Inaugural Dissertation on Therapeutics By Richard A. Phelan – Presented by Julian Winston

Main

Inaugural
Dissertation on
Therapeutics
By Richard
A. Phelan
Presented by Julian Winston

An
Inaugural Dissertation on Therapeutics
Presented to the Faculty
of the Homoeopathic Medical College of Pennsylvania
for the Degree of Doctor of Medicine
by Richard A. Phelan of St.
Louis, Missouri
Philadelphia – February 1st 1867

In
nothing that appertains to man has the great Creator of the universe in
any particular neglected to place within the reach of man a perfect
capacity for the adaptation of means to ends, and if those means are not
legitimately applied, if the ends sought have been but imperfectly or
inadequately reached or not reached at all, the fault is in the man and
not in the means placed within his control.

Perfection
is an attitude of God, and to that extent is God himself; and as he is
perfect, so has he shaped all things in perfection. Imperfection then is
contrary to his nature and consequently contrary to all that is required
of us in our relations with men as well as with Him.

In
all things that exist around us is not the hand of perfection visibly
and grandly marked. There is nothing on the face of earth. on the face
of nature that is not perfectly formed, perfectly made, nothing
partially or imperfectly done, and all things with all their beauties,
with all their charms, were made for man, for man’s terrestrial
happiness. If then so much has been done for man’s enjoyment, how much
near must it not be to the designs of him that has done such things,
that the days of man should be made as numerous and as happy as possible
so that he might feast upon that enjoyment!

With
a view to this end men have formed themselves into various societies.
Some are engaged in the making and interpretation of the laws that
govern us, some in the application and the execution of the same, some
in the elucidation and enunciation of the laws of God, while others are
engaged in divining the course of the stars. Some there are who prepare
the mind for a particular calling in life, while others build up our
cities and cultivate the soil: but for the safety and preservation of
man, the last, the noblest, the grandest work of God, other pursue the
science that transcends them all. The Science of Medicine.

That
man has been endowed with the faculty of prying into and discovering
among the hidden resources of nature so many beauties without which this
world of ours would be to us a sad,a dreary, pilgrimage, should be to
our minds the best evidence that within the grasp of men has also been
placed the means best calculated to sustain and prolong his own
existence. His capacity for discovering the truth in all things,
metaphysical as well as physical, and of adapting means to an end in a
correct and truthful manner, is scarcely inferior to that of the gods.

From
the very day on which he transgressed the first law of his Creator, in
that land where abnormal conditions were till then unknown, we find him
battling his way mid the wiles of earth and sea; “and in the rude
and simple forms of his primitive life already subjected to all the
diseases that are from natural and moral causes.” It is true that
in those early days, diseases were almost as few as men, but as time
rolled on, and mankind became more numerous, diseases became more
numerous too, and the necessity for medicinal aid increased in equal
proportion. Thence forward, medicine became somewhat a science, and in
proportion to the demand for application of the science did the
importance of its cultivation become realized. At what period Medicine
became a particular science we are unable to state, nor does it matter
much to our present purpose to ascertain; all that we do know and that
we know with certainty, is that the only true and correct law of cure,
one now based upon experiment and experience, and one whose laws is
demonstrated with the precision of a geometrical figure, was announced
to the world three hundred years before the Christian era.

From
the fact that a dogma so important as the one before us was proclaimed
to men at a point of so great antiquity and handed down through the ages
af the profoundest learning, it would be natural to suppose that its
application could or should have been based only upon the profoundest
certainty; but such is not the case.

It
is easy to understand the perplexities that surround the physicians of
early times in the application of medicine to disease, and how those of
a more enlightened age should be generous enough to overlook the
misgivings of their day, but when the mind has become enriched with the
beauties of art, and has been made master of all accomplishments which
intelligence is capable to bestow, the justice of legitimate science
should be vindicated, and those who would feign impart a stain to the
fair escutcheon of her name, should be chased from the sphere of its
usefulness to the very halls of oblivion.

Remedial
agents were given to man by the Lord himself, as was everything else he
has, with a full capacity for their proper application. To deny this
would be to attribute injustice to the giver. That the holy and just God
permits men to be afflicted with disease cannot be denied, and to asset
that He has not left man a remedy to heal his infirmities, as he has to
heal his soul, is perfectly absurd, perfectly wicked. To remedial agents
there may be attributed a divine origin, and if the physician, God’s
ministering agent sent to alleviate the sufferings of poor decrepit man,
performs not the functions of his office correctly, terrible will be his
responsibilities. But how has this duty been performed?

