HUNTERIAN ORATION. 
151 
remedies directed chemically to the multiplied chemical changes 
known to be in progress. The orator proceeded to combat some 
of the absurd theories of the present day, observing that the tend¬ 
ency of modern philosophy was to attempt too much to explain 
many of the phenomena of life upon some simple physical prin¬ 
ciples. Some of the admirers of Hunter, by unduly elevating the 
vital property so dwelt upon by him, have led others to turn away 
from the study of his writings; but it should be remembered that 
Hunter had to combat the extreme views of the physiologists of 
his day, and the examination of his whole writings would shew 
that he kept that part of his doctrine in due subordination to the 
rest. Mr. Hunter’s theory of the blood had been doubted, yet the 
deductions of modern science w'ere daily bringing out the solidity 
and justice of his views into fuller and brighter relief Mr. Hun¬ 
ter, indeed, was a man, the originality and fertility of whose 
views entitled him to say— 
“ Libera per vacuum posui vestigia princeps : 
Non aliena meo pressi pede.” 
It was, however, encouraging to observe, that modern physiologists 
and pathologists were not disposed to look to any single cause for 
the condition of so complicated a substance as the human body ; 
that they do not wish nor attempt to explain every thing upon 
mere chemical, mechanical, or any other single theory : they know 
that all these forces might be concerned in one affection ; and 
that, though advancing science had discovered much, there yet 
remained much in the human frame, which regulated that body, 
to which they could only apply the term “ vital affinity,” or “ vital 
action and which took place in that part of the system where 
the solids and fluids were most intimately mixed, and were con¬ 
tinually changing places. What numerous discoveries must 
necessarily, therefore, yet await them ! If their present knowledge 
of these things was so limited, how little could they expect to 
understand of the morbid states ! Mr. Hunter, speaking of the 
“ vital action of the fluids,” was a pathologist far before his age : 
he believed that the fluids were as capable of disease as were the 
solids. It was a curious study to trace his great doctrine, at one 
time exalted most extravagantly, then sinking into disbelief, and 
then again brought forward with all the force of enthusiasm ; satis¬ 
factorily proved in many points, but in danger, perhaps, like 
many others in modern physiology, of being carried to a greater 
extent than Hunter contemplated, or than facts would justify. 
Certainly, the marvellous discoveries during the last quarter of a 
century might excuse some degree of over-confidence in human 
opinions, and some hasty speculations. Those who were inclined 
to the indiscriminate adoption of every theory, and found an un¬ 
known and foreign name more potent than a well-established 
