Imágenes de páginas
[ocr errors]

continuance and prodigious increase. The disease is fully and plainly defcribed: and the various means by which it is propagated, as well as the methods of cure and prevention, are clearly pointed out. Our fenfible and benevolent Author has printed this account on a fingle sheet, and distributed it through thofe parts of the country where the difeafe is most prevalent. Art. XII. Cafes of Aneurisms, with Remarks, by Dr. Donald Monro, Phyfician to St. George's Hospital, London.

We have in this paper ten hiftories, to fome of which are fubjoined the appearances on diffection, and engravings of the dreafed arteries. We have likewite obfervations on the different kinds of aneurifms, whether true, fpurious, or mixed, with references to thofe authors who have written on the fame fubject.


Art. XIII. An Attempt to determine by Experiments, how far fome. of the most powerful Medicines, viz. Opium, ardent Spirits, and effential Oils, affect Animals by acting on thofe Nerves to which they are primarily applied, and thereby bringing the rest of the nervous System into Sufferance, by what is called Sympathy of Nerves; and how far thefe Medicines affe&t Animals, after being taken in by their abforbent Veins, and mixed and conveyed with their Blood in the Courfe of its Circulation; with Phyfiological and practical Remarks; by Dr. Alexander Monro, Physician and Profeffor of Phyfic and of Anatomy in the University of Edinburgh.

Our ingenious phyfiologift has taken a great deal of pains to afcertain the points in queftion. Without entering, however, into any detail of his experiments, we fhall lay before our Readers the General Corollaries, collected from the Remarks made. on the foregoing Experiments with Opium, ardent Spirits, and effen


tial Gils


1. It is obvious that the effects of thofe medicines on frogs, for example of the opium and ardent fpirits, in an over dole, are amalegous to their effects on men and quadrupeds.


2. They affect an animal in a fimilar way, whether applied to an outward or inward-part of its body.


3. The effects of the fame quantity of thofe medicines are more speedy when poured into the prime vie, than when ap-. phed to the found skin, agreeable to the common doctrine. Yet,

4. The reafon given for it, viz. that the prime via are more fucculent and fenfible, is extremely fallacious; for, ongh the great guts can, without diforder, bear fomethings which are very offenfive to the ftomach; yet opium, and probably many other medicines, affect frogs by the ans, fooner and perhaps more than by the mouth. And an injection into the cavity of the abdomen, or, to speak more accurately, into.


the cavity of the peritoneum, which is very denfe, and is faid to be infenfible of cutting, laceration, and erofior, affects an animal much more quickly, and with greater violence, than when poured into the prima via.

Hence the effects of medicines are not in all cafes proportioned to the general degree of fenfibility of the organs to which they are applied, nor to their laxity or number of veffels nor, perhaps, can any univerfal rule be formed; each organ feeming to be endowed with its peculiar fenfe.

5. All the above-named medicines can affect animals in two ways and all can affect them in either way to fuch a degree, as to render them infenfible and motionlefs; or, if long enough applied, to kill them.

One way, is by acting on thefe nerves to which they are primarily applied, fo as to bring all the other nerves to fympathize, independent of their mixture with the blood.

The other way, is by their being abforbed, mixed, and conveyed with the blood, independent of any influence on the nerves of the part to which they are primarily applied.

6. But, as animals are fooneft, and to the greateft degree, affected by thofe medicines, whilft the abforbent, the circulating, and the nervous fyftems all duly exercife their functions; it follows thence, and it is also reasonable to fuppofe, that on a found animal they operate in both thefe ways.

7. To determine the degree in which thefe medicines act on a found animal in either of these ways, or even to which of them we are to afcribe the greateft effect, is difficult; because, we must fuppofe, that by impairing the nervous influence, the abforption is diminished in moft inftances, or perhaps increased in fome inftances, where the medicine is very irritating; and we have found, for certain, that the nerves of the extremities can' fcarcely propagate the moft violent impreffion to the other nerves, if the circulation in that part is stopped: And, therefore, we must fuppofe, that, when the nerves of the abdomen are impreffed by a medicine, after cutting out of the heart, the fympathy of the other nerves with them is lefs remarkable than it would be, were the animal entire. So that we cannot, in that way, have a perfect idea of the effect of a medicine upon the nerves alone; and, although we knew the exact effect on one part, we could not, a priori, det rmine what it would be on another part.


