THE 
Relations of General 
(SC lUN TJFIC MEDICINE) 
-TO- 
Special and Specific 
MODES OF MEDICATION. 
ALFRED MERCER, M. I)., 
Professor of ('linxcal Surgery in the Medical Department of the University of Syracuse, N. Y. 
[FROM BUFFALO MEDICAL AND SURGICAL JOURNAL, SEPT., 1874.] 
BUFFALO: 
ISAKEIi, JONES & CO., PRINTERS, 220 AND 222 WASHINGTON STREET. 
1574. THE RELATIONS OF GENERAL • 
(SCIENTIFIC MEDICINE) 
TO SPECIAL AND SPECIFIC WES OF MEDICATIOH. 
ALFRED MERCER, M. D., : 
Prof, of Clinical Surgery in the Medical Department of the University of Syracuse, N. Y.* 
Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Onondaga County Medical 
Society : 
I believe these resolutions are among the most important ever 
presented for the consideration of this Society, They dip down 
deep into the whole subject—into all the relations of medicine 
and medical science. This discussion involves a# vast amount of 
responsibility—the real status of the medical profession and medi- 
cal science. 
*At the semi annual meeting of the Onondaga Medical Society, held Jan. 28th, 1873, the 
following resolutions were introduced by Dr. Potter: 
Whbbeas, The dictates of reason and common sense commend the fraternization of all 
regular practitioners of medicine recognized by our State laws, therefore, 
Resolved, That it is the sense of this Society that the code of ethics be so amended as to 
be more in harmony with the spirit of our Republican institutions. 
Resolved, That delegates to, and permanent members of the State Medical Society be 
requested to urge that body to so amend section Ith paragraph one, of the code of Medical 
ethics, that members of County Societies may be allowed to meet in consultation, all practi- 
tioners who are recognized by the laws of the State, whenever called upon hy them’or their 
patients. 
The Doctor urged his resolution in strong terms, and thought when ministers of the Gospel 
of different denominations are working together, it was time for physicians to recognize 
those cf other schools, who are gentlemen of culture. Every day the rule was being violated 
in this city, and he thought physicians should have more liberty in this matter. 
Dr. McDonald seconded the resolutions. 
Dr. Campbell thought the question was too large to come up so late, and moved to lay it 
on the table. Carried. 
At the quarterly meeting of the Society, held April 'Bth, 1873, the resolutions were taken 
from the table, and discussed in the following paper. At the conclusion of the reading of 
the paper, it was moved by Dr. Plant “ That Dr. Mercer he requested to present his inter- 
esting paper to the Medical Association of Central New York.” The motion was carried. 
The paper was read before that Society, June 17th, 1873. At its conclusion a motion was 
made and carried, requesting a copy for publication. 2 
MEDICATION.—MERCER. 
We feel altogether incompetent to do justice to the occasion, but 
would beg your indulgence, while we offer our mite of thought for 
consideration. 
But sir, allow me to premise, the medical profession exists not 
for itself, but for mankind. Sin did not enter the world to create 
the clerical profession, neither are churches organized for the bene- 
fit of the clergy, but to develop, promote and direct the growth of 
Christian character. Laws are not enacted for the creation and 
benefit of the legal profession, but for the protection of the citizen. 
"Railroads and telegraphic lines are not constructed for the benefit 
of the stockholders alone, but for the pleasure and convenience of 
the public. Mankind are not afflicted with disease solely for the 
benefit of doctors. The medical profession exists not for itself, but 
for the good it can do ; and individually, as we are able to alleviate 
suffering and conduct disease to a successful termination, so will be 
the honor and usefulness of our profession, so the measure of our 
success—success in all its phases, in reputation, character, useful- 
ness, and in material reward. 
We are the instruments, the workers, the handmaids of medical 
science, and as such, are comparitively of little importance, but 
medical science is of great importance. We die, and pass away— 
medical science lives on—it is its life, progress, and well-being, 
we are to defend in this discussion—we need take no thought for 
ourselves, but all thought for the science—and be assured the 
science will take all needful thought of us. 
If these views are correct, we can narrow down the discussion of 
these resolutions to a single thought, will their adoption tend to 
advance and promote the diffusion of medical knowledge? For 
the present, I am of the opinion their adoption would have no such 
influence; if it can be shown that it would, I shall cheerfully vote 
for the resolutions. 
But Mr. Chairman, I am pleased with the broad and catholic 
spirit of the resolution, as being in harmony with the spirit of the 
age, and our republican institutions. On this point, personally, I 
hope to challenge the living and the dead, as to the freedom of 
thought, and the equal rights and privileges of all men. In this 3 
connection, the Doctor supported his resolutions by referring to the 
growing liberality of the clergy of different denominations, also to the 
frequent violation of our code of medical ethics by members of this 
Society. We fully appreciate this growing liberality of the clergy, 
and still there is room for more. 