Prior
to the days of Hippocrates we have little or no knowledge of the
principles upon which therapeutic agents were applied by the ancients,
but after reflecting upon the facts put forth by that learned man, we
are constrained to believe that there was no certain law of cure
established. Ideas were conflicting as in our own time; not because the
correct principle did not exist but because men, neglecting to make
proper search and inquiry, adhered to the blind theories and formulas of
their ancestors.

Hippocrates,
however, seems to have recognized among the conflicting elements of
time, two theories according to the principles of either of which he
informs us diseases might be cured. One of these is the law of
“Contraries,” the other is the law of the
“Similars.” But why he practiced according the former more
generally we know not, except it is, because it was the most prevalent
in his day, and he did not possess moral courage enough for him to shake
it off.

Now
truth is one and indivisible. There can not be but one straight line
drawn between any two given points. In other words, if the two laws of
cure just referred to be parallel to each other, they can never reach
the same end; hence, one must be correct, and the other, inevitably,
false. Wherefore it becomes to us a matter of the most essential
importance— a matter involving life and death to discover which of
these two laws is the correct one.

In
striving to do this how shall we be governed? Shall we take up the law
that is the oldest, that has passed through successive generations from
the days of Hippocrates to our own, and say that because it is the most
ancient and the most generally received in our day, that we must on that
account, accept it as true? Not at all. It does not follow that because
a law is two thousand years old, it is therefore correct., even if its
principles remain inviolate during that period. Such was the system of
Copernicus. Its proud head had almost reached the stars themselves; but
where is it now? It is dead— it is gone. It was based on the false
theories of man. It was opposed to the truths of Creation, and by the
power of those truths, vindicating themselves through the genius of
Gallileo, it was crushed to earth never to be resurrected. But if a law
has stood the test of ages— if it should have marched onward mid the
progress of science, and never have been suspected, that would certainly
be an evidence in its favor, but very insufficient for intelligence.
Some may laugh at this statement but what of that? Wise men as well as
fools have often laughed at truth.

Before
accepting any important science as correct, especially one upon which
depends the lives of our fellow man— the lives of those who are
nearest and dearest to us on earth, we should be satisfied that it is
based upon thorough experiment and ample experience; and that these
should be confirmed by the test of time. But when a science is based
upon experiments made by learned men of different nations (all uniting
in the same idea) and confirmed by the continual experience of years,
when we find being converted to that science not so much the untutored
masses of the people, as those whose intellects are enriched by all that
art can bestow. When, in a word, the truth of a science is capable of
being demonstrated with the certainty of mathematical precision, then,
indeed, but not till then, can the conscientious be satisfied.

Is
the prevalent, the Allopathic system, surrounded with this certainty? It
claims to be a universal law of cure, and that this cure is accomplished
by producing effects on the system of a nature contrary or opposite to
those of the disease, or as the books have it, “Contraries are
cured by Contraries.” Hence when a man burns his hand Allopathy
plunges it into cold water, when he suffers from exposure to heat,
subjects him to a cooling regimen; when he gets a cold they give him
“hot punches;” if his stomach becomes damaged by excessive
indulgence, abstinence is enjoined; if too much labor or exercise has
exhausted him, he is renovated by rest; when a man is constipated he is
purged, he receives Opium, sedatives to relieve pain, sudifics to
dissipate dampness of the skin, and when the poor man’s had aches, he
has bequeathed to him a misery in the bowels. But let us review this
practice. Is the burned hand cured by cold water? Not at all. It is only
palliated for the time being, for just as soon as it is withdrawn from
the water the pain is renewed with double fury. Hence this cannot be
nature’s mode of curing. Next.

If
you plunge into the cold stream, or expose to the chilling breeze, the
man who suffers gives heat after violent exertion. You produce internal
congestion by the former, which often results in death, while by the
other you effect conditions which are often expressed in pneumonia or
perhaps phthisis; and if you immerse into hot or warm water the solidly
frozen limb, the consequences will almost always be speedy mortification
and death of the part. Is this nature’s law of cure?

Again.
Can purgative be the remedy for constipation? Hot drinks for a cold?
Opium for diarrhoea? Or can sedatives cure pain, or cathartics afford
relief to the aching head? Surely not. Purgatives produce constipation
by the effort they cause Nature to make in repelling them from the
system as invaders of an honest vitality; hot drinks administered to one
who has taken cold induces perspiration, and thereby enables the
organism to resume its normal circulation; but this is palliating and
not curing.