8. We may indeed prefume, that the effects of all the forementioned medicines, when they are applied to the found outer furface of the body, are chiefly owing to their abforption, mixture, and conveyance with the blood, fince they operate as violently, and nearly as foon, when the nerves of the part to which they are applied are cut, as when they are entire.

H 2

• If,

[ocr errors]

If, again, they are applied to the more fenfible inward futface of the prima via, they may probably operate more fpeedily, and, in fome cafes, more violently, through the nerves alone, than by their being abforbed and conveyed with the blood.


And whether a medicine is applied inwardly or outwardly, the quantity of it, or of its vehicle, or the nature of the part to which it is applied, will probably alter the proportional effect, in the one or in the other way.


9. The fympathy of the nerves depends chiefly, and almoft entirely, on their connection at their origin. At the fame time, it has appeared, that, in fome places, neighbouring nerves more readily fympathize than diftant ones.


10. As the opium has a furprising influence over the heart and arterious fyftem, when directly applied to them; and these effects, though greater, are fimilar to the effects of this medicine when abforbed: We may infer, that, when it is abforbed, mixed, and conveyed with the blood, its effects are almoft folely to be afcribed to its operation on the nerves of the heart, and veffels through which it is carried. And, by analogy, the like is probable of many other medicines.

11. I am far from denying in the last corollary, that these medicines produce any alteration on the texture of the fluids; on the contrary, I am perfuaded they do alter them, and that, by long continued ufe, thofe alterations may be fo confiderable, as to effect the animal economy, though, perhaps, we may not be able to perceive or ascertain their nature by our imperfect fenfes I only alledge, that the effects operated on the fluids by one dofe, or by one over-dofe, are inconfiderable, when compared with its effects on the nerves of the circulating fyftem.


12. We are to confider, that the nerves of the heart, and large branches of the vascular fyftem, affected by medicines abforbed and conveyed with the blood, will influence, by fympathy, other nerves of the body, to which these medicines may hot perhaps be able to penetrate through the very fmall veffels. 13. Medicines circulated with the blood, will probably affect fome organs more readily than others, owing to the very different termination of their veffels, and various feeling of their nerves. Hence, we may fuppofe, there are, in nature, medicines which, with ftrict propriety, might be termed cepha lic, pulmonic, hepatic, fplenic, &c. though hitherto these names have been applied with fo little precifion, that at present they are justly in difufe with many phyficians.

Nay, in fact, we may obferve, that the matter of difeafe, or acrid medicines, mixed with the blood, more readily and frequently affect the fkin, trachea, and kidneys, by means of

which chiefly fuch particles are fecreted from the blood, and excreted, as by the functions of life have been rendered irritating and hurtful to the conftitucion, than the other glands or parts of the body.'

We are forry to obferve, that whofe hecatombs of poor harmless frogs, have been painfully facrificed, in the course of thele experiments.

[To be concluded in our next.]

ART. IV. A Vindication of the Protestant Dissenting Minifters, with regard to their late Application to Parliament By Andrew Kippis, D. D. 8vo. I s. 6d. Robinson. 1772.

