may only lie dormant until other repetitions shall cause them to spring forth into living activity. (Exp. Res., p. 7.) Our argument, then, is that it is impossible in the present state of our knowledge to declare that even moderate quantities of certain substances, usually admitted as wholesome articles of diet, do not tend to impair the integrity of the human organism. We have seen, in reference to cattle, that a fluid considered healthy for the system of man, is unequivocally pronounced to shorten their earthly span. Is it probable then, we should ask, that to man the same diet should be innoxious, and that no elements of future mischief have been thereby constituted. At present we are unacquainted with the secondary results of the application of fermented fluids to the interior of the system. We know that it stimulates the nervous system, and that its influence decays with tolerable rapidity; but with what chemical decompositions this subsidence is accompanied, has not yet been ascertained; and hence we are not in a condition to predicate whether the products of the secondary changes in alcohol may not be calculated to produce even a worse influence on the system than that which is effected on the nervous system by the primary stimulating and the resulting depressive action of this powerful agent.

There is a speculation with regard to the possible formation of alcohol from the sugar of the food in the vascular system, the investigation of which would lead to much important exposition of fact. Mitscherlich has given it as his opinion, that the sugar swallowed by animals may be converted into alcohol in the intestines or vessels into which the absorbed food passes. The possibility of this change, it is true, cannot be denied, but there is one objection to the probability of the alcohol remaining for any length of period in this form in the body, that the temperature of an animal would immediately tend to convert it into acetic acid. There is, however, a curious fact which we have met with, and which would appear to corroborate the suspicion of Mitscherlich; it is a circumstance related in a note by the late Dr. Oudney, in his African travels: "Several of our camels are drunk to-day; their eyes are heavy and want animation, gait staggering, and every now and then falling as a man in a state of intoxication. It arose from eating dates after drinking water; these probably pass into the spirituous fermentation in the stomach."

Mere experience, in the ordinary sense of the expression, is not calculated any more than in the case which we have previously cited to inform us as to the wholesomeness or noxiousness of the practice of consuming food in a state of partial decomposition. On the contrary, if we can judge by the extent to which the use of decayed cheese and putrid game is employed, we should be inclined to infer that experience is decidedly in favour of their consumption. It is necessary before we can pass a faithful judgment upon a question so deeply based as this, to take an extensive view of the constitution, of the animal system, and of the mode in which it is preserved in all its integrity from waste and decay. One of the strongest proofs of the inability of common experience to give a valuable opinion upon such a point as this, is the remarkable fact that we do not remember to have seen in any work of original merit upon dietetics the question discussed as to the propriety of permitting or withholding from human beings food, such as we have described to be in a rapid state of decomposi

tion. Yet it is well known that cases of death have frequently occurred from the use of decayed cheese. The deteriorating action in these cases was produced by the influence of a poison, which communicated its baneful state of decomposition to the human system. The body becomes dry and emaciated, and death closes the scene, leaving a mummy-like wreck behind. In such an example, decaying cheese is discovered to be unwholesome, because its action has been allowed to proceed to excess; in short, because a telling experiment, to use a familiar phrase, has been performed. But to argue that it is only when such striking impressions are made upon the senses that we are to suspect disease, would be as fallacious as the conduct of the philosopher who should insist that such phenomena as the showy combustion of gases exhibited on the lecturetable, or in the laboratory of the chemist, exercised a more important influence in the domain of science than the long-continued, secret, and almost insensible actions of a weak battery, which are known to be analogous to the most important electrical operations of nature; far more important indeed, and much more extensive in their consequences, than the most awe-striking lightning or the most powerful reverberations of a thunderstorm. It is, therefore, we conclude with some show of reason, that the man of science advises the physician to direct his attention to principles, as well as to ocular demonstration, guided by mere common sense. It becomes the duty of the practitioner to inquire into the changes which the curd of cheese undergoes in such instances, and to institute a comparison between its condition when altered by an excess of decomposing action and the more limited change in its particles. When affected by common decay, the researches of chemistry show us that in the decay of cheese certain volatile products arise from the comparatively fixed curd, and new bodies are formed and introduced into the system of whose mode of action we are supremely ignorant, unless when an overdose should happen to be followed by a fatal termination. Anatomy would lead us to infer that it is in some alteration in the natural constitution of the albuminous element of the food and blood, giving rise to an organic volatile produce, that we may probably look for the cause of those diseases which are characterized by a regular type, and constitute at present the opprobrium medicorum. It is not at all likely that what we term malaria-an expression analogous to instinct in relation to the actions of animals-is in its nature allied to mere gases, since the results which we can trace as produced by the action of such elastic fluids upon the animal system are irregular and reconcilable in general with simpler chemical action on the tissues or great systems of the organisms, and quite distinct from the regular phases of disease, as typified by such complaints as smallpox and measles. The circumstance that we have gained little or no ground for centuries in the investigation of the causes and consequent treatment of diseases which are distinguished by peculiar types, is a sufficient argument for reforming our methods of research, and for concluding that our scanty knowledge on such subjects may possibly have remained stationary in consequence of our having substituted in not a few instances words for ideas. În reference to the noxious influence of putrid game, and other decomposing forms of animal food, although little attention has been hitherto bestowed upon tracing evil consequences to such a source, it is scarcely necessary to say, that all will agree in the probable bad effects