MEDIC ATIOK,— MERGER. 
The church, past or present, cannot shame medicine in this di- 
rection. But the resolutions do not involve liberality and tolerance 
so much as they involve knowledge, justice and honor, No matter 
what the clergy may do, these resolutions are to stand or fall on 
their own merits. They are to be discussed, and disposed of, in 
the interest of diseased and suffering humanity, and in the special 
interest of no one else. They are to be carefully considered for 
the best and for the right, without prejudice, fear or favor. The 
sick having the first right, and I have so much confidence in the 
right, that if we look after the interest of the patient, all other 
interests will be best served. 
The occasional violation of the code of medical ethics should be 
no excuse for their amendment, if they are founded in honor and 
equity. As well might we clamor for the amendment or repeal of 
the criminal code, because it is violated every day. 
The code of medical ethics is drawn with scrupulous care, and 
with the deliberate conviction as to its exact justice to all parties 
concerned. But there are those among us who would throw up 
the code altogether, and allow every one to keep such professional 
company as may please him best. 
I can hardly agree to this, but times and things may be changing 
more rapidly than we think for. 
The truth and justice embodied in the code of medical ethics, in 
the light of yesterday, may not be truth and justice in the advanc- 
ing knowledge of to-day. The code may have outlived its useful- 
ness—it may be dead and effete. That is the question we are to 
discuss to-day. Good men require little or no law to regulate their 
conduct. The code is no burden to the honorable and educated 
physician. Unfortunately, physicians are not all saints, and the 
code may have some influence in keeping bad men in the line of 
duty, and I believe it well for us all to be held under some whole- 4 
MEDIC VI'ION'.— -MERGES. 
some restraint—to have some standard of etiquette to appeal to fof 
the government of our conduct. 
Though I agree with the catholic spirit of the resolutions, I feel 
that we can better define our own position, and T hope the position 
of this Society and the profession at large, by offering the follow- 
ing substitute resolution: 
Resolved, That we recognize all men and women as physicians 
and surgeons, and will meet them in consultation, if of good moral 
character, who have made themselves familiar with the following 
branches of medical science: Anatomy, physiology, general 
and organic chemistry, symptoms and pathology of medical and 
surgical diseases, with the principles and practice of midwifery; 
with the effects of drugs and medicines on the human body in 
health and disease, and who practice medicine and surgery, under 
the simple designation of Doctor in Medicine. 
And now sir, as an apology for offering a substitute resolution—■ 
I am not particular about its adoption as we shall see by-and-by—> 
I desired some starting point, some definition, some platform on 
which the profession is supposed to stand, some exposition of its 
present attitude to the whole outside world of medicine. 
We propose to discuss these resolutions in a true catholic spirit, 
with an open heart and a free hand, for we have nothing to con- 
ceal or to shun, no malice to ventilate, and no purpose to serve but 
the good of all ; keeping constantly in view the cardinal ideas— 
the interest of the patient, and the diffusion and advancement of 
medical knowledge. 
We need not occupy your time in pointing out the importance 
of all the medical knowledge set forth in the substitute resolution 
to the practicing physician and surgeon. Everywhere, in all the 
departments of life, knowledge and experience is prefered to ignor- 
ance; the practice of medicine forms no exception to the rule. 
All this knowledge is about equally necessary for one to judge of 
medical theories and medical practice. 
And yet almost everyone feels competent to sit in judgment on 
these subtle questions. This thought is more or less applicable to 
the press, in its comments on the recent action of the Massachu- 
setts Medical Society, in expelling some of its members on account 
of their embracing homeopathy. We are ignorant of the merits of 
the ease and have no comments to make. We mention it that we MEDICATION’. MEECER. 
5 
may say a word or two about the press and ourselves. The press, 
almost uniformly, comments unfavorably upon us, and the action 
of our societies. We are always in the wrong, and some one else 
is always in the right. Now I believe the press aims at the right 
as well as ourselves, but how comes this almost constant discre- 
pancy ? Does the press, and the public, fully understand the situa- 
tion, or are we really in the wrong? It is to be presumed we 
understand the situation, and possess the requisite knowledge to 
judge; but are we really blinded by prejudice as to the right? 
Does the press form its judgment from actual knowledge of medical 
subjects or from popular prejudice? If we really are in the wrong 
I hope we may soon learn the right. We have no time now, speci- 
ally and specifically, to discuss these questions, but hope incident- 
ally to throw some light on them as we proceed. 
