PART SECOND. Bibliographical Notices. ART. I.-On Indigestion and certain Bilious Disorders often conjoined with it. To which are added, Short Notes on Diet. By GEORGE CHILD, M.D., Physician to the Westminster General Dispensary.— London, 1847. 8vo, pp. 219. WE cannot say that we have met in this work with any novel facts, or with any masterly grouping of old ones. The book, in short, is just another of those (of which there are already a great deal too many) which fifty or a hundred practitioners of medium intelligence, industry, and observation could easily write. When we say this, we merely mean to intimate that in Dr. Child's volume we are not to look for any essentially new views, new inductions, or new plans of treatment. The work is divided into twenty chapters, of part of the contents of which we propose to give a cursory notice. In chapters first and second, we find nothing whatever new. We think Dr. Child's definition of dyspepsia, at the very outset, may be objected to as at least incomplete. It is "habitual uneasiness while the food in the stomach is being converted into chyme." Now though, according to the strict etymology of the word dyspepsia (which, however, Dr. Child does not refer to), the above definition may pass, yet practically and as regards the word indigestion (which the author allows to be a synonyme of dyspepsia) the case is different. For undoubtedly indigestion is something more than mere habitual "uneasiness" in the process of chymification. It is also imperfect chymification, or we may say (rather, however, to illustrate our meaning, than to express ourselves with philosophic accuracy) it is morbid chymification. There are, indeed, cases in which chymification is obviously most imperfect, but which are characterized by little or no pain or uneasiness, at least in the stomach itself. At p. 7 et seq. Dr. Child notices the effects of food undue in quality or quantity, as leading to indigestion, and here he sets himself to repudiate the notion that "the diet of the rich is more calculated to produce indigestion than that of the poorer classes," and to cite, in order to controvert, the everlastingly-quoted words of the Roman satirist, "innumerabiles esse morbos miraris? Coquos numera." The author then proceeds to observe that as the means of the rich enable them to purchase better articles of food than the poor, and as in the case of the latter "the same dish is often warmed up again" (p. 9), so, for these and sundry other reasons, the rich, as regards diet and cookery, are better off than the poor. Here, again, we think there is slight special pleading, or rather a misapprehension of the true spirit of the objection which the author is combating. No one ever, we believe, would contend that a good article of food is preferable to an inferior one: a sufficiently cooked to an imperfectly cooked dish. But the point aimed at in the query of the satirist and the real practical part of the question is, whether the plain and even coarse diet of the poor is not found, provided only it be sufficient in quantity, to lead actually to less disease, and to the formation of fewer of those artificial tastes, from which disease almost unavoidably results, than the more recondite cookery of the rich does? We think that, looking at the simple and actual results of the two "systems," the question admits but of one answer, though, perhaps, handled as it is by the author, it is one fitted rather for discussion in a popular than a professional volume. At chapter vii, p. 83, "the various pains" which characterize indigestion are treated of. Some of these pains, singular in themselves, are very singularly named and described by the author. Taking up separately these various pains, the author gives his theory of their respective causes, and lays down what he considers the appropriate treatment. This piecemeal method of treating the subject, this attempt to make it be believed that these "pains" are susceptible of an exact pathogenical and pathological classification, is apt to be extremely hurtful in practice. Persons who are imposed on by this dogmatic nomenclature of the author (we do not use the word dogmatic in its offensive meaning) are led to suppose that a far fuller and distincter insight can be gained into the complexities and obscurities of dyspeptic derangements, than can be practically obtained. In no part of the work, perhaps, is this endeavour to give precision to subjects actually incapable of it, more visible and more unsuccessful, than in the observations on "bilious headache," "gastric headache," and "gastrobilious headache" (pp. 114 to 129 inclusive), which affections, both from the topical proximity and nervous connexions and sympathy of the organs concerned in them, and from our still great ignorance of the physiology and pathology of these, are totally insusceptible of diagnostic distinctions so precise as those attempted to be laid down by Dr. Child. To a great extent the therapeutical directions are distributed through the work, following the descriptions of the several forms of dyspepsia, to which those directions apply; but chapter xix, page 191, is devoted to the "general treatment of indigestion," in which, however, we