F the cause of religious liberty and toleration, the unalien

able rights of confcience and private judgment, are fubjects that claim the ferious attention of every confiftent Proteftant, of every one who is acquainted with the genius and fpirit of the gospel, the late application to parliament, by the protestant diffenting minifters, for the purpofe of obtaining a legal toleration, is, furely, entitled to the very attentive confideration of every fincere friend to liberty. It must be matter of aftonishment to every perfon of a truly liberal and catholic way of thinking, that fo reafonable a requeft as that for an enlargement of the Toleration Act, fhould, in a proteftant country, and fo enlightened an age, be rejected. That fo many of the temporal lords fhould appear against the Bill, is matter of furprife; but that not a fingle bifhop fhould be found in the church of England, to plead the caufe of toleration, the pride and boast of cultivated humanity, is indeed amazing! We admire the genius of fome of our bishops, we refpect the learning, the abilities, and the virtues of others; but we cannot help thinking, that their conduct, in regard to the diffenting minifters, was repugnant to every maxim of SOUND policy, as well as to the genuine spirit of Christianity.

In the performance before us, Dr. Kippis, who was one of the committee appointed for conducting the late application to parliament, defends the principles, and vindicates the conduct, of his brethren, with a decent and manly freedom, and with great candor, folidity, and judgment. He is an advocate for an equal and extenfive toleration, and he writes in fupport of fo noble a caufe with the fpirit of a gentleman and a proteftant divine.

He fets out with fome short, but pertinent reflections concerning the right, expediency, and utility of requiring an affent or fubfcription to articles of religion, and creeds, compofed by fallible men; likewife on the petitioning clergy, and the principal reafons that prevented their fuccefs; after which he proceeds in the following manner : • Should

H 3

Should it be aed, why these things. are mentioned, or what connection they have with the abject before us; I answer, that it appears to me to be of importance to mention them, because it is hence evident, that the motives for rejecting the petition of the clergy are not applicable to the fituation of the Proteftant Diffenting Minifters.

Without pretending to approve of the arguments which were fo fatal to the petitioners, without withing ill to their caufe, many of us could not but be rejoiced to find that these arguments did not difcourage an application to parliament in our particular case. We were:naturally led, both by our fentiments and fituation, to pay a vely diligent attention to the controverfy between the diffatisfied clergy and the advocates for fubfcription, and to obferve the progrefs and fate of the petition offered to the legislature; and we faw with pleasure, that the reafons alledged for the continuance of subfcription were applicable only to thofe who are members, and receive the emoluments of a national established church. We saw, with pleafure, that none of thefe reafons militated against the liberty which may be claimed, and ought to be granted, under a toleration. We faw, with pleasure, that Mr. Toplady, one of the warmelt defenders of the Thirty nine Articles, had afferted, that the fubfcription required of the Diffenters is a real grievance, equally oppreffive and abfurd. We faw, with ftill greater pleafure, that Dr. Tucker, the ablest apologift for the church of England, had declared-" Let the minifters of Difenting congregations, if they will choose to apply, be heartily wished a good deliverance from the burden of our fubicriptions." But what gave us peculiar fatisfaction was, that our cale was not involved in the arguments urged against the petitioners in the House of Commons, and that it was even spoken of in a manner, which might afford a rational profpect of obtaining redrefs. By all the fe circumstances we were encouraged to hope, that we should fucceed in an application to be relieved from the fubfcription required by the Act of Toleration: nay, fuch an application was highly expedient, because the peculiarity of our fituation became every day more and more notorious. It was declared in feveral publications, it was declared in the House of Commons, that the greater part of the Diffenting Ministers had not fubfcribed. It was known too, that a large number of us could not poffibly fubfcribe, and that we flood exposed to very fevere penalties for our refufal. When, therefore, our danger was evidently increased, and there appeared, at the fame time, a difpofition to relieve us, we fhould have been fhamefully deficient in the duty we owe to ourfelves, to our pofterity, and to the divine cause of religious liberty, if we had not endeavoured to obtain a legal toleration

But though the circumstances I have mentioned encouraged an application to parliament at this time, and we might otherwite have been contented fome years longer with a ftate of connivance, let it not be imagined that we were infenfible of the infelicity of our condition, or that we did not defire and aim at procuring a deliverance from it. We were painfully confcious of our difgraceful fituation: we lamented, that, as minifters of the gofpel, we were not under the protection of law, and could fcarcely be confidered as members of

« AnteriorContinuar »