For ourselves we are not very particular how or where this 
requisite knowledge is obtained. It may be possessed without a 
college diploma, and may possibly be wanting with one. But its 
possession does not of itself make one a good physician. The best 
class scholars do not always make the best prescribers, and it has 
been remarked that “ high science may leave one stupid for prac- 
tice.” With proper deportment, and with a knowledge of the 
branches set forth in the substitute resolution, I should feel dis- 
posed to fellowship any man or woman in the practice of medicine. 
But before we go further, this Society is not an inquisition, and 
I shall speak of this Society as a representative society, and synon- 
ymous with the profession at large—for membership, it asks no 
question as to theories, opinions, or belief, but what does the can- 
didate know, and is he of good moral character ? This Society, 
then, is not only a scientific society, but a moral society, moral to the 
extent of common honor and honesty, and during my connection 
with it, all expulsions have been for immoral or other unprofes- 
sional conduct, altogether outside of medical theory or practice. 
And in my opinion there is no organization, no society known 
among men, where there is greater tolerance, greater liberty of 
thought, and greater freedom of will to do, or not to do, and still 
hold honorable connection and fellowship, than in our medical 
societies, and where every man’s opinion is respected and deferred MEDICATION. MERGER. 
to, so long as lie grants the same privileges to his fellows. But, 
when one in arrogance assumes he is right, and all others are 
wrong, when he claims superior wisdom and judgment, and blazons 
his ideas to the world as something new and wonderful and beyond 
the knowledge of other men, to captivate the credulous, and pam- 
per to prejudice and ignorance, he looses cast among us as he 
ought to do. 
It is not so much, then, what the practitioner really believes or 
does, as how he represents or misrepresents himself and .others to 
the public. We eyer have been, and are still charged with being 
arrogant, bigoted, and intolerant. These charges may, or may not 
have been true in time past; at present, we are only intolerant of 
ignorance, and false pretences; and, though we may not all be 
well learned and all honest, we believe we are as honest as the 
average of mankind, and that our schools furnish the best, the 
most thorough and complete medical education that can anywhere 
be obtained. 
The resolutions of Dr. Potter propose to so amend the code of 
medical ethics that the members of county medical societies may be 
allowed to meet in consultation all practitioners who are recogniced 
by the laws of the State. If I understand the laws of the State, 
there are no laws in force on the subject. Any person may practice 
medicine and surgery that feels disposed to do so, and the law 
recognizes him or her as a physician and surgeon. The resolutions 
then propose that we consult with all forms of quackery and ignor- 
ance. • In its practical workings will this tend to lower or elevate 
the standard of professional knowledge, usefulness and respecta- 
bility ? 
We cannot spend much time in discussing the question of law, but 
such is the law, and, professionally, it suits us well enough, but we 
have some interest in humanity. We are able to take care of our- 
selves without law. A learned profession needs no special protection; 
learning always has the advantage of ignorance. For what, and 
from what, do we need protection ? A thorough knowledge of our 
profession is superior and better protection than any law can be> 
however cuningly devised. That is the best, and all, the protection 
we can, or ought, to have. It is the people not the medical profes- MEDICATION". MERCER. 
sion, that need the protection of law. This absence of law, no 
doubt, is up to their standard of intelligence, and their ideas of 
liberty, and it suits us if it suits them. When they are more in- 
telligent, they will ask for protection. The people must move in 
this matter, not we. It we move, the whole world of quackery and 
ignorance would be arrayed against it and us, and would cry perse- 
cution. Law making, to prescribe the knowledge deemed neces- 
sary to practice medicine, must abide its time in the progressive 
enlightenment of the people. 
But laws are in force that attempt to protect the people from the 
wiles of the sharper, that they shall not be indiscriminately de- 
ceived, cheated and killed at the pleasure of cupidity and avarice. 
Steam boilers are inspected, as well as many articles of food. We 
have boards of health, and health inspectors. Lawyers are exam- 
ined before they practice in the courts, and ministers, before they 
enter the pulpit. But there is no examination, no qualification, 
deemed necessary in the eyes of the law for one to practice medi- 
cine and surgery. This certainly is republican liberty, if not 
democratic license. 
Should not every man that puts out a sign, physician and sur- 
geon, be qualified to stand on the platform we have erected in the 
substitute resolution, and, as there is no law requiring such quali- 
fications, should we not be a law unto ourselves and to an undis- 
criminating public, as we are in the by-laws of this Society and in 
the code of medical ethics ? 
