so as to produce a sickened stomach and vomiting, 
in which all the phenomena occur pertaining to 
the inverted act of the stomach by an emetic intro- 
duced into it. Yet it would not surely be correct to 
reason on the modus operandi of medicamental 
emetics introduced into the system operating 
in whatever way, by their material presence, 
from any effect which horror or disgust or foul 
air evinces, on the disturbed sensorial function, 
involving sickness and vomiting in the instances 
given. ‘The vomiting under these circumstances, 
is effected by an immaterial agent inscrutably 
called into action by an untouched, or distant 
material object of disgust, er a partially poisonous 
inhalation of the Jung: ae oe Bevis Noes 
The third opinion relative to the operative man- 
ner of diuretics, is a participatory junction of the 
two preceding. It supposes that some diuretics 
operate after the first mentioned manner, and 
others after the second mode. Many support this 
two-fold theory. Dr. Eberle has adopted it in 
his elements of therapeutics and Materia Medica. 
This joint opinion maintains still less unity of ac- 
tion. It supposes ee : mid 
ist. That some diuretics act primarily on the 
urinary organs, in two ways, a by stimulating 
while the substances themselves are unsusceptib 
of decomposition in transitu. b By thus stimula- 
ting the renal vessels, undergoing decomposition 
the secreting vessels of the kidnies, by contact, 
in transitu. ‘ 
imarily on the absor- 
ad. e¢ That others act prim 
bents, and secondarily on the kidnies. 
4d. That others again act primarily on the sto- 
mach and first passages, and secondarily on the 
absorbents, which is ellectec 
modes of action. d By diminis 
flected in three different 
hing arterial action 
_ Ape me sagt yore 
