PATHOLOG Y. 
rience in particular difeafes; and, when theory has been 
promulgated, it has generally had its foundation in new 
difcoveries in phyfiology. Hence too it is no longer pof- 
fible to enlift ourfelves under the banners of any one 
pathologift, and, by quietly affuming the infallibility of 
his doftrines, fave the trouble of thinking for ourfelves. 
It mull not therefore be fuppofed, that, becaufe this 
aera may not tranfmit to pofterity the name of an author 
whofe works might contain all that we know on medical 
fubjefts, we have done lefs for the fcience we profefs 
than our continental neighbours. True it is, that the 
fpeculations ofBroulfais and Tommafini have fomething 
better to recommend them than the fyftems of Cullen, 
Brown, or Darwin; yet ftill many imperfeftions exift 
in them, imperfeftions necelfarily connefted with the 
unfinilhed Hate of the ground-work on which pathology 
is built. Neverthelefs, in real improvement, the firft 
twenty years of this, the 19th, century, affords the moll: 
delightful profpeft. The errors of Brown, here firft 
promulgated, were here firft refuted. Currie introduced 
the judicious ufe of cold bathing in the molt numerous 
and formidable complaints to which human nature is 
liable, viz. fevers. Abernethy and Hamilton have Ihown 
the efficacy of purgatives in molt difeafes, and the inno¬ 
cence of their properly-regulated exhibition in all. The 
bold and decided treatment praclifed by Jackfon, as 
well as his found theoretical views, deferve the higheft 
encomium; and we have to regret that the peculiar 
ftyle and expreflion of that author has fo long oppofed 
the general reception of opinions which are equally con- 
fonant with reafon and the long experience of thirty 
years. To Armftrong, Clutterbuck, and a hoft of others, 
the infertion of whofe names would tend to render our 
hiftory a mere catalogue, we owe the prefervation of 
many of our fellow-creatures. Nor have our inveftiga- 
tions on thefe topics been confined to our own ifiand. 
The accounts we receive from our Indian poffeftions ferve 
to inftruft us in the treatment of acute difeafes, by 
ftiowing them in the intenfe marked forms which they 
exhibit in tropical climates. 
Phyfiology likewife has been by no means neglefted in 
this age. That fcience, which no longer can be called 
uncertain, has received auxiliaries from the improve¬ 
ments daily occurring in the collateral branches of 
knowledge. Its more general principles have been illus¬ 
trated by difcufiions which the fpeculative notions of 
Hunter and Abernethy on the one hand, and Lawrence 
and the French phyfiologifts on the other, have given 
rife to. The motive powers of the vafcular fyftem have 
been illuftrated by Parry, Carfon, Bell, Philips, and 
Brodie. To the two laft of whom we are moreover in¬ 
debted for fome ufeful information concerning the phe¬ 
nomena of fecretion and the dependence of that funftion 
on nervous influence. The contradictory opinions, how¬ 
ever, which we meet with on thefe fubjefts, compel us 
to acknowledge that this fcience bears little proportion 
in its advancement to that of the practice of medicine. 
In the early part of the prefent year, Mr. James, a 
furgeon of Exeter, publilhed “ Obfervations on fome 
of the General Principles, and on the Treatment, of the 
different fpecies of Inflammation.” This work is an am¬ 
plification of the Differtation which gained the Jackfon- 
ian prize on Inflammation, when the illuftration of this 
fubjeft was recently propofed by the Court of Afiiftants 
of the Royal College of Surgeons. This production 
comprifes many interefting obfervations; but the author 
is too much the difciple of John Hunter, and he exhi¬ 
bits more of the manner of reafoning of that phyfiologift, 
than aclofe inveftigation into the mode of production of 
the phenomena he defcribes; like him, he refts con¬ 
tented with a fubftitution of terms, inftead of endeavour¬ 
ing to explain the operations of which they are only the 
expreflion : in a word, his ideas want precifion, and his 
pathology depth. Mr. James adduces a new claffifica- 
Vol. XIX, No. 1286. 
