are too old in debate to be caught by such a handful of chaff. What is the next species of "hocussing' which has been resorted to by our opponents? Finding that all mere arguments fail to overturn the fact that cures have been made under Homoeopathic treatment, they say, "Well, it certainly could not have been the medicine administered-it must have been the dietary regulations imposed which efected the cure." What think you, reader, of this? Does it not sound like this?" If we cannot deprive you of actual existence, we will at least undermine and ruin your character." Generous promptings of the haman heart! But if our cures only came by reason of the treatment imposed, why have not the faculty the common honesty towards their patients to adopt at least this part of our curative art"? Which are we to infer that our Homeopathic practitioners are more honest than the haughty followers of Hippocrates and Galen, preferring at least to give their patients something for their money; or that they are more skilful, having a better knowledge of the human system, and therefore enabled at least to effect a cure-by what means we need not dispute? The position assumed by our opponents lays them open to either or both these inferences. This is a point we shall hope to have answered. If dietary regulations will effect a cure for one class of medical practitioners, why not for another? It is a cure that the patient wants, and he will not be likely to dispute about the means employed. Almost to the present moment we had thought that the wrath which "Vinclum " heaped upon us in his last paper was merely “A thing of sound and fury, signifying—nothing." But we were wrong! Both our wit and our wisdom (thanks to "Vinclum" for giving us credit for the possession of both) were at fault this time, and we confess it. How could we be so blind as not to see that in our last paper we struck the right nail upon the head? We felt, when we made allusion to the subject of medical charges, that we were laying ourselves open to the accusation of uncharitableness, and we were disposed to bave omitted the offensive paragraph; but either our wit or our wisdom (we won't say can which) prompted us to let it remain, and behold the confirmation it has received at the hands of " Vinclum"! After dismissing us with a few lashes, he turns, scourge in hand, upon that important personage, the PUBLIC, and hearken:-"We know, and the public know too -at least it ought to know, only [mind !] it shuts its eyes blindly to the fact that under the old system, and too often under the improved state of things, medicine is sent and charged for which is not absolutely necessary." What think you, reader, of the fact thus boldly proclaimed, that the faculty Do plunder the public? "But," seriously adds "Vinclum," people grumble at a practice which they alone are instrumental in retaining?" Does "Vinclum" mean that people should patronize Homœopathy, and thus rid themselves of the old practitioners altogether? He does not say, therefore we may adopt what inference we please. But he further adds, "If they (the public) will not pay a medical man for his time, which is inestimably precious, for his health, which is equally so, and for an expensive education, can they complain if the fee which is so fairly due for professional advice, is grudgingly extorted by means of unprofessional bills for unnecessary items?" Thus speaketh "Vinclum;" need we say more upon the point? We were right, and "Vinclum" has proclaimed the fact to the world! The position of the inquiry stands thus:We assert that Homoeopathy is sound in theory, and we adduce our reasons for arriving at such a conclusion. We assert that Homoeopathy is beneficial in practice; we base this assertion on actual experience, and produce statistics in support of it. And until equal powerful testimony- that is, proof-be adduced to the contrary, we shall have no cause to alter our opinion. There is one other point to which we wish to make a passing allusion. It is to the attempt made by one of the negative writers to cast a slur upon the character of Hahnemann, the original propounder of the Homœopathic theory. This is as mean as it is unjust. We have consulted several of the best authorities upon such matters, and find it admitted on all hands that he was decidedly talented. That he manifested his ability early in life, which led to his being placed to the study of medicine; that “he gained a high reputation in the hospitals as a judicious and skilful practitioner;" and that, so far from wishing to build up his fame at the expense of his reputation, his fame was established before he advocated, or had even discovered, Homeopathy. One word by way of conclusion. If it should so happen that we have found favour in the sight of any of our readers during the period we have had the pleasure of addressing them, it may be of interest to them to learn that, after having carefully noted our symptoms during the past few hours, we begin to have some hope for ourselves. We find-and we should wish to do the justice to state that we can only attribute the fact to the mirth we have enjoyed at the expense of our energetic opponents-that 66 NEGATIVE ARTICLE.