quiring whether the statistics upon which these novel and interesting deductions are founded are themselves trustworthy or not.

But even if the results of Dr. Scoresby-Jackson's investigations had been more positive and original than they are, we should have felt compelled to object to them on grounds which must strike at first sight every reader who peruses them. Let us take, for instance, the question of the influence of weather upon mortality alone. And here we may as well remark that, though from the title of Dr. Scoresby-Jackson's work it would be inferred that it included the influence of weather upon disease as well as mortality, the former subject is almost wholly ignored. Dr. Scoresby-Jackson alleges as a reason for this that after collecting a mass of statistics from several dispensaries and hospitals with the view of comparing the rate of morbility with that of mortality, he was obliged after much labour to abandon the morbility statistics as next to worthless. But it may be asked, How are we to separate the subject of mortality from that of disease? Death is not a condition per se, it is merely the climax of disease; and if the weather exercises any influence at all over mortality, it does so in virtue of its influence on the progress of the diseases which terminate in death. But even admitting that we may, for purposes of comparison, arbitrarily separate the question of mortality from that of disease, what are the chances of our being able to establish any definite connexion between it and the weather? Given the rate of mortality, what causes other than the weather are likely to influence it? Without attempting to specify all the causes by which the death-rate may be affected in any district, we may mention as among the more important-sanitary conditions, such as drainage, ventilation, sufficient clothing, &c., proper kind and amount of food; peculiar occupations or pursuits; liability to epidemic disorders; accidents; aggregation of population in communities as compared with its diffusion over a wide tract of country. These and other conditions all exercise an important influence over the development of disease, and consequently on mortality, quite irrespective of that of the weather. How is it possible, we may ask, to eliminate the influence of these various agencies, or to determine to what extent the influence of the weather upon mortality is favourably or unfavourably affected by them? But, even supposing that we overcome this difficulty, we have yet another source of obscurity to clear away before we shall be in a position to place the slightest reliance upon any statistics that we may obtain on this subject. We will assume that in the month of April, for instance, our observations give us—and we take the illustration from Dr. Scoresby-Jackson's tables -a mean temperature of 42.7; a mean barometric pressure of 29.7; a rain-fall of 2.3 inches; winds varying between N.E. and S.E., and varying also in force; and, with all these meteorological data, a mortality in a known population of 243.6. To what extent are we justified in assuming a connexion between these two sets of conditions? It is very obvious that a large portion of the mortality of any given month is due to causes that are altogether independent of the month itself, from their having been in operation long prior to it.

The man who dies from paralysis in April may have received the first shock of the disease six months previously, and the disease may have steadily progressed since that date until it culminated in death. The same may be said of the great majority of chronic diseases. Acute diseases which run a rapid course might, it is true, be employed as a source of statistics for our purpose; and there are some diseases, especially rheumatism and pneumonia, with regard to which a series of observations on the influence of weather upon their production would be especially valuable; but this is a very different thing from an attempt to determine the influence of weather upon mortality from all

causes en masse.

We might, if it were desirable to do so, adduce other objections to Dr. Scoresby-Jackson's statistics, more especially on the ground of their fallacious character in a mathematical point of view; but the results which he has obtained are of themselves so trivial that it is quite unnecessary to waste our readers' time in inquiring whether the actual numbers upon which they are founded are trustworthy or not. The fact is, that Dr. Scoresby-Jackson has not only attempted the solution of a problem which in the present state of our knowledge is perfectly insoluble, but the process which he has adopted is radically so unphilosophical in its character as to be incapable of leading to any satisfactory results. Even if it were possible to determine the relative value of the various disturbing causes by which the influence of the weather upon the human system is intensified, or counteracted, any investigation of the relation existing between the weather and the mortality of any given district would be about as useful as an inquiry into the connexion between the political tenets of the Republican party in North America and the actual number of slain in the battle of Bull's Run. What we really wish to discover is, what is the influence which the weather exerts on the development and continuance of the diseases of which the mortality is the result, in the one instance; and what is the influence which the spread of Republican sentiments has had in producing the state of things that led to the conflict at Bull's Run in the other? Until Dr. Scoresby-Jackson can give us some better reason than he has done for the separation of these two considerations, we must be excused for thinking that the labour he has expended on the collection of these statistics is in great part entirely thrown away.