From our knowledge of the subject, we ought to be the most 
competent judges of the matter, and, in this, we have no selfish 
ends in view. For ourselves, simply as medical practitioners—by 
the means of which we expect to earn a livelihood—it is of little 
importance whether the original resolutions shall be adopted by 
this Society, or whether the State shall see fit to set up some medi- 
cal standard as a prerequisite to the practice of medicine and 
surgery. All this is of vastly more importance to the public than 
to us. 
Very few possess knowledge sufficient to be judges in medicine, 
and the outside world of medicine is largely sustained by ignorance 
and prejudice. Here we may be met with the statement that many 8 
MEDICATION. MERGER. 
very intelligent men—men in the learned professions—select their 
physicians from this outside world of medicine, but we know of 
no intelligent man in medicine that does so. 
Medical knowledge and medical judgment comes not by intui- 
tion, not by reading newspapers and novels, not by studying poli- 
tics, not by studying Latin and Greek, theology or law, but by 
studying medical books; and where are the very intelligent men 
that study medical books ? They may be learned and intelligent 
everywhere else, but unless they are learned in medicine, their 
medical judgment is worth little more than the judgment of the 
street boot-black. 
Not that the primary branches of medical science are very diffi- 
cult of comprehension, but to the unlearned they are as a foreign 
tongue. Eor instance, we know the Greek from the Eomau char- 
acters—there our knowledge of Greek ends. We know nothing as 
to the pronunciation, translation or construction of the language* 
We could not by any possible means detect the errors of pronunci- 
ation or translation of a quack pseudo-professor of Greek. And 
now, if we should listen to a correct pronunciation and read a cor- 
rect translation, it would be equally impossible for us to determine 
which was the true and which was the false without a knowledge 
of the language. The unlearned in medicine can be as easily im- 
posed upon as the unlearned in Greek. To judge of Greek schol- 
arship, we must have studied the language. To judge of medical 
theories and practice, we must hare mastered the several branches 
of medical science, and all the better, if we have witnessed their 
application at the bed-side. To judge critically in medicine one 
must himself be competent to practice the healing art. Here as else- 
where, without knowledge there can be no intelligent judgment. 
But all the cunning and craft of the quack does not belong to the 
outside world of medicine. It is not every man that has a medical 
education, and is a member of a county medical society, that is free 
from the charge. Our fundamental knowledge as medical men 
does not materially differ. It is the judgment with which this 
knowledge is used at the bed-side that constitutes the superior 
physician. He may, or he may not, be quackish in his character, if 
he assumes to know and do the wonderful, that other men cannot MEDICATION. MERCEE. 
9 
do. If he promises to do what there is no reasonable expectation 
of performing—perhaps to secure a paying patient —when he know- 
ingly deceives patients and friends, he is running into quackery. 
Again, the attending physician is always at the mercy of the 
consulting physician—so we are sometimes wary who we consult 
with—it may develop itself in a fulsome display of sympathy and 
learning, and no matter how judicious the treatment may have 
been, it is in the power of the consulting physician to create dis- 
trust and thus undermine the confidence’ placed in the attending 
physician. He was called too late, if this, or that, had been done, 
or, if he had treated the case from the beginning, things would 
have been different. All this, in the main, is quackery, for such 
expressions can seldom be warranted from any known uniform 
power of medicine to control disease. 
The learned then can play the quack as well or better than the 
unlearned, for quackery is made up alike of deceptions, vain 
ostentatious boasting, and ignorance. 
But the quack in medicine has his victim at the greatest possi- 
ble advantage. His deeds are done in secret, or at least, are subject 
to no intelligent criticism. The lawyer may play the quack in his 
office, but he is sure to be exposed in court by those who are com- 
petent to sit in judgment. The medical quack, learned or un- 
learned, is not likely to come before any such tribunal. 
Deception, ignorance, and prejudice, constitute the- life-blood of 
quackery. They are as prominent elements of our civilization as 
intemperance, and prostitution, evils that this generation will not 
overcome, and, no doubt, the best way for us to fight quackery is to 
let it alone, and study to our professional improvement. 
Do ivhat we may, be assured, that, for ages to come, the harvest 
will be continually ripening for the golden sickle of the audacious 
charlatan. Greater the audacity, the greater the harvest. Gold is 
light in the balance to the dying man. 
These resolutions propose to grant us the privilege of consulting 
with at least the following list of doctors: The Clairvoyant, Spiri- 
tualist, Uriscopic, Indian, “Heathen Chinee,” Botanic, Analytical, 
Eclectic, Thornsonian, Hydropathic, Homeopathic, Traveling 
Specialist and non descript mountebanks in general. Liberty 10 
MEDICATION.—MERGER. 
enough. I hope the prospect pleases, gentlemen, in the opening up 
of these Elysian fields. But perhaps the doctor did not intend to 
include all this array of names in his resolutions. If he did not, 
where shall the line be drawn, who shall he elected, and who re- 
jected ? 
