fresh invoices of Blatta orientalis (cockroaches all the way from Russia), in the leading journals for the year 1878? And if there were no consumption of powdered cockroaches by the learned and illiterate of this enlightened country, why the supply? And while some of our nabobs would turn up their noses in disgust at the idea of American Indians living and feasting on grasshoppers, they themselves or their families might be treated at the very same time to powdered, perhaps saccharated cockroaches, without making a wry face thereat. Indeed, where ignorance is bliss, it would be folly to be wise.

SPECIFIC MEDICATION.

As an American outgrowth of and improvement on the Hahnemannian system of Homœopathy, there has recently appeared upon the field of Reformed medicine an innovation called Specific Medication, that is, a system more devoted to simple medication, and endeavoring to bring into use a direct remedy for every pathological condition. John M. Scudder, M. D., has done much to get this waif christened, which had heretofore been looked upon and considered as a step-child of various other systems of medicine. Dr. Honigberger's Medium System, already mentioned, is essentially aiming at, and must be accepted as the same thing, just as much so as the Siamese twins were one and the same entity.

The theory of Specific Medication is rather calculated to do in the place of Homœopathy, with the liberal adherents of Allopathia and Homœopathia of the present day. Those of our Eclectics who did not have a hand in the earlier and unpolished system of Eclectic medicine, which recognized many old-fashioned compounds and nostrums, as well as simples in the treatment of the sick, desirous of making themselves heard and felt, took a lead in this new change. Some of them remind us of many small boys who are always on hand where commotion and noise are loudest. Yet, for all that, Specific Medication has done a great deal toward a more careful study of our Materia Medica. Its opponents had to "brush up" in order to meet many fine points which arose and had to be criticised. And if its advocates do not succeed as admirably as their sanguine expectations led them to hope, they still have the alternative, as most of the Homœopathists have taught us, to give anything and everything wherewith to combat disease. But, is not honesty the best policy?

The introduction of pleasant medication, so much admired by the patrons of Homœopathy, did much in retarding the ascendency of Eclecticism at a time when a better basis should have been laid for our system of medicine. With the advent of Specific Medication, it must be confessed that Eclecticism has met with renewed favor by the people. From the fact that our physicians are enabled to control any fever in from twenty-four to forty-eight hours with a few well-timed and small doses of tincture of Veratrum viride or Aconitum, and can readily control the infantile convulsions depending on dentition or entozoa with several quick-repeated potions of tincture of gelsemium or lobelia combined, it is gratifying to know that much of the ground lost has been retrieved.

From the small doses used, many have been led to believe that we, too, practice Homœopathy, a supposition which has not been detrimental to the success of our practitioners. The readiness with which Eclectics circumscribe erysipelatous inflammation, by a few applications of tincture veratrum viride to the parts, and the speedy relief which follows in the cases of bilious colic, from a few doses of our tinctures of Dioscorea villosa, Xanthoxylum and Gelsemium have won for us the former confidence of the people. Much of our success depends upon the quality of medicines used; and it is now demonstrated that our tinctures, carefully prepared from the fresh plant while still green, have furnished us with surer and better means than tinctures prepared as of old. While we do not claim to have introduced all the plants mentioned, we nevertheless, by taking hold and trying them unremittingly, assert that we certainly have been instrumental in popularizing many of the best American drugs now in use. And venesection, cupping, blistering and mercurializing, relics of a former barbarous system, fought as they have been by us too, are now but little tolerated by a thinking community.

In the treatment of the sick we find it much safer and of lasting benefit to our patients to follow a conservative course of medication. We know how to relieve the tumid veins by stimulating endosmosis and exosmosis. Determination and apoplectic conditions are relieved by ligating the large extremities close to the trunk, thus preventing too great a flow of blood to the head, thereby obviating the former extraction of blood. The timely

exhibition of alkalies in the treatment of inflammatory diseases will speedily arrest the further progress of the malady, and acids, exhibited in fever, are as likely to reduce it to a minimum condition as any other method.

ASCLEPIAS TUBEROSA is an old and well tried specific for pleuritis. If combined with Veratrum viride, in alternate doses, it will abort every case of pneumonia. We prefer the use of an infusion of the former to any other preparation. Cereus Bonplandii, C. grandiflorus, and other species, act specifically in angina pectoris and palpitation. Belladonna is a positive drug for scarlatina and pertussis. Baptisia, likewise in the former, when throat-symptoms demand antiseptic treatment. Drosera rotundifolia will remove the cough of measles, and lobelia, the spasmodic attacks of asthma. Phytolacca decandra will abort the worst form of mammitis and hasten suppuration when too far advanced, and with obelia seed, combined and applied as poultice, without any other treatment. Phosphorus and nux vomica act specially in typhoid conditions. For dysmenorrhoea we give, with certain success, Viburnum opulus, and in threatening abortion, V. prunifolium. In certain forms of paralysis, Xanthoxylum fraxineum is a specific remedy. Apocynum, in dropsy; Cimicifuga, in rheumatism; Erigeron, in uterine hemorrhage, as well as Ergota for the same; Hydrangea, in calculus; Leptandra and Podophyllum, in obstruction of the liver, might be cited as additional evidences of direct or specific medication.

