From a variety of circumstances, the system of hydropathic medicine has been greatly misunderstood and misjudged by the general public. For one thing, the name of "water cure," or "hydropathy," adopted by Priessnitz, has been very prejudicial, as leading to the false inference that the one element of water alone constitutes the bone and marrow of the system, playing the part of a panacea for every form of human ail ment. Such a notion has never been maintained by the practitioners of scientific hydropathy, and it is matter of regret that some more comprehensive and catholic title. as that of " hygienic medicine," has not long since been adopted. As it is, the prej udice against the system is gradually giving way; it is no longer treated as heresy by the orthodox profession; and many enlightened practitioners are in the habit of sending certain classes of their patients to hydropathic establishments, and even subject them selves to the treatment. In fact, the tendency of ordinary medical practice has of late years been ,towards the principles on which hydropathy is based. A manifest disposi tion exists on the part of the more enlightened members of the profession to rely much less on art and much more on nature in the treatment of diseases of every type, but especially those of a chronic character, than was formerly the case; and as the prac titioners of scientific hydropathy by no means exclude the use of drugs, when they appear to be necessary, it would seem that a convergence of opinion is really coming about.
Hydropathy, hitherto, has been almost exclusively practiced in large establishments, presided over by competent medical men, and dedicated to a thorough and systematic carrying out of the principles on which the system of cure is founded. There can be
no question that this is by far the most complete and satisfactory arrangement when it can be accomplished. But the power of leaving their daily work for the purpose of seeking health, is what falls to the lot of very few; and if the hydropathic treatment were to be absolutely,limited to its chosen retreats in the country, and incompatible with the business and work of town-life, it would be shorn of half its utility as a remedy, and be a luxury to which only the rich and disengaged could aspire. But exercise, morning and evening, can usually7be had by most persons. The same applies to the systematic and persistent use of the bath, to the regulation of diet, and the observance of early hours. By these means, even without country air and other hygienic adjuncts, no doubt a vast deal might be done both for the cure of disease and the preservation of health. Towards effecting the latter object, at least, no one will deny the immense value of hydropathy. No one, having any practical acquaintance with it, can doubt its influence in the promotion of those habits of temperance, clean liness, self-denial, and general obedience to the laws of health, which, while they tend so much to the happiness of the individual, go no less to secure the strength and pros perity of nations. To those who would inquire further into the subject, we may recommend the work of Dr. Gully, entitled The Water-cure in Chronic Disease; that of Dr. James Wilson, called Principles and Practice of the Water-cure; the several works of Dr. Edward Johnson; and Dr. Lane's treatise, Hydropathy, or Hygienic Medicine.