Our substitute resolution defines who, and what, we will recog- 
nize, and we believe it is broad and liberal enough to include all 
men worthy of the title of doctor, or worthy of the confidence of the 
public. It requires ample knowledge of the elementary brances of 
medical science, leaving each for himself to adopt any theory, or, no 
theory, and prescribe any medicine, in any dose, that to him may 
seem best. He is simply to be a doctor, and blow no trumpet of 
his own superior knowledge, skill, or fame. 
We do not propose to examine the status of more than two or 
three of this long list of doctors, with something added to their 
names, as each being superior to all other modes of medication. 
And first of the Thomsonian, who is now nearly obsolete, but he 
was a clamerous and an agressive fellow in his day—as we remem- 
ber him—and captured his patients and disease by storm or “blow- 
ing steam/’ it made little difference which, and is to be remembered 
mostly for his useful efforts in expunging the last remaining law 
from the statute book, regulating the practice of medicine. 
Notwithstanding the imposing cognomen, Eclectic Physician, it 
is for the most part simply a clap-trap, catch-penny institution, as 
being something different from other medical men. His sign is a 
libel .on his declaration of principles,* and should read Discard- 
ing Physician in place of Eclectic Physician. If he is what he 
claims to be, he is one of us, and would be Avith us. We elect the 
good and useful, in our judgment, from all sources, and compel 
nothing. But he vrishes the world to understand that he is some- 
thing different and better than other medical men. 
Men put up signs and advertise to exalt, not to demean them- 
selves and their Avares before their patrons and the public. But as 
a class I belieAre they are improving in medical culture and intelli- 
gence. 
The botanic sign caters to a prejudice, that it aims to create and 
of the Eclectic Med. Soc, of the State of N. Y., 1873, page 3. MEDICATIO NT.—MERCER. 
11 
perpetuate. Its hobby-horse is apt to be calomel, quinine and 
arsenic—quinine being a vegetable—and that vegetables are all 
innocious and minerals all poisons. This may be a strong picture, 
but I believe I have heard it in substance. If it were true, but it 
is not, we have no lawr or rule requiring or compelling us to use 
any mineral remedy whatever. We may use soda, calomel, iron or 
sulphur, or we may let them all alone and use nothing but vegeta- 
bles, and still hold honorable fellowship in this society. 
The homeopathic sign has its special attractions, especially for 
children. The medicine is so easy to take, and this is the more 
common argument used in its favor. We are all supposed to be 
familiar with Hahnemann’s theory of medicine, and there are 
fewer objections, perhaps, to our consulting with one of his true 
followers, if such can he found, than with any other class of men. 
We could consult with him on moral grounds if not on scientific. 
He is not a quackish deceiver; he is what he pretends to be. He 
is simply deceived, or we are. He attributes the recovery of his 
patients to his thousandth dilutions, we to rest, regimen and nature. 
If wTe consult with him it will stand something like this: First, 
we should expect a fee, and, it seems to me, this is the hub of the 
resolutions. They look more to loaves and fishes than to any 
other interest. Second, we might agree or disagree on diagnosis, 
prognosis, and treatment. Most likely, we should disagree on treat- 
ment, and we might not, for the patient might not require any 
special or specific medication. Our opinion, if favorable to recovery 
might afford the patient some consolation. I believe this to be the 
most honorable consultation we can hold outside ol the regular 
profession. But, for all this, humanity first, profession second, to 
do good in emergencies when called on, but not in the way of formal 
consultation. Butin regard to those who wear the “livery” of 
Hahnemann and are not his disciples; they are simply hypocrites, 
using ordinary forces in nature and attributing the effects that 
follow to their magic wand. Is it desirable that we consult with 
this form of reception ? 
And now, in due candor and honesty of purpose, from medicines 
found, from time to time at the bed side of their patients, from the 
statements made by their patients themselves, and the druggists of Ivl EDICATIOK.—M KRCER. 
whom they buy their remedies, and from conversation with their 
own members, we have reason to believe that a very large majority 
of those styling themselves Homeopathic doctors are in the con- 
stant habit of prescribing medicines in ordinary doses, and on 
ordinary principles of practice, just as we do. 
