GONORRHai:A. 



by a pimple, full of yellowifh matter. This pimple was 

 touched with cauflic, and healed in the fame way as the fore 

 on the 'prepuce. Fonr months afterwards the chancre on 

 the prepuce broke out again ; tlien it healed, and returned. 

 This it did feveral rimes ; but always healed without any 

 application to it. While the fores remained on the prepuce 

 and glans, a bubo formed in the groin. A fufficient quan- 

 tity of mercury A\"as given to cure the gland locally, but not 

 to prevent the coniliturion froni being affefted. Two months 

 after the cure of the bubo, a venereal ulcer, according to 

 Mr. Hunter, formed on oi!e of the tonfils. This was cured 

 by ir.eixrury ; biit the medicine was purpofely left off as foon 

 as the fore was {kinned ever, in order to fee what parts 

 would next be afie&ed. 



About three months afterwards, copper-coloured blotches 

 made their apper.r.ince in the f.an, and the ulcer on the 

 t-onfil recurred. This difeafe was again osily palliated by 

 mercury ; but the complaints returned in the iame fituation 

 as before ; f.nd were ultimately cured by a proper quantity 

 of mercury. 



On the other hand, doubts mud cxift, concerning this ac- 

 count of the matter of gonorrhoea, when the following cir- 

 cumftances are taken into coniiderntion : 



III. It is impoffible to fay what tim.e may clapfe between 

 the apphcation cf venereal poifon to the penis, and the com- 

 mencemeiit of ulceration. Therefore, Bougain\-ille's failors, 

 alluded to by Mr. Hunter, might have contracted the infec- 

 tion at Rio de la Plata ; but adiual ulcers on the penis 

 might not have formed till about five months aftcrv.ards, 

 v.-hen the (hip ai-rived at Ocaheite. 2dly. The fecond ar- 

 gument adduced by Mr. Hunter is certainly inconclufive. 

 Every ulcer in the throat is not regularly venereal. A 

 common ulcer may herd while the patient is ufing mercury. 

 Hence the cure, apparently accomplilhed by this medicine, 

 is no proof tliat the complaint was fyphilitic. 3dly. The 

 hft fact of inoculation is undoubtedly very llroug. But, 

 though the infertion of gonorrhccal matter, or any other 

 r.iorbitl matter, beneath the cuticle, will undoubtedly pro- 

 duce troublefome local complaints, may we not doubt that 

 tlie fores, in the above cafe, were adually venereal ones ? 

 Can we implicitly depend on the continence of the fubjecl 

 of the above remarkable experiments, during the long fpace 

 offour months, between theheahngof the fore ontheprepuce, 

 and its recurrence ? If we cannot, the inference, in regard to 

 t'le power of gonorrhaal matter to communicate the venereal 

 difeafe remains uneftabhlhed. How much more concliifive 

 I 1 this refpect, the experiments would have been, had the 

 i loculation been praclifed on any other part but the penis. 

 If the matter of gonorrhoea be capable of communicating 

 th.' venereal difeafe, why does not the difcharge commonly 

 jiroduce chancres on the glands and prepuce, with which 

 parts it muft lie in contaft a very coufiderable time in every 

 rnfe i Why alfo does not the prcfencc of a chancre fro- 

 ci'jently caufe a gonorrhaa ? If the infedlion of gonorrhoea, 

 ;•. id the venereal difeafe, be really cf the fame identical 

 iiriture, certainly, it feems very extraordinary-, that the 

 f )rmer complaint fliould receive no benefit from mercury, 

 and the latter difeafe invariably require tiiis fpecidc re- 

 medy. 