ART. XV.-Den almindelige Therapie, i fire Forelæsninger. Af Dr. og Prof. O. BANG, Conferentsraad, Commandeur af Danebrog og Vasa, Danebrogsmand m. m.

General Therapeutics, in four Lectures. By Professor BANG.-Copenhagen, 1862. 8vo, pp. 56.

FROM the preface to the above work it would appear that no treatise on general therapeutics exists in the Danish language. The author, impressed with the advantages derivable by medical students from the

possession of class-books, has published the present volume as a foundation for future lectures.

The author divides treatment into-1. Cura causalis, referring, not to what earlier writers designated causa proxima-the essence of the disease-but to the occasional or predisposing causes. 2. Cura radicalis, which may be based indifferently on theory and on experience, may be both Cura rationalis and empirica. 3. Cura symptomatica, palliativa: this is often as important as the foregoing; it is employed to remove dangerous or painful symptoms, and those conditions which might interfere with the efforts of nature; it is frequently adopted when we do not recognise the disease, but where active interference is nevertheless required. To these may be added two others--Prophylaxis, whose aim is to prevent the disease; and, lastly, which makes the malady or death easier to bear,-Eupathia and Euthanasia.

With reference to the treatment of the different diseases, the methods of cure may be divided into two classes, of which one has no subdivison, while the other has many subdivisons,-the expectant and the active.

Professor Bang calls especial attention, in limine, to the remarkable fact that

Many a remedy, inactive in the dose hitherto recommended, becomes of great value when it is given in much larger doses; for example, in one which would prove fatal to a person in health, in whom its action must of course be different. We must not forget that the medicine, as an unusual stimulus, may, in a healthy person, produce an anomaly, a disease of greater or less gravity, while in a patient it loses its injurious action in the conflict with the disease; indeed, the fewer the symptoms are attending its administration in health, which manifest themselves on its employment in disease, the more the remedy is probably indicated. The large doses of opium, for example, and of mercury which a patient can bear without detriment, and seems to require, would, in a short time, kill or greatly injure a person in health.”

The large doses of opium found beneficial in peritonitis from perforation, delirium tremens, &c., and the vast quantities of stimulants taken with advantage in certain morbid conditions, at once suggest themselves as familiar illustrations of the author's remarks.

Having made some observations upon the expectant, Professor Bang proceeds to consider the active method of treatment. This in general commences with the Cura causalis.

The cause having been removed, the direct means of cure come under consideration. These may be divided into two classes; one including those means which act upon the strength, the other comprising those which seem chiefly to have influence upon the material of the body.

Of these classes the former again includes remedies of two kinds :1, those which promote; and 2, those which diminish reaction.

The remedies belonging to the first of these subdivisions may be further divided into stimulants, tonics, and astringents. Those belonging to the second may be enumerated as sedatives, comprising refrigerants and antiphlogistics, anaesthetics, hypnotics, anodynes, antispasmodics, &c.

The remedies comprised in the second class-i.e. those which act upon the proper secreting and excreting organs, are considered under the heads of errhines, sialogogues, expectorants, emetics, cathartics, diuretics, diaphoretics, emmenagogues, derivants, escharotics, &c.

Of an elementary class-book, such as the above, a detailed analysis would of course here be quite out of place; we have therefore contented ourselves with endeavouring to give our readers a general idea of the arrangement of Dr. Bang's useful manual.

ART. XVI.-Proceedings of the International Temperance and Prohibition Convention, held in London, September 2nd, 3rd, and 4th, 1862. Edited by Rev. J. C. STREET, Dr. F. R. LEES, and Rev. D. BURNS.-London, 1862. pp. 518.

ONE of the marked features of the present time is the great effort which is now in progress in the cause of temperance—an effort having its origin in the conviction of the vast evils produced by intemperance. Had we any doubts on this subject, the work the title of which we have given above would carry conviction to our minds that excess in intoxicating drinks is at the root of much of the poverty, much of the vice and crime of society in every country in which such drinks are abused; and that poverty, vice, and crime have ever been in a close relation, though not in any exact ratio, to the degree of the abuse.