Some of these more honest than others have taken a step in the 
right direction, and have stricken Homeopathy from their signs, 
but they still adhear to the organization, though Homeopathic 
only in name. Why practice this deception on the public ? Why 
keep up this factitious opposition, but to gain sympathy and thus 
gain patients, and keep np the cry persecution, bigot, intolerant, 
martyr? Tire chasm between us and this class of Homeopaths, 
and we believe it embraces nearly all of them, is but a step, and 
that step is deception, and I believe is ere long to be more or less 
perfectly bridged over with truth and honesty. We differ as much, 
or more, among ourselves than they differ from us as a whole on 
matters pertaining to theory and practice, still we live in peace, 
tolerant of each other. 
Medical science bears on its front the olive branch of peace 
and good will to man, and now will some one of our many 
critics, the press if yon please, be kind enough to point out the 
way of honorable reconciliation between us and any, or all, of 
of these exclusive systems of medicine? What shall we do, what 
pathy shall we adopt to make friends and secure peace ? We will 
wait the reply of the outside world, of medicine, their champions 
and defenders, and in the mean time allow ns to suggest that the 
chasm may be bridged any day by obtaining a good medical educa- 
tion, keeping special dogmas and pathies in the background, be 
doctors in medicine simply, standing on professional knowledge 
and merit for patronage and preferment, granting the right of 
private judgment to all, as to medicine and dose to be used to 
relieve disease, and we meet at once as brothers at the bed-side. 
What is there of bigotry and intolerance in this ? If we critically 
examine the status of medicine, outside the regular profession, 
there is no fold where an honorable and educated man can find a 
resting place. They all voluntarily place themselves under bonds 
before the public—Eclectics excepted—to do or not to do certain ME D [CATION.—“M EKCER. 
13 
tilings. If they abide by the contract thus made, they so imper- 
fectly represent the curative powers of the healing art that we 
could scarcely recognize them as brothers. If they disregard the 
contract, their practice is a fraud and a cheat, and as such, we, cer- 
tainly, could not recognize them. 
With us it is different, we are pledged to nothing, only intelli- 
gence and honor. We have set no stakes either in theory or 
practice beyond which we may not go—we have made no contract 
—placed ourselves in no straight jacket before the public by ad- 
ding a prefix to our signs, our thoughts and deeds are as free as 
the air we breathe. 
Again, all honorable and educated medical men may become 
members of this Society in good standing, under our present laws 
and ethics without any amendments whatever. Knowledge and 
good moral character are the requisites to admission, no questions 
are raised as to theories, medicines to be used, or doses to be ad- 
ministered. We are all left perfectly free on all these points. 
Who then have we discarded? Ko one but the ignorant and im- 
moral man, and these men would have the world believe they are 
martyrs. 
As a member of this Society, I am at liberty to believe the 
Hahnemann theory and administer any medicine in any attenua- 
tion I please, and this is all there is of Homeopathy, and for this 
alone there is no law of this Society under which I can be brought 
to an account; and for this alone there is no thought in the code 
of medical ethics that can be distorted into an excuse for a repre- 
raand. The issue then is something outside of medical theory and 
medical practice. Patients seldom ask what medicines we propose 
to use, and seldom, if ever, what doses we propose to administer. 
We give large or small doses, next to nothing, as we think best, 
and in accordance with the theory of Hahnemann, Brown or 
Bronssa, or without any theory whatever, only the theory of em- 
pirical experience if you please. 
If then we are as free to believe and to do as all this, what need 
we of any resolutions, our borders are large enough already to 
embrace all honorable and educated medical men. 
But all these outsiders set themselves up to be our betters—if 14 
MEDICATION.—MERCER. 
they were our commons they would come into our fold—and claim 
specially and specifically to be our superiors, with new and better 
modes of practice to secure patronage, for no one intentionally 
employs an incompetent physician. We are berated as inferiors 
on all proper occasions, as behind the age, worse than old fogies, 
our treatment of disease is worse than useless, for it inflicts untold 
evils on mankind. If we are half as bad as represented, they 
ought to flee our company and thank heaven for deliverance; 
they ought to rejoice, as honest men, that they can escape from 
such a Society, with pure hearts and clean hands, in place of cry* 
ing persecution, martyrdom, to excite sympathy if they are excora* 
municated. What sane Society, however villanous or holy, would 
foster an assassin in its bosom, that was daily thrusting a dagger 
at its heart. 
But, perhaps, after all, it may be necessary to have all these sorts 
of doctors to please the whims and prejudices of the people—* 
prejudicices and whims that have been mostly excited by de* 
nouncing us, whether it is necessary or not, we do not propose to 
quarrel with them, the most we aim at in this discussion is to 
point out some of the relations they sustain to legitimate 
medicine. 
We can hardly expect mankind to agree in medicine, while they 
differ so much in theology, law, government, engineering, temper- 
ance, and in nearly all the affairs of life. 
