The ninth memoir, entitled "Experimental Researches relative to Corroval and Vao: two New Varieties of Woorara, the SouthAmerican Arrow-poison." This, the joint labour of Dr. Weir Mitchell, of Philadelphia, and of the author, is deserving of all praise for completeness, and, as well as we can judge from the details, for care and accuracy in the experiments, and justness of reasoning and deduction. According to his method, he prefixes a brief history of the labours of other inquirers on the poison, previously and longest known, woorara. From the experiments on corroval, the conclusions arrived at are the following:

"1st. That it differs essentially from any variety of woorara hitherto described, both in its chemical constitution and physiological effects.

2nd. That it acts primarily upon the heart, through the medium of the blood, producing an arrest of the action of this organ.

"3rd. That the annihilation of voluntary and reflex movements is a secondary result of its action, depending primarily upon the discontinuance of the function of the heart.

"4th. That it acts upon the nerves from the periphery to the centre, and abolishes both the sensory and motor functions.

"5th. That it destroys muscular irritability.

"6th. That it paralyses the sympathetic nerve, this being one of its primary effects.

66 7th. That it is absorbed both from the intestinal canal and the skin of frogs.

8th. That its poisonous qualities are due to an alkaloïd hitherto undescribed."

From the experiments on Vao or Bao, the deductions arrived at are given in fifteen propositions, admitting of the inference that vao is merely a weaker variety of corroval, and that the apparent difference in the effects produced by the original extracts is due merely to a difference in their strength.

The physical and chemical characteristics of these two substances are treated of in a distinct memoir, the tenth. From the experiments made, then limited by the smallness of the quantity operated on, the inference drawn was that the toxic principle of both is a peculiar alkaloïd, for which the name of corrovalia is proposed, and which, accounting for the difference of strength, was found to exist in a larger proportion in corroval than in vao. The power of the alkaloïd is very remarkable, "equalled by few, if any, substances hitherto known to man: one minim of a solution formed of one grain of the alkaloïd and one hundred minims of water, killed a small mouse in five minutes, when inserted under the skin; and five minims similarly placed under the skin of a medium-sized rabbit occasioned its death in five minutes. No antidote has yet been found for this poison; even artificial respiration, which seems to have some efficacy in poisoning by woorara, appears to have no power over the more deadly corrovalia. The plant or plants from which corroval and vao are obtained are yet unknown to the botanist. Both were brought from Rio Darien, in the province of New Grenada, South America; and, it would appear, had never before been noticed by those who have written and experimented upon

the subject; nor is it yet known how either of them is prepared; that they are entirely vegetable seems to admit of no doubt.

The eleventh memoir is entitled, "Experimental Researches relative to a Supposed New Species of Upas." It had been obtained in Singapore, but without any information respecting its history. The quantity of this poison at the disposal of Dr. Hammond was too small to allow of a thorough investigation of its properties. From such experiments as he was enabled to make, the conclusion he finally came to was that this upas is not, as he first supposed, the upas tiente, the well-known arrow-poison of the Eastern Archipelago, but altogether a different species and hitherto undescribed. One of its remarkable and distinctive properties is that it takes effect when applied to the skin or mucous membranes. In consequence of the tetanic convulsions it produces, ending in the cessation of the heart's action, Dr. Hammond considers it more allied to strychnia than to corro valia, and that it is probably a compound of two antagonistic principles, one acting on the heart, arresting its motion, the other on the voluntary muscles, occasioning tetanus. For the minutiae of the research we must refer to the memoir. The results are exceedingly interesting compared with those described in the preceding memoir, and this not only on account of the intensity of action of the poisons on the living being, comparatively inert on dead animal matter, but also from the different morbid phenomena which they produce when taken into the circulation, and yet without materially affecting the blood which is their vehicle.

In the two memoirs with which the volume ends, Dr. Hammond resumes the inquiry respecting the "Diuretic action of Colchicum," and "Uræmic intoxication." The results of his additional experiments on colchicum are in accordance with his preceding, and confirmatory, he thinks, of his former conclusion that this medicine is a true depurator of the blood, and, in consequence, beneficial in those blooddiseases, gout, and rheumatism. Whilst he admits with Dr. Garrod that colchicum does not increase the excretion of uric acid, he does not adopt the doctrine of the latter, that this acid in excess in the blood is the cause of a paroxysm of gout.

