Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1880-03-16
The War of the Pellets.

DR.. ]. w. Routh.
SIR: In your vindictive and altogether
untruthful reply to my article signed
Homeopathy" you fail to defend in the
least your assertion ''that small minority
only of homeopathic physicians believed in
or used remedies prepared according to the
Hahnemannian method. again affirm that
all homeopathic physicians do believe in
and use these preparations.
The first misstatement to which call at
tention is contained in your attempted elu-
cidation of the potency question. You say
"the Hahnemsnnian potencies are prepared
thus: Take one drop of medicine and 100
drops of water or other neutral solvent
shake it-this is the first potency or dilution
take one drop of this and 100 of water
shake, and you have the second potency /;
one drop of the second and 100 of water
shake, and the third is made, and 80 on, etc.
I would advise you to inform
yourself little better on the
principles of homeopathy before
you undertake to explain the methods of
drug dynamization. Here you have simply
demonstrated that your ignorance of homeo-
pathic principles is as great, if not greater,
than of homeopathic practice. There is no
such scale of drug attenuation in the Hahn
emannian method, and challenge You to
contradict me and prove it.
Next you claim to be an ardent defender
of homeopathy. A most valiant defender
you are, when you attempt to hold up to rid
icule one of it's foundation principles and IT,
fer in sneering manner to DR.. Herring, of
Philadelphia man who has done as much,
if not more, than any other to advance the
science of homeopathy.
1 deny your assertion that drug dynamiza-
ton is no part of homeopathy. Every au-
thor of any character or marked ability in
our school believes in and uses drugs pre-
pared in this way. It is you and the class of
practitioners whom you represent who are
the excresences and PARASITES clinging to
our schools, palming yourself es off on the
public as homeopaths. -.
Finally, in regard to that neuralgia case,
you say you did not use morphine hypoder-
mically. You also denied using chloral
hydrate when met you at the bedside of
the patient, and stuck to it until l produced
the bottle which held it bearing your own
initials on the label, and containing enough
of chloral to bear evidence to the truth of
my assertion that you had used it. You were
careful not to allude to this chloral, for the
very good reason that You dare not again
deny usingit. This alone brands your pre-
tended homeopathic treatment as fraud,
and proves you to be mongrel practitioner.
NY reasons for stating that you used NOR
phine hypodermically are these: When
was called, the attendants of the patient in
formed me that about O'Clock A. N. You
had used the hypodermic syringe; in five
minutes he fell into heavy sleep, from
which he did not rouse until 5 o'clock next
evening; seventeen hours unconscious; verify
Q marvellous result from the one hundred
and twentieth of grain Of atropia, which is
all, you say, you gave him. My conclusion
was that you used morphine, and, notwith-
standing your denial of it, think this con-
clusion much more likely to be the correct
one than that the one hundred and twentieth
of grain of atropia caused this stupor, as
you claim, and II am willing to refer the case
to any three intelligent and unprejudiced
physicians for affirmation or denial.
am tired of correcting your misrepre-
sensations, and intend to allow anything
further you may say to pass unnotieed.
b. HUTCHINSON.