E. H. Tracey, the Hon.,EnglandL. J. E. Rudnick, Phil. Doc.,PrussiaJ. Hailes, Major, Bengal ArmyE. C. Ellery,LondonHugh Barr,Paisley, ScotlandG. Pietsch,LeedsJ. H. O. Moore, Capt. H. B. M. S.Sig. Goetzel,ViennaEdward Birch, British ConsulCount J. Schaffgotsch, Chamberlain to King of PrussiaJ. F. Sparkes,EnglandBaron F. D’Unsulz,PolandC. A. Lane, Lieut. Col., Bengal ArmyBaron Schmidburg, Sect. Austrian Gov.Alonzo Draper,New YorkA. B. Mills,GlasgowT. V. Ganahl,Inspruck, TyrolJ. T. Delvarnes, son of Ex-President of ChiliC. W. Ganahl,DittoH. A. Muller,Hambro’H. C. Wright,Philadelphia, N. Y.Carl Burmester,DittoH. D. Avrainville,DittoH. Schierholz,DittoBaron Rudolph,Lüttechan, AustriaTheod. Heyman,DittoCount Guillaume D’Aichott,WestphaliaE. Holzmann,DittoCharles Dr. Pickler,Gratz, StyriaCount Szirmay, Chamberlain, A. G.Baron de Leutch, Capt. Austrian ArmyH. G. Robinson,YorkshireCount Pierre, Dr.,Goess, StyriaL. de Grotoski,PolandBaron Keller, Capt. Austrian ArmyNapoleon Maleski,DittoCount Zelenski, Chamberlain,AustriaJ. Slatter,Isle of JerseyGustav Hirschfeld,HolsteinLe Chevalier de Montiglio, Sec. Legation,SardiniaH. K. Marcher, M. D.DenmarkPrince Auguste Ruspoli,RomeCount Wallowitz,PolandF. Kronwald, Councillor,AustriaL. Lemoile, French ConsulCount Zeno Sarav, Austrian ChamberlainBaron de Wrede,AustriaBaron Tindal, Sec. Legation,HollandCount Henkel, Dannesmark,PrussiaThe Rev. Thos. Smythe,EnglandC. Balsch, Grand Logothet,MoldaviaJ. Hamilton,Carnacassa, Monaghan, IrelandBaron de Pabst,HollandL. Bardel, Lieut. Austrian S.J. N. Spencer, Surgeon Dentist,LondonH. de Strager, Lieut.,DittoF. B. Y. Ribas, Spanish Consul,OdessaC. Niemann, Provincial Deputy,Pomerania, PrussiaF. Harnish, Apothecary,BresslauVictor Kurnatowksi,PolandDonilzi de Galetti, Capt., Russian ArmyBaron N. de Höpken,StockholmAlexr. de Harmasaki,MoldaviaGenges Siebil,Lyons, FranceV. Hake, Lieut. Col.,PrussiaKarl Quovos,Prussian PolandV. Crety, Lieut.,DittoFrancis Rieger,CracowOtto Schramm, Royal Councillor,PrussiaJohann Gotthilf, President Criminal Court,PrussiaEdward Hoffman, Lieut. Prussian S.Count Oscar Roswadowski,AustriaEdward Calvos. Lieut. Austrian S.Baron J. Wallish,DittoJ. Gibbs,Enniscorthy, IrelandBaron M. Lyncker, Lieut.,PrussiaEdward Joseph Tabelar, Councillor,ViennaBaron Mezenthin, Major,DittoBaron C. V. Radzig,BavariaIvan A. Roiz,Brazils, S. AmericaMichael Avrial, Merchant,ParisNicholas Arnault,ParisIgnace St. de Ionnewald, Major,AustriaGuiseppe Weyher,TriesteV. Siegl, Barrister,AustriaAugust Navez, Lieut.,BelgiumV. de Lauken, Lieut. Prussian S.Wilhelm Lommatsch,SaxonyV. Siegler, Capt. Austrian S.Baron A. Ledderer, Colonel,AustriaCount V. Orosz, Sec. Excise Bureau,ViennaVon Kutzl, Lieut.,DittoV. Perboe, Lieut. Austrian S.Von Bovelmo, Lieut.,DittoL. Liebshang, Postmaster,AustriaBaron Huelberg, Lieut.,Ditto
“P.S.—We, the undersigned, cannot vouch for the exactitude of each particular in the four cases, related above, not having been at Gräfenberg during their occurrence; but we are happy to state our conviction and experience to be fully in favor of this mode of treatment.
E. Hallman, M. D.,BerlinR. L. Jones,Luton, BedfordshirePeter Wilson, Writer to the Signet,ScotlandA. J. Colvin,Albany, N. Y.Horatio Greenhough,U. S.A. F. Webster, R. N.,Battle Abbey, SussexA. Schrotterick, M. D.,NorwayW. Cybulvo, M. D.,PragueFrancisco Bazan,de la Province de Seville en Espana, M. D.Dr. Hempin,PrussiaJ. M. Gutterieg Estrada, late PlenipotentiaryW. Murray,Monaghan, Irelandto the Court of London, fromMexicoW. S. Ellis,Middle Temple, LondonC. M. Mecker,AmericaT. H. Cohen,London”
In 1845 a work of a very different tendency appeared, which, though approving of the hydropathic treatment in itself, denounced Priessnitz’s application of it, and calumniated him personally in the most unwarrantable and groundless manner. The author was R. H. Graham, M. D.; and so unpardonable was his attack on Priessnitz that it drew forth the following letter.
“To the Editor of the London Times,
“Gräfenberg, 2nd February, 1845.