45 
tion of inflammation. His arrangement, is founded on 
the difpofition which inflammatory aCtion affumes to 
fpread ordiffufe itfelf, or to be limited by the adhefive 
procefs or other means. In this point, too, we recognize 
John Hunter. As, however, this fortuitous quality of 
inflammation but feldom conllitutes a generic difference 
in the form which the difeafe affumes, but depends on 
feveral varying conditions of temperament and other 
things in the patient, and on accidental conditions of 
the atmofphere, and other external circumftances, it ap¬ 
pears to be objectionable, and not likely to be adopted 
by the generality of pathologifts. The .author’s conli- 
derations in other refpefts, efpecially thofe relating to fe- 
miology and therapeutics, are judicious, and developed 
with l'uflicient order and perfpicuity. 
In anatomy, as far as the relative fituation of parts is 
concerned, our diligent anceftors have left us little to do. 
So that, if we except a few difcoveries concerning the 
more minute ftrufture of membranes, the mufcularity 
of veffels, &c. we have nothing new to tranfmit to our 
fucceffors on this fubjeft. Far different is the refult of 
our refearches on morbid anatomy. The labours of Dr. 
Baillie, accompanied with defcriptions and plates of 
great accuracy, are too well known to require our com¬ 
ment ; as likewife the excellent works of Farre, Bell, 
Sec. in the fame department. And thefe examples have 
been followed very generally by our moll eminent prac¬ 
tical phyficians. 
Of courfe this brief (ketch cannot be fuppofed to em¬ 
brace all the names or difcoveries which dignify our 
country in this enlightened sera. We lhall have occa- 
lion to fpeak largely of them in the body of this article, 
when we come to notice particularly the treatment of 
each difeafe; and therefore may be excufed entering in 
the detail of them here. In the mean time, it may not 
prove uninterefting to trace a faint outline of the labours 
of our foreign brethren at this moment. By fo doing, 
we enlarge the fund of our experience, and thus correct 
the error into which more limited obfervation might be¬ 
tray us. 
France. —If reiterated experiment and unceafing ob¬ 
fervation be the means which molt forward medical fci¬ 
ence, the French nation have claim to high honour. 
In no other country is the fcience of life illuftrated by 
fo many experiments, elucidated by the application of fo 
many different fciences, or examined fo ciofely in all its 
varied and extenfive phenomena: yet weobferve theories 
continually arifing, opinions afferted one day to be re¬ 
futed the next. But fome recent labours of the French 
phyfiologifts, have eftablilhed fafts which ftand on the 
firmed: bafis: fuch are many of the doctrines of Bichat, 
of Majendie, and of Brouffais. 
Of Bichat enough has been faid, in every country 
where his works have been read, to ftamp him as a phi- 
lofopher of the greateft merit; and all who are interefted 
in the improvement of fcience, muft deeply regret the 
lofs of one whofe comprehenlive and enlarged mind, 
whofe minute anatomical ftudies, and whofe brilliant pa¬ 
thological difcoveries, alike fitted him for re-forming and 
re-cafting the fabric of medical fcience. This vail de- 
fign had been formed by Bichat; and, when a few lec¬ 
tures had developed his opinions, he was fuddenly car¬ 
ried off. In teaching mankind to ftudy the minute 
ftrufture and fabric of the body, rather than to be perpe¬ 
tually occupied with the defeription of its relative fitna- 
tions and parts, he feems, like our countryman, John 
Hunter, to have followed that courfe which Lord Bacon 
had fo clearly pointed out to anatomifts, and in which 
much ftill remains to be done: he lays, that “ they (anato- 
mifts) inquire of the parts and their fubftances, figure, 
and collocations; but they inquire not of the diverfity 
of the parts, thefecrefies of the paffages, and the feats or 
neftlings of the humours, nor much of the footfteps or 
impreflions of difeafes; the reafon of which omiffion I 
N fuppofe 