Really, Specific Medication is not a new feature. It is an old cause figured anew in a change of garb, and a straggling waif of every other school. That it tends to advance Homœopathic proclivities is not at all astonishing, when considered that even Hahnemann held similar views. In the 147th paragraph of his Organon, Hahnemann states, with unmistakable clearness, "that the remedy, which is truly Homœopathic to the disease, is the specific remedy in this particular case."

Other shining lights of Homœopathy have even taken stronger views of the same theory. Prof. Charles J. Hempel—a gentleman now living in the crystallized age of eighty, at Grand Rapids, Mich.-twenty-five years ago published his "Organon of Specific Homœopathy." He says: "Inasmuch as each drug is specifically different from every other, it follows that each has spe

cific therapeutic uses to fulfil toward the organism in a state of disease." And in his introduction the following passage occurs: Specific Homœopathic remedies do not necessarily achieve a cure in every case. Even specifics will fail of curing when the reactive energies of the organism are entirely destroyed; but specific remedies accomplish a cure in every case where a cure is possible, and much more speedily, safely and thoroughly than any other medicine could do." As a competent critic Hempel is entitled to much respect when saying: "It is to be hoped that the time is fast approaching when Homœopathy will cease to be a science of inglorious illusions, and when the living, unerring truths of experience and reason will be substituted in their stead." Prof. Hempel showed but little regard for symptom-hunters, which he was fond of stigmatizing "high attenuationists."

From the evidence elicited, it must be conceded that John Martin Honigberger long ago advocated Specific Medication.

DARWINISM: ITS WEAK AND STRONG POINTS. BY A. J. HOWE, M. D.

Darwinism, so called, is not a complete and steadfast doctrine, but a somewhat disjointed combination of theories and speculations invented to account for the origin, continuance, and variation of organic forms on the earth. Hypotheses of a kindred character were discussed by the ancient Egyptians, and afterwards obtained support from Aristotle, as well as other classic philosophers. Views of a similar character have been entertained by liberal minds of every age. At a comparatively recent date, substantially the same ideas were collated and expanded by Jean Lamarck, a French physicist and cotemporary of Cuvier.

The theory of the birth and development of the organic kingdom, to say nothing of the evolution of the siderial and solar systems, did not spring full-grown from a single brain, but proves to be the patch-work of many contributors, the most methodical and scientific of whom was Charles Darwin, an English naturalist of great experience, industry and ability. The doctrine of Evolution, as applied to cosmic changes and organic development, was well along toward recognition a century ago, but it required the

mind of a profound scientist to elaborate the many facts and fancies into the semblance of a system. Darwin could do no better than to adopt the theories and principles of Lamarck, and follow his general course of reasoning in regard to the evolution of our planet and the vital objects that are upon it. In fact, the doctrine of Evolution, so far as it pertains to the inorganic world, is more Lamarckian than Darwinian. The peculiar cosmic views entertained by the anonymous author of "The Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation" are substantially the same as those advocated by Lamarck, and later by Darwin. The chief difference consists in the more methodical manner of treating vital problems that is characteristic of Darwin.

The doctrine of evolution as applied to biology has been strengthened from time to time by Huxley, Hæckel, and other profound scientists, yet the name of Darwin will be forever associated with the famous theme that has so long engaged the attention of scientific men. And from the amount of discussion at present devoted to vital operations, past and present, the topic seems as captivating as ever.

Lamarck held that the inanimate matter of the universe embraces forces that have a reciprocal relation with the activities or functions of organic structures. He looked upon the attributes of the physical world as correlative with those that give life and form to plants and animals. In other words he was an avowed materialist, declaring that the present state of the earth was evolved from nebular masses, and moved by impulses inherent in solar systems and siderial bodies. He argued that the earth's surface was diversified through necessity, and that the earth's inhabitants were a sequence in the great chain of cosmic operations. Life was spontaneously generated, or the outcome of chemical, magnetic, and other forces inalienable from planetary activities. He claimed that if life were to come to an end by some catastrophe, it would soon appear again when original conditions were repeated; a simple cell coming first, and more and more complex forms afterward, until the widest range of variation be reached. Now, all this is but Darwinism in a crude form. If an organism, however simple in structure, could be endowed with vital attributes through an inherent law of variation, a monad might be evolved into a mammal.