This brings the case down to August, 1883, when patient appeared like a lady about seven or eight months gone in the family way. To make matters worse, a child ran against her (impinging on the protuberant abdomen), and hurt her a good deal, when I gave platinum mur. 3x, but also to no good purpose.

Any wonder that patient was getting down-hearted ? Two years medication and bigger than ear ! And the doctor-are a few guineas any adequate reward for such responsibility ? Then came Bovista 3x, Mer. cor 5, Aur. mur. 3, Helonin 3x trit., when the breast was a good deal better, the cracks of the nipples better, and the little tumour drying up. The excoriation between the legs was described by the patient as dreadful; pain in the back very bad; disagreeable taste.

R Lapidis alb., 6 trituration.

January 10th, 1884. About the same in a general way; complains dreadfully of her back. This dreadful back distress finds a grand remedy in the virus of variola, which I gave in the 30th dilution, and in very infrequent doses; and anyone objecting thereto is answered thus : Aux grands maux les grands remedies.

February 14th. Seems to have done her back real good; left breast is much better; was so well that she absented herself for a few days. The same remedy was continued.

March 6th. Maintains that this last prescription did her harm, while the previous one did her much good, which I can well understand, viz., de trop of the right remedy. Back exceedingly bad; much frontal headache.

R Trit. 6 Calc. fluoris.

April 5th. Head better; back very painful when she walks; anorexia; bad nights.

26th. Has had a good deal of pain at the menses and in the left side; nights much better.

R Var.c.

May 29th. The nights continue good; much easier in general; is getting thin; was very stout, notably mammary hypertrophy; is very debilitated, but the tumour is decidedly smaller.

R Tc. Aur. mur. nat. 3x. Two drops in water night and morning.

July 10th. “Dreadfully sickly,” i.e. intense nausea; she feels very weak; tumour is much smaller.

R Psoricum 30

August 21st. Frequently faints away, at times falling down; less nausea; vision is failing.

R Thuja occidentalis 30.

September 6th. Is still giddy, but does not actually faint away; has menstruated three times in eight weeks; sick feeling gone; dreadful pain in the left side; toothache.

R Argent. nitric 5, 3iv. Five drops in water night and morning.

October 16th. Much enlargement of the spleen, which pains a good deal.

R Tc. Ceanothus Americanus 1x.

November 5th. No better.

Berberis vulgaris O.

January 9th, 1885. Breast well; the tumour of womb still very large, and patient has every appearance of being enceinte; wakes very early, and cannot get of again. (This is a capital indication for Bellis).

R Tc. Bellis per perennis 1.

29th, She now sleeps wells, and feels much easier in the abdomen. I would here interpolate a rather important clinical tip in regard to Bellis, viz., it is often curative of the symptom. “Wakes early in the morning and cannot get off again” ; and in cases of pregnancy and of uterine tumours (also enlarged heart), Bellis gives great ease in many cases, i.e., takes away the effects of mechanical pressure.

February 26th.

R Variol. 30.

March 26th. Back is on the whole better; tumour rather smaller; g giddiness.

May 9th. Pain in left side.

R Ceanothus Americanus I.

June 8th. Toothache and pains in the back.

July 23rd. Much pain in the left side, which is tender. Tumour is smaller, which is evident from general appearance.

R Tc. Chionanthus virginica O.

September 3rd. Side better; the left nipple is very sore.

October 2nd. The nipple is better, more comfortable; the tumour of womb about the same.

R Trit. 4, Hecla lav.

December 5th. Feels much freer from pain, and more easy and comfortable in herself than for long. This remedy has cured her constipation.

R Repeat.

January 26th, 1886. Is very giddy ; fairly comfortable in uterine sphere : left nipple has been gathering. She is so cold in her stomach.

R Tc. Cedron. I.

March 9th. Feels dreadfully sick.

R Trit. 3x, Hecla lav.

May 29th. Patient is so much better that she is getting very irregular in attendance. The diminution in the size of the tumour is considerable.

R Repeat.

August 6th. Continued marked improvement in the size of tumour, but there is good deal of pain in her legs, worse on getting up out of bed in the morning.

R Tc. Bellis per per. 1, 3iv. Five drops in water night and morning.

October 6th. This is the date of my last not when patient presented herself normally menstruating, in blooming health, plump and ruddy, though still complaining of some tenderness of the left ovary and left nipple. One can see where the little tumour formerly was on the left breast by the deeper colour of the skin. I prescribed Kali chlor, 6, which, no doubt, has taken away the tenderness complained of.