Sedatives
are the harbingers of death in Allopathic hands. They proceed
immediately to the destruction of life; Sudifics act temporarily and
palliatively, never curing a chronic disposition to dryness of the skin,
and cathartics to cure a headache burst open the “Flood-gates of
secretions,” pour them out in torrents— command them to sweep out
the contents of the ailimentary canal, chase from the blood all its
watery elements, and finally the ache in the head is drawn to the aching
bowels, and fastened, as it were, by a string to the exhausted
flood-gates. O beautiful system, that undergoes so much fatigue to
alleviate the grievances of poor suffering humanity! Here then are
exhibited a few examples giving to show the manner in which the law of
the “Contraries” is applied. But it is claimed that the law of
the “Contraries” is universal in its application to disease.
Let us see. What are the opposite states to rheumatism and neuralgia?
What to erisipilas, measles and scarlet fever, scabies, boils,
carbuncles, smallpox, and the various diseases of the skin?

What
are the opposites of tubercular menningitis, phthisis pulmonalis,
membraneous croup, whooping cough, hemorrhages, imperfect development of
the bony structure in children? What of the bubo, the chanchre,
condylomata? And lastly, what is the opposite of cholera?

Here
allopathy is stunned— it is before the jury; and being unable to
establish the truth of the facts it proclaims to be governed by, it goes
off into rage, and exclaims, “Don’t insult my nobility, I am two
thousand years old!”

To
attempt to cure any of those diseases by producing conditions of a
nature contrary, or rather opposite to that of the disease, is
ridiculously absurd, and if diseases can not be cured by producing the
opposite effect, why this Allopathic system must, sooner or later, fall
to the ground.

But
its advocates of today say that they
do not produce a condition of nature directly opposite to that of the
disease in order to cure it. They say that they produce a disturbance in
a different part of the body from that of the disease with the intention
of attracting the notice of the circulatory apparatus to the seat of
that disturbance, and expect that with the turn of an excessive
circulation to that part, will also disappear the old disease.

But
even granting them this view of the case their inconsistency will be as
short lived as was the other. How is this doctrine applied in the
treatment of rheumatism and neuralgia? Why just as the pharisee applied
to himself the law which he taught to others. They treat those diseases
with Aconite, Veratrum virde, Gelsemium and Colchicum, and Quinnine and
Arsenic frequently in neuralgia. But these agents do not cure rheumatism
and neuralgia according to the law referred to. Instead of being
allopathic they are Homoeopathic to the case, and to the allopath who
thinks differently we would say, “Consult any of your works on
toxicology, and you will find that those remedies produce conditions similar
to, and not contrary to, or different from those they cure.

In
like manner they treat intermittent fever with sulphate of quinnine and
Arsenicum, while syphilis in all varieties they combat with mercury and
iodide of potassium— remedies that produce on the healthy organism
conditions as closely similar to the
conditions they cure, as can fairly be recognized.

Men
of exalted intelligence in the Allopathic ranks have not been unmindful
of the fallacy of the law of “Contraria”, and many of them
have had courage enough to deny its universality and efficiency as a
great therapeutic law, while others still sailing under the ageis of its
protection,promulgate and establish new principles at direct variance
with its teaching of a thousand years.

The
learned Watson [probably Thomas Watson, MD, author of The Practice of
Physic—JW] saw the imperfection of his science when resorting to
blood-letting to stop hemorrhaging, he said they were forced to
acknowledge Homoeopathy. And the same learned author, when speaking of
cholera says that he knew of no remedy upon which any reliance could
reasonably be placed in the treatment of that disease in its collapsed
stage.

In the Cyclopedic Practice of Medicine it is laid
down, that slight disorders, such as colds, diarrhoeas, hemorrhages, and
external inflammations should be left to get well of themselves because
no good could result from interference. And further on in the same work
it is stated that in functional derangements all that can be done is to
moderate them and conduct them to the least
dangerous termination that circumstances will permit: thereby
acknowledging that when Allopathy does help, even then it will terminate
dangerously. Headland too, one of our best modern writers, a man whose
name is a “household word” in medical science, when reflecting
upon the law of the “Contraries” says that the rule becomes
inapplicable when the cause of disease is so complicated that they
cannot tell where to find a substance that shall directly
oppose its agency; and besides, he says, that it cannot in
theory be applied for it takes no notice of treatment by evacuation and
revulsion.

But
why multiply evidences of this kind? The masses of mankind unskilled in
medical science have noticed the changes going on in the medical world.
Twenty years ago men received calomel in fifteen and twenty grain doses;
the very youth received from six to ten, while guardian angels wept to
see the sucking babe inbibe the bitter draft. Twenty years ago the fatal
arrow of Allopathic ignorance was aimed against life’s vital spark, and
the fluid which sustains god-like man made to flow like torrents upon
the earth. But thank Heaven those days of medical inhumanity have passed
away, and the men of today who are witnesses to the things of the past,
will not perhaps descend into the silent tomb [in] what is left of that
science shall have passed before them.