“Sir.—We, the undersigned British and Americans, who have resided here for periods varying from three months to two years and upwards, and who consequently have had ample opportunities of acquiring correct information, deem it our duty publicly to assert that a work, entitled ‘A true Report of the Water-cure, by Robert Hay Graham, M.D.’ abounds in gross exaggerations, mis-statements, and calumnies respecting Priessnitz. It would lengthen this document too much to go into a detailed repetition of all those portions of Dr. Graham’s work which we could contradict; we therefore refrain from noticing any in particular: it will be sufficient to say, thatfrom personal observations, we can deny several of Dr. Graham’s allegations, and, from information upon which wecanrely, we are convinced that many more are totally devoid of foundation.
“We have seen a letter dated January 15th, 1845, from Captain Wollf, whom Dr. Graham gives as his authority for some of his most unfounded assertions, and to whom he dedicates his book; and we beg attention to the following extracts from that letter.
“‘I not only’ says Captain Wolff, ‘was a passionate Hydropathist, but am still, to this day, known as an out-and-out one ... the information which I gave Dr. Graham, concerned solely the scientific part of the Water-cure, and could not, of course, be otherwise than favourable; I being, as above stated, an Hydropathist. With regard to the wretched stuff you allude to, as to whether Mr. and Mrs. P. drink wine or grog, whether Miss J. S. and other English ladies were treated with or without clothes, the tiresome story about Munde, or whether the Princess L. did or did not employ the Water-cure, with such like, I have never concerned myself; for I lived at Gräfenberg exclusively for the Water-cure.’
“Thus does Dr. Graham’s principal witness fail him! It is only necessary to add, that we do not place the least reliance on any of Dr. Graham’s statements. We are led to say thus much from regard to truth, and from esteem for a great and good man, who has been basely vilified.
“In our opinion Priessnitz, from long practice, varied experience, and close observation, guided by his extraordinary genius, has acquired so intimate a knowledge of the action of water, of its dangers and advantages as regards the human body, both in health and disease, that the most delicate invalid may safely rely on his judgment; and in this opinion we are sustained by the fact of his great success in the treatment of almost every variety of disease, which surpasses that of any physicians on record. The patients who seek his aid may be divided, with few exceptions, into two classes:—those who by medical men have been pronounced incurable; and those, whose diseases are the result of medical treatment: and, out of the large number whom he yearly treats, it would be absurd to expect that he should never lose one. But we cannot believe that the Water-cure is the best remedy for disease, without also believing that he, its discoverer, is the best practitioner of it; and to convince us to the contrary would require somewhat stronger and more unexceptionable testimony than that of Dr. Graham. From the portrait which Dr. Graham draws of Priessnitz, one who did not know him, would be apt to imagine him as full of assumption and Charlatanism, whereas he is as far from either as any man; being as remarkable for his simplicity and truth, as for a native modesty and unassuming propriety of demeanour, which, combined with his kindliness of heart, win respect and regard from almost all who approach him. Requesting that you will do us the favour to give insertion to this letter, We are, Sir, Your obedient Servants,
Lichfield (The Earl of)Horatio Greenough,U.S.E. H. Tracey (The Hon.)W. D’ArleyW. S. Ellis,TempleJohn GibbsRichard L. JonesWilliam MurrayGretton BrightAndrew J. Colvin,U.S.Augustus Blair (Capt.)Alonzo Draper,U.S.J. H. O. Moore (Capt.)G. PietschThomas Smithell, M.A.James HamiltonAndrew B. MillsHenry J. RobinsonC. SewellC. H. Meeker,U.S.”
If Dr. Graham’s object was to injure Priessnitz, it was, unquestionably thoroughly defeated; for his fame continued to increase, and at the end of the same year, Gräfenberg washonoured by a visit from the Archduke Charles, heir apparent to the imperial crown of Austria, who treated Priessnitz with the greatest consideration, and shewed great interest in the Hydropathic treatment. On his arrival, an address was presented to him, numerously signed by the visitors at Gräfenberg, and presented by—
Don I. M. Estrada, Ex-MinisterBaron A. D. Lotzbeck, Chamberlainfrom Mexico to Londonto the King of BavariaCount Cyacki, Grand Marshal of Poland.Capt. Moore, 35th Regt.Count Shaffgatch, ChamberlainF. La. Moile, Ex-Consul de France.to the King of Prussia
The Archduke seemed much pleased with it; and as it was a novelty in Germany, where addresses are unknown, we think a translation may be interesting to our readers.
Address presented toArchduke Franz Carl,at Gräfenberg, October 4th, 1845.
“We, the undersigned natives of various countries, enjoying here the hospitality and protection of a paternal government, hasten to take advantage of the propitious occasion offered by the presence of your Imperial and Royal Highness, to lay our homage at your feet. How could we fail to evince the sentiments of gratitude which we entertain towards your illustrious house, for the favour it has deigned to grant for the development of a system, which has produced such happy results on ourselves, on that around us, and on the thousands of invalids who have preceded us. The protection of Government having been extended to the establishment at Gräfenberg and Freiwaldau, your Royal and Imperial Highness has judged it not unworthy to see with your own eyes the marvellous effects of a treatment, which gradually spreading over the universe, will preserve the human race from the double curse of intemperance and disease. For this condescension we tender our thanks. In all times and in all countries the use of cold water as a curative means has been acknowledged. The great physicians of past ages already had recourse to it. Travellers relate singular cures effected by its means amongst even the most savage tribes. In recent times we occasionally see light feebly penetrating through the darkness of prejudice and routine, and revealing the neglected virtues of this simplegift of nature; but these facts remaining isolated, the germs of such a noble discovery had hitherto always remained undeveloped. It was reserved to the soil of Austria to give birth to the immortal author of a system which can already rank among the sciences. Priessnitz, a simple farmer, in a poor and retired hamlet, obeying only the promptings of his genius, has triumphed over all obstacles, and, still young, has marched with a rapid step towards the destiny of great men. Relying solely on observation and experience, he realised truths which the science of ages could not reveal. The fame of his marvellous cures resounded at first in the immediate neighbourhood: but his star always rising and never vacillating, at last ended by shining throughout the world. Invalids from the most remote countries hastened in great numbers to submit themselves implicitly to his directions. Many disciples of medicine even hesitated not to throw aside their prejudice, and become enlightened by his discoveries. His cottage became the refuge of suffering humanity, his hamlet the seat of a new doctrine; still, far from being intoxicated with so much success and such unexpected good fortune, Priessnitz has in no way deviated from his original simplicity and primitive manners. His greatest ambition is the accomplishment of the laborious task he has imposed on himself; his sweetest recompence the affection and veneration of all who surround him. We know not which to admire most, the rare genius of this gifted man, or the firmness and modesty which characterise him. Guided by gratitude, and the admiration we feel for the Hydropathic system and its origination, we have ventured to present this humble address to your Imperial and Royal Highness, trusting that the visit of such an enlightened Prince will be a good augury for the further dev[e]lopment and extension of the curative system from which we have ourselves experienced such happy results.”
