In the more chronic forms, where the urine does not deposite much mucus, or is tinged with blood, the addition of ten drops (very gradually increasing the quantity) of the diluted nitric acid may be made to the fluid injected, repeating or declining the operation, as the effects are discovered to be advantageous or prejudicial.
In an irritable state of the bladder depending on some disease of the kidney, there is a frequent desire to void the urine without there being any, or but very little, urine in the bladder. There is also a severe cutting pain felt about the neck of the bladder, especially after each effort to make water, followed or attended by a “languid” pain in the loins. The urine is often the color of whey, at other times tinged with blood, and deposites, when suffered to remain a while, a purulent sediment. The severe symptoms should be allayed by the same remedies as prescribed in irritable bladder arising from other causes; but the original seat of the disease in this instance demands energetic attention. The various counter-irritants are in great requisition; leeches, blisters, setons, &c.
In addition to the tonics and astringents already advised, an infusion of the wild-carrot seed, made by macerating for a couple of hours one ounce of the seeds bruised in a pint of boiling water (drinking, when cool and strained, the whole of the liquid in divided doses during the day), may be taken with every chance of relief. As in the other infusions, the patient must persevere in the use of this for some time.
ORIGIN OF THE VENEREAL DISEASE.
The reader will allow that it can not be for want of materials to produce a book, that this subject is introduced, as the multifarious nature of this work’s contents will readily testify; but it is briefly to explain certain probabilities and conjectures which the afflicted curious are generally desirous of being satisfied upon. Who ever suffered under syphilis but was solicitous to know how such a plague came into the world? Many moralists believe and insist that it is a specific punishment, sent for our physical transgressions. Philosophically speaking, such it is; because the infringement of any natural law always incurs a penalty. However, if it be a manifestation of divine displeasure, it certainly is most unequally apportioned; for it generally happens to the least licentious, instead of the most depraved—the timid, scrupulous, and nervous man, contracting it on the first loose intercourse, whereas the man of the town revels almost with impunity; and, lastly, he who exercises the greatest caution and cleanliness escapes it altogether, although he may be the most deserving of the infliction. In a state of timorous excitement, we are more apt to catch the latent mischief. The careless, thoughtless libertine, hardened against infection by indifference, free living, and probably strong health, often escapes scot-free; and the cool and calculating pleasure-hunter, who exercises those useful antagonists to disease, namely, ablution and selection, comes off triumphant with still greater certainty.
The point at issue is, when the disease first arose, and where. Medical historians give credit to America, Spain, and France, for its propagation; and controversies have been carried on by various parties, each disclaiming the honor. Now, as I do not propose to analyze the authorities, but simply to venture my own opinion, with the reasons for the same, I have no alternative but to refer the reader, if he be dissatisfied with my attempted exposition, to more comprehensive and elaborate conjectures than my own. Starting upon the proposition that nature’s laws are unalterable, and believing that fever is, and has been fever since the creation of the world; that a cut finger has healed by the first intention, or has festered, and ever may do so—each condition being modified by the state of health of the party, and the nature of the wound; that a broken limb was attended with the same consequences in the year 1 as it will be in the year 1900; and that dirtiness generated itch, and does so still: I can not reconcile myself to any other belief, but that any violation of the laws whereupon sexual intercourse has been permitted, has been, is, and will be, attended with corresponding results; and as such violations most likely exist where numbers cohered together, I consider both gonorrhœa and syphilis to have been coeval with the origin of mankind. They both doubtlessly are much modified by climate, habits, and constitution; and therefrom ensue the many modifications we see in Europe, and the other large portions of the globe. The proofs that can be adduced in favor of this hypothesis are interminable.
It is said that, until the arrival of some British sailors at Otaheite, the disease was unknown in that territory. Possibly, in its present modification; but previously to this new intercourse, it is most probable that the sexual cohabitation was not so promiscuous or frequent, and that that very infringement entailed a new form of irritation. In married persons, of even temperate passions, and of most careful habits, local sexual disorders are of frequent occurrence, the slightest derangement of female health giving rise to vaginal disturbance, that unsuspectingly is increased by the marital embrace, and communicated to the husband; and only from its presence does it occur, that the coitus may have been the cause of it. By attending to the simple suggestion of nature, namely, abstinence, cleanliness, and rest, a cure is effected; but where neglected, or should either party be unfaithful to the marriage vow, the disease becomes magnified, and extended to, mayhap, innocent parties.
The next question is, are gonorrhœa and syphilis identical? Certainly not, any more than the very many modifications of generative sores. It is absolutely, now-a-days, a difficult question to solve, whether this or that be syphilis; so numerous and yet so closely in resemblance are the ulcers that ensue after sexual cohabitation. The eye is not to be trusted, because so different is real from spurious syphilis that the French surgeons decide the point by inoculating a healthy portion of the body with the matter or discharge from what they suppose to be a syphilitic ulcer. If a corresponding ulcer be produced, the disease is decided to be syphilis. If, on the other hand, no result follow, the patient is proclaimed free from that malady, and stated to be laboring under merely common local irritation. What is still more curious is this: a patient will have ulcers, which every medical man will pronounce, on beholding, to be chancres; yet, upon this trial, the inoculation will not evince them to be so. A while after, supposing the chancres to be healed, secondary or other symptoms will show themselves—sore throat, spotted skin, glandular enlargements, or painful joints, follow. The same consequences oftentimes ensue after gonorrhœa. The primary diseases can not be identical, because the symptoms are vastly different, and the parts attacked are also unlike; and yet there is this anomaly, that the after-consequences frequently closely resemble each other.