The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-08-21
Indeed.

To the Editor OF the Indianapolis Journal:
Why may a doctor be called a quack? Be-
cause in old Egyptian hier~oglyphics the fig
ure for a doctor was a duck. A duck
quacks and by reverse reasoning 1t is sup
posed the doctor who quacks is a duck.
What is ii for a doctor to quack? 1 am not
expert along this line, but suggest that a
'quack DOCTOR" like a quacking duck or a
Growing rooster, is one who is very jealous
of his place in the ~barnyard, or his splutter
in the puddle, who makes a loud noise. poses
IN grandiloquent style when his domain Is
invaded by one not quite of his feather:
lines are crossed; who would muZzle the
tongue of him who would not pronounce
his shibboleth; who squeals for protection
when his theories are drawn through the
seive of scrutiny: who threatens to thrash
the man who will not take his medicine.
This, indeed, is the quack doctor. This is
quackery. No political parties, no religious
sects, no two PHILOSOPHERS in science or art
are so Numerically opposed as the allo-
pathic and homeopathic schools of medi-
cine. Their notices are respectively: Con-
traria contraries curautur,'' and 'Similia
similitus curautur." What one affirms the
other denies. With their swords constantly
drawn they meet and pass each other With
contempt and scorn. In their literature
they treat each other with ridicule ana
scott. On certain occasions, however, the
chasm between them is spanned, and, with
weapons sheathed, they are seen parading
arm in arm TO the footlights OF the public
domain where they in unison bow deeply
and declare that they are the keepers OF
the public health" and, continuing their
meanderings, they reach the courts Of JUS
tice, where they again bow low repeatedly,
and finally vow that intruders are within
their realm, who are treating disease by
new methods and are usurping their rights
without authority from the state board,
and are, therefore, irregular" hence in
competent and dangerous TO the public veal.
No sane person can fail to see the real mo-
tive for such opposition to the new and
perhaps better methods of treating disease.
1t is purely and simply because they are
strong competitors in the field of therapeu-
tics, otherwise they would die in due time
of public neglect. symptoms devoid of mer-
it do not have to be leg
islated or litigated out of existence.
systems of medicine is for a commercial
purpose. If the allopath is TO De believed,
the homeopath is a charlatan and the eclec-
tic is a fraud. while the physio-medic is too
insignificant to be noticed at all. If the
homeopath is TO be credited he has saved
society from the narrow dogmatism of allo>
pathicN ignorance; and If the eclectic is heard
he tells us he has garnered TO himself the
wisdom OF all the schools and nothing but
sistent with professional ethics to consult
with each other, and each believes his own
20 be the one branch OF medical science
worthy of the cause. Homeopathy ought
its way TO recognition against the bitter
and implacable antagonists OF the regular
bitter abuse. ridicule, persecution and in
vective. Its disciples suffered all the pain
that hatred, contumely and authority could
infiict upon il. Proscriptive legislation a
half a century ago would have sent the
homeopaths in schools TO the common Jail
and branded them with the outlawry OF
society. Now they unite with their hered-
itary and still unreconciled adversaries 10
deny to others the claim they have vindi-
the effort TO e~xtinguish all forms of healing
save their own. 1t is neither just nor gener-
Gus. Society has not forgotten their scram-
bles and IL may be pardoned IL Ii sees some
thing beyond the philanthropic desire TO
protect the public health. The fundamental
vice of such proceedings is that they deny
absolutely 10 the individual the constitur
der pretense of his protection. II is not the
outspoken and aggressive assault upon in
dividual liberty that men should fear, but
the indirect or resultant blow that is mask
ed and falls Unexpectedly. DIR. John Sex
ton. late president of the Indiana State
Medical Society. is right in saying that
a medical law should discriminate between
competent and incompetent practitioners OF
whatever school. not between ''pathies."
the people OF Indiana will stand by and see
their money spent in what is necessarily
a foolish effort TO secure for them a pro-
lection which they have never asked, and
at the same time shackle progress in the
healing art, TO enrich the advocates OF GER
tain systems? A CITIZEN.
indianapolis, Ind, Aug. 10.