In the ensuing summer a most flattering testimony was decreed to Priessnitz by the Emperor of Austria. It was a gold medal (called aVerdienst Medailleor medal of merit), and was presented to him by the Governor of Troppau, on the 7th of July, 1846, at the altar, with great ceremony, in the very church in which he had been formerly denounced. Shortly after, an incident occurred which had nearly deprivedthe world of this great man: this was the marriage of his eldest daughter, then only seventeen, to an Hungarian nobleman of large fortune. The young couple started for Hungary; and Priessnitz, on taking leave of them, was observed to be much affected. Later in the day, whilst visiting his patients, he found it difficult to lift one hand to his head. He hurried home, where he hardly arrived when he was suddenly struck with general paralysis, and was quite insensible. His attendants resorted to his own remedies, he was placed in a tepid bath and rubbed by four persons for nearly two hours before he began to regain his senses, when he ordered the tepid water to be changed for cold; and he has since been heard to say, the former would not have been attended with sufficient reaction, and consequently would not have had the desired effect. He now ordered his own treatment and recovered in a few days; his health was afterwards re-established by a fortnight’s visit to his daughter in Hungary.
A few months since he was rejoiced by the birth of a son. This event conferred great happiness on him; for, as may be remembered, his first-born whom he lost was a son, and all his other children until the last, were daughters.
It is to be hoped, that Providence will spare his valuable life to see his son grow up, so that he may initiate him experimentally in the theory of Hydropathy, which can never be perfectly disseminated in any other way.
Several monuments and fountains erected at Gräfenberg, testify the admiration and respect in which Priessnitz is held. The English and the Hamburghers are at present engaged in erecting similar testimonies. The latter have placed his bust in the Exchange at Hamburg.
Judging from the strides Hydropathy is making, it is fair to conclude that in the course of time these examples will be followed by every nation in the world.1
The term “hydropathy,” has been cavilled at; its etymological sense meaning “water-disease,” whilst its conventional sense means “water-cure.” If disposed to dispute about terms, we might say that “physiology,” in its etymological sense, means merely a discourse about nature; whilst, in a conventional sense, we understand it to treat of the science of animal life. For want of a better word, that of “hydropathy” was adopted, to express the manner of curing disease, by cold and tepid general and local baths, wet sheets (sometimes called linen baths), dripping-sheets, douche and friction, air, exercise, and drinking water. To this may be added, simplicity in our habits, and temperance in our manner of living.
In fact, by the term “hydropathy,” were intended all those appliances by which nature may be put in the best possible way of assisting herself, since no allopathist,homæopathist, or hydropathist, will pretend that anything he can administer has of itself any healing virtue. It is a common observation, that riding, climbing, and exercise, give us strength; the horses, hedges, mountains and ground, do not, however, impart strength, but they afford the opportunity, the necessary resistance to develop or increase that strength which is in us. The weak man, do what you will, can only develop the strength which is in him, and the strong man the same. Let, therefore, the reader judge which is best calculated to cause that development—hydropathy or drugs.
It promotes the vital energies, quickens the action of the absorbents, strengthens the nerves, allays irritation, promotes healthy action of the vital organs.
The extreme vessels deposit healthy particles, which the absorbents remove.
Dr. Gibbs, in his “Letters from Gräfenberg,” states that water, applied hydropathically, acts in the following ways:—
1st. By the more rapid liberation of caloric.2nd. By accelerating the change of tissues.3rd. By constringing the capillaries.4th. By increasing nervous power.5th. By restoring tone to the skin.6th. By derivation.7th. By forwarding the elimination of morbific matter; or, in other words, as a sedative, alterative, tonic, stimulant, derivative, and counter-irritant.
1st. By the more rapid liberation of caloric.
2nd. By accelerating the change of tissues.
3rd. By constringing the capillaries.
4th. By increasing nervous power.
5th. By restoring tone to the skin.
6th. By derivation.
7th. By forwarding the elimination of morbific matter; or, in other words, as a sedative, alterative, tonic, stimulant, derivative, and counter-irritant.
And taken internally, it acts—
1st. As a solvent, and contributes to the greater part of the transformations.2nd. Gives tone to the stomach.3rd. Promotes the secretions and excretions, particularly from the skin, bowels, and kidneys.4th. It is a most important and indispensable element in the blood; and “its partial application,” says Dr. Johnson, “acts by determining the force of oxygen from one part to another; it produces all the effects of bleeding and blistering—except the pain,” and he might have added, the debility.
1st. As a solvent, and contributes to the greater part of the transformations.
2nd. Gives tone to the stomach.
3rd. Promotes the secretions and excretions, particularly from the skin, bowels, and kidneys.
4th. It is a most important and indispensable element in the blood; and “its partial application,” says Dr. Johnson, “acts by determining the force of oxygen from one part to another; it produces all the effects of bleeding and blistering—except the pain,” and he might have added, the debility.