But
if the Allopathic were universal in its application to disease— if by
producing an opposite, artificial disease the existing one could be
cured; if, in a word, it were capable of accomplishing all that its
advocates claim for it, it would not even then be a legitimate law
because it is not in accordance with the wisdom of Creation or the
economy of Nature, to destroy or impair one part of the human organism
in order to repair another.

From
a consideration, therefore, of the forgoing facts it is quite evident
that the great embodiment of Allopathic therapeutics, viz. Contraria
Contrarius Curantur is a false one, one based upon a false application
of principles, upon false logic. It does not follow that if one is sick
at the stomach and relieved by vomiting as an effort of nature, that we
must, on that account, administer an emetic in the sense that it is used
by Allopathy, as a therapeutic agent to relieve a similar condition of
the stomach when Nature does not relieve herself. Not at all. This is
false logic. It does not follow that we must practice venesection to
relieve hemorrhage because congested organs relieve themselves by
hemorrhage. Yet this is precisely the practice to which the Allopathic
system resorts. When Watson bled to stop hemorrhage he denied that the
practice was according to the law of his science, and as was said
before, acknowledged that he practiced Homoeopathy. Similarity and not
identity or likeness is the law of Homoeopathy. Identity or likeness
includes similarity, and hence, the sentence “Like cure like,”
which is used by many homoeopathic writers is incorrect; indeed it has
led to the most absurd references made toward our science by sore-headed
members of Chilvaric Allopathy. We would respectfully suggest that those
who use the sentence consult some of the various works on Synonyma.

Innumerable
examples of this kind could be adduced to prove the fallacy of this
ancient law. Indeed we need not step outside our own limits to find the
elements of its destruction, for in all ages of the world it has found
its worst enemies within its own halls.

The
progress of men in the acquisition of knowledge has created revolution
after revolution in its ranks, till scarcely anything is left of it but
its name, and before the close of the nineteenth century it will be
found buried with the things of the past— we hope so at all events.
Ought not these evidence of the fallacy of that ancient system, which we
have endeavored to point out, be so sufficient to awaken in the minds of
men at least a desire to search for a higher and nobler science, unlike
unto God himself— universal and perfect— reliable and true?

But
in the long ages of Caos [sic] and confusion which has marked the
history of medical science, has man made no progress in the discovery of
those means which we know the God of Nature must have bequeathed unto
him for the cure of his evils? He certainly has. When in all ages men
have seemed to be blind to the teachings of truth, God has raised up
among them geniuses through whose mediums the Divine will has been
accomplished, and so it has been in medical science.

More
than two thousand years ago Hippocrates knew of a law different than the
one he appears to have handed down to posterity, but he does not seem to
have had soul enough to shake off the opposition of his day and proclaim
to the world the light that was in him. Age after age still rolled on,
and men gifted with fortune and learning continued to refuse to lend
their intelligence to God; but God being moved moved by the
supplications of his suffering people, cast aside the proud spirits that
heeded not his voice and raised up to proclaim his law as well as to
confound the wise and the strong— the poor— the humble— the
Jusicuted Hahnemann.

Retired
and alone while pondering over a science with the principles of which he
became dissatisfied as incapable of alleviating the suffering of his
fellow men, his soul became suddenly fixed with the idea of a higher and
a better law the very one that haunted the haught minds of those that
passed two thousand years before him— the law of “Similia
Similibus Curantur.” This then brings us into Homoeopathy.

Homoeopathy
is that Science which has as its object the curing of disease by the
administration of therapeutic agents of a dynamico-catalytic nature,
which induces in the organism symptoms or conditions of a nature similar
to those of the disease it is intended to cure.

Allopathy
defines disease to be “An abnormal condition of the blood, and of
the solid constituents of the blood.” This definition was
sufficiently extensive for that old system which generally
speaking looks upon disease as nothing more than material
alterations; and consequently combats them with material or chemical
agents. But since we have now to deal with a higher and grander science,
we must look upon disease as affecting nobler powers of the living
organism, and hence we define it to be An abnormal condition of the
blood (and then of course the solids) consequent upon an abnormal
condition of the spiritually animating principle of the material organs
of the body, which we conceive to be nothing else but the living soul.

Some
will say that this is a wild notion advanced to sustain the idea that
none but dynamic or catalytic agents are capable of curing disease. That
there are persons whose limited minds would perish mid the brilliant
luster of such a law, I have no doubt, and many of them too can be found
sailing under the gallant banner than beams aloft the law of
“Similia,” but independently of the ideas of such croaking
“tadpoles” that law shall live with us and its utterance will
find expression in places into which they dare not peep.