This is the long weary course of my treatment of this terribly complicated case, lasting, as the notes show, just five years. During this long period my patient was very often importuned by her well-meaning friends and relations to undergo an operation, but she steadfastly refused, wavering only once or twice when her homoeopathic friends also urged surgical interference. If patient should call again before this goes to press, I shall add a few words more. Patient subsequently came to know if she might accept an offer of marriage, which I answered in the affirmative.

May 15th, 1888. Patient continues well. I give it as my opinion, that had this lady been treated surgically, she would have died long since, and that miserably.

It is not merely medicines that will cure tumours, but diet and suckling will also do so. Let me give the following case, and to which I have previously referred.


In the Herald of Health Mrs. Nichols, a very talented lady, had been giving a retrospect of her own life-experience. The following portion has a moral, medical, and scientific value:.

“I think that much of the sympathy I feel for the sick is due to my own ailments. If I had been born a strong child, if I had not known so many the ills that flesh is heir to, I should never have been a physician. I have loved my profession only because it has enabled me to relieve suffering-to reach the sickness of the soul, often through that of the body. Long ago I became convinced that all sickness if from sin-from voluntary or involuntary disobedience to the laws of life. It is not the sin of the individual alone, but the sins of progenitors, that afflict us with our many diseases. The study of the human race, its passions, its sins, crimes, sorrows, and agonies.

“I have had my aspirations. I have loved literature and art. I have longed for a life of beauty, of abstraction from the sorrows of this earth-life, but sickness of body and soul was born with me my humanity; for when I had suffered and had learned a way of relief, how could I refuse to hep others?.

“I did not study the art of leading in any ordinary way. I learned the science of cure in my own person. To illustrate this statement: I was born with disease of the liver. No matter what part of a parent is weak or diseased, of that weakness or disease the child will partake. The child is specially made from the mother. If the paternal element is strong, it takes hold strongly upon the maternal, but what the mother has not, that she cannot give. If she has weak lungs or liver, or fragile bones, her child has the same in greater or less degree.

“I inherited from my mother a diseased liver. When a young child I remember (for my memory reaches to my second year) bilious disorders which caused me intense suffering. Of course I knew nothing them, except that I was ill; and my parents knew no more than I did. For ordinary illness they used domestic remedies-tea made of tanzy, oak of Jerusalem, motherwort, etc.

For serious illness the family doctor was called, and his practice was severe and sanguinary. Bleeding, calomel, jalap, opium, antimony, etc., formed the materia medica of my childhood. An empiric Thompson protested against bleeding, and introduced emetics of lobelia and the stimulus of capsicum, but the first robbed the blood of its serum to reject the poisonous lobelia, and the last was little better than drunkenness, the capsicum being prepared with spirits, and a severe irritant in itself.

“The tender mercies of all medication were cruel in those days. If any pessimist says the world does not grow better, I have only to say to him, Look at the diseases and medication of fifty hence. As much blood was shed by the lancet as in a war, and mercury was found impacted in its crude state in the bones of patients who had taken the orthodox doses of calomel. The world is very bad in this 81st year of the 9th century, and much of its medication is a cruel and unwise thing, but homoeopathy is a fact, and water-cure is widespread as prophylactic or remedial, and the power of sympathy is recognized by many.

“The diseased liver which formed a part of my evil inheritance became so bad in 1868 that I sought the assistance of a learned water-cure physician. Certain reasons prevented a diagnosis, and I was thrown back upon myself to try I could do for my relief or cure, as the even might be. A tumour had formed in the liver, so large that it had to be supported in the daytime by an elastic band, and in the night by a pillow. I had no rest, and scarcely any sleep. At about five oclock in the morning I slept a little while.

I could not take food without great distress. Digestion was never begun under seven hours, and only accomplished after hours of torment. In this condition I resolved to take but one small meal in the twenty-four hours, and that at mid-day. I began this practice, and the third day I was so weak and giddy that my husband me to take some food. I was convinced that I must die if I took food, and I could only die if I did not. I therefore resolved to rest what I could in bed, or on a sofa, and continue my fast. I took one meal at mid-day, and when thirsty drank lemonade or orangeade.