The hydropathic treatment causes the elimination of all foreign matters from the body, and thereby promotes contraction, without which there can be no health, which Dr. Billing has shewn to demonstration; he states “that the proximate cause ofalldisease is relaxation and enlargement of the capillaries: the indication of a cure, therefore, is to constringe the capillaries, and cause them to contract, and resume their healthy state.”
“As all organic action is contraction, all organic or animal strength depends upon the power of the different parts of the body to contract.” If it be true, that the effect to be brought about in the treatment ofalldisease is to unload and constringe the capillaries, how can this be better achieved than by the sweating or wet-sheet process, and the cold bath; Dr. Johnson says—“The hydropathic treatment, which unloads the capillaries by sweating, and constringes them by cold, is clearly an efficient substitute for bleeding, purging, vomiting, uva ursi, digitalis, antimony, mercury, arsenic, nitrate of silver, sulphate of copper, iodine, iron, and multitudes of other remedies, enumerated by Dr. Billing, merely by their power of unloading and constringing the capillaries.”
Priessnitz’s theory:—
1st. That by the hydropathic treatment, the bad juices are brought to, and discharged by, the skin.2nd. A new circulation is given to the diseased or inactive organs, and better juices infused into them.3rd. All the functions of the body are brought into a normal state, not by operating upon any particular function, but upon the whole.
1st. That by the hydropathic treatment, the bad juices are brought to, and discharged by, the skin.
2nd. A new circulation is given to the diseased or inactive organs, and better juices infused into them.
3rd. All the functions of the body are brought into a normal state, not by operating upon any particular function, but upon the whole.
If these are the results of hydropathy—and that they are so, has never been disputed; nay, the truth is even proved by the following great medical authority unconnected with the water cure: it must be admitted that the sooner drugs are dispensed with the better.
British and Foreign Medical Review, and Quarterly Journal, October, 1846.—Extract.
“The water cure is astomachic, since it invariably increases the appetite.
“It is alocal calefacientin the wet sheet covered by a dry one.
“It is aderivative; cold friction at one part, byexciting increased action there, producing corresponding diminution elsewhere;the compressfrequently acting, if not like a blister, at leastlike a mustard poultice.
“It is a local as well as a general counter-irritant.
“It is essentially alterativein the continual removal of old matter: its renewal is shewn in the maintenance of the same weight.
“An important hydropathic principle is, that almost all itsmeasures are applied to the surface. One of the most formidable difficulties with which the ordinary physician has to contend is, that nearly all his remedies reach the point to which they are directedthrough one channel.
“The only means of relieving certain diseases isby inundating the stomachand bowels with foreign andfrequentlyto thempernicious substances.
“Hydropathy employs a system of most extensive energetic general and local counter irritation.
“A fifth physiological feature of hydropathy is the number of coolings. Thegeneration of caloric has been traced to its right source. It results from the burning up of waste matter, which by accumulation would become injurious.
“It is singular enough that almost all arguments usedagainst cold bathing are the strongest theoretical arguments in its favor. Dr. Baynard, a most sarcastic writer, gives us the following anecdote:—
“Here a demi-brained doctor of more note thannous, asked, in the amazed agony of his half-understanding, how ’twas possible that an external application should affect the bowels, and cure pain within? ‘Why doctor,’ quoth an old woman standing by, ‘by the same reason that, being wet-shod or catching cold from without, should give you the gripes and pain within.’
“If a rude exposure of the surface to cold and wet is capable of producing internal disease, there is nodoubt that a close relation exists between these agents and the morbidconditions of internal parts.”
After devoting upwards of thirty pages to prove the value of Hydropathy, the reviewer sums up as follows:—
“After what has been said and written in favor of Hydropathy.—Judgment must therefore be entered by default against its opponents, and hydropathy is entitled to the verdict of harmlessness, since cause has never been shown to the contrary.”
Are the effects, as described by hydropathists and by the British and Foreign Medical Review, produced without purging, vomiting, drugging, or the lancet—or by what other means are such essential results to be attained? We answer, by hydropathy alone are they to be produced, through the medium of the external and internal skin or mucous membrane, the most important organ in the human structure, and the most neglected by the guardians of the public health; and by the promotion of all the secretions and excretions.
The Abbé Sanctorius, a Florentine, might be said to have spent twenty years of his life in a balance determining the amount of matters thrown off by the pores of the skin. To ascertain this, he first cleaned and then placed small glasses, some not longer than thimbles, on various parts of the human frame, when the result proved that every man ought to pass off from his person, daily, from six to seven pounds. Two and a half pounds are supposed to be released by theordinary modes of evacuation, and the remainder by the pores of the skin. Now, if this exhalation is impeded, and the necessary amount not eliminated (which must happen if the skin has lost that energy, which exercise of the body and cold ablutions can alone support), what becomes of the superfluous juices thus retained in the system? The answer is easy; they circulate through the internal organs and become the source of fevers, inflammations, dropsy, and all sorts of diseases. Medical men see these effects, but do not suppose them to have resulted from suppressed perspiration. Instead of attacking the skin, they assault the stomach and bowels, weaken the digestive organs, and by that means create disease; whilst water, on the contrary, is a remedy, possessing at once dissolving and strengthening properties, which would seem to neutralise each other, but that we have daily evidence to the contrary.
Herein lies the great secret of hydropathy: by its modes of application, morbid humours are drawn to the surface and eliminated, the body is cooled, and the skin put into a state to perform its indispensable duty. In internal inflammations, the morbid heat from the internal skin or mucous membrane is drawn off by the application of cold and irritation to the surface, and the disease subdued without charging the stomach with anything but pure spring water, which in contradistinction to drugs, produces the most salubrious effects.
The following extract shows that the skin is the great drain through which matters injurious to the system, and superfluous heat are drawn off and accounts for hydropathy being so universal a remedy.