The
eminent Stahl years ago taught, and his teachings have met the approval
of learned men since his time, that matter is necessarily and
essentially passive and inert and that all its active properties or
powers are derived from an immaterial animating principle which is
superinduced upon it or added to it; that it is by the operation of this
spiritual principle upon the material organs of the body that all the
vital functions are produced; that it is in the absence or presence of
this principle that the difference between living and dead matter
essentially depends, and that these effects could not be referred either
to chemical or mechanical agents. Clear as this point must now seem to
everyone, it does not seem to have been known before the days of Stahl,
a fact that goes to prove the correctness of what was asserted in the
beginning that if man had not discovered those things that tend to the
perfection of his nature he had himself to blame.

Doctor
Paine says that all sensible results depend upon certain alterations
which agents affect in the vital properties and actions of the vessels
or tissues which are the seat of the morbid conditions, and the immortal
Hahnemann, one of heaven’s best gifts to men, says that during health
the system is animated by a spiritual [unreadable] vital power which
preserves it in harmonious order; that in disease the vital power is
only disturbed, primarily, and expresses its sufferings (internal
changes) by abnormal alterations with sensations and actions of the
system.; that it is only by the means of spiritual influence manifesting
itself through morbific agents that our spiritual vital power can be
diseased; and we add that it is only by the spiritual (dynamico
catalytic) agency that health can be restored. This idea that the vital
forces are the first assailed by disease was proclaimed to the world
long before the days of Hahnemann; but the genius that fired the soul of
Hahnemann was not possessed by its originators— they could not
withstand the opposition of the day, and it fell a victim to their
weakness.

Hahnemann
too met the opposition of his day, but the material doses of
allopathic opposition and logic could not reach the spark that inflamed
his soul— it was the vitalized principle of Heaven— Heaven’s banner
borne before the breeze which can be cut down only when men shall cease
to be.

Now
since we have the law and since we know that the vital forces are the
seat of disease, it becomes a matter of importance to ascertain how we
shall proceed to bring back those forces to the normal standard when we
find them laboring under disease. To do this we must have therapeutic
agents, can reach the vital forces, and these we denominate
dynamaco-catalytic. Dynamic force is that which is neither material nor
chemical but as it were spiritual, while Catalytic is that which
neutralizes or counteracts moribund conditions or agencies by mere
contact without its own nature being changed or destroyed. This is the
idea of Catalytic which the learned Headland has given us.

But
what shall be our guidance in the administration of medicine? Shall we
take physiology and pathology as the groundwork of our practice? Or
shall we take symptomatology as our guide? For our part we should take
for our criterion that which will bring us nearest to the perfection of
our art, and that we conceive to be symptomatology.

Of
symptomatology be not yet perfect, physiology, pathology, and diagnosis
are less so because they rely upon symptomatology for their existence;
they are only parts or branches of a greater whole, and consequently
inferior to it. When Stille and Headland insist on particularizing and
generalizing, certainly homoeopathists should be found willing to do the
same. There can be no correct pathology insofar as it is based upon and
goes to the full extent of symptomatology. Symptomatology thus is our
pathology. It is by it alone that we are made capable of successfully
treating disease, and without it we can never be good judges of what
constitutes sound physiology.

Every
disease has its own peculiar symptoms, and so too has every therapeutic
agent. The pathologist says he finds the organism sometimes burdened by
a variety of diseases which cannot be traced to any one pathological
cause, and consequently compounds his remedies (just as the mongrel
homoeopathists do when alternating) in order to meet the case. The
symptomatologist recognizes a similar conclusion of disease, but he
denies that there is any set of symptoms that cannot be fully met by
some one therapeutic agent, and consequently traceable to some cause
that operates on the system similar to that of the curative agent. As
every disease has its own characteristic peculiarities, so has every
remedy its own peculiar indications. The same disease does not manifest
itself alike in different individuals, neither do medicines produce
effects identical in character in different persons.

Take
and compare all the leaves of the gigantic oak and tell us if you can
find any two of them that will exactly resemble each other, or point out
identity in the features of any two men on earth. It cannot be done,
hence the beauty of homoeopathy, the truth of symptomatology.

If
ideas differing from these were propagated only by the advocates of
Allopathic practice there would be but little cause for surprise; but
men who profess to be homoeopathists do the same and Allopathy makes use
of their ignorance to thwart our science.

If
therefore a remedy can be found which is coextensive in its symptoms or
conditions with those of any known disease, that disease should be
combatted by that one remedy and not by a combination of remedies or by
two or three in alteration.