This I took in the forenoon, and I found it refreshing and not hurtful. In a week from the beginning of my fast I slept well six or seven hours in the night. My spirits rose to cheerfulness. I was weak, and my working time was a good deal abridged. I could work after my dinner, but I did little in the forenoon but endure my weakness and a passionate longing for food. This, however, gave way after a time, and my greatest suffering was from weakness and inability to work. For six months I kept this fast, only taking a moderate meal at mid-day, and sometimes a glass of lemonade or orangeade in the forenoon.

“At the end of six months, one day I took breakfast and dinner. The consequence was a burning indigestion that made me more miserable than I can describe. Only once was I seduced into eating a breakfast. I continued my fast for another month, and the tumour on my liver was gone. It had been so large as to be felt by anyone from the outside. It was now entirely dissipates, so far as I could judge from internal feeling and external examination.

“I now began to take a very light breakfast of bread and fruit, and a little milk and water, and I made my dinner about seven hours after. This I have continued to do with good results, for the years that have elapsed since my cure. My digestion is slow, and I find that two meals a day suit me better than three. I have sometimes varied from this course when away from home, but have uniformly found my health and digestion better when I have returned to the two meals a day, taken seven hours apart.

“I have had a great deal of practice in disease of the liver, and what are called “Indian livers. Much oily food causes and exacerbates hepatic disease. I have found in such cases a diet of whole wheatmeal bread, porridge, and a half-pint of milk for breakfast, and another half-pint at dinner with fruit, only a little whole wheatmeal bread or fruit for third meal, most beneficial.

“we give the hot-air bath where the patient can bear it, and the half pack at night. Sympathetic remedies and Hydrastis canadensis we have found beneficial. The kneading, or movement cure, and judicious exercise,a re most useful. But of all remedies the diet is most important. Oily food of all kinds is disastrous for diseased liver; neither chocolate not cocoa are admissible.

To keep the bowels free and open with brown bread and fruit, and to use packing, or hot-air bath, to throw off the retained waste and diseased matter, are very important. In some diseased conditions of the liver there is great constipation. The retained waste matter is diffused through the system in the effort to eliminate it, and it forms often the basis of typhus. The use of hot air, or sweating packs, to cleanse the system is therefore all important.

“It will be from my narrative that the tumour, or what some call lumps in the liver, can be dissipated entirely. From the end of my seven months fast, I have never had an hours suffering from my liver”.

Although this work is intended to give my own experience only in the medicinal cure of tumours of the breast, I think the foregoing personal narrative of the sufferer herself eminently instructive. Some of the statements I do to quite agree with, and I think the power of diet is often much over-rates, still the subject is too important for us to be able to omit such as excellent personal testimony.

My objection to diet by itself lies in the fact that many are too weak to bear dieting, and very rigorous diet uses up normal tissue as well as morbid. I know of no case of tumour of the female breast cured by diet, but I lately had the following case under observation, and it exemplifies the wisdom of Natures own little ways, that some of the soft patent and sinful moderns are trying to upset. Only conceited soft-put-downs would dream of thwarting Natures efforts.



A lady of 32 had a little adenoid tumour in her left breast of the size of a marble. As she was enceinte, I recommended her to do but little for so small a thing, but to be sure to well suckle her child when it came. This she did with very praiseworthy perseverance, though she had but very little milk, and the process had to be materially supplemented by the bottle, and at the end of the fourth month of suckling the tumour had entirely disappeared. It is true I gave her a few medicines also with reference to the tumour and for other ailings, still I conclude that the baby helped to draw off the tumour, causally because of the short duration of its waning; the mammilla of that side had always been retracted, which, though a small circumstance, deserves attention.

Personally, were I a woman with baby, I would suckle it from purely selfish motives, merely to depurate my own blood and organism, for a woman who had a family and does not suckle her offspring, is drawing a bill on the future of her organism which she is likely to be either unable to meet at all or to do so with great difficulty. Mother Nature suffers no tampering with her provisions; with her it is simply and emphatically, Obey; or suffer disease or extinction.


The case I am about to tell about is psychologically and sociologically interesting, as my readers will see.

On December 15th, 1884, a married lady, 44 years of age, mother of one child, then 16 years old, came to place herself under my care.