do not find anything materially new or important. We cannot, however, refrain from giving one quotation from this part of the work, with a view to afford the reader an opportunity of judging of the inductive powers of the author. Often a little circumstance lets us into a knowledge of an author's capacity and mode of drawing conclusions from premises. The passage we refer to occurs at page 196, and is as follows:-"The well-known virtue of nitrate of silver, internally administered, in removing morbid irritability of the stomach, led me to expect that its external application would prove a highly important counter-irritant in dyspeptic congestion. Accordingly, I have often rubbed it on the epigastrium, but I must confess I have been disappointed with its effects." It would not be easy to write a sentence more open to criticism than the above, but the reader will discover this without our aid. Chapter xx is occupied with directions of a purely popular character, in regard to diet, &c. We have been struck, in this volume, with the little reference to what may be called the hygienic treatment of dyspeptic disorders, which, of all others, are most benefited by such treatment. Change of scene and place and occupation, mental distraction, relaxation, excitement, fresh air, exercise, walking, riding, jumping, racing, dancing, are little, if at all, alluded to, yet a large proportion of cases of "dyspepsia and the bilious disorders often conjoined with it" would vanish under the adoption of these means alone, along, of course, with plain and moderate diet; while, without these means, no variety or amount of medicinal treatment will much or at least radically avail. But, alas! in most of our practical works, "the trail of the serpent is over all:"-drugs-drugs-nothing but drugs; tradetrade-nothing but trade; while that which mainly appertains to the more refined and higher philosophy of our noble and majestic art, is rejected as valueless, or passed by unheeded and unknown. ART. II. THE WHY AND THE WHEREFORE; or, the Philosophy of Life, Health, and Disease. New and Original Views explanatory of their Natural Causes and Connexion; and of the Treatment of Disease upon a few General Principles, based upon the Laws of Nature and Common Sense; with Rules for the Preservation of Health and Renovation of the System. The Fruit of Thirty Years' Observation and Experience. By CHARLES SEARLE, M.D., M.R.C.S.E., and late of the E. I. C. Madras Establishment.-London, 1846. 8vo, pp. 266. DR. SEARLE dates his book from Bath; we infer, therefore, that he is practising as a physician there. He proposes to present the reader "with a complete system of the science and practice of medicine, and of the philosophy of life and health." His reader is not, however, expected to be the professional and educated man, and therefore a competent judge of the author's merits as a writer and as a practitioner, but rather the uneducated (we mean technically uneducated) layman. This is amply shown by the following long-winded paragraph: 66 Being of opinion that the principles of the subject are within the comprehension of every intelligent person, and that a distinct knowledge of the principles of any subject is essential to its successful practice; and seeing the lamentable ignorance that exists in these matters, and the charlatanism which prevails, I have been induced to address myself to the public rather than to the profession, not from any disrespect to its members-far otherwise, for a more enlightened and liberal-spirited class of men nowhere exists-but with the view of laying open to the public the delusions of incompetent pretenders, and of imparting that amount of knowledge which every individual ought to possess, on a subject of such preeminently personal importance, and especially so as regards the causes and prevention of disease, and of those calamities we see daily recorded in the public journals, such as persons falling down dead in the streets." (Preface, p. v. We think this a fundamental and fatal mistake in the plan of Dr. Searle's work, for mistake we believe it to be, and not a premeditated attempt at quackery. This is much to be regretted; for if Dr. Searle had directed the energy and industry which he evidently possesses to a more judicious plan, he might have done good service to the public and the profession; but as the matter stands, his book is too abstruse for the general reader, and too theoretical and generalizing for the professional reader; so his labours go for nothing. Dr. Searle might have written in elegant language on dietetics; he has written de omnibus rebus et quibusdam aliis. He might have made the established principles of pathology popular and intelligible; he has attempted to make popular some theoretical notions of his own. He might have laid down a safe system of elementary therapeutics; he has, we fear, made public a somewhat dangerous system-and on this point we need only refer his recommendation of opium as a remedy in mental anxiety. He might at least have written scholarly; he has written with "muggishness," to use a word we see in print for the first time in his book. An example of "muggish" writing, addressed, be it observed; to "the