HOMEOPATHY.
{"newspaper_name": "The Columbian fountain.", "edition": "01", "page": "p2", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 3804, "word_count": 646, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9581000208854675], "ccnet_perplexity": [1030.5999755859375], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
MEssRs. EDIToRs Having noticed an art-
Gle in your paper Of Thursday upon the Ho
meopathic system of treating disease, we
should feel obliged by being allowed small
space in your paper in a brief reply. Before
going into statistics and facts we would ask
an intelligent, discerning public to decide which
should receive the greater amount OF confidence
and faith, a science promulgated more than
two thousand years ago, and which has IN all
ages and up to the present moment had identl-
fed with il, and for its advocates the most pro-
found intellects, the most comprehensive ge-
MUS, the most enlarged attainmenis Or one
conceived within century, and 10 whose
novel, and to us undefnable principles, II has
been mainly indebted for its Limited counte-
nance and patronage. From the days OF Hip
pocrates, who has justly been termed the ia
iher Of Medicine, to the present day, the Aio


path;c system of practice has been enrlehine
Itself by the most severe and closest examlna-
posterior to death by noting most critically


the impressions upon their localities caused BY


specific diseases by collating and registering
the symptoms manifested; by recording The
operation Of certain medicines administered K
counteract particular diseases, and by judi


ciousy taxing Chemistry, Botany and Mine
ralogy to make up Materia Medica adequate
to the suppression. of those ills the physica
system is liable to. But, says the HomGo
lpathist, our system is based upon simple and
natural principles; is free Of all that complex
ity of which you have spoken, and il is on ac
count Of that freedom from massveness which
lrenders its practice safe and efficacious. In
reply to such argument, if so it can be called


we would say, that the public is yetto be sat
is6ed ofihe truth of this assumption. And as
this brings us to suitable place for statistical
j evidence and facts, we improve il as ground
offensive and defensive in discussing the prin.
ciple at issue.


As your correspondent J.. G. has given sta.
tistcs Of disease occurring in Hospitals and
other public Institutions in Europe and oul
own country, we will pursue the same course
and leave the reader to pass his own judg
ment upon the discrepancy apparent
| We will now make an extract from med
ical Journal Of the first reputation, VIZ, Rev
Med. Feb. 1884, from Hackers Annals Nov
1888. "A Saxon physician, DIR. Hermann,
the great apostle Of the system in Russia, was
1 invested by the Grand Duke Michael with ful
powers to display, in a course OF CLINICAL ex
periments, its superiority over the commen
practice and theory of the day. One OF the
wards Of the Hospital de Tuttschin, which
contained a number Of soldiers affected with
fevers and dysentery was allotted to his spe-
cial management during space eftwo months
The following table exhibits the results:


Patients Cured. Died Rem.
Common method, 457 364 %
homeopathic do. 1913 65 o %
Notwithstanding the results Of this expert
ment were so decisive against the new doc
irne, the ministers Of the Russian Govern
ment some time afterwards summoned Or. II.
10 Petersburg, gave him authority 10 select his
own hospital, and TO make any arrangements
he thought ft. The wards were fresh painted,
and every hygienic precaution faithfully exc
cuted. Even the kitchen was placed entirely
under his control and superintendence and
in order 10 prevent the possibility of any inter-
ference, sentinel was placed before the door,
and none permitted TO enter during the occa-
sIonal absence Of DIR. Hermann. His tlrst re-
quest respecting the patients was very mod.
crate and modest one, viz, that none should
be sent to his hospital who labored under ul,
GERS, syphilis, dropsy. phihiss. &c.,. and that
he should have the selection Of all his cases +! !!
Even under these mos, fortunate circumstan-