When
remedies are administered in compound form, or when alternated, it is
impossible to say which of them produces the curative influence in the
case, not to mention the injurious influence of those that are
superfluously thrown in to the system. No two of them can work together
at the same time to produce the same results; no two bodies being
capable of occupying the same space at the same time. Hence, a very
unreliable practice and one that evinces a great ignorance of
professional duty. Here again one cannot fail to see the great
superiority of true Homoeopathy over those of the Allopathic or
alternating systems.

Taking
then symptomatology as a guide, and our remedy as our agent, the next
point of importance to ascertain is what shall the nature of that agent
be, and how shall it be selected. Since the vital forces are first
seized upon by the morbific influence and since that influence is
dynamic in its nature, it is but rational that the opposing force should
be dynamic too. It is the immaterial principle in man which suffers from
disease (which can be seen when the system is brought under the
influence anesthetics) and nothing will cure it but an immaterial agent
(just the reverse of what is generally
taught by allopathy) and this agent we have designated
dynamico-catalytic.

Of
large material doses of medicine Headland says most positively that they
are not therapeutic agents; but of catalytic agents he says that they
are the surest and most potent of all the remedies employed in the
treatment of disease; that they tend to work out of their own peculiar
operation, and that their effects are permanent; that when they cure a
disease they do so definitely, so that it does not in general tend to
return, and that when they only alleviate, the improvement is more or
less permanent.

The
nature of the remedy being now ascertained, how shall we proceed to
obtain it, and when obtained, what becomes the duty of the physician?
The remedy is obtained by dynamization and succussion, that is to say
one drop of the tincture of a certain remedy, Aconite for instance, is
mixed with one hundred drops of alcohol, and shaken a certain amount of
times till the particles are thoroughly mixed with one another; and this
process is repeated until the dynamic power of the medicine is reached.

At
what particular dilution the dynamic force is reached we cannot well
ascertain; but as the result of long and ample experience the learned
Jahr informs us that it is perhaps reached about the sixth dilution
(centesimal scale). Headland, as was shown above says that the material
doses of the allopathic system are not therapeutic agents, and that
nothing but those of a catalytic nature are capable of affecting a
permanent cure. Wherefore we must conclude that material doses are mere
palliatives to disease, and do not touch the morbific influence that
holds the vitality in check. Here then is an allopathic writer
acknowledging the Homoeopathic Law, which mongrel practitioners of the
same law are still found mixing themselves up with materialism. What a
consideration! The enemies of Homoeopathy acknowledge and recognize the
dynamic force, while its own members deny it by their practice!

But
the low dilutionists who use nothing but the crude preparations of drugs
say that they are very successful in the treatment of acute forms of
disease. Well, what of that? We grant that they remove certain diseases
when in their infancy but this, as Headland says, is palliating and not
curing— we grant that a glass of good punch may restore the
circulation when checked by the chilling blast, but we deny that such an
influence is curative. Such is Old-School practice. The genuine
Homoeopathist does not palliate, but he cures those juvenile conditions
and relieves the system of the predisposing cause.

Precisely
the same principle is involved in the treatment of all acute forms of
disease my material doses of drugs. When the invading enemy first
intrudes upon innocent vitality, the nervous system is called upon to
battle for the safety of the terrestrial frame, and in doing so, sends
out messengers (which we designate symptoms) to invite the physician to
come to the rescue; and if only the least aid he rendered to vitality
before the invaders take full possession, his route from the premises
will be speedily effected.

Now
this is precisely what the mongrel low dilutionists do. They come to the
rescue before the enemy has time to establish his Steud Quentus; but if
unfortunately he is found in full possession those tadpoles never come
up to the scratch, they either skirmish at a distance or beat a speedy
retreat.

While
we regret the practice pursued by our tardy bretheren, we do not wish to
be uncharitably disposed towards them, and consequently we must enter
our objection to the use of the term Mongrel as applied to them, because
from it we cannot imply a change of State in accordance with the natural
growth of events, and therefore we prefer to apply to them the more
suitable epithet— Tadpole. This term, it will be seen, implies
progress, as being the first state of that animal from its spawn, by and
by they will get legs, and finally jump clean out of the mud.

You
see this change of state beautifully demonstrated at Cleveland, there
you find tadpoles no longer, they have got clear out of the mud, their
skirts are nearly cleaned, and in New York they have already begun to
get legs.

It
is a notorious fact that when relief follows material doses of medicine
in conditions in which vitality has been but recently invaded the
disease will always make its appearance in its own proper time if the
last disposing Cause Continue which it is equally as well established
that if the dynamic-catalytic agent be exhibited, relief is never
followed by any such consequences.

But
when we hear the question asked— is it possible that so minute a
quantity as the millionth or the decillionth part of any medicine can
have curative effects? And if so, after what manner does it expel
disease from the system?