A Practical Treatise on Healthy Skin, byErasmus Wilson,1 Vol. 1845.—Extract.
“The structure of the skin and the diseases to which it is liable, have latterly received from many of the medical profession considerable attention. The skin is that soft and pliant membrane which invests the whole of the external surface of the body, as also the interior which is called mucous membrane.
“The construction of these two membranes may easilyinform us, without having recourse to fanciful hypotheses, how disease, affecting any part of this membrane, either internally or externally, may pass to any other part and affect the whole; and thus how a faulty digestion in a lady, a disease of the investing or mucous membrane of the stomach, may show itself in eruptions on the face. We see at once, too, how it happens that, calling into more active action the shower bath and flesh brush, dyspepsia may be avoided or cured. It serves also to explain the circumstance noticed by Fourcroy and Vauquelin, that the skin, with all its products, ‘is capable of supplying the office of the kidneys,’ and carrying off, as we know it to imbibe nourishment, the indispensable excretions for which the proper organs may be deficient.
“In explanation of this circumstance, we must remark, that the skin, internal or external, in which terminate all the arteries and commence the veins, in which too, the nerves of sensation commence, and the nerves of volition terminate, not only envelopes the whole body internally and externally, but is also the secretory organ of every part, and the immediate means of communication with the external world.
“The skin is the organ of contact with the external world, and the means of making us acquainted with every part of the universe. The senses of touch, of hearing, of smell, of taste, are all exercised by the skin.
“By the vessels terminating in the skin, or of which it is formed, all the phenomena of nutrition, and decay of appetite, and sensation, health and disease are produced.
“Whatever may be the climate or temperature in which the body is placed, it is kept at nearly one uniform and vital heat by the varying and adapting operations of the skin.
“The skin is the organ by which electricity is conducted into and out of the body.
“Its functions are, in short, proportioned to its vastness; and as it envelopes every part, so manifold are its purposes.
“The structure of the skin is highly curious; it consists of two layers; the one horny and insensible, guarding from injury; the other highly sensitive, the universal organ of feeling, which lies beneath; the latter feels, but the former dulls the impression.
“The following will show how, by the perspiratory organs, excess of water is removed from the blood, and the uniform temperature of the body preserved.
“Taken separately, the little perspiratory tube with its appended gland, is calculated to awaken in the mind very little idea of the importance of the system to which it belongs; but when the vast number of similar organs composing this system are considered, we are led to form some notion, however imperfect, of their probable influence in the health and comfort of the individual; the reality surpasses imagination and almost belief.
“The perspiratory pores on the palm of the hand, are found to be 3,528 in a square inch; now each of these pores being the aperture of a little tube of about a quarter of an inch long, it follows that in a square inch of skin on the palm of the hand, there exists a length of tube equal to 882 inches, or 73½ feet. Such adrainageas 73 feet in every square inch of skin, assuming this to be the average for the whole body, is something wonderful; and the thought naturally intrudes itself, What if thisdrainage were obstructed? Could we need a stronger argument for enforcing the necessity of attention to the skin?On the pulps of the finger, where the ridges of the sensitive layer of the true skin are somewhat finer than the palm of the hand and on the heel, where the ridges are coarser, the number of pores on the square inch was 2,268, and the length of tube 567 inches, or 47 feet. To obtain an estimate of the length of tube of the perspiratory system of the whole surface of the body, I think,” says Dr. Wilson, “that 2,800 might be taken as a fair average of the number of pores in the square inch, and 700 consequently of the number of inches in length. Now the number of square inches of surface in a man of ordinary height and bulk is 2,500, the number of pores therefore, 7,000,000, and the number of inches of perspiratory tube 1,750,000, that is 145,833 feet, or 48,000 yards, or nearly 28 miles.
“This is only a specimen of the extraordinary structure.
“Besides the perspiratory vessels, the skin is provided with vessels for secreting an oily substance, which is of a different nature at different parts of the body; with vessels to repair abrasion and provide for its growth, and carry off its decayed parts; with nerves and blood-vessels that are probably as numerous and extensive as the perspiratory vessels.
“It must at the same time be remembered, that the interior skin or mucous membrane, is provided with equally numerousand complicated vessels, to answer some analogous purposes. The whole of them may be affected by applications to the external skin.”
Dr. Wilson has, in his work, introduced some equally curious and instructive passages, as to the formation and uses of the oil-glands, the structure and functions of the hair, the influence of diet and clothing, and the effect of exercise and cleanliness on the health of this extensive organ.
Dr. Rauss, author of a work on hydropathy which passed through several editions, says, “It is almost impossible for any one to die of an acute disease, in whom reaction can be produced, and who from the commencement is treated Hydropathically.
