one sense, while we might have the first form of matter here, yet a power above and beyond matter shaped it into material and minute forms of gradation from lower life to man. The mere fact that different forms are created shows that protoplasm is not the starting point, but is used by the Divine architect to create his works. I believe the time will come when all scientists will believe that they have a soul and that this is immaterial.

This spirit back of the protoplasm shapes it to a divine purpose. It develops into a human being because it has a spirit power. The numerous designs of the creative power is shown in the varied forms of the created beings.

DR. T. F. ALLEN: I suppose no one in this room has a firmer belief in the spiritual side of man than I have, but I do not believe we have any right, when studying material things, to mingle the spirit question with it. Drugs do not affect the soul essence of man. Arsenic, for instance, destroys the protoplasm, not the vitality; the soul of man is not destroyed by the arsenic. We are studying the nature of the action and reaction of material things, or of molecular action one upon another, and not the force derived from the Almighty. We have no occasion to trouble ourselves about the spiritual part, since it does not enter into this discussion, which is simply upon the disturbance of molecular combinations.

DR. FARRINGTON: I think you misunderstood me. None of our medicines destroy the soul, but they may destroy that which keeps the soul in this world. I do not believe that a potentized drug removes matter, but it causes the spirit to act. I do not believe anything can act in this world that is not moved by a spiritual power.

DR. MARIA N. JOHNSON: I would like to ask Prof. Allen if drugs do not act upon the spirit? I have had the theory that a remedy had such a power over the spirit or essence that it would dull or lessen it to a greater or less degree. I had a case of poisoning in a prover, where the patient was prostrated to an extreme degree, so low, in fact, that there seemed but little hope for her recovery. Her mind was destroyed by the action of the drug, and if she had died in this condition, I believe she would have gone without a spirit.

DR. T. F. ALLEN: I would answer the question in this way: The pewer of the mind to act is impaired because the machinery through which it acts is impaired. Let me instance the case of an idiot. Why is he in this condition? Because the material is wanting for the proper performance of mental functions. But when the child dies, its soul is as perfect as that of any one of its brothers or sisters. I have been attending a case of uræmic poisoning, in which there was inability to think, but the mind was all right, it was the brain that was at fault.

BUREAU OF CLINICAL MEDICINE.

CONTENTS.

Prejudice: The Chief Obstacle to the Scientific Investigation

of Posology in Clinical Medicine,

Remarks on Posology, with Cases from the Writer's own

Practice,

Observations on Dose,

Mania-a-Potu,

H. C. ALLEN, M.D.

EDWARD CRANCH, M.D.
W. P. ARMSTRONG, M.D.
GEORGE F. FOOTE, M.D.

PREJUDICE

THE CHIEF OBSTACLE TO THE SCIENTIFIC
INVESTIGATION OF POSOLOGY IN

CLINICAL MEDICINE.

BY H. C. ALLEN, M.D.

Sidney Smith is quoted as saying: "Never try to reason the prejudice out of a man. It was never reasoned into him and it never can be reasoned out of him."

Notwithstanding the self-evident truth of the above quotation, prejudice may almost be considered a common birthright of the medical profession, where the most enlightened are disposed to place as much weight on a theory as on verified fact. It has affected all schools of medical belief, retarding the advancement of the dominant school as well as the perfecting of "the science of therapeutics" developed by Hahnemann. It required years of severe mental discipline ere Hahnemann himself-the most original medical investigator the world has yet produced-could completely divest himself of the prejudices of his early education. Hence, one of the first steps to take in entering upon the scientific investigation of any subject-particularly one surrounded by so many difficulties and one in which our colleagues honestly entertain so many differing opinions as on the subject of posology-is to divest our minds of prejudice. Unless this be done in a spirit of candid enquiry, our investigations will have little of scientific value and less of practical weight in the field of clinical medicine, as in the entire range of medical topics there are few on which we entertain stronger or more absurd prejudices, or cling to them with greater tenacity, than that of the materiality of drug action.

Our Fundamental Principles.

Hahnemann is often referred to as the discoverer of the law of the similars, and in a certain sense he no doubt was, in that his

experiment with Cinchona bark was the first insight he had of it. But Hippocrates saw it centuries before, and Haller not only discovered the law but promulgated his discovery to the profession years before Hahnemann saw the dawn of a better day in medical history.

In 1738, nearly fifty years before Hahnemann's discovery, Stahl condemned the prevalent method of treating diseases by opposite remedies as completely false and absurd. On the contrary, he says, "diseases are subdued by agents which produce a similar affection. It is by these means I have succeeded in curing a disposition to acidity of the stomach by using very small doses of Sulph. acid in cases where a multitude of absorbing powders had been administered to no purpose." But even as astute observers as Haller and Stahl, after detecting the "law of cure" and in a crude way applying it in practice, like most of their contemporaries, appear to have been content with the simple discovery, or at least not able to so far perfect it as to reduce to actual practice and make a system of medicine.

In 1761, thirty years before Hahnemann's experiments with Cinchona, Baron Stoerck made a proving of Aconite. But he, likewise, failed to connect the symptoms elicited with any natural law of cure," or to establish upon that basis a science of therapeutics.

Such distinguished lights in the medical world as Hafeland, Sydenham, Pereira, Watson, Trousseau, Simpson, Cooper, Forbes, Holmes, Wood, and many others, although able to see "the beam in the eye" of the prevailing system of medicine, and while pain fully convinced of and deeply deploring the terrible uncertainties of medical science (so-called) as taught and practised in their time, yet none have been able to cast aside their prejudices and pre-conceived opinions and honestly undertake its improvement by practical experiment, even after they had been told there was a better way.

To Hahnemann was reserved the herculean task which at once marked the genius of the man and the independence of the unprejudiced explorer. He not only pointed out the way, but he cast aside his prejudices, and led the advance; thus by reducing