On the fallacies of homœopathy and the imperfect statistical inquiries on which the results of that practice are estimated / by C.H.F. Routh.

  • Routh, C. H. F. (Charles Henry Felix), 1822-1909.
Date:
[1852?]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: On the fallacies of homœopathy and the imperfect statistical inquiries on which the results of that practice are estimated / by C.H.F. Routh. 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.

    6/92 (page 2)
    fellows: tlie individual members of society at large have no part in this condemnation, and, however they may look up with respect to the declaration of learned persons, as embodying opinions of some weight, in this inquiring age something more is needed than a mere declaration. On the other hand, the violent opposition of others to- Homoeopathy can do no good. Abuse, intolerance, cannot be accepted by the world as a fail- and philosophical inquiry. These can only call forth new defenders, and even those who perhaps may have hastily adopted its doctrines, and who, if logically and temperately admonished, might have been convinced of error, will not be compelled to recant. All doctrines are founded on truth, or what is sup- posed to be truth. The way to disprove a doctrine is, therefore, not by assailing it as ridiculous or absurd,—a conviction of error can only follow when the foundations upon which it is based are shown to be untenable. Examples of such unphilosophical demeanour in refusing fair inquiry, or prosecuting an ex parte investigation, are not wanting; and, from the time of Galileo down to the present day, are triumphantly appealed to by those who seek to subvert legitimate medicine. Thus the Homoeopath has reason on his side when he appeals to the history of the French Academy, as exemplifying intolerance and unfairness in inquiry. He tells us that in 1642 this Assembly declared that the blood did not circulate in the body; in 1672, that it was impossible.^ In 1774, after having opposed inoculation for fifty years, it admitted its advantages, the moment tlu-ee Princes of the Royal blood had been inoculated contrary to their permission. In 1609 it expelled one of its members for making use of, and curing his patients of ague by quinine. Even among ourselves, the great Harvey was persecuted for his discovery. The time was when the surgeon who had dared to bring together the edges of a cut surface to unite by the first intention, or who had ventured to dress wounds by water-dressings, in lieu of plugging by large pieces of lint and cerate, had met with the universal reprobation of the profession, and been accused of quackery. Even in later years, with what opprobrious names was the discovery of the great Jenner assailed 1 Nay, but very recently, with what violence was the introduction of the stethoscope opposed ! and in the present year how have not certain physician-operators