His experiments on "uræmic intoxication" admit, he thinks, of the following conclusions, all of them, we may remark, important and especially interesting in a pathological point of view:

"1st. That the injection of urea in limited quantity into the blood of animals produces a certain amount of disturbance in the nervous system, similar in its symptoms to the first stages of uræmia; but that this condition even disappears if the kidneys are capable of so depurating the blood as to eliminate the toxic substance.

"2nd. That urea, when introduced into the circulation in larger quantity than can in a limited period be excreted by the kidneys, induces death by

uræmia.

"3rd. That by ligature of the renal arteries, or removal of the kidneys, the elements of the urine being retained in the blood, render this fluid unsuitable to the requirements of the organism, and, consequently, induce a condition of system not essentially distinguishable from the uremic intoxication of Bright's disease, or that caused by the direct introduction of urea into the blood.

As, however, was pointed out by Bernard and Barres wil, so long as the urea, or the products of its metamorphosis, are discharged by the stomach or intestines, uræmia does not take place, but that when these channels become closed, convulsions and coma are produced, and death soon follows.

"4th. That the introduction of urea or urine into the circulation of animals, the kidneys of which have been ablated, shortens the life of such animals, as Frerichs and others have already shown.

"5th. That there is reason to believe that the urine, as a whole, is more poisonous than a simple solution of urea; for in those cases in which urine was injected into the blood, the amount of urea thus introduced was much smaller than that previously thrown in, in a pure state, and yet symptoms of as great intensity followed."

"6th. That urea, or the elements of the urine, as a whole, induce such a condition of the nervous system as strongly predisposes to congestion and inflammation of the viscera, especially of the lungs, pericardium, and spleen.

"7th. That urea, when directly injected into the blood, or suffered to accumulate in this fluid by extirpation of the kidneys, deranges, in some manner, the process of sanguification, so as to disturb the normal relation of proportion existing between the white and red corpuscles, and either to hasten the decomposition of the latter, or to interfere with the due removal from the blood of such as are broken down and effete.

"8th. That there is no reason to suppose that, under the circumstances specified, urea undergoes conversion into carbonate of ammonia, but that, on the contrary, there is sufficient evidence to warrant the conclusion that no such process ensues. The fact that in the foregoing experiments a larger amount of urea was generally found in the blood taken from the body after death than in that abstracted during life, is of itself conclusive against such an hypothesis."

We cannot, we think, do better in finishing our brief analysis of this able work than by offering another quotation, and by recommending the principle on which it was written, for the guidance of other inquirers in the noble and fruitful field of physiological research, with the addition of the excellent saying of the Abbé Fontana, that "Those only who observe and experiment make mistakes; those only who do neither never err." The author's words in harmony with this are:

We

"To say that I entered upon the inquiry without certain preconceived opinions would be far from correct. That such views as I had conceived have, however, blinded me to the truth, or warped my judgment of things as they actually were, I do not believe. Theories are true but for the time being, and physiological hypotheses are even more ephemeral than any others. should therefore be prepared to yield our convictions without regret, when they do not accord with the results of experiments better devised and more accurate than our own, for only by so doing can we entitle ourselves to be considered useful labourers in the fields of science."

REVIEW IV.

1. Seventeenth Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy to the Lord Chancellor. Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed, 9th June, 1863.—pp. 176.

2. Fifth Annual Report of the General Board of Commissioners in Lunacy for Scotland. Presented to both Houses of Parliament by command of her Majesty, 1863. pp. 226.