-IV. an increased number of adherents; like the skeleton of man, if put under ground and covered with the earth, so that not a globule of air or moisture is allowed to touch it, while there in this dry condition, without a particle of light being permitted to beam upon it, it will continue in the same form; but dig it up, and bring forth to the light, and it will crumble to dust. Just so with Homœopathy; as soon as its followers are unable to shrink behind some barrier, or keep back from the searching test of science, they must fall, as a natural consequence. "Similia similibus curantur" is the basis of the whole system called Homœopathy; i.e., treat your patient by those remedies which are most calculated to produce the morbid state in which you find him. I HAVE frequently felt great satisfaction in reading the articles on the different subjects brought forward in your valuable journal. A journal has long been required, as a medium through which truth and error could meet on fair grounds, without the comment, the prejudice, and the bias of the editor, so that the gold may be separated from the dross, and that which is of great price from the worthless and pernicious. Such a medium is now to be found in the British Controversialist, where subjects are discussed on equal grounds—a boon unprecedented. A journal, thus started, I firmly believe, cannot fail to accomplish the objects for which it was born, and to be of incalculable benefit to that most important class of society-the young men. It is well calculated to transform the thoughtless, in- Let us suppose a person attacked with different, and barren mind, into the thought- hydrothorax, or water in the cavity of the ful, intelligent, and fertile intellect; in fact, chest, between the layers of the pleura, and it will be one of the great and noble instru- that the cause of this disease was not from ments in producing our future Peels, Russells, acute pleuritis, but from great debility. It Disraelis and Cobdens; our Herschels and is a well-known fact in medical science, that Rosses, our Lyalls and Bucklands, and our a constitution suffering from great debility, Humphrey Davys. But to the subject:*- produced by various circumstances, as imIs Homoeopathy true in principle and bene-poverished blood from excessive depletion by ficial in practice?" I have read the affirmative articles, and have been exceedingly surprised to find how shallow they are of argument. They seem rather to have set up the barricade of sarcasm, so that they may escape being brought out to the test of true science. Whilst in the dark it will remain, and perhaps prosper, or rather have 66 any means, hard study, great anxiety, night air, cold, check of general secretion, and neglect of health by irregular habits, &c., that there is a great tendency for the effusion of fluid in some cavity. What would the Homœopath do with such a patient? Surely he would deplete the patient still; perhaps he might feel inclined to advise the means by which that state of debility was brought | novel, tasteless, and (forgive the expression) about, viz., what I have already mentioned. harmless globules. His name is spread abroad Is it not absurd on the very surface?-yet among all her friends, and she unhesitatingly sarely it is a fair deduction, and to me declares that her life has been saved by those (according to their principles) appears to be precious little spherules given to her by Mr. the acme of treatment. I myself had the the Homoeopath; and in the same misfortune to be attacked by the disease breath declares, with the usual perseverance I have described, and which was caused by and zeal of her class, that the old system of debility. As soon as my condition was found medicine is murdering the people by hundreds, ont (for it crept upon the constitution very and even thousands. I happened to be brought insidiously) all hope of my recovery had in contact with a maiden lady, who occupied vanished; death seemed inevitable. How much of her time in praising Homoeopathy weald my case have terminated, had I called to the skies, and in aiming her invectives in some disciple of Hahnemann ?—the little against Allopathy. After a little conversahope, which every man is possessed of while tion, I found that she suffered frequently from life lasts, would certainly have been swept to a periodical pain over her left eyebrow, which the four winds of heaven: but I was unwise commenced in the morning as soon as she enough to call in one or two practitioners in arose, and, by the beneficial tendency of the legitimate medicine, and, to my surprise, I Homœopathic globules of china, the pain was soon enabled to watch and to experience would depart about dusk; however, it used the beneficial effects of those remedies which to return in the morning, and, by a few were judiciously administered—not under the more china globules, would cease in the false principle of "similia similibus curantur;" evening as before, and so on, continuing for bat my recovery is due to the opposite prin- a fortnight, three weeks, a month, or even eiple, a principle which is founded on scientific longer. Now the merest tyro at the hospital facts. Gratitude and joy flow forth from my would know at once the nature of her comsoul to my fellow-medicals, who have thus plaint it was of the intermittent or aguan y their skill, under a true principle, reno- type, which promises