But,, there can be only one true science of medicine, and that, in 
the details of practice, must be infinitely variable, to meet the 
exigencies of constitutional peculiarities, age, sex, climate, occu- 
pation, endemic epidemic, and other influences. There must also 
be a one best way to treat disease, not that inferior treatment 
does not often succeed, and there are many very serious cases of 
disease that terminate in health without any treatment whatever. 
But in the wdiole medical world as it now stands, in what direction 
ought we to look, expecting to find this one best treatment. 
Among the learned, or among the ignorant, among those who have 
tied their hands, and set limits to medicine and medication, to 
work inside a theory or dogma, or among those who encourage 
the most learning and exercise the greatest possible freedom of 15 
thought and action. Let ns carefully review the situation, and, if 
we are not in this one best line of direction, let us hasten to find 
it, summoning all human wisdom and experience to our aid. 
Have we been on the wrong track, have we really been napping 
in our activity and zeal in prosecuting medical inquiry, and now 
wake up to find ourselves second in medicine ? If we are in this 
unfortunate condition, let us scramble to the front before we offer 
our council to those in advance. If we are at the front, is it well 
to look back while there is so much unoccupied territory before 
us? We ever welcome honor and learning to our standard; here 
is congenial soil for both to flourish. All the world of medicine 
can come to us in honor, but to what ism or pathy can we go and 
maintain our honor and self respect ? 
MEDICATION,—MERGER. 
We have said little, or nothing, as to the merits or demei’its of 
these outside systems of medicine at the bed-side. We have di- 
rected attention more to the relations they sustain to medical 
science, and the well-being and protection of the public against 
fraud and deception, for the reason, that practical medicine is one 
of the most abstruse subjects that can well engage the attention 
of the human understanding. It undertakes to handle, manipu- 
late, guide, control, or direct, by material agency, almost—shall I 
not say an immaterial force—certainly a force that science does 
not comprehend, and over which these material agents have no 
absolute uniform and constant control. 
In disease, we are cognizant of certain changes taking place in 
the functions or structure of one or more of the various organs 
o 
composing the human body. To devine the cause, the same ap- 
parant cause often producing very different diseases, owing to 
constitutional differences and predispositions, to interpret the 
signs manifested by these diseased organs, to direct remedies to 
so modify vital force as to restore them to health, is the special 
business of the physician. But medicines do not fit names and 
diseases by any uniform and absolute rule as a tenon fits a mor- 
tice, or a keystone fits an arch—the same exposure is not 
always sure to induce the same disease. And now this vital force 
is always varying, and always an unknown quality, that no sym- 
bol can represent, therefore we have no fixed positive data, cer- 16 
MEDICATION.—MERCER. 
tainly in one direction to reason from in practical medicine. Thus 
comes the abstruseness of the subject. 
With these elements of the unknown and apparently the un- 
knowable, reason is the sport of uncertainty, and the best observ- 
ers are baffled in judgment to give due credit to each—vital force 
and medicine—fin the successful management of disease. But this 
vital force is always present, often very feeble, with its best en- 
deavors to restore the diseased organism to health. 
And in this connection, if we may venture an opinion, it wTould 
be that in general we overestimate the importance of medicine in 
the cure of disease. We know that very many diseases are self- 
limited in this nature, and tend to terminate in health without 
medication. 
“To know the natural cure of disease is more than half of thera- 
putics.” The reputation of the inert materia medica of one or two 
hundred years ago ; the reported cures by charms, amulets, 
raetalio tractors, royal touch and the fairy globules of to-day, all 
point in this direction. And when we contrast all this with the 
heroic treatment of fifty years ago—the enormous blood-lettings, 
and other active perturbative treatment, and inquire as to the re- 
sult of these two extremes of practice, I believe nature may fairly 
dispute for honors among all the doctors. 
In all this I hope not to undervalue the powers and usefulness 
of the healing art; we often witness its significance, and in heroic 
practice to, but the secret is to know when to do, when to trust 
nature', and when to resort to art. This is the one great lesson 
we all want to learn. 
Now all these outside systems imperfectly represent medical 
science, and often misrepresent it by charging it with many faults 
of which it is not guilty, exciting a prejudice in their own favor, 
charging medicine as doing more mischief in breaking down gen- 
eral health than disease itself, of which the whole human family 
finally perish. Disease is innocent, medicine is all powerful for 
evil to those who recover. As well might we claim fire to be in- 
nocent, and charge all the damage to the water that extinguishes 
it. They are all partial and circumscribed in their usefulness, but 
they serve to enlarge the field of medical observation, and we aim M KD LC ATI O N.—ME HC Eli. 