As
the human body is made up of various elements, each one differing
essentially from the other, and as one portion of the body differs in
the materials of its composition from the materials found in another
par, so likewise it is true that one part of the body has a peculiar
susceptibility for one medicinal agent while another part elects a
different one. Hence that remedy should be selected for the relief of
vitality which finds the greatest affinity in the part diseased— an
affinity similar to that which was formed by the morbific agency.

As
all things were made in perfection, and the perfection of perfection
itself being displayed in man it would be culpable in us to sat that
disease is the work of Divinity. Therefore it must be man in accordance
with the intentions of nature that the agency which is capable of
sustaining vitality should find greater susceptibility in the vital
tissues then those which are directly aimed at its destruction.

At
the same time we acknowledge that the morbific agency and the
therapeutic agent are respectively capable of producing conditions similar
but not like to one another, the spiritual power of man being endowed
with the faculty of selecting its own best friend.

Wherefore
when the therapeutic agent reaches the own peculiar home in the
organism, and finds it occupied by disease, the agency which generated
the latter is overwhelmed by the force and contact of the former, and
finally the disease is expelled from the system, while the friendly
agent, like the physician, will also leave the system when its proper
office is performed.

This
is our own idea of the action of therapeutic agents, Homoeopathically
chosen,and hence it is that we use the term catalytic in connection with
dynamic, and for one other reason also, because Headland, that great
Allopathic writer, inculcates a similar doctrine and thusly enables us
to refute Allopathy with its own logic.

This
doctrine of the vital forces is now becoming the all absorbing topic of
the day, and like Homoeopathy will soon become universal. There is no
such thing on the face of the earth that is exclusively dead, lifeless
materiality, and this we beautifully illustrated when striking together
the apparently lifeless steel and the similarly dead piece of flint; and
does not all chemistry proclaim its truth?

That
there is a similarity between the
vitality of matter and the spirit can scarcely be denied but however
this may be, one thing we are certain of, that the former sustains the
latter while dwelling within the organism, that is to say, it preserves
the organism from death by keeping all its parts in subserviency to the
soul, which is to the body what vitality is to the plant. The vitality
of the plant or the rock is of the same nature as the vitality of the
tissues of the body after the departure of the spirit— one belongs to
heaven while the other belongs to earth— one is made to subserve the
wants of the other by similarity of
action, not likeness (expel this
term from Homoeopathy) and hence the beauty of the “Law of
Similia.”

The
lower animals are endowed with the faculty of propagating their own
species, with their own peculiar instincts, differing in one from the
other; and so is man capable of generating his also ; And we contend
that it is vitality not materiality that is thus propagated or
generated.

This
capacity is limited in the lower animals as can be seen in the Mule,
which cannot generate its own species, or in the grafted branch on the
apple tree which will yield but its own peculiar kind, all going to show
that the lower animals possess instinct as governing their corporeal
system, while in man no such limit can be observed. No matter how the
races may be comingled or united, man’s soul
cannot be destroyed or merged because it is intended to be everlasting;
but the body of man may have its peculiarities. Hence, the great
superiority of man, his exalted dignity, one in which God himself has
condescended to dwell; man to whom has been entrusted the privilege of
propagating immortal souls.

Teach
him then that he is the instrumentality of the hands of God for the
accomplishment of this end, and you strike him at once with a holy
reverence for his species— you elevate his manhood, you give him
dignity, and you make abhorrent in his sight the act (now too frequently
practiced) that would send destruction to vitality during embryonic
life. Thanks to the Homoeopathic Medical College of Pennsylvania for
giving origins to this idea in our mind. But how does the remedy reach
the diseased part? Allopathy teaches that it passes through the
circulation while Headland admits that the nervous system is often the
means of communication. For our part we believe the latter to be the
most general channel of communication, because we know that remedies
often induce their effects in a shorter time than it is possible to do
through the circulation, and because we likewise know that parts are
very often effected through reflex action of the nervous system.

If
vitality communicates its distress and its wants through the nerves, we
cannot understand why the dynamic agent (which is not required to be
vitalized in the blood as is taught by Allopathy and low dilutionists)
cannot relieve those distresses through the same agency. Intelligence is
communicated in the twinkling of an eye from one continent to another
over the electric fluid, and so too is the dynamic agent communicated to
the diseased part through the system of nerves. Materialism is too slow
and too far beneath science to be made a criterion of, by us. We must
adapt that electrical means by which the departing spirit may be reached
when midway, as it were, between earth and Heaven.