intermissions of altervated my constitution. Nothing has more nate health. wedded me to the profession which I follow; and I shall consider myself honoured by still associating with men whose theory is borne out by true science, and who need not shrink (as our opponents have done) from the scrutimizing test of the scientific world. Again. The Homeopaths profess to ad"ninister remedies in infinitesimal doses, and they state that, if applied in larger doses, the ficacy is lost. Now this is against all law, experience, and the common sense of man. I can imagine some Homœopath, being rather loquacious, called in to attend a very fidgety patient, who fancies she has all imaginable ills, and, at night-time, is honoured with ghosts, hobgoblins, &c., calming her spirit, and obtaining her faith, by these almost invisible globules, giving express directions with regard to diet and to out-door exercise, and assuring her, by all that is great and true, that her recovery will at once commence, and perfect health speedily follow. And so it may, there being nothing the matter, or no morbid condition but what diet, and exercise, and occupation of mind could eradicate; the atter being managed by her attention to the A man of any knowledge and acumen could see through this absurd chicanery of the Homoeopathic system, and this doubtless forms the basis by which the Homeopaths have raised their popularity. Such a basis must shortly dissolve, vanish, and "leave not a rack behind." The Homœopaths (for the want of something better to say) talk much about the conversion of medical men from the old to the new system. I have certainly heard of some medical practitioners, who possess small practices, and are not of very great note, considering it a good opportunity to become popular and busy, for the sake of the loaves and fishes, have (laying aside all integrity and principle) practised the new globular theory with great satisfaction to their purses. An instance of this I read a short time since. Some Homœopathic chemist sent a box of globules to Dr. Simpson, of Edinburgh, anonymously, who, on receiving them, gave them to his little boy to play with: the little child was in ecstacies with his new playthings; the globules attracted much attention, and caused great delight. M He would empty one bottle of globules and put them into another bottle, and so exchange places; afterwards he seemed desirous to know how many little balls he had, so he emptied every bottle, and put the globules together in a mass, and mixed them for some time, after which he filled each bottle with the mixed globules. About this time a medical man called on Dr. Simpson, and seeing this box of globules on the table, asked whether he might take them away? The reply being in the affirmative, he put them into his pocket, and left. Some time having elapsed, Dr. S. met this young medical practitioner, who told him that the box of globules he gave him had been of incalculable benefit, and in fact produced such a revolution as to cause him now to practise Homeopathy. Dr. S. smiled, but said nothing; but, meeting with him a short time after, told him the fact that his little boy had often played with them, and mixed them over and over again! G. V. talks of specifics; the mere term brings up in my mind, with feelings the very reverse of admiration, the names of Holloway, Morison, Widow Welch, Parr, and a host of other quacks. Shall the educated and scientific medical practitioner be told to receive, as truth, that a certain remedy is a specific for a certain disease, irrespective of the cause and constitution of the patient? Has not the medical man, who examines his patient with a scientific eye, to obtain knowledge of the cause of the disease, of the constitution, temperament, idiosyncrasies, and many other conditions, before he is in a position to prescribe? And for an M.D. to talk of specifics for diseases, appears to me to be a perfect solecism, and the very essence of incongruity; he must either be entirely ignorant of the laws of medicine, or we must attribute it to dishonesty and hypocrisy. What are these globules composed of? I remember a young lady, who was rather in a mirthful mood, taking two of these globules for a dose, irrespective of remedy, and, to the great merriment of those around her, she was as well the next day as if she had taken nothing extraordinary-a great argument for the harmless effect of these globules, and certainly bearing out G. V., where he says that "Homœopathy will in no case do positive injury." In every view, and in every aspect, has the Homœopathic system the characteristic and prominent features of imposition. G. V. tells me something new, and I am no less astonished than "Vinclum" and L. G. G. to hear that "Homoopathy emancipates mankind from bodily ills." This is startling! and certainly a blessing, if true. So we are likely to disappoint Cowper, who says— "Man always is, but never to be blest," even while this world lasts, and that at a time not very distant, judging from the progress of this blessed system. The best thing the Homeopaths can do is, to organize and collect all their forces together in some of the golden regions, as the followers of Joe Smith have done. "Union is strength." By inviting their converts to combine with them, doubtless