THESE annual blue-books present the usual particulars respecting the doings of the Commissioners, the condition of the asylums for the insane (public and private), and the statistics of lunacy. As on former occasions, we have again to remark on the greater value and completeness of the Report issued by the Scottish Commissioners. The English board appear wedded to their old style, and fail in presenting nearly so full an account of the state of lunacy in this country as their fellow-Commissioners do for Scotland. For example, we have no complete statistics of the number of the insane in this country prepared by the Lunacy Board—a fact that has been overlooked by some writers who have not been at the pains of accurately comparing the official returns made in each country respectively. To this the Scotch Commissioners allude in their last Report:

"An erroneous estimate," they say, "has been formed of the prevalence of insanity in Scotland, by instituting comparisons between the number of the insane in England and Scotland, founded on the official returns of the English and Scotch Boards of Lunacy. But, in making these comparisons, it has been overlooked that in the English returns no account is taken of private lunatics, resident with friends and boarded with strangers, who have not been reported to the Commissioners. In our former Reports, we estimated the number of this class in Scotland at 1887. We see no reason to doubt that if similar investigations were undertaken in England, a corresponding increase would take place in the known number of the insane of that country. In making such comparisons, it is likewise necessary to bear in mind that in Scotland the visits of the Commissioners are not limited to asylums and poorhouses, but extend to every house, wherever situated, in which a pauper lunatic is placed. Every parish in Scotland is thus visited, on an average, once a year, either by the Medical Commissioners or Deputy Commissioners; and there is, accordingly, good reason to think that the number of unreported pauper lunatics is much less in Scotland than in England, where no such parochial inspections are undertaken. We are of opinion, therefore, that any such seeming excess of lunacy in Scotland is not so much due to a larger proportion of insane in the population as to more copious and accurate returns." (p. 5.)

Comparisons are proverbially odious, and in the above quotation the comparison thus officially drawn of the manner in which the duties of a lunacy board, when rightly apprehended, are performed in England as compared with Scotland, is unfavourable to the Commissioners in the former division of the kingdom.

Indeed, it is a fact that cannot be ignored, that the interests and

welfare of the insane are in England not watched over for nearly the whole number known to exist. The attention of the English Commissioners is pretty nearly absorbed in the supervision of those lunatics whose position is the most favourable. Their visitations of public and private asylums leave nothing perhaps to be desired, except in frequency; but the poor lunatics who are detained in workhouses are only visited by them at intervals of uncertain length, of from one to two or three years, whilst that large number referred to by the Scottish board in the quotation above, as distributed singly in cottages and private houses, are not (except when found lunatic by inquisition and inspected by the Chancery physicians) visited at all by any inspectors or commissioners. And yet every Report gives details of unfit lodging and improper treatment, and of illegal detention in workhouse wards and in private houses, which in the course of the year have been brought under their notice by others.

The official Reports themselves may therefore be adduced to prove the necessity for the visitation of all lunatics wherever and however situated, and of a like thorough investigation into their existence as that which brought to light so many as 1887 scattered cases in the comparatively small population of Scotland. The desirability of a general supervision will doubtless be conceded by the Lunacy Commissioners, but they are unable to undertake so extensive a charge. At the present time they are pressed by work at their central office, and, as we have seen, cannot make an annual visit to the various workhouses which contain insane inmates, notwithstanding the extended provision of the Lunacy Act, enabling any one of the honorary or of the paid Commissioners to visit alone. The obvious remedy is to increase the number of Commissioners, or, as a more economical proceeding, to appoint Assistant-Commissioners, as has been done in Scotland, to whom a very large portion of provincial inspection might be allotted, and great facilities be thereby afforded for the performance of the functions invested in the Commissioners themselves as members of a central board, occupied in licensing, in a heavy correspondence, in making investigations, and in some degree in acting as a judicial body. But, oddly as it sounds, the Commissioners, according to the statements of some of their members examined before the Committee of the House of Commons in 1859-1860, are averse to any additions to their number in any shape, whether of compeers or assistants. We were told they are such a happy family that they could not avoid quarrelling with any intruder, because as a novice unacquainted with their traditions and usages, he would probably interrupt their harmony, and, what was still more to be deplored, might prove an innovator. We commend this sagacious argument against rendering a board efficient to the consideration of our readers whose mental vision is not obfuscated by the cobwebs of office.

There is not much of interest to the general medical reader in the English Commissioners' Report. Several sad cases of violent death in asylums are fully reported, and were investigated with the greatest One case, happening in a private house, would furnish a valu

care.