/ 
394 THE COTTAGE 
Some eighteen centuries ago, Pliny wrote as his con- 
i viction that the remedies for our diseases should ho 
derived from the plants which are growing around us. 
This, says the Roman naturalist, is the origin of medi- 
j cine, and nature ordained that remedies should be 
prepared only from those things upon which we live, 
and which are common, easily found, and without 
price.* We confess ourselves to he disciples of Pliny. 
We plead guilty—if guilt he upon the opinion—to a 
conviction, that they are not mere meaningless words 
and acts when we are told that the Tree of Life was in 
the midst of the garden, and when Moses healed the 
waters of Mara by throwing into them the branch of a 
plant. In short, as we think that in ancient days they 
employed no other remedies than were derived from 
vegetables, and that “ halm in Gilead ” was the type of 
all pharmaceutical preparations, so we think now, that 
in Medical Botany we ought to seek chiefly for our 
remedies. 
No one is more conscious than wo are ourselves of 
the debt we owe to the alchemists. We readily acknow- 
i ledge that among their crucibles was the birth-place of 
chemistry; hut we regret, that in their search for the 
elixir of life they brought into repute mineral medicines 
so much to the* exclusion of those derivable from plants 
Within the present century we hoped that a contrary 
course had been permanently adopted ; and we rejoiced 
to read of every fresh addition to the vegetable portion 
of the Pharmacopoeia, from the day when Withering 
ventured to administer the Foxglove, down to that when 
Berra dared to give doses of the deadly Nightshade. 
We hoped, and still hope, that year after year fresh 
discoveries may be made in the same fair field ; and we 
would have our readers feel, as we feel, that this hope 
' has a cloud of evidence from the past to ifustain it. 
Debar the modern medical practitioner from the use 
I of Opium, Digitalis, Rhubarb, Ipecacuanha, Veratrine, 
j Elaterium, Hyoscyamus, Quinine, and a hundred others 
i we could name, and you deprive him of the chief of 
I his most active medicaments. Now, those are all of 
I 
j vegetable origin, and almost all the results of researches 
| within the last century. Is this a time, then, fitting for 
; relaxing in our efforts to promote such researches? Not 
a reader but will respond in the negative. Is it not 
rather a time to increase those efforts, and to incur 
! further expenses, and to strengthen present institutions 
intended for such researches? Not a reader but will 
i agree with us that it is. 
Feeling all this, we read, with no small astonishment 
and regret, that the Apothecaries’ Company have re- 
i solved to render their Chelsea Botanic Garden more 
j inefficient than it is even at present. Why is this ? 
Does the Company consider that it achieves too much 
good? Does it think that it already is too promotive 
of the pharmacy of England ? Does it labour under 
the impression that it too much excels foreign kindred 
institutions ? If such opiate delusions are in operation 
* It is a curious coincidence, that the prophet, when describing: Ids 
vision of the holy waters, relates that of the trees growing; by their side, 
that “the fruit thereof shall be for meat, and the leaf thereof for medi¬ 
cine.”— Ezek. xlvii. 12. 
GARDENER. August 25. 
at Apothecaries’ Hall, we advise them to arouse betimes 
to a sense of the truth that the opinion is fast gaining ! 
ground that the Company performs a too-inefficient part 
in the medical education of the present day. 
It may be true that the Chelsea Garden costs annually 
some hundreds of pounds. It may be that it eflects 
little good in comparison with the outlay; but these 
are not reasons for its abolition, or lor its depreciation. 
They are only reasons for a m<#e liberal outlay, and for 
better directed efforts. There can be no plea of a want j 
of funds, for, to name but one source of income which j 
might be more legitimately employed, why is not the 
profit derived from the sale of drugs at Apothecaries 
Hall devoted to the support of the Physic Garden, 
instead of being transferred, as it is, into the pockets of 
certain old medical practitioners, who ought to blush 
when they acknowledge the receipt of money so mis¬ 
appropriated ? 
Let it not be supposed that such an institution as a 
garden devoted to medical botany is useless; for, if 
this be abolished, whither can the medical student 
proceed to obtain an inspection of the plants useful in 
his profession? Indeed, so far are such gardens from 
being useless, if properly organised and liberally sus¬ 
tained, that not a medical school of eminence on the 
continent but has such a garden, to which its pupils are 
called upon to resort. 
We are quite aware that the Chelsea Garden is not 
to be abolished, and that, probably, for the best of 
reasons — the Company would forfeit all title to the 
property if they were to attempt such a perversion. 
The garden is not to be abolished, it is only to be 
curtailed and reduced in its efficiency in its green¬ 
house and hardy plants we know not how much; but 
we learn from its present able curator that “ The Apo¬ 
thecaries’ Society have authorised him to preserve a 
selection of the more important tropical medicinal 
plants.” A selection! — why not all?—why not an 
increase?—why not a greater outlay to establish a 
museum of medical plants and their products, a moie 
worthy library, and more efficient lectures ? 
We have said that the Company would forfeit the 
possession of the garden were they to attempt to pervert 
it from its legitimate purpose; and we so say, because, 
when Sir Hans Sloane conveyed the garden to the 
Company, he had the conveyance preambled and cove¬ 
nanted as follows:—“That to the end the said garden 
may, at all times hereafter, be continued as a Physic 
Garden, and for the better encouraging and enabling 
the said Society to support the charge thereof, for the 
manifestation of the power, wisdom, and glory of God 
in the works of the creation, and that their apprentices, 
and others, may better distinguish good and useful 
plants from those that bear resemblance to them, and 
yet arc hurtful, and other the like good purposes ; the 
said Sir Hans Sloane grants,” &c., to the Society the 
said garden, “ provided, that if these conditions be not 
fulfilled, or if the Society shall, at any time, convert the 
garden into habitations, or to any other uses, save such 
as are necessary for a Physic Garden, for the culture, 