She had noticed a swelling in her right breast, and was naturally much frightened. An intimate friend of hers (in fact, her former governess) had been cured of a mammary tumour by me with medicines, and so Mrs. came off to London to place herself under my care, but when arrived, her metropolitan friends quite laughed her out of it, telling her it was all nonsense to trust herself to my tender mercies, first, because of my homoeopathic proclivities, which they adequately despise and actively hate; and then “it was well known that no medicines (and least of all, homoeopathic ones) were any good at all in tumours”.

The poor frightened thing of course yielded, was hurried off to what I suppose I must call eminent men, who declared it to be cancer, and urged immediate operation in order to save her life. The operation was duly performed in April, the whole right breast being completely ablated by Sir. The wound healed up quickly and well, and the lady was sent home to her husbands country CURED (!!) and the case, no doubt, continues to stand as one of the CURES (1) of the eminent operator. The social value of medicinal cures of tumours is slander and contempt.

However, the cutting-off process was rose than useless, as in a few months another tumour appeared in the remaining breast, which confirmed the pinion of the operator that it was a case of cancer.

Was it cancer? No, I think not, but an irritable tumour of utero-ovarian origin. Indeed, I am quite sure this is the correct diagnosis. Our operating surgeons are mad; the biggest and best are clean mad. No sooner does a poor woman get a lump in her breast than she is frightened out of her wits by consultations between these eminent and eminently ignorant knife-people, whose diagnostics are confined to feeling, seeing, and the microscope.

My treatment of this recurrent tumour lasted three years, and the following remedies were used: Psor. 30 Hydrastis canadensis O, Bellis per. I, Ranunculus sceleratus 3x, Psor. c., Thuja occidentalis 30m Bellis perennis O, Solanum tub. 6 and 12, Aurum muriaticum nat, 3x, Cundurango I; and on February 7th, 1888, the breast was normal and the remarkable thoracic hyperaesthesia had at last disappeared, and this had for years on patients chest caused her to wince and shrink from contact.

To give all the notes of these three years of treatment would fill a little volume, and so I am compelled to narrate it in these few words. But I again state that it was not a case of cancer, but the lumps came in the breasts-first in the one was cut off, and then in the remaining one-from a wrong state of the uterus and ovaries, and in precisely the same physiological way as the milk comes into the breast after child-birth.

The origin of the first tumour was curious: the lady was getting out of their carriage when she fell against one of the buttons of her husbands coat. When I first saw the left breast it was red, hard, and very painful. The lady had been vaccinated four or five times, the last twice unsuccessfully. She was very found of salt. She had had much grief and worry. Her confinement was very severe, owing to size of foetus. She subsequently had a good deal of congestion of the womb and leucorrhoea, for which her surgeon and physician gave her local treatment. This is the usual thing: at first a poor ladys constitution is wrong; Nature, kind clever Nature, sets about righting it with leucorrhoea, ulcers at the os uteri, and uterine congestion; the doctor (poor brainless creature) cauterizes, gives injections, and cures (drives back); then it concretes in the breast as a tumour, which is cut off, and-apres ca le deluge!.

I told the lady straight away that hers was not a case of cancer at all, but as she had had the opinions of the greatest living authorities on tumours and cancers she did not believe me.

What do her husband, family, and friends now say of the diagnosis and the cure by remedies? I do not know, I merely have been made aware that they now poke fun at the duration of the cure. “When are you going to leave off going to your doctor? surely you are well, you look it!” And these were the very people who prevented her from coming to me in the first instance, and morally compelled the poor frightened lamb to have one of her breasts ablated!.

When I was a student and used to watch my professors paint tumours with iodine, give their bearers tonics, fail to do any good, and then explain authoritatively how that medicines were useless in tumours, and how that nothing but the surgeon;s knife was of any real avail; when I used to see and listen to all this, I often dreamed day dreams of trying to find a solvent for tumours, and so avoid the cutting business, of which I have, and ever have had, an instinctive horror. And in the beginning of my professional career I tried hard and long to find such a solvent for tumours, but, of course, never found any. Why?.

James Compton Burnett
James Compton Burnett was born on July 10, 1840 and died April 2, 1901. Dr. Burnett attended medical school in Vienna, Austria in 1865. Alfred Hawkes converted him to homeopathy in 1872 (in Glasgow). In 1876 he took his MD degree.
Burnett was one of the first to speak about vaccination triggering illness. This was discussed in his book, Vaccinosis, published in 1884. He introduced the remedy Bacillinum. He authored twenty books, including the much loved "Fifty Reason for Being a Homeopath." He was the editor of The Homoeopathic World.