XLV.-XXIII.

11

of such diet. The facts that over-salted food exclusively employed, is apt to induce scurvy, a state of the system in which the blood and tissues are imperfectly formed-that bacon in particular stages of decomposition and sausages have been known to produce death-that fresh dead bodies when excised communicate by inoculation dangerous. disease to the human system-supply us with examples of injury, induced by an over-dose of noxious matter, and would lead us to the suspicion from analogy that a smaller dose cannot fail also to occasion a deteriorating action upon the organism, which is not the less influential because it is slow and silent in its operation. One of the great obstacles in the way of improvement in the medical profession, and particularly in the investigation of such diseases as we have just noticed, is the unfortunate love of argumentation instead of research which long ago crept in, and still adheres to the members of our noble science. We are quite willing to admit that the practice of meeting and discussing medical questions, is calculated to confer benefit on those engaged in it; but the propriety of that discussion being confined in general to raw and comparatively unlearned heads, and, above all, the wisdom of publishing such immature opinions, may safely be pronounced as highly questionable, irrespective of the injury inflicted on the youthful debaters. It has been well said that

it is a very bad and dangerous habit to permit one's self to express an opinion regarding subjects which one has not considered. In this way, leanings are often contracted which continue through life, for nothing is more easy to acquire, or more difficult to cast off, than a mental bias. Many persons also can hardly engage in an argument without persuading themselves at least that that side is the better one which they defend. It is related that Pope Sextus V was impracticable to all but the Venetian ambassador. Those who investigated the art of the courteous politician discovered that when he wished to gain any point with the sovereign pontiff he began by proposing the opposite measure to that which he desired. This is too frequently the condition of our younger members, and having placed themselves in a false position, they often continue to occupy it through life.

It is too often the description of practitioners who oppose the results of what they denominate their experience to the efforts of exact science, to generalize or connect the isolated experiments or facts of the observer of disease. This conduct is very much on a parallel with that of the maker of any minute portion of the mechanism of a watch, who should refuse to allow it to enter as an element into the composition of the entire machine, by adducing trivial objections instead of giving his willing assistance to enable the work of his hands to occupy suitably the original position for which it was designed. It is a very common occurrence to find well and long-considered experiments objected to by crude and superficial arguments, which must have occurred also to the experimenter on his first survey of the subject, but which have long previously been overcome in his own mind. Often, too, they are assailed by those who are incapacitated from want of previous knowledge to give a correct judgment on the subject. We lately met with such an example in physical science, in the diseased leaven disseminated by a cheap press. The object of the writer, a Manchester Chartist, was to refute the first chapter of Genesis, for what purpose it is difficult to conceive, and the peculiar weak point for assault he

considered to be the passages in which it is stated that light was created before the sun, just as if, added our wiseacre, "any one were ignorant that the sun is the source of light,"-thus exhibiting his want of acquaintance with the present theory of optical science, that the sun is not the source, but merely one cause of the development of the phenomena of light. It is this description of reasoners, who would have us to reject every good or sound idea, merely because it had been contaminated by a polluted source, as if gold were not all the purer from its oft-repeated subjection to the fiery ordeal.

It is in a conciliatory spirit, therefore, that we should address ourselves to such researches as have for their object the investigation of the very elements of our physiological knowledge. Such works as those we have cited at the commencement of this article are of this description. It may be that the conclusions contained in them are not always perfectly demonstrated; but if it be conceded that the authors have been labouring in the right direction, it cannot fail but that new light must be thrown on the subject of their investigations, by the number of facts which they have adduced and carefully scrutinised. It remains for the physiologist to exercise a critical eye upon such labours, not with a quibbling disposition, but with the judgment of one possessed of the spirit of generalization.

