now of the other of these forces. Now the great objection against this is that one does not see how a reaction of the nervous power can dilate a bloodvessel, which is one of the instances we have to explain, and therefore the former explanation is much the more probable. Both hypotheses, however, suppose a natural readiness, but inability, in the nerves of the part, to return to the normal state, so that the smallness of the stimulus necessary is accounted for in the same way in both. Both, too, suppose an oscillatory power, actual or potential, which is weakened or destroyed in disease.

I trust that this important question will be taken up by our best thinkers and thoroughly reasoned out. In anything I have written on the subject I have merely meant to contribute some thoughts towards the great end of the explanation of the homœopathic law. I pin my faith to no opinion which afterthoughts, either of others or of myself, may tend to discounte

nance.

All lovers of truth will stand like a company of friends gazing at some distant but approaching object. Is it this, or that?-of this colour, or that?-does it run, or walk? &c. &c., are questions freely discussed, and this or that opinion is advanced or given up in turn by each as longer or

observation suggests, until probabilities end in certainty, and differing opinions unite in one.*

* [We beg to direct Dr. Hayle's attention to Fletcher's Pathology, a work

ON THE HOMOEOPATHIC COLLEGE QUESTION.

IN our last number we expressed our gratification at the flourishing condition of the Homœopathic Medical College of Pennsylvania, and gave large extracts from the last Report, to which we now recur for a different purpose. Regarding this as the first extensive independent homœopathic college which has been established, it very naturally suggests to us the inquiry how far and in what circumstances such institutions are to be desired. We have no wish to be understood as raising doubts of the expediency of the Pennsylvanian College; the circumstances of our transatlantic brethren being in many important respects so greatly different from our own, the remarks which apply to institutions in Great Britain may be inapplicable to similar institutions in America.

In thus calling attention to this vital question, on the right answer to which the future position of homœopathy in this country may in a great measure depend, we desire rather to throw out some reflections for the consideration of others than to undertake at the present stage of the inquiry to give final judgment in the matter. Very naturally, finding new obstructions on the recognised familiar roads to graduation and practice, the cry is raised to have a road of our own, and for our exclusive use; and, in the flush of triumphs which the very rapid advance of homœopathy in this country may have justified, the cry is accepted and eagerly repeated, without our having paused to consider maturely, whether in truth there may not be some way of removing the recent obstructions, or of bridging them over, so as to make the old roads still serve our purpose better than any new ones which we have at present the means of forming.

We may put in order the few remarks to be now made on

which we have repeatedly recommended to the readers of our Journal. Dr. Hayle will there find the subject of the relation of homœopathic remedies to the action of the capillaries fully thought out and discussed. We would hint to Dr. Hayle, as we once formerly did to another esteemed contributor, that if he had taken the trouble to read Dr. Fletcher's work before writing the above, it would have saved him some considerable amount of intellectual labour.-EDS.]

this interesting subject, by considering in succession the two objects which such institutions contemplate, and for which they are valued; and by then comparing the advantages in each respect to be looked for in any new homœopathic medical college with those possessed by existing establishments.

The objects of such institutions are, first, to afford the means of valuable medical instruction; and, secondly, to grant some honorary title, such as a degree or a diploma, which shall be accepted by the public as legally or socially entitling the holder of it to a certain status or consideration.

These two objects are not always united; there may be valuable instruction given by private teachers who have no power of granting honours; and there may be honorary titles bestowed by an institution (the University of St. Andrews for example) which has no provision for medical teaching of any considerable value.

We have now to compare the probable means of instruction attainable to students in any new homœopathic medical college which it would be at present possible to establish, with the opportunities afforded by the existing medical schools.

