86 
PATHOLOGY. 
mucus from the anus,) which are difeafes of the former 
order, the connexion is entirely loft: nor will it, per¬ 
haps, meet with general approbation that thefe, together 
with Gonorrhoea (ufed in the vulgar fenfe of the term), 
Cyftirrhcea, and Phthifis, (hould be united with Coryza 
and Dyfentery, under one common genus, to which is 
given the name of Catarrhus. This, however, is a genus 
upon which Dr. Parr peculiarly prided himfelf, and upon 
which he unqueftionably bellowed very great pains. In 
like manner the order Eruptiones feems at firft to claim 
a near affinity with Phlegmasia ; and in the genus Ex¬ 
anthema it does fo fubftantially,-for here we can trace 
diftinCtly fomething of that febrile, or, to fpeak more cor¬ 
rectly, pyreCtic diathelis, which unites thefe two orders 
with the order Pyrexia. But in the mere cutaneous 
eruptions, here collected into one genus, named Efflo -. 
rf/ceniia, the line of union becomes fo fine and filmy as 
to be altogether invifible. Were we to purfue this prying 
indagation, we fliould foon arrive at breaks far wider and 
more obvious. It would perhaps be difficult to find four 
difeafes more difcrepant from each other than Dyfpepfia, 
Amentia, Amaurofis, and Agenefia. They feem to have 
no one common property with each other. Dr. Parr, 
however, has contrived to make them all fpecies of a 
fingle genus, to which he has given the name of Anepi- 
thi/mia, and which he has defined, “a diminution of power 
in the different functions a character fufficiently (weep¬ 
ing to cover at leaft half the difeafes that man inherits ; 
for excefs and diminution of power may eafily he made 
to embrace the whole; and are made to do fo under the 
Brunonian theory. Yet, notwithftanding this licentious 
generalization, and aim at a natural arrangement, the 
difeafes of the external fenfes, which feem to have a pretty 
clofe proximity with each other, are partly fcattered at 
conliderable diftances over the entire fyftem, and partly, 
as in the inftances of Caligo, Dyfopia, Paracufis, Anof- 
mia, Ageuftia, and Antefthefia, are in the unfortunate 
fituation of Dr. Cullen’s “ Catalogus morborum a nobis 
omifforum and, from forgetfulnefs orfome other caufe, 
have no place allotted them in any feCtion of the fyftem. 
There is, neverthelefs, much in Dr. Parr’s fyftem that 
is highly meritorious. The diftinCtions of the different 
divifions are fcientifically laid down ; and, except that 
the genera are occafioually too extenfive, accurately 
maintained. Dr. Parr gives the following fhort explana¬ 
tion of his own fyftem : “ In this arrangement there is 
a concealed methodus, which, as it is notan objeCt of 
importance, we need not explain farther than by adding, 
that feverilh complaints, increafed and diminillied eva¬ 
cuations—increafed, diminifhed, and irregular, nervous 
excitement—difeafed fluids, appearing either in increafed 
or diminifhed bulk—the difplacements and folutions of 
continuity—follow in order.” 
Dr. Young's “ Introduction to Medical Literature, in¬ 
cluding a Syftem of Practical Nofology,” though limited 
to a fingle oCtavo, ranges through an entire courfe of 
medical education, anatomical, pathological, therapeuti¬ 
cal, and chemical, as well as nofological; whilft in the 
laft department it is drawn up with a fomewhat different 
view, and is more ftriCtly limited to the pale of the me¬ 
dical profeifion. The arrangement of Dr. Young, while 
effentially diftinCt from that of Dr. Good, will be found 
perhaps to make the neareft approach to it of any that 
lias hitherto appeared. In wanting the divifion of orders 
to two of its clafles, it is fcientifically defective ; but its 
fyftemntic boundaries are as clearly feen, and as precifely 
maintained, as thofe of Dr. Parr. Yet its chief merit, 
perhaps, confifts in offering to the ftudenta mafterly gui¬ 
dance, through the whole of his profefiional tuition, to 
the heft authorities and fources of information ; in this 
refpeCt anfweringthe purpofe of Plouquet’s feven quarto 
volumes, with a great faving of expenfe, a prodigious 
laving of time, and by a far nearer and pleafanter path¬ 
way. 