“Those unacquainted with this treatment will naturally doubt its wonderful power; and the physician, when he reflects upon the number of patients who in acute diseases have perished under his hands, will no doubt treat it with derision; nevertheless,” says the Doctor, “as I am not advancing a doctrine that may be controverted,I here publicly make known that I am ready, by deeds as well as words, to prove all that I have stated.” “To state,” adds the Doctor, “$1” The cure of all acute diseases, of whatever nature or kind, with these exceptions, is to Priessnitz merely child’s play; in no instance of nervous fevers or inflammations, in any stage, was he ever known to lose a patient; and what is worthy of remark in acute cases, a cure is effected in a few days without the subsequent debility which results from other treatment. Whilst I was at Gräfenberg, all descriptions of acute attacks came under my immediate notice, and I assert, without fear of contradiction, that they were all cured, with but one exception,—and that a highly valued friend of my own, a medical man, who was attacked with inflammation of the lungs. The doctor, who was advanced in life, retained his old prejudices, andconsequently refused to submit to the treatment until too late. Confident in the power of Hydropathy for the last six years, whenever occasions offered (and they were not few during my sojourn in Ireland), I applied the treatment with invariable success. A case of inflammation of the mucous membrane is worthy of notice. One M. D. declared his belief that the patient would not live two hours; the other, that he could not exist until the evening. On the application of the wet sheet and tepid bath, the resuscitation of the man was as by miracle. In a case of diarrhoea, the rubbing sheet and its bath acted to the astonishment of the family. A young man had been under medical treatment for diarrhoea for a month, when he could not sleep more than a quarter of an hour at a time. He abandoned drugs, and was cured by hydropathy in three days. Dr. Engel of Vienna, and many other writers on the subject, are quite of the same opinion as Dr. Rauss as regards acute disease. This mode of treatment is efficacious in chronic diseases accompanied by atony; in all nervous affections, spasms, pains of which medicine will not discover the cause; in cases of obstruction of the bowels, and all the systematic evils which arise from them, such as indigestion, hypochondria, piles, jaundice, &c; in gout, rheumatism, scrofula, and most diseases affecting women; in fact, it is successful in a number of complaints altogether beyond the reach of medicine. I have had frequent occasions for admiring the result of the treatment in cases of ague, nervous, typhus, putrid, and scarlet fevers; but its most signal triumphs are obtained over those serious derangements of the system produced by the abuse of drugs, or when consumptions are produced by iodine, arsenic, or the consequences of mercury, tartar emetic, or other dangerous medicaments, have manifested themselves.”
It may be stated without the fear of contradiction (not a word has been written to the contrary), that in small-pox, scarlatina, measles, croup, and all the complaints incidental to children; in fevers, inflammations, cholera, cholic, dysentery, diarrhoea, and, in fact, all acute diseases, hydropathy competently administered is omnipotent; and that in chronic complaints it effects more than can be obtained by any other means. The question is frequently put, “Will hydropathy cure all complaints?” I answer it is no catholicon, no panacea; nor is any cure for all diseases to be found.
“As man, perhaps, the moment of his birth,Receives the lurking principle of death,The young disease that must subdue at length,Grows with his growth and strengthens with his strength.”
Thus Pope viewed it, and thus it must be viewed by all who think on the subject. What the advocates of hydropathy assert is, that sudden fevers, of whatever nature they may be, diarrhoea, dysentery, cholera, English or Asiatic, in fact, all complaints that are termed acute, when the vital energies can be roused are sure of being cured; and that in old-standing complaints, usually denominated chronic, the water cure will do all that can be done by drugs, and that it is all-powerful over many complaints which are beyond the reach of all pharmaceutical remedies.
It is frequently said, by way of detracting from the merits of the Water-cure, that it is not new, that ages buried in the past have been witnesses to its merits. To this it may be replied, its advocates admit that the application of water to the cure of disease is as old as the hills;—but let me ask, breathes there a man who can point to the page, or call the dirty manuscript, from cavern or chest, wherein lies hid the present process of Hydropathy’s main arms, the wet sheet, sweating process, the douche, etc.? Where shall we find the sage of ancient or modern times, buried in herbalistic lore and practice, that ever succeeded so completely in the cure of diseases, by thrusting nothing upon his patient’s stomachic organs but pure unadulterated water, as Priessnitz? We seek not to prove its novelty, but its utility.
It has been shewn that water as a curative agent, has been known from the remotest period; but its means of application were insufficient. In the days of Pliny, it agitated the Roman world. In the sixteenth century, great efforts were made in our own country to introduce it into practice, and again more lately, the subject was agitated, but it did not advance. Thus it has been with all great discoveries—witness Steam. Le Caus, who discovered its powers two hundred years ago, was consigned to a mad-house. The French Academy of Science denounced Fulton’s discovery as a chimera and absurd, as it did Hydropathy a few years since. Others, anxious for theexistence of a hidden treasure, were ever in search of it, each step conducted slowly nearer the goal; but a Watt, was required to give full and vigorous development to its powers. Thus, it has been with water, which, unaided by its present manifold modes of application, was nearly as ungovernable as the steam without the engine.
All nations recognised and many partially profited by the healing properties of water; but the genius of a Priessnitz was required to explore its capabilities and resources, and, by reducing them to a science, confer an inestimable boon on mankind and scatter to the winds the accumulated fallacies of ages.
If all these effects which we have shown, are to be produced by Hydropathic appliances, is it not evident there is something to be learnt? An acquaintance with its details, itsmodus operandi, can only be acquired by study and experience, as Lady Morgan says, “knowledge is a fruit which no longer grows upon trees; on the contrary, it partakes more of the nature of the truffle, and must be dug for by those who are desirous of tasting it.”2
A Medical Education does not necessarily assist in the knowledge of Hydropathy; on the contrary, it acts as barrier to the acquirement of a perfect insight into it. Hydropathy and Allopathy in their practice are like the poles asunder.
The question is frequently mooted, if Hydropathy is so harmless and yet so certain in its operations, how is it that the medical professors, whose object is to relieve their fellow-men, and prolong their lives, do not take it up? To this it might be answered, “It is a difficult thing to force any to believe the evidence of their own senses, if their instincts or their interests (which are one and the same) happen to point another way.”
“In the practice of Medicine, as in every thing else, there are vested interests, those in the receipt of large sums of money are content with things as they are, those in more limited practice have not the courage to enter upon anything new, however persuaded of its utility. Others are deterred by the fear of being considered Quacks, or losing cast[e] with their brother practitioners, and all see, that, in the ordinary occurrences of life the application of Hydropathy is so simple, that were it generally practised, nine tenths of the facultywould have to throw up their briefs. A writer in Chamber’s Journal justly observes,—“If the subject be new and startling, and still more so, if any interest or prejudice be disturbed by it, the clearest demonstration on earth is of no avail.”