before very long they would secure a perfect paradise on earth. C. W., Jun., disapproves of the condemnation of new theories and systems; so do I, if they can be proved to be true. But new systems and theories are divided into two classes--1, Those which are true; and, 2, Those which are false: and it is my consciertious conviction that Homœopathy belongs to the latter class. C. W., Jun., appears to receive everything new as true; approving of Mesmerism, Phrenology, Hydropathy, &c.; and is, I presume, also a follower of Joe Smith. If the Homoeopaths would allow me to suggest a president for their settlement. C. W., Jun., appears to be just the man: for he embraces all new theories, and consequently must be the most perfect man as ye found, ever progressing towards that state of perfectibility and goodness which he will doubtless very soon attain; for, being a Homeopath, the disciples of Hahnemann will emancipate his body from disease, and the followers of Joe Smith will give the correct tenets of the most recent-ergo, the true| religion. A. S. Chelsea. Live not on opinions; but think for thyself and act with reason, and shun carefully the contagion of the mind, which communicates itself by the ways and manners of those we converse with. Politics. OUGHT THE JEWS TO BE ADMITTED TO PARLIAMENT ? AFFIRMATIVE REPLY. Ir is, perhaps, one of the commonest it is the adornment of the soul, and not the canses of our misapprehensions and disagree-mere investings of the state; that it dwells ments, that we are content to argue from contestable premises, when a right principle is the true touchstone of the subject. Our friend "Veritas," in assuming the spiritual element to be a necessary part of the British constitution, has given the use and consequence of first principles to mere notions which he must be aware are at issue with the views of a great body of the British people. They have a painful conviction that, sound and excellent as that constitution may be in its essentials, there are, nevertheless, defects and disfigurements which, having surrounded themselves with the halo of antiquity, and the respect which was due to the normal institution alone, are powerfully mischievous in their influence on the interests of society, and the progress of the human mind in its approach to truth. Were there no other proof of this, it would be sufficient to show how the "Church and State" idea. unlawfully incorporated by lust, power, chicanery, sincerity, in fact, by every species of motives and means, and by the same, both good and bad, perpetuated, till it had become a real part of the contour of the national system, has operated to the great detriment and distortion of justice, and also to the contracting of minds, otherwise sensible and capable of impartiality. In the present instance these results are seen-first, in the mind of "Veritas" finding its fundamentals in such simplicities as the following: "monarch bound to be a Christian "-"lords spiritual”—“ commons originally obliged, not only to be Christians, but also to be communicants in the Church of England;" and then, in the ignoring of righteous claims, because they and the prior conception cannot tally. May God forbid that Britain should ever be without national religion, and that the christian religion; be it still our bulwark and glory: but let us remember that the kingdom of God is within, not without; that in the highest and holiest of inward principles, and not in arrangements of parliaments; that there is really no religion at all if there be not individual religion, though you accommodate, in a wholesale way, Queen, lords, commons, and people with its name and reputation; and that it abhors, above all things, semblances, Pharisaisins, narrownesses, and unjust behaviour; and there will then be little fear that we shall cheat the Jew under the pretence that our "constitution" requires it, or our religion either. If "Veritas" had based his reasoning on broad, immutable principles, had he taken his start but from even one natural truth, how great the advantage he had possessed. He could not be argumentatively strong upon anything short of it. He should have gone back, as W. G. says, to "the true principles of civil polity and government," and he would then, perhaps, not only have bettered his cause, but his arguments would have commanded careful consideration. As it is, viewing them as drawn altogether from a false source, we add nothing to what W. G. has said, save a simple denial of their applicability; but in bidding adieu to "Veritas," commend to a second reflection his favourite maxim, that "what is morally wrong cannot be politically right." Passing on to the article of " Aristides," we readily acknowledge the general soundness of the propositions he has laid down in support of his views. A degree of identity in certain particulars is essential to the utility of any organization. There is this also to be observed in these positions and subsequent remarks of "Aristides," that they are free from that disposition to exclusiveness and unnatural jealousy which too frequently characterize the words and writings even of the most sincere of those who will not concede the claims of the Jew. Belonging to no class of intermediate, policy-spun accommodations, these come nearer the mark of |