The attempt to arrest the evil is meritorious, and has our very best wishes; and when we consider the scale on which it is made, the distinguished men by whom it is encouraged and aided, and the ability and energy displayed in carrying it out, we become very hopeful of a certain amount of success. The great object of the Convention, as put forth in its Proceedings and insisted on in various detail, is not only to put a stop to drunkenness, but to drinking; not to the abuse of intoxicating drinks, but to their use. Now, when we reflect on the history of these beverages, especially in those countries most advanced in civilization-measuring it by the intellectual and moral progress of the people, taken as a whole, we cannot be so sanguine as to expect that this its object will be accomplished; and, indeed, do not think, were it attainable, that it would be desirable.

The

What is there that is not liable to abuse? Intemperance in eating -gluttony-though not so injurious to society as the vice of drunkenness, is hardly less so to the individual who gives way to it. golden rule of conduct is to be temperate in all things. This cannot be too strongly insisted on; and sure we are, that as it is an established and universally-admitted truth, in accordance with reason and the experience of every one, the inculcation of it would have full approval and encounter no opposition, such as the prohibitive system of the Convention has met with.

It is not our intention to notice entirely the "Proceedings" of the "Convention;" our remarks must be limited to but a few of them. The great subject of the work, the evils of intemperance, is discussed

in an almost exhaustive manner, under a variety of points of view, "Historical and Biographical," "Educational and Religious," "Social and Sanitary," "Economical and Statistical," "Political and Legislative.” In each of these sections, much interesting and valuable information is given, accompanied by summaries, to aid those readers who may not have perseverance or patience enough to peruse the whole.

The scientific and medical section is that which has had most our attention. We cannot express approval of all therein stated, whether theoretically or practically considered. Alcohol is denounced as a poison throughout; nor is it allowed, like other poisons, to have any medicinal virtues; it is condemned without qualification, and pronounced to be worse than useless in medical practice. Mr. Higginbottom is especially severe on it. In one place he states:

"I have not known a single disease cured by alcohol. On the contrary, it is the most fertile producer of diseases, and may be truly considered the bane of medicine and the seed of diseases. It is entirely destitute of any medicinal principle implanted by the Creator in genuine medicines such as emetiæ (sic), in ipecacuanha; rhein, in rhubarb; jalapin, in jalap; quinine, in Peruvian bark, &c. Alcohol is the invention of man, in the forms we use it, by the destruction of the good food which God has given us."

Further on, he says:

"I have discovered a great truth and have made a great discovery-that alcohol in every form may be dispensed with in medical and surgical practice, and is not required in a single disorder or disease."

The italics are his. He adds:

"What evidence can be clearer or more satisfactory? My practice has been open to hourly inspection and observation for thirty years, in the centre of a large, populous town, surrounded by more than forty surgeons, most of them intelligent, discerning men. Surely some of them would have informed me of my insufficiency or mal-practice, had I been in error; but I have heard of no such remark from a single individual, although in daily communication with them.'

We shall not comment on this experience, or on the style in which it is expressed.

Professor John Kirk, Edinburgh (sic), is equally decided in his opposition to alcohol, and condemnatory of its use, even as a medicine. Here is an example of his style, experience, and reasoning. He

states:

"A case came lately under our observation. A man advanced in years, but originally of a strong constitution, was dying of pressure on the respiratory nerves, and had been for above a week in great suffering from difficulty of breathing. The heart's action had been irregular and weak all that time. The pulse such as seemed to threaten sudden death at any moment. This continued until mortification of the extremities had visibly set in. Then, without any. thing whatever having been administered, both his pulse and breathing became regular and comparatively strong. The heart and lungs seemed to recover nearly full and healthy action. This is no uncommon case, as every one at all acquainted with the experience of the dying must know. Nor do we think it difficult of explanation. But place it over against the recovery of pulse by the action of alcohol, and it will be very difficult to adhere to the idea that the liquor

64-XXXIII.

12