Since the education of medical men (totally at variance as it is with all the principles of the Water-cure), gives them no advantage whatever over a non-medical man in judging of what is, or what is not a fit case for Hydropathy; or, in prescribing its practice, any opinion from the faculty, opposed as their interest, and prejudices are to it, ought to be received for as much as it is worth, and no more. One thinks Hydropathy available in gout—another doubts that, but believes it to be good in fevers or inflammations—a third would not hesitate to apply it in dysentery or diarrhœa—a fourth, for a cold—and so on through the whole category of disease; but, with the gravity of true sons ofAesculapius, to their own patients they recommend caution, which at once deters them from trying it. When these practitioners are asked, how they arrived at the conclusion, that the complaints they name may be cured by this treatment, their reasons are entirely speculative; and when pressed as to why they do not apply it, inasmuch as they admit it to be good, they argue the impossibility of contending with public prejudices.
Might we not ask, who are the authors of this state of things? Few people think for themselves, either in Law, Physic, or Divinity. As long as incomes from one thousand to thirty thousand pounds a year (and that there are the latter is proved by the returns of the Income Tax), are made by members of the profession, no reform with their consent can be expected. At one period, after the amputation of a limb, bleeding was staunched by the application of boiling pitch. Paré deprecated this treatment, and recommended the taking up arteries, as is now done. He was treated with derision: “What” said the old practitioner, “would you hang the life of a man upon a thread?” When Harvey propounded his theory, he lost caste with his brethren, and a medical writer doubts if any practitioner of the period, who had passed forty years, believed in the circulation of the blood.
Jenner, to secure himself from the fury of a mob, sought refuge in the house of Colonel Wilson; and there is still a minute in the books of the Foundling Hospital, the first publicestablishment that adopted Vaccination, stating that as its application could not be entrusted to the faculty, the Committee recommended that the operation of vaccination should be performed by the Clergy.
Lady Mary Wortley Montague was so persecuted, that she always regretted having introduced inoculation into the country.
The use of the Lancet is a subject that ought to interest every friend to humanity in an especial manner. By this, our mortal foe, more have fallen than by the sword. The use of one is as unjustifiable as the other. “Blood is the life,” this is the language of holy writ; he who sheds that, deprives us of a part of our existence.
“The use of the Lancet,” says Dr. Dickson, “was the invention of an unenlightened, possibly a sanguinary age; and its continued use says but little for the after-discoveries of ages, or for the boasted progress of medical science.
“Will the men who thus lovingly pour out the blood, dispute its importance in the animal economy? Will they deny that it forms the basis of the solids,—that when the body has been wasted by long diseases, it is by the blood only it can recover its healthy volume and appearance?
“Misguided by theory, man, presumptuous man, has dared to divide what God, as a part of creation, has united; to open what the Eternal, in the wisdom of his omniscience made entire.
“It is on the face of it a most unnatural proceeding. How can you withdraw blood from one organ without depriving every other of the material of its healthy state?
“The first resource of the surgeon is the lancet. The first thing he thinks of, when called to an accident, is how he can most quickly open the flood-gates of the heart, to pour out the stream of an already enfeebled existence.”
Capt. Owen, in detailing the mortality which took place among his people on the coast of Africa, by yellow fever, says, “he had not one instance of perfect recovery after a liberal application of the lancet. And in the subsequent report of the Select Committee on the Western Coast of Africa, thereoccurs the following passage. “The bleeding system has fortunately gone out of fashion; and the frightful mortality that attended its practice, is now no longer known on board our ships.”
“Let the reader,” says Dr. Gibbs, in his letters from Gräfenberg, “enter the crowded hospitals in England or the Continent, and see how mercilessly the lancet, the leech, and cupping-glass are employed in the diseases of the poor. Look at the pale and ghastly faces of the inmates.”
Among the numerous diseases which bleeding can produce, Darwin says, a paroxysm of gout is liable to recur. John Hunter mentions lock-jaw and dropsy; Travers, blindness and palsy; Marshall Hall, mania; Blundell, dysentery; Broussais, fever and convulsion. “When an animal loses a considerable quantity of blood,” says John Hunter, “the heart increases in frequency of strokes, as also in its violence.” Yet these are the indications for which professors bleed. Magendie mentionspneumoniaas having been produced by it; and further tells us, that he has witnessed among its effects “the entire train of inflammatory phenomena;” and mark, he adds the extraordinary fact, “that this inflammation will have been produced by the very agent chiefly used to combat it.” We read in scripture, “He that sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed.” It has ever been supposed, that this applied to the assassin; but holy writ is deeper than this! and no doubt the time will come, when one man will no more think of bleeding another, than he would of committing any other act that should expose him to public ignominy.
The operation of blood-letting is so associated in the minds of most men with the practice of physic, that when a sensible German physician, some time ago, petitioned the king of Prussia to make the employment of the lancet penal, he was laughed at from one end of Europe to the other.
“The imputation of novelty,” says Locke, “is a terrible charge against those who judge of men’s heads as they do of their perukes, by thefashion; and can allow none to be right, but the received doctrine.” Thus Hydropathy, like many other valuable discoveries, and even Christianity itself, must wait its time; a circumstance much to be lamented—because all that is sought by bleeding is effected without this soul-harrowing process. Let such as doubt the fact, go to Gräfenberg, there they willlearn that during the whole course of Mr. Priessnitz’s practice, not a single drop of human blood has been spilt; and yet all diseases for which the lancet is applied are hourly relieved. This is a fact so notorious, that no pen has ever been raised to deny it; so long as interest governs prejudice, practitioners may continue their destructive practice with impunity; but where are the feelings? As observed by a writer, “what a long dream of false security have mankind been dreaming! They have laid themselves down on the laps of their medical Mentors, they have slept a long sleep; while these, like the fabled vampire of the poet, taking advantage of a dark night of barbarism and ignorance, have thought it no sin to rob them of their life’s blood, during the profoundness of their slumber.”
