like a prime conductor. Static electrization, however, may be regarded as practically in disuse, the milder forms having no appreciable tonic effect, and the great "tension" required from the Leyden jar to reach well-covered muscles or deep-seated parts cause such disturbances as render its application difficult, if not impracticable. Curative results, however, have been produced when other modes have failed, by its application to the larynx in obstinate nervous aphonia, than which, as some writer has said, "nothing short of being hanged could be more unpleasant." Dynamic electricity is employed nearly equally under the two forms of galvanism and Faradisation, and is that variety which is developed by chemical decomposition. Galvanism, or the "interrupted continuous current," is of low intensity in its action on the nerves and muscles; but it produces chemical or "electrolytic" results, as in the coagulation of blood, the mortification of tissues, and a calorific action, which are not to be obtained from the Franklinic or even from the Faradic pro cesses. Faradism, or the "induced," " magneto-electric," "voltaomagnetic," or "voltao-dynamic" electricity, as it is variously called, is of very high tension, and more like the Franklinic than the galvanic. Its chemical and calorific action are insignificant; it has not the burning and heat of galvanism, but produces marked contraction of the muscles and powerful action on the nerves, both of sensation and of motion. It is induced, but only of momentary duration; and these momentary currents, made by breaking and resuming the galvanic current, are effected so rapidly that a great many of only momentary duration, but of very high tension, pass in both directions in a single second of time. The question which Dr. Duchenne has undertaken to solve is: Are the physical and therapeutical qualities of the different forms of electrization identical, and can they be indifferently applied? From the time of Remak, whose name is identified with electrization in Germany, very acrimonious discussion has been going on upon this point, and it has never been more bitter than since the late Franco-German war, cropping out in quite a number of French and German prefaces we have had occasion to look at. The dictum of the Regent of the University of Berlin, "that Germany was a contented nation, and coveted nothing beyond its own boundaries," rankles deeply within the bosom of the Gaul. But while in Germany the school of Remak still adheres to galvanism, it is still in France that, in Becquerel and others, Dr. Duchenne finds his most persistent opponents. In England and America both currents are employed: in general practice the Faradic, with specialists the galvanic, more or less exclusively. Dr. Duchenne maintains that the two currents, whose physical action is so dissimilar, ought to produce different therapeutic actions, and each should correspond to special indications. Electropathy is an art so difficult that slight shades of difference should not be allowed to complicate treatment, and the question mainly is whether any such difference is one of kind or of degree. Practically, it is of degree only; the object is to get electricity in the form most suitable for the emergency. In electro-surgery both currents will avail to disperse tumors, heal ulcers, or hasten absorption. The galvanic is said to be superior to the Faradic in power of overcoming resistance, and it might therefore be expected to act more effectually on the brain, the spinal cord, and the sympathetic nerve,- the anatomical position of these parts requiring considerable resistance to be overcome. It also produces muscular contractions where the Faradic fails; and after a certain amount of treatment by the galvanic current, paralyzed muscles frequently resume their susceptibility to the Faradic. Thirdly, it has a different and more chemical effect for the purposes of cautery, using elements that generate large quantities of electricity, and combining them in a particular way. An ordinary single element, or a large number arranged for intensity, are but feebly electrolytic, and the alleged superiority of galvanism in neuralgia, atrophy, or rheumatism is probably due to the molecular or other tissue changes produced by this chemical action. On the other hand, Faradism, through its frequent interruptions, produces muscular contractions if applied anywhere over the muscle. While in galvanism one of the electrodes must be placed upon the motor nerve of the muscle, and the galvanic current requires to be broken to produce effects, the Faradic is already in the condition of constant interruption. But the advantages of Faradization are most marked in general electrization, its powerful tonic effects being largely due to the passive exercise and consequent important tissue changes resulting from the myriads of muscular contractions, while it is less likely to produce unpleasant or injurious effects. Under particular circumstances it is the only one that can be used with benefit or safety. Dr. Duchenne claims that Faradization is the only therapeutic agent which, limited to the skin, can produce most acute sensations, which cease at once with the operation, and can be graduated from the slightest tickling to the most intense pain, passing through intermediate degrees or going suddenly from one extreme to the other without ever disorganizing the skin or leaving any trace upon its surface beyond a slight erythema or elevation. Such an agent must respond to innumerable indications, from restoring simply lost sensibility to the skin itself to the most powerful revulsion in deep-seated neuralgias. It can be tempered, moreover, to the degree of excitability of any individual, and even of