I. As regards the teachers.

We of course assume that in the particular department of therapeutics, and in whatever directly relates to it, the teachers in such a college will have the material advantage of being in possession of the homœopathic law of cure, the value of which we will not be supposed likely to underrate. Now in any liberal course of medical instruction, it is but a very moderate proportion which will be considerably influenced by the homœopathic doctrine; a sixth, or a fifth perhaps; certainly not a fourth part. In the University of Edinburgh, for example, there are fourteen chairs connected with the faculty of medicine, nine of which have no necessary reference at all to the homoeopathic law, while of the remaining five some are only very partially affected by it. In regard then to some four or five chairs, it may be deemed of importance that they should be taught by homœopathists, and to that extent there would be an advantage cæteris paribus on the side of the proposed homœopathic college; but no further. On the other side, let us fairly look at the disadvantages

necessarily attaching to any such college as regards its teachers. Even in the best of the old universities, with their endowments, privileges and high reputation, the inducements offered to physicians in any considerable practice to become professors are by no means overpowering. In any sectarian institution they will be even less cogent; there will be connected with the office less emolument, less influence, and no public estimation. While thus we have only an inferior price to offer for the required services, we have also unhappily to purchase in a smaller market. Making all due allowance for what general superiority may, on the most extravagant estimate, be claimed for Hahnemann's followers, there will still remain a large balance against

us.

While these are counted by units or tens, the others are still counted by hundreds; and it is out of all probability that we shall be able to secure, among the units or tens, teachers in the respective independent branches of science equal to those who are to be had among the hundreds. Again: even had we ample supplies and a sufficient corps of ablest men out of whom to choose teachers, there is every reason to anticipate that the preponderance of one idea throughout the whole college would operate unfavourably alike on teachers and students. There would be wanting the free collision of minds, out of which so much light has often come, if not to the disputants, yet to less partial on-lookers; and there would be a continual tendency on the one hand to exaggerate and extend beyond its true limits the law of cure on which the institution was founded, and on the other to neglect or misrepresent other historically important and possibly complementary doctrines. It is difficult to overvalue the importance to students of having teachers so variously gifted that they present facts under different aspects and in new lights; and with all their faults the old universities have this advantage, that they teach no exclusive system, are ruled by no single idea. It is mentioned by an historian of the University of Edinburgh, that when Cullen and Gregory were professors respectively of the institutes and of the practice of medicine, by their own request it was arranged that they should teach each

*Bower's History of the University of Edinburgh, vol. ii, p. 385.

class alternately. It is added that this was done "in consequence of the different theories they had espoused upon some leading medical doctrines, which both professors could not avoid mentioning in their lectures." We have no doubt that this unusually reasonable arrangement was greatly for the benefit of the students.

One word more only on this head. It is obviously true that the views of the related sciences which a professor believing in homœopathy is most likely to take, are precisely those which would naturally occur to intelligent students otherwise disposed in its favour, and therefore the views which it will be least necessary to suggest or illustrate to them. It is thus a loss, not a gain to them to have a teacher so like-minded.

II. As regards the students.

Under present circumstances those who ultimately become practitioners according to the homeopathic law are drawn from the general body of medical students by a fuller appreciation of, or what may be termed a greater affinity for the homœopathic law. They have chosen it in preference to all the others submitted to them, as the truest, the best, by which they are prepared to stand or fall as professional men. Their faith is thus put to a severe test; and their choice is seldom made until they have become acquainted through their teachers with all other usual means of cure. Notwithstanding a contrary teaching they have embraced the young faith, of which they are therefore most valuable confessors; and having already come into collision with the other older forms of belief, and mastered them, they are not likely to be easily overthrown in any subsequent conflicts. To a great extent they may thus be regarded as the élite of the students of medicine.

The students reared in a homoeopathic college will have no such claims to respect. Being predestined homœopathists from their very entrance upon professional studies, their remaining such can indicate no strong convictions, and gives no security for the future. Profess to believe homoeopathy they must, as the condition of graduation; for while to impose any creed is inconsistent with the right administration of universities in which no exclusive creed has ever been acknowledged,