original edition of JAEGER has no further merit than that which belongs to the collection of a large number of type specimens of irregular progression as regards size, and not altogether uniform in character, and the substitution of arbitrary numbers for the old familiar names. Whether the responsibility of this travesty of JAEGER lies with the English publisher or with the Philadelphia printer, such blundering as is shown in this series of tests is unpardonable. As regards No. 15, which the author evidently supposes he has added to the series, it is given, together with many others which he has omitted, in all the editions of JAEGER which we possess, namely, those of 1854, 1860, and 1865.

The mechanical execution of the book is unequal; the paper and letter press are fair for an American medical book, but many of the wood-cuts are very bad, both in execution and printing. Among the cuts we notice five very old friends, whose existence dates back at least twenty years.

J. G.

THE MEDICAL USE OF ELECTRICITY, with special reference to General Electrization as a Tonic in Neuralgia, Rheumatism, Dyspepsia, etc., etc. With illustrative cases. By GEO. N. BEARD, M.D., and A. D. ROCKWELL, M.D. New York: William Wood & Co. 1867. 12mo., pp. 65.

[For sale by PETER SMITH, Bookseller, St. Louis.]

It is manifest that the medical profession is awaking from its indifference toward the therapeutical uses of electricity. Writings of able explorers in this field have become numerous, and although practitioners generally still show a deplorable deficiency of information in regard to the remedial effects, capabilities, and indications of galvanization and faradisation, yet the lately increased supply of instructive works permits some conclusion to be drawn as to the demand.

The little work before us (a republication of articles which originally appeared in the Medical Record) treats mainly of a new mode of using the interrupted current or "faradaization," as the authors correctly propose to spell the word, namely not locally, as in the manner of DUCHENNE, but over the general surface, so that the electric current may affect the whole system. The authors have found "general electrization" to have a much wider range of applicability in medical practice than the localized

use of the current. According to their experience, "the descending faradaic current, thoroughly applied, with the negative pole at the feet, is a tonic and corrective of far greater efficiency than any internal remedy now known to science" (p. 25). "Although paralysis in its different forms is usually more benefited by electricity than by any system of internal medication, it is yet among the least tractable of the various diseases that present themselves for this method of treatment. The diseases which are found to yield more readily and surely to general electrization are neuralgia, dyspepsia, rheumatism of the subacute and chronic varieties, chronic bronchitis, constipation, amenorrhea, anæmia, hysteria, and general debility" (p. 26). "Localized electrization, according to the method of DUCHENNE and his followers, is serviceable in paralysis, acute neuralgia, and kindred affections; but where a general tonic effect is desired, as in dyspepsia, rheumatism, amenorrhoea (etc.), general electrization is indispensable" (p. 62). "It is a tonic, and it is to be applied on the same principles, subject to many of the same limitations as are all other tonics, except that it is more rapidly and surely effective than any internal medication" (p. 64).

That is saying a good deal in favor of a new remedy, and in bold, assured tone, savoring a very little of the dogmatic. But in the average the views of our authors are related soberly, and in commendably fluent and readable language, so that we gratefully acknowledge the pleasure we have had in their perusal. For proof of them the authors quote chiefly their own experience, as illustrated by quite a number of cases here recorded.

The essay is preceded by a short explanation of terms; but an index is wanting. It is printed on very good paper, and in beautiful, clear type; but the heavy and handsome binding impresses us unfavorably, being out of proportion and too pretentious for the modest little treatise. G. B.

CLINICAL LECTURES ON THE PRINCIPLES AND PRAC TICE OF MEDICINE. By JOHN HUGHES BENNETT, M.D., F.R.S.E., Professor of the Institutes of Medicine, and senior Professor of Clinical Medicine in the University of Edinburgh, etc., etc. Fifth American, from the fourth London edition. With 537 illustrations on wood. New York: William Wood & Co. 1867. 8vo., pp. 1022.

[For sale by PETER SMITH, Bookseller, St. Louis.]

Again a new edition bears testimony to the popularity of Dr. BENNETT'S clinical work, which has been so eminently successful on this continent, and is so generally known that it would be superfluous to commend it to our readers. The first American reprint (of the third English edition) appeared in 1861, and a second edition in 1863; the third American reprint (of the fourth London ed.) appeared in 1866, and already we have a fifth.* These last editions have increased the volume to over a thousand pages, seventy more than the older issues. Comparing the work before us with the second American edition, we find that the last original edition (1865) is a pretty thoroughly revised one.

In the Introduction, the highly instructive remarks on the mode of conducting the clinical course are much extended in defense of practical examination of the patient by the student,―the plan of instruction which the author was accustomed to pursue. In the summary on the present state of practical medicine we find only one new paragraph (relating to our knowledge of animal and vegetable parasites). There would seem to have been room for more; six years have passed between the two last English editions,―and six years in modern medicine are a long time.