public," for the noble purpose set forth in the foregoing quotation, is subjoined. "153. Hysterical breathing or other spasmodic affection of the muscles of the tongue, the voice, or those muscles associated in swallowing, (circumstances concomitant with the mental excitement, and connected with the irritation in the brain involving that portion of it from which the nerves of these organs arisethe medulla oblongata and summit of the spinal marrow-inducing the patient to protrude his tongue and to utter discordant sounds, occasioning difficulty of swallowing or breathing,) if not to be relieved by a full dose of opium, which should be administered if necessary, exhibit the advanced condition of inflamma tion, when cupping or leeching the back of the head to a small extent daily, and a blister kept open between the shoulders or behind the ears, are the proper remedies, following them up by the insertion of a seton at the summit of the neck." (p. 114.) Very explicit and useful information for "the public" here, and no less elegantly conveyed to the same "public"! But what do our readers think is the mode recommended to the decrepid "public" for the "renovation of the system"? Why just repeated bloodletting! both 366. "Renovating influence of bloodletting. If what I have said is correct, we have, in the renewal of the stream by bloodletting, which not only removes the bad, but facilitates the entrance of the good and fresh materials, (absorption of air and of nutriment being increased in proportion as the vessels are emptied.) [!!] a most valuable agent of renovation of the system, and one which, if judiciously employed, bids fair, I am of opinion, to relieve, if not to restore to perfect health, a large proportion of the decrepid and incurable which are everywhere to be found, but it will be argued, &c." (p. 257.) Now we feel certain that Dr. Searle would himself condemn such doctrines as this if propounded by another writer; or if old age and decrepitude should overtake him, it is not probable that he would submit to the treatment which he advises for others, and be daily bled. It is always to us a painful duty to write in disparagement of any work which we believe to be the production of an honest, and well-meaning, and respectable practitioner, as we believe Dr. Searle to be, and we cannot but express our regret that he has published his views in their present form. ART. III. The Potato Plant, its Uses and Properties: together with the Cause of the Present Malady. The Extension of that Disease to other Plants, the Question of Famine arising therefrom, and the best Means of averting that Calamity. By ALFRED SMEE, F.R.S., Surgeon to the Bank of England, &c.-London, 1846. 8vo, pp. 174. With 10 Plates. OUR author's promises as set forth in this title-page are large enough, and form a striking contrast to his amount of performance. Everybody knows that of the thousand-and-one hypotheses which have been proposed to account for the fearful infliction that has fallen upon the cultivators of the potato, each singly, however specious it appeared at first sight, has been proved to be deficient in that universality of application, which could alone warrant its reception as the vera causa. Nothing daunted, however, by the failure of his predecessors, Mr. Smee plunges boldly into the investigation; convinced that a medical man is the one to make the discovery for which vegetable physiologists and agriculturists have vainly sought, and that his own qualifications for the search peculiarly marked him out as the fortunate benefactor of mankind, whose name should be handed down to succeeding generations as long as the potato shall be cultivated for the food of man or beast. "The business of a surgeon," he says, "is essentially locomotive, and his duties are practised over an extensive space. It frequently happens that I have had to traverse London in two or even more directions in a single day, which circumstance has given me abundant opportunities of making my observations in different localities." We should like to see these vast potato-fields which Mr. Smee is so clever in perambulating between the extremities of our smoky metropolis, where we thought that nothing grew but houses and "humans." But his researches have not been confined to London alone. They have extended even as far as Clapton, which (we may inform our country readers) is no less than four miles from the Bank. "During the summer months," he informs us, "I was living at Springfield, Upper Clapton, where I had the advantage of a large garden, wherein were several plots of potatoes, which I was in the habit of observing the first thing in the morning, again on my return from London, and frequently the last thing at night. In the neighbourhood, moreover, were larger potato grounds, where I used to enjoy the air and study the disease in the evening; and it has curiously happened, that I have made my observations on the potato-plant in the same garden in which I considered the experiments for my former work on Electro-Metallurgy;" a coincidence which will doubtless impress the public with additional confidence in the author's results. Finding a few diseased potato-plants at Clapton, covered with aphides, |