This
brings us to the next point— do infinitesimal doses produce curative
effects ? The Allopathic school does not believe that they do, while at
the same time they teach that there is a dynamic force in drugs which is
possessed of great curative virtues; and this too is the teaching of the
Italian school of Medicine which says, that it is to the dynamic
influence alone that any curative influence can be attributed. This is
only another way of teaching Homoeopathy. The dynamic influence of any
drug is nothing else but infinitesimal, indeed we might say it is more,
because dynamic influences embraces all infinitesimal degrees.

Stille
says that Kreosote will manifest its peculiar smell in a solution
containing one part of the drug to ten thousand
parts of water. Chemistry teaches that the litmus blue is changed into
red by contact with the most minute quantity of acid in solution. One
drop of solution of Indigo will color (1000)one thousand cubic inches of
water. The millionth part of a drop of the poison of the Adder
introduced into the vein of a lamb caused instantaneous death. An atom
of lead is said to be one hundred and four times larger than an atom of
hydrogen, and yet this atom of hydrogen is only 1/310,000,000,000th of a
grain which would leave the atom of hydrogen one hundred and four times
smaller still. It has been demonstrated that metallic gold distributed
mechanically throughout a liquid in particles so minute as to defy
detection by the most powerful microscope still retains its physical
properties.

But
how can these things otherwise be? Is it not an incontrovertible fact
that matter cannot be destroyed? Does not the very schoolboy know of the
law of indestructibility? Hence, if matter is indestructible

It
follows as a necessary consequence that some portion of matter will
always remain behind, no matter how much it may be divided, and
therefore must produce its own peculiar effect when introduced into the
organism. But the tadpole “homoeopath” will not believe this
because he cannot see the particles through the microscope. No wonder,
his optics are yet in their juvenile state— to delicate to endure the
brilliancy of such a light.

The
true homoeopathist knows that the 200th potency will cure
disease and he also knows that the 200 would be too crude for certain
conditions of vitality, requiring him to go higher still. We might
content ourselves here by saying we know these things to be true and why
therefore trouble ourselves by trying to impress the same upon unwilling
minds. But this will not do. If God blesses man with a knowledge of this
great and saving law of Homoeopathy, it becomes his duty to communicate
it to his fellow men, and to discharge his whole duty in this regard, he
must never cease doing so until the grave receives him into her bosom.
From this brief review, it is plain that Homoeopathy, as taught by
Hahnemann and his followers, is the expression of the only true and
reliable system of therapeutics on the face of the earth. The blisterng,
bleeding, leeching, cauterizing, purging system of the Ancient school of
Medicine can lay no claim whatsoever to it. Its remedies are agreeable
to the taste, speedy in their operation, and when properly administered,
always crowned with success.

Homoeopathic
therapeutics has surrounding it all the marks of perfection that we see
displayed in the various other productions or operations of nature. It
is one, indivisible, unchangeable law, alike today, yesterday, and
forever— always advancing, never receding. The same symptoms produced
by a remedy one hundred years ago can be reproduced today by the same
agent, and such will be the case as long as Human Nature shall last. Its
principles are axiomatic, alike taught and understood all over the
world. Thousands of learned men have flocked to its standard, while
millions of our people bear homage to its name. It is the truth of
Creation being vindicated by the multitude and before the force of its
progress will yield every vestige of opposition as does the tender
sapling beneath the mighty avalanche. It has spread Caos[sic] and
confusion among pathologists of the day, and raised Medical
Jurisprudence to a level with itself. It has spared to many a would-be
orphan an affectionate parent, and banished death from the cradle of
youth.

O
venerable founder, Hahnemann! To the memory of thy name be erected a
temple of fame in which all true admirers may worship; and may Heaven

“Speed
the happy intercourse from soul to soul,

And
waft a praise from Indus to the pole.”

Richard Phelan

---

The
following is a transcription of the senior thesis of Richard Phelan, who
graduated from the Homeopathic Medical College of Pennsylvania in 1867.

Dr.
Phelan returned to St. Louis, Missouri after his graduation and
established a medical practice. It was Dr. Phelan who was called to
treat Mrs. Kent in 1878, and it was, therefore, Dr. Phelan who gave
James Tyler Kent his introduction to homeopathy. How much Dr. Kent
studied with Dr. Phelan is not known. Little else is known of Dr.
Phelan. He is not listed in Cleave’s Biography, nor in King’s work.

The
hand-written thesis was found in the Archives at Hahnemann University in
Philadelphia. I had thought that it might be interesting to see what the
first teacher of Kent had in mind when he was a senior in medical
school. I have transcribed it fully— all commas, semicolons, and
capitalizations are as they were written.

Julian Winston
Philadelphia, June 1990

Copyright
© Julian Winston 2002