THE COMPOSITION OF CHLOltODYNE. 
707 
trouble to refer to the words, he will read that I regretted that so few had re¬ 
sponded to my “ invitation and this invitation was not, as he says a little 
further on, “to indulge in speculations on the composition of chlorodyne,” but 
“ to bring forward their experiences of one kind or another.” 
2nd. He next objects that I have drawn my inferences from a solitary case. 
But my sharp-sighted critic is too hasty in fancying that he has caught me 
napping. If he himself had been a little more attentive, he would, in the first 
place, have noticed that I put forward my case only as a “ leading,' 1 ' 1 i. e. as a 
typical or illustrative case; and, secondly, he would not have overlooked the 
last paragraph but one in my first paper, viz., “ And a long course of observa¬ 
tion has furnished me with numerous corroborative proofs,” etc. Surely he will 
concede to me the same benefit, resulting from opportunities of “ becoming 
acquainted with the nature of this compound,” which, in his second paragraph, 
he claims for himself. 
3rd. ‘ Another Provincial ’ objects to the fairness and validity of my case, 
that “ when a patient has taken chlorodyne for three years and three months,” 
etc. But the patient only took chlorodyne in his sense (“ chlorodyne ver”) for 
three months, at the expiration of which time it was succeeded by a prepara¬ 
tion which certainly did not contain belladonna. To this extent, therefore, his 
requirement that a solution of morphia should be substituted after a few weeks’ 
trial of the original chlorodyne, in order to give the inference drawn greater 
weight, was virtually fulfilled, especially as this substituted chlorodyne con¬ 
tained no active ingredient, except hydrocyanic acid, beyond the solution of 
chloroform and morphia. And when, at the end of three years, this acid was 
withdrawn, the patient continued to experience, not only the same amount of 
benefit from the plain morphia, but also precisely the same kind of benefit as 
before. 
4. My provincial brother has a rather one-sided notion of administering jus¬ 
tice. When I advance and support views which I have long entertained, he 
“ thinks it clearly apparent that I have framed a theory , and am anxious to 
make everything square with it.” But when speaking of views which he has 
long entertained, he styles them “ the opinion I have long entertained.” Now, 
surely what is sauce for one ‘Provincial’ should at least be seasoning for 
‘ Another.’ 
5th. Speaking of my second paper, he states that I rest my proof that chlo¬ 
rodyne is only a disguised solution of morphia entirely on the case related in 
the September number (and on Mr. Smith’s analysis). I am afraid that this is 
only another proof of my critic’s carelessness, for that case is never once referred 
to in the paper in question. 
6th. The next instance to which I have to advert, though I do not impute it 
as intentional, yet has all the effect of a direct misrepresentation, or, rather, of 
three misrepresentations rolled into one. ‘Another Provincial’ says, “The 
only . . . proof that chlorodyne does not owe any of its efficacy to belladonna 
is the negative evidence of Mr. E. Smith’s analysis, which ‘ A Provincial ’ ad¬ 
mits may not be absolutely conclusive.” In this sentence the word “ which ” 
refers to the phrase “negative evidence” (viz. the fact that no atropia was de¬ 
tected). But my critic applies it to the phrase “Mr. E. Smith’s analysis,” and 
goes on to say, “ After this admission it is surprising to find, a few lines fur¬ 
ther on, ‘ this was the one and the obvious thing wanting to settle the contro¬ 
versy ” and he proceeds to ask, “ How so, if it is not conclusive?” Now, 
the ‘this’ which I said was “the one and the obvious thing wanting,” etc., 
was the analysis undertaken hy Mr. E. Smith; while the ‘it’ which I said 
might not be absolutely conclusive was the negative evidence. By this adroit 
shuffling of his pronouns, my reviewer would fain make me appear to contradict 
myself. But why does he add that, “ in opposition to me, he thinks the most 
