Table Of Content

\ % Purchased for the University of Toronto Library from funds donated by Hannah Institute for the History of Medicine t> :5 :2 5 cr s- >^ 3 r£oje:.'^ r'c-rrt.. C2^C^ ^=^-: —-C--r5"- r3:^tri >-c2_<:" cp-c8 P:- 1C^- C- ?r 5 ^— a=.: = ^ c X _ _^ ^ ^ a5 CO 2 _. _ DR. GROSS' H. COMPARATIVE MATERIA MEDICA EDITED BY CONSTANTINE BERING. for on your choice depend both safety and health. • Shakespeare. PHILADELPHIA: BCEKIOKE. F. E. LONDON: TURNER H. & CO. 1 8 6 t. « Entered according toAct of Congress, in the year 1S66, by F. E. BCERICKE, In the Clerk's OfBice of the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. King&.Baibd,Printers,607SansomStreet,Pbiladelpliia,Pa. SEEN BY PRESLRVATION IVICES DATE, ^~. .M|^«b.4U«<M!W IlsrTKODUCTION. BY £. H. GBOSS. In cnnipanson to that which is not known, the knowledge of all physicians in this world is certainly small. But we should never be able to enlarge u])on the existing basis, did we deny, as do the skeptics upon principle, the general certainty of cogni- tion in medical science, or, to speak practically, the reliability of experience in the medical art* True, there are many trifles connected with the demeanor of the physician, either winning or destroying confidence, without the observance of which even the most distinguished experience and ability cannot captivate the public. Such a boon is usually somewliat dependent upon innate individuality, though sometimes acquired or developed. It would be unjust to denounce bluntly the use of these outward expedients by the cheap name of "charlatanry;" they deserve this designation only when not based upon — a solid, scientific foundation, a foundation which, however, cannot be present, or at least not apparent, where skepticism is raised to a dogma; or, where no connection has yet been found between theory and p7'actice. But to return: in accordance with his experience, every physician cures as best he is able. In this respect we are in favor ofthe widest toleration, claiming the same for ourselves. No one is justified in marking out purely arbitrary paths in science, because these are mutually opposed as much as are anarchy and rational liberty. HohenheinVs doctrine did not lieconie the common property of all physicians, because it was enveloped by a mysterious obscurity.f | Homoeopathy has no such fate to fear since she has a widely diffused "Press" as an — ally. Great, but not insurmountable, are the difficulties which, until now, have prevented her universal recognition and practical application. In so far as these difficulties lie in the Materia Medica, which, indeed, to the novice appears a chaos, I hope to remove them in a great measure by the present work. Our treasury ofremedies has grown so much, both extensively and intensibly, that the publication offurther provings of new remedies seems only exceptionally desirable. * Everypractitionerwlioderives hissupport fromthe patronageof the publ'c will admit that this "Experience" is his grcaiest ally and at the same time his best passport to confidenceon thepart of society. M. t Hohenheim—moregenerallyknown andslandered underthename Paracelmta—did notdo this him- self; itwas donebyhis followers and theeditorsof his writinirs. Withthemitwas a kind offashion toputfupeverything by surroundingitwith cloudsofmysteriousness. Exactlyasinearagecrinolines areworn, disgustingtoevery man oftheslightestcultivation oftaste. C.Hg. X Ol'teii. in pastages, hasmedical truth, departing fi-om the paths markedout bythedogmatism of thesctiools after briefly glimmeringbeforethevision of those who refused to seize upon it, vanished into obliviou. M. IV INTRODIJCTIOTs\ On the other hand, the pvovin.o: of (old) remedies on ourselves is indispensable to self- — instruction. But we would have to confine ourselves to the treatment of only some particularly acute diseases, in order to be able to move within the small circle of* our own personal proving:. I mean, that it is impossible to have proved on oiusclves all the remedies at our disposal for the treatment of chronic diseases. It is thereforenecessaryto find and smooth a pathwhich,without being arbitrary, shall be correct, and by which we may discover and appropriate, without much difficulty, the results of the hitherto known provings. I believe I have taken this path by exhibiting the DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS ofsiicli remedies as are similar in their effects. Fichte (the father) has already observed, that every honest work leads the author beyond his original purpose. When I undertook this work, I had no idea of the wide reach ofits results, because it has incidentally yielded the foUowing: A. The characfevifftic effectsof such remedies as are herein compared; what is want- ing in one diagnosis is found in others. The differential points delineate the character of the effects of the medicine as distinctly as microscopic objects appear under polarized light. This predominating character of the remedy must be useful even to the gener- alizing physician, for whom, in fact, this book has not been written; and who, since he will never fully make use of it by earnest study, is therefore also not competent to judge it. B. Irrefragable proof is herein furnished that, in their fullest compass, the collective effects of a remedy agree with each other, under physiological laws, and that they have therefore their own intrinsic physiological explanation, by which at once all theoretical elaborations of single remedies become for the future unnecessary, and again, through which even those who hitherto have lieen strangers to Homoeopathy may convince them- selves, without further exertion, of Nature's truth in regard to "physiological" provings ofremedies. The most important principle for testing the genuineness ofevery proving ofa remedy is thereby also produced. Further, this work will help to preserve for all time the results of the labors of the first halfcentury of IIomo?opathy, as well as give new life to the stud}^ ofremedies, inas- much as thus farverylittle has been done to enable the medical profession to find its way through our Materia Medica, and thereby to hberate itself from indolent Scepticism and to make use ofour treasure ofremedies by individualizing in practice. That ofwhich "Non-Homroopaths" have accused us astriviality, they will find herein in a desirable lapidary style. In fact, it is also a sort of generalization, but one which does not extinguish the effective character of the object; for one can easily conceive that every agent is distinguished from another by definite traits. All physicians tak? more or less notice of a relation ofmedical effects particularly so ; the friends of Doctor Rademacher (the founder of a peculiar m—edical school in 1845), as well as the followers of the so-called "specific" healing art; but the discoverv of modalities, ofconditions under which an agent discloses its specific powers, is thus far exclusively the merit of the homoeopathicians.f Whosoever maintains that these mo- * It is certain that one succeeds betterwithafewwell-known remediesthanwithmanywhereof he knows little. But the pract—itioner who strives to reduce the numberof his remedies moreand more mustnecessarilygeneralize, whereas, a true follower of individualizing homoeopathy, cnmmencin"' bis practicewith buta few articles, graduallylearnstheapplication ofmore and more. l^.H.Gr. t ITomn?opathy urges the difl'erence of effects in separate remedies, and knows, therefore, no sur- rogate. K.H.Gr.