17 
to profit by their experiments and experience, and appropriate to 
our own use what is found useful. We are not particular whence 
our knowledge. 
But, while we may have learned something from these outside 
systems of medicine, the great and important discoveries in medi- 
cine and surgery, the real substantial progress of the science, has 
been acheived by the regular profession. I may not be well in- 
* formed on the subject, but I am unacquainted with any really 
valuable addition made to our stock of knowledge from this 
quarter, nothing worthy of notice beyond what we believe to be 
the hypothetical theory of Hahnemann, and whatever of truth 
may be claimed for it, and we think that very little, two things 
are certainly true in regard to it. Diseases are successfully treated 
outside of this theory, and it is not applicable to all forms of 
bodily ailments. 
It is seldom, patients and friends have the right sort of confi- 
dence in their medical advisers; they too often think they must 
be dosed to recover. The sick should be under intelligent medical 
observation; but often medicine is of little or no service to them. 
I have occasionally received a call something like this: Doctor, 
my daughter, Jennie, does not feel well; we do not know what 
ails her; I wish you would go and see her, and tell us what the 
matter is, and if you think she will get along without medicine, 
you need not give her any. I will pay you for your visit all the 
same. 
This is music to the physician’s ear; it has the ring of true 
metal, and illustrates the relations that should exist between 
patient and physician. If this was the common relation of phy- 
sician and patient, the sick would take much less medicine than 
they do. But we all know how the mind acts and reacts on the 
body, and that must be taken care of to facilitate recovery, and 
can be done as well with sugar as with bread pills. 
And now, after this imperfect and, perhaps, somewhat irrelevant 
review of the situation, where is the line of duty ? Man} of the 
men practicing medicine outside of the regular profession are 
supremely ignorant, others, perhaps with more learning, are equally 
cheats and charlatans. We cannot descend to this sort of fellow 18 
MEDICATIO N.—ME KCIO R. 
ship. But there are still others, respectable in society, and fairly 
respectable in medical knowledge, and what is our duty to them, 
to medical science, and to the public? From all that we have 
said and from all that we have thought on the subject, I believe 
it is our duty to remain just as we are, and for one simple reason 
among many others that might be adduced. They do not enter- 
tain a medical thought that I may not entertain, they never have, 
and I believe they never will make, a prescription that I might not 
make and still hold an honorable connection with this Society, 
with all its privileges and immunities, and they can do likewise if 
they will. The door is wide open for all honorable and educated 
men to come in.* 
* Since this article was written, an act has passed the legislature, regulating the practice 
of medicine, which I think very defective-better than nothing perhaps, for it may lead to 
something better,since public attention is directed to the subject. If the act had prescribed 
a form for the examinations for all societies to follow, and the results of all such examina- 
tions had been submitted to some competent board of stare censors for approval, the law 
then might have had some virtue in it, taut as it is, i fear it will afford little or no protection 
to the people from ignorance in the profession, and on the whole have a damaging influence 
on the general standing of the profession, by giving legal authority to ignorant ana unworthy 
men. At any rate it is liable to this sort of abuse. Alfred .Mercer. THE SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY. 
REV. ESASTUS- 0 HAVEN, D D., L L. D , Chancellor. 
The University was incorporated in 1870. At the present time 
three Colleges are organized and in active operation. Other Col- 
leges will be organized as circumstances may permit. 
I. THE COLLEGE OF THE LIBERAL ARTS. 
Rev. E O. Haven, D. D , L L. D., President of the Faculty. 
Fall Term opens Sept. 15, 1874. 
11. THE COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS. 
Fkedkuick Hyde, 11. D., Dean of the Faculty, Cortland, N. Y. 
Fall Term opens October 1, 1874. 
HI. THE COLLEGE OF THE FINE ARTS. 
Geo hue F. Comfort, A. M., Dean of the Faculty, Syracuse ' 
Fall Term same as College, of Liberal Arts 
C J\. T-i EN ID _A_ R. 
I. In the College ol Liberal Arts, the year is divided 'nto three terras, 
commencing respectively September 14, 1874, January 4, 1875 and April 5, 
1875. 
11. The College of Physicians and Su bolds two terms. The 
Lecture term begins October 1, 1874, and ends February 19, 1875 Tiie 
Recitation term begins March 1,1875, and ends June 24, 1875. 
For Particulars and Circulars add less 
Prof. W. T. PLANT, M. D , 
Secret ry of the Faculty, Syracuse, 
111. The College of Fine Arts, holds terms cortcsp -i-ding to the terms of 
the College of Liberal Arts. 
Forthe “Annual ” or any information, address the heads of either of the 
respective Faculties.