introduction of wholly new and startling ideas.

“And we may venture to repeat, that not only must the experimental method be continued, but the progress of physiology will chiefly depend on the increased application of that method. The more involved and abstruse the problems become, the more necessary does it also become that the inquirer should be able to choose his own conditions for the observations he desires to make. Happily, the experimental method itself brings with it in the course of its own development the power of removing the only valid objection to physiological experiments, viz., that in certain cases they involve pain and suffering. For in nearly all experiments pain and suffering are disturbing elements. These disturbing elements the present imperfect methods are often unable to overcome; but their removal will become a more and more pressing necessity in the interests of the experiments themselves, as the science becomes more exact and exacting, and will also become a more and more easy task as the progress of the science makes the investigator more and more master of the organism. In the physiology of the future, pain and suffering will be admissible in an experiment only when pain and suffering are themselves the object of inquiry. And such an inquiry will of necessity take a subjective rather than an objective form.”[1061] Let the President of the Royal College of Physicians give his views of the utility of vivisection from the point of view of a practical physician:— SIR ANDREW CLARK before the “Clinical Society of London” (_British Medical Journal_, Feb. 3, 1883) said: “For whatever purpose they may be employed; however carefully they may be designed and executed; however successful may be the precautions taken to exclude error, experiments have their subtle difficulties and dangers which are perilous to truth, and cannot be wholly averted. By the prestige of precision, which often undeservedly they profess, undue weight is attached to their results; and by the assumption that in like conditions the results would be the same in man as in the lower animals, flagrant errors are committed, and currency is given to false or inadequate generalisations. The experimenter interprets the results of his experiments by the light of their structural results; he forgets or he ignores the life-history of the processes by which they have been evolved, and he takes no account of the fact, beyond controversy, that different clinical states find occasionally the same structural expression. In such circumstances doubt is inevitable, and it is only to clinical medicine that any just appeal for its solution can be made. To her, at last, all such experiments must be brought for trial; she must be their examiner, critic, interpreter, user, and judge. And no results of experiments can be made of any avail to medicine, or be used with safety in her service, until they have been filtered through the checks and counter-checks of clinical experience, and have responded to the tests and counter-tests of clinical trial. Had these principles exerted their just influence in the recent debates concerning questions of this kind, we should not have had a seton in the neck of a man taken as the parallel of a seton in the neck of a guinea-pig; we should not have had the artificial tuberculosis of the rodent pronounced to be identical with the natural tuberculosis of the child; we should not have had grey tubercles and caseous pneumonias pronounced on the grounds of mere likeness of structure to be of one and the same nature; and we should have been spared the sight of science, drunken with success and drivelling with prophecies, soliciting the public on the common highway.” APPENDIX. _ON SOME OF THE MORE IMPORTANT MINERALS USED IN MEDICINE._ (Compiled chiefly from Royle’s _Materia Medica_.) CARBONATE OF SODA is the _neter_ of the Hebrews. It was known to the early Hindus, and is by them called _Sajji noon_ (_i.e._ Sajji or Soda Salt); it is the Sagimen vitri of Geber. The Natron lakes of Egypt were known to the ancients, and it was early employed in glass making, etc. (Royle). On the shores of the Indian Ocean, the Red Sea, and the Mediterranean, plants of the order _Chenopodeæ_ are burned to form the ash called Barilla, and from this ash soda is obtained. Carbonate of soda was also formerly prepared on the coasts of Scotland, Ireland, Wales, and Normandy, by burning algæ or sea-weeds, and the ash so obtained was called _kelp_. There is no doubt that the process is extremely ancient, and the discovery of the properties of these ashes accidental. CHLORIDE OF SODIUM, or common salt, is so universally distributed that it must have been known and used in food from the earliest ages. BORAX is thought to have been the Chrysocolla of Pliny. It is the _Sohaga_ of the Hindus (Sanscrit, _Tincana_), and is called _Booruk_ by the Arabs. It is abundant on the shores of some of the lakes in Thibet, and was brought into India across the Himalayas (Royle). SULPHATE OF SODA, or Glauber’s Salt, is found on the soil in India and other