^V'ith refpeft to the venereal difeafe and gonorrhoea having 

 rvifen in Europe and elfewhere at different periods, it has 

 ' -'en obferved by fuch writers, as incline to the belief in tlie 

 identity of the virus of the two afieclions, that every kind 

 of contagious difeafe appears with greater violence in iiew- 

 infefted countries, than in other fituatior.s where it has been 

 a confiderable time endeir.ial. In this manner, an endeavour, 

 which, ia our opinion, is quite unfuccefsful, is made to ex- 



plain the caufe why the gononhaa generally did not raakc 

 its appearance till a long while after the vencrt-al diic-afe iiad 

 lliewn itfclf in much worfe Ihapcs. The fame dafi of 

 reafoners alfo affert, that, notwitlillanding the diligent en- 

 quiries of many able men, there k ftill a degree of doubt 

 concern !ng the exact time when thcfe difeafcs originated, 

 and, of courfc, concerning the point, whether one of them 

 actually exiikd a long while before the oilier. As we fuaH 

 liivc occafion to treat of the origin of tlic venereal difeafe 

 hereafter (fee Lbiw ViiNf:KK.\), we (hall not enter into 

 this difquitition in the ]>refent article. W'q mav be per- 

 mitted, however, to exprefs our fufpicions, that difcharge* 

 from the urethra muil have been cccafi-mal difcafca from 

 time immemoriaL Whether there be a fpecies of gonorrh(r« 

 truly venereal, that is to fay, one whicij depends upon th.- 

 fame viriw, as fyphihs, there may for e-.er remain doubts; 

 but, that there are claps or difchargcs which arife from 

 no poifonous or infectious matter whalfoeicr, but altogether 

 from mere irritation in the urethra, as, in certain cafe^ c>t 

 ftriclurcs, is certain and uudilputed. Thefe gonorrh<ca.i 

 mufc have prevailed as long as that cr.ual lias been liable to 

 various kinds of irritation. 



One argument adduced againft tlic identity of the virus, 

 is derived from the ilrikmg dilTercnce ubfervable in the 

 progrefs and fpiiptoms of the two difeafes. \Vhen the 

 venerea! difeafe is negleftcd, it always groivs v^irfe and 

 worfe, and fooner cr later brings on the p.iticii* 's diifolutioD. 

 On the contrary, a gouorrhira tends to a natural cure, and, 

 though left to itfclf, commonly ends in a favourable wav. 



The ad\T)catts for the identity of the poifon, however, 

 contend, that, in order to account for thij lad faft (vliich 

 they Hate is not without exceptions), it is bv no n.e?xs 

 nece(I<iry to fuppofe a diSerent virus. The^- bring into 

 c infideration the circuniilancecf gonorrhara depending upon 

 an inflammation of ihe furface of the urethra, and not ulce- 

 ration ; and they m.aintain, that .the abforption of the 

 vjnereal poifon generally happens much more eafilv from 

 u'cerated furfaces, than from fuch as are (imply inflamed. 

 This mode of reafoiiing is brought forv.ard as explanatory 

 of tlie caufe why, in the majority of cr.fts, a gonorrhoea re- 

 mains entirely a local complaint, and admits of a fpontan.'ous 

 cure, while the vericreal difeafe is always prone to extend 

 itfclf, and fpread from one part of the body to another. 



An argument againlt the identity of the Wrus is alfo 

 f jundcd on the reflection, that the venereal difeafe is only 

 «{jable of communicating the venereal difeafe, and gonorr- 

 hxa of impai-ting gonorrhoea. The partizans of the doc- 

 trine which imputes this latter aflvction to the venereal 

 virus, acknowledge, that things do ufually correfpond with 

 tiie ftatcment jull now given ; but they aiTcrt that the 

 contrary cafe is alfo freqiicntly obferv'ed. They remark, 

 that we may calily convince ourfelves of this circumllance, 

 by a faiil which is well known to practitiontrs, namely, 

 tliat when persons, who Lave a gonorrl-.tca, are not prrti- 

 cularlv careful to keep the gians and prepuce clean, claji- 

 cres are very apt to lur.n upon tiiefe part.', and by o«:e fuch 

 fore the whole tyllem m;iy become iufefl.d. It h r.lio 

 aii'erted, that, iudcpeudcntly of the fonuationof any cii.^tcr-, 

 therc are cafes proving, tlikt the venereal d-f.-afe nay be the 

 confequeiice of a gvinorrha-a, and that ei.rv- liu-gcon cf es- 

 tenfive practice muli -r.ec'. \vith inllances <;F ihis kird. Ore 

 of the moll remark;.bie on record, is that related by Mr. 

 Hunter ; and it having been 8lr;-ady r.jticed by i:s is ibr 

 pivfont article, v.e iie.d noi dwell upon il agcia. 



With refpeft to chimcn-s arifiiig frv.m the ma'tcr »f 

 gonorrha-a being in contiiot with the glans and prpiice, 

 we Jo, undoulieiiiv, fee l>.>ih trfti zudiruccc who barr 