The only addition of consequence in the first (symptomatological) section is the chapter on laryngoscopy, occupying 5 pages, and illustrated by 14 new wood-cuts. In practicing percussion and auscultation in the hospital or for clinical purposes, Dr. BENNETT uses outlines of the trunk printed on slips of paper for conveniently recording the results; copies of these are shown on page 62. The general rules for auscultation are given more fully, and 9 wood-cuts added.

Undoubtedly the most interesting, if not the most important feature of this new edition is the author's "molecular theory of organization." The learned doctor is here certainly going to the

*We regret that the fourth American edition is not at hand for comparison. We compare chiefly with the second American (or third London) edition.

very foundation of things. Though this theory of his has been published years ago, it is now for the first time embodied in his great clinical work, and is shortly stated as follows (p. 118):

"The ultimate parts of the organization are not cells, nor nuclei, but the minute molecules from which these are formed. They possess independent physical and vital properties, which enable them to unite and arrange themselves so as to produce higher forms. Among these are nuclei, cells, fibres, and membranes, all of which may be produced directly from molecules. The development and growth of organic tissues is owing to the successive formation of histogenetic and histolytic molecules. The breaking down of one substance is often the necessary step to the formation of another; so that the histolytic or disintegrative molecules of one period become the histogenetic or formative molecules of another."

In his exposition of this exceedingly simple and radical explanation, it strikes us the author committed one fundamental error by omitting his definition of a "molecule." Is it a thing without special form? or is it so small that we can not detect its form? Either one of these suppositions must be correct, for nowhere do we find the least allusion to its shape. In fig. 125, the "molecules" are represented as (histological) globules, and in fig. 130 they are pictured as (histological) granules. If we are not able to describe their form, of what use has been the "improvement in optical instruments" and our high magnifying powers, which the author says have enabled us to arrive at these grand conclusions? We see "molecules" with every magnifying power, high or low, with a powerful Nachet, and with a simple lens; we see "dust" with the naked eye. But what appeared as a mere speck with a low power, becomes a cell or other thing of some definite shape with a higher power; therein lies the advantage of the "improved optical instruments.”—And yet he can not mean things without special form, the chemist's molecules, for he speaks (p. 116) of the visible molecules of the histologist.

The

We can not conceive of life without organization. ultimate, the very last element to which we can refer vital phenomena must still be organized,-must have a definite chemical composition and physical form. "Vital force" surely does not reside in amorphous particles of albumen. We observe how oxygen is pumped into a living mass of albumen and fibrine and

fat and glue, and yet no putrefaction ensues; this is "in opposition to chemical and physical laws," and must be due to "vital force." Now if we invite Mr. Simple to witness how a photographer places a pane of glass in his box and draws forth a picture, he will be likely to surmise some iconogenetic force residing in the photographic camera, for an ordinary box will not act like this. Mr. Simple has as perfect a right to suppose a force, as physiologists have. But wherein consists this iconogenetic force of the photographer's apparatus that acts contrary to all the known laws governing ordinary boxes? In the especial chemical composition and physical construction of its parts. So of the ultimate living constituents of the body; they also are machines of such material and of such especial construction, that they seem to us, who are ignorant of this construction, to produce phenomena other than those following physical and chemical laws in dead masses.

If, however, Dr. BENNETT allows his molecules to possess these requisites, to be extremely small bodies of a special material and a special construction, then we are a step nearer towards agreeing with him. Then the next question will be, whether the cells, or the nuclei, or the still minuter organisms he terms molecules, are really the ultimate vital, active constituents of the body. This question is a purely histological one, which no amount of acute reasoning will solve; and we would accordingly rather await the solution of it by histologists more experienced than Dr. BENNETT. We are disposed to think that VIRCHOW himself would not care much whether his pathology be called cellular or nuclear. The change would be chiefly verbal. BEALE'S histology is also in a sense molecular, but even he makes every molecule a derivative of some living cell (germinal matter), and would probably object to that spontaneous-generation picture of Dr. Bennett's on page 119 (figs. 125-129). The latter is an especially weak feature; for the molecules upon which the author bases his arguments are in reality germs of either vibriones or fungi, and are not generated in the "clear animal infusion," for they do not begin as infinitely small specks as the theory would seem to demand, but are large enough to be intercepted by cotton, as PASTEUR has shown; besides, the same vibriones would appear in the "clear animal infusion" after it had been boiled-i. e., killed, if left exposed to the air. This illustration of the new theory is clearly not in accordance with the assertion on page 123,