Dr. Kitto, in his clever work on consumption says;—“On the subject of bleeding, purgatives, mercury, and a low course of diet, I shall have occasion to show, in the course of my observations, that these agents are not only unnecessary, but actually mischievous, particularly bleeding, which has proved more fatal than the pestilence or the sword. Nature is our best and surest guide; and if we would follow only her admonitions, we should not so frequently have to witness the impotence of our efforts to alleviate suffering; or to mourn the unfortunate results of cases, which, despite the boasted improvements in the healing art, but too frequently terminate in the grave.”
Thales, like Homer, looked upon water as the principle of every thing. The Spartans bathed their children as soon as born in cold water; and the men of Sparta, both old and young, bathed at all seasons of the year in the Eurotas, to harden their flesh and strengthen their bodies.
Pindar, in one of his Olympic Odes, says, “The best thing is water, and the next gold.”
There was a Greek proverb to the effect that the water of the sea cured all ills.
Pythagoras recommended the use of cold baths strongly to his disciples, to fortify both body and mind.
Hippocrates, the father of medicine, who added friction tocold bathing, was accustomed to use cold water in his treatment of the most serious illnesses. It was Hippocrates who first observed that warm water chilled, whilst cold water warmed.
The Macedonians considered warm water to be enervating; and their women, after accouchement, were washed with cold water.
Virgil called the ancient inhabitants of Italy, a race of men hard and austere, who immersed their newly-born children in the rivers, and accustomed them to cold water.
Pliny, in speaking of A. Musa, who cured Horace by means of cold water, said that he put an end to confused drugs; and he also alludes to a certain Charmes, who made a sensation at Rome by the cures he effected with cold water. On being asked what he thought drugs were sent for, he said, “he could not imagine, except that men might destroy themselves with them when they were tired of living.”
Celsus, called the Cicero of doctors, employed water for complaints of the head and stomach.
Galen, in the second century, recommended cold bathing to the healthy, as well as to patients labouring under the attacks of fever.
Charlemagne, aware of the salubrity of cold bathing, encouraged the use of it throughout his empire, and introduced swimming as an amusement at his court.
Michael Savonarola, an Italian doctor, in 1462, recommended cold water in gout, ophthalmia, and hæmorrhages.
Cardanus, of Pavia, 1575, complains that the doctors in his time made so little use of cold water in the curing of gout.
Van der Heyden, a doctor at Ghent, in a work published in 1624, states that during an epidemic dysentery, he cured many hundreds of persons with cold water, and that during a long practice of fifty years, the best cures he ever made were effected with cold water.
Short, an English doctor, 1656, states that he had cured the dropsy and the bite of mad dogs with cold water.
Dr. Sir John Floyer published a work, called “the Psychrolusic,” in 1702, showing how fevers were to be cured with water. From that period to 1722, his work went through six editions in London.
Dr. Hancock, in 1722, published an anti-fever treatise uponthe use of cold water, which went through seven editions in one year.
Dr. Currie of Liverpool, who published a work in 1797, on the use of water, introduced that element extensively in his practice with astounding results.
Tissot, in his “Advice to the People,” published in Paris, 1770, shows the importance of cold water.
Hoffman, the famous German doctor, says that if there existed anything in the world that could be called a panacea, it was pure water: first, because that element would disagree with nobody; secondly, because it is the best preservative against disease; thirdly, because it would cure agues and chronic complaints; fourthly because it responded to all indications.
Hahn, who was born in Silesia, in 1714, wrote an excellent work upon the curative agency of water in all complaints, a copy was lately found upon a book-stall, and purchased by Professor Oertel, for little more than one penny, and has been re-published; it is interesting to all who regard with attention that great moral change which the Water-cure is calculated to effect.
In Dr. Hahn’s work, it is stated that Pater Bernardo, a Capuchin monk from Sicily, went in the year 1724 to Malta, and there made some most astonishing water-cures, the fame of which spread throughout Europe: he used iced water internally and externally, and allowed his patients to eat but very little. He made a proposition that the doctors should take 100 patients, and said if they, by their mode of treating them, could cure forty, then would he undertake to cure sixty more easily and securely, and in a shorter time. His remedy of iced water, was just as effectual in winter as in summer. A case is cited of a man, ninety-two years of age, who was at the point of death from the virulence of a fever, and was cured with cold water only.
Evan Hahnemann, father of Homeopathy, in a work published at Leipsic, 1784, recommends fresh water, without which, he says, ulcers of any long standing cannot be cured, and adds, if there be any general remedy for disease, “it is water.”
The Rev. John Wesley,a.m., published a work in 1747 (about a century ago), which went through thirty-four editions,called “Primitive Physic, or an Easy and Natural Method of Curing most Diseases.”
After deprecating the manner in which drugs were imposed upon mankind, the mysteries with which the science of medicine is surrounded, and the interested conduct of medical men, the Rev. gentleman proceeds to shew, that he was fully aware of the healing powers of water; and from the long list which he has given, and which follows, it will be evident that he thought water capable of curing almost every disease to which human nature is exposed. He writes:—
“The common method of compounding and decompounding medicines, can never be reconciled to common sense. Experience shews, that one thing will cure most disorders, at least as well as twenty put together. Then why do you add the other nineteen? Only to swell the apothecary’s bill! nay, possibly on purpose to prolong the distemper, that the doctor and he may divide the spoil.
“How often, by thus compounding medicines of opposite qualities, is the virtue of both utterly destroyed?
“Nay, how often do those joined together destroy life, which singly they might have preserved?
“This occasioned that caution of the great Boerhaave, against mixing things without evident necessity, and without full proof of the effect they will produce when joined together, as well as of that they produce when asunder; seeing (as he observes) that several things which taken separately are safe and powerful medicines, when compounded not only lose their former power, but compose a strong and deadly poison.”
In recommending to his followers the use of water, Mr. Wesley proceeds to state, “that cold bathing cures young children of the following complaints:—