diseases of the eye, 47 



Treatment of Inflammation. 



" It must be admitted by all who coutemplate the actual state 

 i)f medical practice at the present day, that the use of blood-let- 

 ting and of other antiphlogistic remedies, has, within a recent 

 period, greatly declined. According to Youatt and Percivall, 

 fe'jch remedies, and more especially blood-letting, were formerly 

 highly successful in arresting diseases, in the treatment of which 

 we now know they not only fail, but are even highly injurious. 

 The inference has been drawn from these supposed facts, that in- 

 flammation itself is no longer the same ; that its type has altered 

 from an inflammatory to a typhoid character. In short, it seems 

 to have been the opinion of certain writers that an advanced 

 knowledge of physiology and pathology has had little influence 

 in producing this great revolution in our treatment, but that the 

 constitutions of animals are fundamentally altered, and that medi- 

 cal men were as right in bleeding thirty years ago as they are 

 correct in now abstaining from it. In opposition to these views, 

 it will be my endeavor to show, 1st, That little reliance can be 

 ] -laced on the experience of those who, like Blaix, Percivall, 

 and Youatt, were unacquainted with both histology and organic 

 chemistry, and, per consequence, the nature of inflammations ; 

 id. That inflammation is the same now as it has ever been ; 3d, 

 That the principles on which blood-letting and antiphlogistic 

 remedies have hitherto been practiced are fallacious, and opposed 

 to pathology ; 4th, That an inflammation once established can 

 not be cut short, and that the object of judicious medical practice 

 is to conduct it to a favorable termination ; 5th, That all positive 

 knowledge of the experience of the past, as well as the more ex- 

 act observations of the present day, alike establish the truth of 

 the preceding propositions as guides for the future. 



1st I^ropositiox. — That little reliance can be placed on the ex- 

 ptrience of those who, like Br^iN, Percivall, and Youatt, tcert 

 unacquainted tmih histology, and, per consequence, the nature of 

 inflamrnations. 



Inflammation, for many years, was generally recognized, espe- 

 cially in external parts, by the existence of pain, heat, rednesa, 

 and swelling, and in internal parts by fever, accompanied by 

 pain and impeded ftinction of the organ affected. In fact, groupa 

 of symptoms, in accordance with the nosological systems of the day, 