A glance has already been given atafevv limited nofo¬ 
logical arrangements, by writers who have confined their 
attention to a fingle family or group of difeafes, detached 
for this purpofe from the reft; and to this defcription of 
works Dr. Good has applied the name of monograms. To 
the names of Selle, Pinel, and Crichton, it is neceffary to 
add, under this view of the fubjeCt, thofe of Plenck, 
Willan, Bateman, Abernethy, and Granville. 
Dr. Plenck, of Baden, is the author of two diftinCt 
treatifes of this kind; the one a methodical arrangement 
of the “ Difeafes of the Eyes and the other of “ Cuta¬ 
neous Difeafes.” In the former he follows the order of 
anatomy in the diftribution of his primary divifions, be¬ 
ginning with the eye-brows, and defcending from with¬ 
out inwards till he clofes with the retina. In the latter, 
which confifts of clafles, genera, and fpecies, without the 
interpofition of orders, he employs a loofer line of fuccef- 
fion; though the general idea feems to be that of advanc¬ 
ing from the (lighter to the more prominent elevations of 
the (kin, commencing with Macula, and proceeding to 
Excrescentia ; the remaining clafles confiding of Cu¬ 
taneous Ulcers, Wounds and Insects, Diseases of 
the Nails and of the Hair. He is a more induftrious 
than difcriminative writer, as the reader will perhaps 
readily concede, when informed that he has arranged, 
defined, and followed, through their progrefs and mode 
of treatment, a hundred and nineteen genera, comprifing 
very nearly fix hundred fpecies, or diftinCt difeafes of the 
eyes, the genus amaurofis alone extending to twenty 
fpecies; and one hundred and fifteen genera, including 
nearly fix hundred fpecies, or diftinCt difeafes of the 
(kin. 
Yet compreffion, and a more fcientific arrangement, 
would make either of Dr. Plenck’s attempts a valuable 
work ; and Dr. Willan has the merit of having performed 
this friendly office to the latter of the two, in his book 
on “ Cutaneous Difeafes;” and at the fame time of hav¬ 
ing added fo much valuable matter of his own, as to 
entitle it to the claim of being ftriCtly an original per¬ 
formance. The diftinftive characters of papula, puftule, 
veficle, bleb (bulla), fcale, and cruft, are well given and 
maintained by the former; but the latter has exprefled 
them more neatly, and has added many diftinCtions which 
the former does not afford ; whilft he has drawn his 
literary and practical hiftory, and treatment of the dif¬ 
eafes difcuffed, from very different fources ; and, as far 
as might be, from his own perfonal obfervations. That 
Dr. Willan did not live to finiffi this valuable work muft 
be regretted by every one who has the welfare of medi¬ 
cine at heart; but the able and judicious manner in which 
it has been brought to a clofe by Dr. Bateman has ferved 
in no fmall degree to abate the general difappointment. 
Had Dr. Willan lived to complete the direCt objeCt of his 
purfuit, and then extended his views to the whole circle 
of difeafes, he muft have greatly modified his firft and 
more reftriited fyftem before he could have incorporated 
it in the larger plan. As it is, indeed, it (lands in need 
of no fmall degree of modification to clothe it with all the 
perfeftion it deferves; for feveral of his orders would 
make better generaalmoft all his genera are decided 
fpecies, while his fpecies are feldom more than varieties, 
and are in many cafes fo denominated by himfelf. In this 
refpeCt he might have taken a good leffon from Dr. Young, 
Dr. Parr, or Dr. Macbride; as he might alfo from the 
two former in giving the eflential character of each dif- 
eafe antecedently to the admirable defcription with which 
it is followed up. 
The name of Mr. Abernethy is here mentioned in refe¬ 
rence to his methodical “ Claflification of Tumours.” 
This claflification is ltriCtly fymptomatic, the characters 
being derived, as they ought ever to be, as much as poffi- 
ble, from fenfible phenomena. 
The laft monogram we have to notice is a “ Claflification 
of the Difeafes of Children,” by Dr. Granville, principal 
phyfician to the Royal Infirmary for Sick Children ; and 
detailed by him in the London Medical Journal for De- 
3 cember 
