Some of our readers, especially the non-medical, may desire to know what the following remarks, which appear to apply generally to the human family, have to do with cattle doctoring. We answer them in the language of Professor Percival. "The object of the veterinary art is not only congenial with human medicine, but the very same paths which lead to a knowledge of the diseases of man, lead also to a knowledge of those of brutes. An accurate examination of the interior parts of their bodies; a studious survey of the arrangement, structure, use, connection, and relation of these parts, and of the laws by which they act; as also of the nature and properties of the various food and other agents which the earth so liberally provides for their support and cure,—these form, in a great measure, the sound and sure foundation of all medical science, whatever living individual animal be the subject of our consideration. Whether we prescribe for a man, horse, dog, or cat, the laws of the animal economy are the same; and one system, and that based upon established facts, is to guide our practice in all.
"The theory of medicine in the human subject is the theory of medicine in the brute; it is the application of that theory—the practice alone—that is different.
"We might as well, in reference to the principles of each, attempt to separate surgery from medicine, as insist that either of these arts, in theory, is essentially different from the veterinary: every day's experience serves to confirm this our belief, and in showing us how often the diseases of animals arise from the same causes as those of a man, exhibit the same indications, and require a similar method of cure.
"The science of medicine, like others, consists of a collection of facts of a common and not a specific character. These, therefore, admit of arrangement into different systems, according to the notions of theorists, and the various species of philosophy, brought to bear on the subject.
"The first regular system was founded by Hippocrates, about three hundred and eighty years before Christ. It was founded upon theory, and comprised the doctrines of the ancient dogmatic school. Its pathology rested upon a supposed change of the humors of the body, particularly the blood and bile; and here are the first elements of the 'humoral pathology.' Its remedial intentions were founded upon the existence of the 'vis conservatrix' et 'medicatrix naturæ;' and, although often maintaining direct antipathic principles of action, it rested mainly on physo-dynamic influence for the accomplishment of its therapeutic purposes.
"About two hundred and ninety years before Christ, Philinus of Cos introduced the ancient Empiric System, which was founded upon experience and observation. About one hundred years before the Christian era, the Methodic System was introduced by Asclepiades of Bithynia. This system was got up with an avowed opposition to that of Hippocrates, which was called 'a study of death.' Themison of Laodicea, pupil of Asclepiades, gives an exposition of the fundamental principles of the methodic system; and it seems that all physiological and pathological action was considered to be dependent upon the strictum and laxum of the organic pores, or increased and decreased secretion, and that all medicines act only on two principles, i. e., by inducing contraction and relaxation, or an increase and decrease of the secretions.
"It would seem that, in the first century of the Christian era, the methodic system was divided into various subordinate ones—the Pneumatic, Episynthetic, and Eclectic. The pneumatic system, which was the most popular of the fragments of the methodic, was most indebted to Athenæus of Attalia for its successful introduction. This system contemplated the doctrine of the Stoics, which recognized the existence of a spirit governing and directing every thing, and which, when offended, would produce disease; hence the name pneumatic. The indications of cure were more moral than physical. Fire, air, water, &c., were not considered elements, but their properties—heat, cold, dryness, moisture, &c.—were alone entitled to the name.
"In the second century, the Galenic System was founded by Claudius Galenus. This might, indeed, only be considered the revival of the dogmatic or Hippocratean system. Galen professed to have selected what he found valuable from all the prevailing systems, and has embraced the elements and ruling spirit of the pneumatic school. Thus he explained the operation of medicines by reference to their elementary qualities,—that is, heat, cold, dryness, and moisture,—of each of which he admitted four degrees. But he was governed by a prevailing partiality for the system of Hippocrates, which, he states, was either misunderstood or misrepresented by all theorists, ever since the establishment of the empiric and methodic schools. He devoted most of his time to commenting upon and embellishing it, and thus again established a system, founded on reason, observation, and sound induction, which maintained its character, without a rival, for more than one thousand five hundred years.
"Near the middle of the sixteenth century, Paracelsus introduced the Chemical System. This was strongly opposed by Bellonius and Riverius, who maintained the doctrine of Hippocrates and Galen. But the presumptuous Paracelsus burned, 'in solemn state,' the works of the ancients; and being succeeded by the indefatigable Van Helmont, the whole science of medicine was overwhelmed by the mysticism of the alchemical doctrines and languages. The chemical theory, in the main, rejects the influence, or even the existence, of the vis medicatrix naturæ, and explains all physiological, pathological, and therapeutic operations upon abstract chemical laws. Thus chemical or inorganic agents, and many of the most virulent poisons, as arsenic, mercury, antimony, &c., were placed among the most prominent remedies.
"Soon after the introduction of the chemical system, medical science, if we make one exception, became less eccentric, but much less marked for the permanency of its systems. Boerhaave ingeniously blended most of the prominent doctrines of the Galenic and chemical systems; and by an application of several of the newly-developed natural sciences, especially mathematics and natural philosophy, he led his successors into a more even path and fixed method of investigation; for no more do we find any abstract physical laws the sole basis of a system. But these were the highest honors allowed Boerhaave; his particular system was soon subverted by Stahl, who proved the supreme superintendence of an immaterial, vital principle, corresponding to that pointed out by Hippocrates. To this he ascribes intelligence, if not moral attributes. Hoffman led Cullen into the path that brought him into the fruitful field of nervous pathology and solidism, which, with a modification of Stahl's ruling immaterial essence, formed the groundwork of his admired system.