countries, and exists in the ashes of many plants, in mineral springs, and in sea-water. LIME was known to the Egyptians and Hindus. MAGNESIA seems to have been known to the alchemists. Its name occurs in Geber and other writers of the period. The CARBONATE OF MAGNESIA was probably first used as a medicine by the Count de Palma at Rome. Hoffmann introduced it into the list of Materia Medica. EPSOM SALTS (SULPHATE OF MAGNESIA) was first discovered by Dr. Grew in 1675 in a spring at Epsom. It is found in many countries. ALUM is mentioned in _Pliny_, xxxv. chap. 15, and probably is referred to by _Dioscorides_ (v. chap. 122). _Shib_ was the generic term of alum of various kinds in Arab writings. Egyptians and Hindus must have known of its properties from the earliest ages of their civilization. It was introduced into Europe from Syria by the Genoese. _Green Vitriol_ or _Sulphate of Iron_ was known to the ancients. It is mentioned, says Dr. Royle, in the _Amera Cosha_ of the Hindus (_Hind. Med._, p. 44), and it is used by them as by the Romans in the time of Pliny in making ink. ZINC seems to have been first made known as a metal in Europe by Paracelsus. The Hindus have imported it from China from remote times. The Oxide of Zinc was anciently called tutty, probably from the Tamil Tutanagum. In the East, says Royle, SULPHATE OF ZINC is called _suffed tutia_, or white tutia, the Sulphates of Iron and Copper being called _green_ and _blue tutia_ (_Hindu Med._, p. 100). COPPER was one of the metals most anciently known. It was employed in medicine by the Hindus and Arabs in the form of the Sulphate or Blue-stone. VERDIGRIS, the DIACETATE OF COPPER, must have been known wherever copper vessels were used. It was employed by the Greeks as a medicine, by the Arabs, and probably also by the Egyptians. LEAD was equally well known of old; the carbonate of the metal was one of the most anciently known of the metallic salts. The Middle Ages introduced the acetate of lead commonly known as SUGAR OF LEAD. EXTRACT OF LEAD, or EXTRACT OF SATURN, or _Goulard’s Extract_, have been known since the time of B. Valentine. BISMUTH was first mentioned by Agricola in 1520. SULPHUR was employed in medicine by the Greeks, Hindus, and Arabs. Geber knew of its solubility in an alkaline solution, and Albertus Magnus taught the method of procuring Sulphuret of Potassium by fusion. PHOSPHORUS was discovered in 1669, when it was found in the Phosphate of Soda and Ammonia of Urine by Brandt, an alchemist of Hamburgh. Knuckel in Germany and Boyle in England had also the credit of discovering it (Royle, _Mat. Med._). NITRIC ACID was known to Geber, and probably also to the Hindus (Royle, _Mat. Med._). IODINE was obtained by M. Courtois in 1812 in the residual liquor of the process for obtaining soda from sea-weed. IODIDE OF POTASSIUM was first employed in medicine by Coindet. BROMINE was discovered in 1826 by M. Balard, in _bittern_, the uncrystallisable residue of sea-water. Bromide of Potassium was first introduced into the London Pharmacopœia in 1836. SAL AMMONIAC was known to Geber. Avicenna and Serapion mention it by the name _Noshadur_. Persian writers give _Armeena_ as its Greek synonym. The Sanskrit name is _Nuosadur_. In Egypt it is made from camel’s dung. It must have been known to the Romans, as Pliny says that one of the kinds of _Nitrum_ gives out a strong smell when mixed with quicklime (Royle, _Mat. Med._). CARBONATE OF POTASH is obtained by the burning of vegetables. It must therefore have been known to primitive nations. “Dioscorides describes it by the name τεφρα κληματινης, or _Cinis sarmentorum_, ashes of vine twigs (‘cineris lixivium,’ _Pliny_, xxxviii. chap. 51). The Arabs are usually supposed to have been the first to make known this alkali (al-_kali_); but the Hindus, in works from which the Arabs copied, made use of the ashes of plants” (Royle, _Mat. Med._). TIN was the Bedel of Moses. It was used by the Egyptians, who probably procured it from India. The Greeks and Romans obtained it from the Phœnicians. ANTIMONY was probably discovered by the Alchemists. The sulphuret of the metal, however, is the στιμμι and stibium of the ancients. In Asia it has been used from time immemorial for painting the eyebrows and eyelids. Several of the Sulphurets of Antimony have long been used in medicine. The Tartarate (TARTAR EMETIC) is supposed to have been discovered by Mynsicht (Thesaurus, etc., Hamburgh, 1631). MERCURY or QUICKSILVER was known to the ancients. It was probably first prescribed internally by the Hindus. The Romans and Arabs used it externally. Pliny says that mercury is poisonous, “unless, indeed, it is to be administered in the form of an unction on the belly, when it will stay bloody fluxes.” The Arabs appear to have re-introduced it into the European practice (Royle). The red oxide was known to Geber. CALOMEL is the subchloride of mercury. It occurs native in Carniola and in Spain. The Hindus from very early times prepared it artificially and prescribed it internally. It was introduced into European practice in