ART. XII.

The Military Miscellany; comprehending a History of the Recruiting of the Army, Military Punishments, &c. &c. By HENRY MARSHALL, F.R.S.E., Deputy Inspector - General of Army Hospitals, &c. &c. London, 1846. 8vo, pp. 375.

ALTHOUGH the volume before us is not, strictly speaking, a professional work, it has many claims to our notice as medical reviewers. While the object of the author is stated to be "to supply the reader with some information respecting the constitution, laws, and usages of the army, and to excite attention to the means which may meliorate the condition of soldiers, and exalt their moral and intellectual character," he has entered at some length into questions of great importance to the army surgeon, and particularly as relates to his duty with reference to military punishments, and to the effects of these on the health of the soldier. Mr. Marshall is already favorably known to the profession by his 'Notes on the Medical Topography of Ceylon,' and his valuable work 'On the Enlisting, Discharging, and Pensioning of Soldiers,' which is still the best in our language on feigned diseases. To him also we owe, in a great measure, the valuable Military Statistical Reports, as he drew up the plan on which they were framed, and for some time superintended the preparation of them. It is not very creditable to the authorities that they permitted the officer who was intrusted with, and satisfactorily performed, this laborious and responsible task to remain upon half-pay without the slightest acknowledgment of his valuable services.

In a motto prefixed to the Miscellany, our author, in the quaint words of Sir James Turner, assigns a reason for having compiled this work: "You ask me, what moved me to write these discourses? If I were put to the rack till I gave you my reason, I could give you no other than this,

that being out of employment and not accustomed to an idle life, I knew not how to pass away my solitary and retired hours with a more harmless divertisement." We would be well pleased to see many more members of the profession spend their leisure hours in so praiseworthy a

manner.

Our author gives an interesting historical account of the various modes of recruiting the army, from the days when the justices were required “to raise as many men by impress, for soldiers, gunners, and chirurgeons, as might be appointed by His Majesty and both Houses of Parliament," till the present time, when an error in the mode of attesting a recruit has been deemed a sufficient reason to grant him his discharge. But we must pass over these details, interesting and amusing as they are, and turn to that section of the work which more immediately treats of the duty of the medical officer, viz. that on punishments in the army. These may be considered in two points of view: 1st, as regards the duty and responsibility of the military surgeon; and, 2dly, with reference to their effects upon the health and efficiency of the soldier.

I. The duty and responsibility of the surgeon in cases of corporal punishment in the army. It is a remarkable fact, that no instructions nor code of regulations of any kind have ever been promulgated by the military authorities for the guidance of the surgeon when called upon in the course of his duty to superintend a punishment. When a soldier is tried by a court-martial, the following certificate is laid before the court: "I certify that No. —, Private

of the regiment, is in a good state of health, and fit to undergo corporal punishment or imprisonment, solitary or otherwise, and with or without hard labour."

(Signature of the Surgeon or Assistant-Surgeon.)

If he is sentenced to receive corporal punishment, it is necessary, according to the regulations for the army, that a medical officer should be present when it is inflicted. This rule appears to have been framed for a twofold purpose: 1st, to prevent the prisoner escaping any portion of the punishment if able to bear it; and, 2d, to prevent the infliction being carried to such an extent as to endanger life. This has been very clearly stated by Lord Chief Baron Macdonald, on the trial of Colonel Wall, in 1802:

"It is usual," said his lordship, "even in the infliction of ordinary punishments, that the assistance of surgeons should be called in, when the punishment is intended at the outset to be only such as experience shows us is never, without a very singularly unlucky accident, attended with death. The medical officer is, it would appear, to guard the life of a delinquent under punishment, so that the army may not lose the services of a man by death or by being permanently disabled. In the execution of this highly important duty he must be guided by a knowledge of the physiology and pathology of the human body, the habits and duties of soldiers, and an acquaintance with the regulations and usages of the army. A medical officer is presumed to divest himself of any opinion he may entertain in regard to the delinquency a man has committed, or the sentence which has been awarded him; his duty being, in the first place, to prevent the man from escaping punishment by feigning indisposition; and secondly, to see that he does not receive such a degree of injury as may endanger life or disable him permanently for the duties of a soldier. While the surgeon should invariably lean to the side of safety, duty requires that he ought to be scrupulously careful not to unnecessarily obstruct the course of military law-the rules and usages adopted to establish and sustain military discipline."