When cholera was approaching western Europe, Hahnemann was studying his "provings," to ascertain what substance resembled most nearly in its effects the symp toms of the disease. The medicine lie found to be camphor; and before he had ever seen a case of cholera, guided by the details given by practitioners, he announced in the year 1831: "Every one, the instant any of his friends is taken ill of cholera, must immediately give hint camphor." This bold prediction, that camphor was the antidote for the first stage of cholera, was soon tested in Hungary and Moravia, and camphor has since been accepted universally by homeopathists as the most efficient remedy against an invasion of cholera.
The reported success of the homeopathic treatment of cholera at Vienna had a powerful influence in directing public attention to the hospital where the new system was practiced. Physicians from all parts at Europe and from America went thither to watch the treatment, In a report published by Dr. Fleisehmann some years ago. it is stated that at that time he had treated 17,313 cases, chiefly of acute diseases. Among these were—of erysipelas, 514 cases, of which 510 recovered; of rheumatic fever, 1417, of which 1416 recovered; of intermittent fever, 1066, of which 1058 recovered: of inflam mation of time lungs, 1052, of which 1004 recovered.
From Germany as a center, where it is now extensively practiced and taught, homeopathy spread over Europe and America. In America there are upwards of 2,000 avowed practitioners of the system. In France, Italy, Spain, and other countries it has numerous adherents, many of whom occupy influential positions of trust and authority. It was introduced into England in the year 1827 by Dr. Quin, physician to the king of the Belgians; and there are now above 300 registered practitioners in Britain who have adopted it. In London there is a hospital capable of containing upwards of 100 patients, where lectures are occasionally delivered by appointed teachers.
The number of physicians who avowedly practice homeopathy lies not greatly increased of late; but its adherents claim that the actual practice of it has been greatly augmented. In proof of this they point to the more recent text-books in medicine, pub lished by the teachers of the dominant school; and to the recognition of the value of sihall doses of aconite in inflammatory fevers, arsenic in gastritis, ipecacuanha (in one drop doses) in vomiting, etc.
The objections entertained by physicians to the so-called "homeopathic" practice of medicine are based, not upon any unwillingness to employ medicines whose action resembles more or less the features of the disease for which they are prescribed, but solely on the impossibility, according to the common view, of adopting this as a specific rule of practice, and especially as an exclusive and all-embracing law of therapeutics.
The action of emetics in some kinds of indigestion:and of rhubarb in some kinds of diarrhea, are familiar examples in daily use, showing that ordinary practice is not regulated by any blind prejudice against what is called the homeopathic law of sigellift timilihus curantur; but in these cases the physician does not in the least commit him self either in favor of or against the law, but rather sets it aside as a mere metaphysical abstraction, having nothing to do with the real principle of the cure, which is to be found in common-sense and experience, applied to the facts of individual cases and groups of cases. The true physician is not a sectary; he disowns all artificial formulas of cure, exactly as he disowns homeopathy; and lie especially disowns the nickname of allopathist, invented for him by Hahnetnann. His belief in remedies is not founded on extreme generalizations, and he refuses to be limited in his practice by any other technical rules than those derived from a fair view of facts investigated on the ordinary principles of positive science. It is very certain that Hahnemann's alleged " have been rejected as in great part visionary by the great majority of those who have attempted to ascertain personally the effect of the same remedies; and it is equally cer tain that Hahnemann himself admits the general aggravation of diseases by homeopa ihie doses when administered in sensible quantities, and that the system of infinitesimal doses was with him simply a last refuge from the character of the results obtained under the earlier trials of remedies devised according to his assumed principle. The argument of physicians in general has been that the principle was false, and that the infinitesimal doses are its rolue.tio ad absurdum. They admit freely that homeopa thy has in some instances done good, by illustrating the spontaneous cure of disease. and correcting a blind faith in heroic remedies; but although individual converts of local credit have here and there been made, there is not the slightest appearance of a movement in the profession towards adopting homeopathy as a system, and its much-vaunted statistics are generally regarded as extremely fallacious.