On the discovery of leucocythemia, (being a reply to a letter on that subject by Professor Kölliker, in the Monthly journal of medical science for October 1854) / by John Hughes Bennett, M.D.

  • Bennett, John Hughes, 1812-1875.
Date:
[1854]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: On the discovery of leucocythemia, (being a reply to a letter on that subject by Professor Kölliker, in the Monthly journal of medical science for October 1854) / by John Hughes Bennett, M.D. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Glasgow Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Glasgow Library.

    1/20
    ON THE DISCOYERY OF LEUCOCYTHEMIA, (beino a reply to a letter on that subject by pbofessor kolliker, in the montiilt .toulinal of medical science eoh october 1864.) By JOHN HUGHES BENNETT, M.D., F.E.S.E., PROFESSOR OF THE INSTITUTES OF MEDICINE AND OF CLINICAL MEDICINE IN THE UNlVEnSITV OF EDINBURGH, ETC. ETC. Professor Kolliker of Wurzburg having undertaken to lay before the English scientific medical world the history of tlie discovery of Leucocythemia as it is understood in Germany, I think it due to his scientific character and to the temperate tone of his communication, to correct the errors into which he has been led. In I'eply to his appeal to my sense of justice, I request from him a careful perusal of the following statement, in the confident belief that he will take some opportunity of informing such of his countrymen who may feel interested in the subject what are the real nature of my claims to the discovery in question. It is said by Professor Kolliker that the first observations on this subject occur in the year 1845, and take their origin from a case of disease by Dr Craigie, etc., etc. Now, the fact is, that Dr Craigie's case occurred in 1841 ; and it is admitted by Dr Craigie himself that it would not have been published even four years afterwards but for the occurrence of mine. He says, I kept it unpublished from the period at which it took place ; and it is published at this time, chiefly because of the occurrence of a case in many, if not in all, re- spects similar to another physician in the same hospital, led me to anticipate similar results, and went far to confirm my conclusions deduced from the first case.—Edinb. Med. and Surg. Journ., Vol. LXIV. p. 402. Professor Kolliker takes great pains to show that Dr Craigie and myself held the same opinions as to these cases, and that in mine, which followed his, no- thing further was elucidated. On the other hand, he says Professor Virchow was the first to point out that no signs of inflammation in the veins were any where discoverable, etc. Now, exactly the contrary of this is the fact. Dr Craigie put forth two possibilities as to the cause of the blood disorder. Isi. He says, It is barely possible that some inflammatory action had taken place in the tiibutary or constituent veins of the riiesenteric trunks ; and that the purulent m,atter and lymph thus formed had been conveyed into their inte- rior with the blood, and thence into the vena cava, heart, and vessels of the brain. 2d. He says, Another opinion occurred tome, however, as more pro- bable, and which vaiious circumstances in the case induced me to regard as the most correct. Considering that the spleen had been for some time, that is, for several weeks, in a state of chronic inflammation, and taking into account the large vessels with which this organ is connected to other organs, it appeared to me that this inflammatory process, which had been continuing so long witliout abating, subsiding, or being subdued, was at length beginning to give rise to tlie formation of lymph and pdrulent matter, and that tliesc substances, as they were formed, were immediately taken into the veins, and thus circulating with the blood, gave rise to the peculiar assemblage of symptoms which the patient presented during the few days preceding his death. (P. 409). From these extracts it must be clear that Dr Craigie considered the blood disease as second- ary, and dependent on the absorption of pus from an inflammatory lesion either m the mesenteric veins or spleen. The view taken up by myself was wholly different, viz., that the blood disease was primary, originating in that fluid itself, altogether independent of local in-