each region of the body; and in the intense current required for certain muscular affections, induction is the only appreciable form. Claiming this, Dr. Duchenne admits that its electrolytic action is too feeble to coagulate the blood in aneurism or to affect the atrophization of morbid growths. We have considered electrization, so far, in its relations to treatment, and have but little space left to devote to any account of its uses in diagnosis. Its conclusions in this field of study, however, are not universally accepted; in fact, are not very widely known. Professor Acland says, "The exploration of the nervous system by electrical agencies in evidence of chemical alterations and in proof of corresponding changes in the organism (by Dr. Duchenne of Boulogne) shows the certain advance of physical inquiry as applied to disease." It is due to the great reputation, moreover, of Dr. Duchenne to state that he was the first to describe the character and pathology of the progressive paralyses known respectively as, (1.) Progressive muscular atrophy; (2.) Progressive locomotor ataxia; (3.) Glosso-labio-laryngeal paralysis: all of which types are now well recognized in practice. And in this his third edition, which we have just examined fresh from the press, he adds another morbid condition not hitherto described, but not less fatal in its march and termination, namely, pseudohyper-trophic paralysis or myo-sclerosis; also a form of infantile or "obstetrical" paralysis, and an acute and a sub-acute anterior spinal paralysis of the adult. These therapeutical researches are the result and aggregate of Dr. Duchenne's indefatigable clinical and pathological studies, most of them having been communicated during the past few years to the different scientific societies of France. The report on the action of mercury by Dr. Hughes Bennett and the committee appointed by the British Medical Association must have greatly astonished the average British practitioner. Although a few medical men now profess to have long been sceptical as to the action of mercury, nothing was ever more generally believed than that it stimulated the biliary secretion. Abernethy's eternal blue-pill is a matter of history, and it was almost the only medicine that Sir Astley Cooper knew anything about. Sir Benjamin Brodie was asked why he always gave blue-pill in certain cases, and could afford to answer, "because he always had given it, and it had always been right." The point for the committee to determine was whether mercury was a chologogue, that is, a bile-stimulant, and these were not the first experiments that had been undertaken to determine the specific action of mercury. Professor Nasse, in 1852, seemed to have ascertained by direct experiment that calomel did increase the absolute quantity of bile, but that it diminished the amount of the solid contents. Holliker and Müller demonstrated that the first dose of mercury increased the quantity of bile, and that subsequent doses diminished it in quantity but increased its consistency. Dr. Mosler investigated in order to determine "what substances introduced into the blood were found afterwards in the bile," and his conclusions were that calomel, in large or in small doses, "does not pass so readily into the bile nor produce the marked increase of the biliary secretion that medical men imagine." Dr. Scott found "a dim inution in the amount of bile and bile solids secreted after the administration of large doses of calomel." This was the state of the question in literature. Dr. Bennett tells us that his committee comprised "the skill of the anatomist, the analytical power of the chemist, and the varied knowledge, theoretical and practical, of the histologist, physiologist, physicist, pathologist, and therapeutist, as well as the physician whose knowledge of diagnosis is unimpeachable." Every instrument, appliance, and chemical, together with a public hospital and the sum of one hundred and twenty-five dollars (!), were placed at the disposal of the committee. At their first meeting, November 16, 1866, the first and, as we think, fundamentally vicious conclusion was arrived at, that no kind of examination of the dejecta could yield trustworthy results; supposing that the characteristic constituents of the bile found their way into the alvine evacuations unchanged, "the imperfections in the analytical method (!) render their quantitative analysis impossible," either by Hoppeseyler's method or by the simpler process with alcoholic extracts. (Hoppeseyler, professor at Tübingen, estimated the amount of bile acids from the effect which their solution exhibited upon the ray of polarized light, which Professsor Tyndall's experiments have made comprehensible.) We are to infer, therefore, that neither the bile acids nor the coloring matter were determined or estimated. For an examination of the excreta, they substituted the formation of biliary fistulæ in living animals, and the collection of the amount directly through such fistulæ from the gall-bladder. The committee admit that, under the action of purgatives, unchanged bile is occasionally discharged from the system; and it is also evident to us, from an inspection of their numerous tables, that the biliary secretion was increased after the first dose of mercury. We observe also that the animal began to fail soon after the process of drawing off its bile commenced; that in fact the very organs and tissues experimented upon were on the road to death; that it was not only an animal which was not man, but a wounded and a diseased animal. From the experiments, however, such as they were, and Dr. Bennett states that they were carefully repeated under every varying circumstance that could be thought of, the following |