Attacks When in France


Cothen, 31st May, 1832.



(“Zeitung der homoeopathischen Heilkunst” von Dr. Schweikert, Vol.5, 1832, pages 126-128, and “Allg. Anzeiger d. Deutschen,” No. 173, of June 28th, 1832).

It is obvious that the High Ministry has been deprived of all insight into the character of the homoeopathic science of healing, otherwise it would not have taken away from the homoeopathic physician by such an order, his inalienable, and in the nature of things, established rights, of giving the (simple) remedy himself to the patient who is imploring him for it (so that he may be assured that it is the right remedy) and to assign it to the apothecary, who only holds the privilege of dispensing the mixed prescriptions of the old school, to whom such an order does not even bring gain.

Let people listen!

The initial preparation of a complete stock of approximately one hundred homoeopathic remedies cannot cost more than 100 thaler, to him who has sufficient knowledge for it, which no ordinary apothecary possess. The preparation of each of these remedies would take one worker nearly five hours, and the expenditure might be six silbergroschen, inclusive of spirits of wine, small globules, glasses, stoppers and utensils, so that the preparation of every remedy would at the highest amount to one thaler. A stock of this kind that cannot spoil, would not be exhausted if it were used to supply remedies for fifty years to the Prussian army, and all the hospitals as well as the largest practices of several thousand homoeopathic doctors. Now if the apothecary gave to the patient, by the written order of the homoeopathic physician, the necessary simple remedy (for it is not a dispensing of a prescription, as the apothecary has no mixture ex versis pensis to prepare), if he gave him as I say, the small globule in a two grain powder, which would not cost him a half-penny, what can he charge for his trouble? (as the globules and their medication have already been accounted for in the 100 thaler initial expenses?).

Surely not more than half a silbergroschen for each little powder, which in itself is sufficient medicine for one or more weeks in the case of a chronic patient! Even if he were allowed to put on 100 per cent. interest for the initial outlay of 100 thalers, he could not charge more than one silbergroschen, and for such a sum German apothecary hardly rises from his chair.

The simple remedies of the homoeopathic physician (which up to the present have remained unknown to the High Ministry) have so to speak no monetary value, and that is why he gives them to his patients gratuitously. How could then an imaginary and high price now be affixed to them, which would make them so expensive for the poor, just because it is deemed right to let them pass through the hands of an unnecessary apothecary, who is accustomed to make a great deal of money? SAMUEL HAHNEMANN.




He writes to his pupil Dr. Wislicenus, of Eisenach, whom he refers to Regierungsrat von Gersdorff, there in residence, as: “This guardian angel who appeared to you, this expert and friend of our art,” as follows: Cothen, 25 December, 1823.

In order to communicate to you my thoughts on what you still require there, the personal preparation and dispensing of medicines, I should like you to make some similar arrangements for the present, as Schubert and others, in Leipsic, who have so far not been lacking in courage. If you could live quite near to an apothecary and have on his premises in a secluded part, a small medicine cupboard with your own lock and key, which contained several drawers marked with different letters, in which you could keep sugar of milk powders, previously prepared at home by you, but which the apothecary would think were medicines, and probably special medicines on account of the different letters, and he could hardly help doing so, you would then have the advantage that after preparing the powders yourself containing the medicine in front of him, the other powders which are nil could be numbered (to fill in the days during which you wish the medicine to go on acting undisturbed) and taken by you from the various small boxes, and to all appearances, be chosen as if they were different in contents since the small boxes have different marks on them-in this way it would be impossible for the apothecary to proclaim to the public that the other powders were all the same, and contained nothing but sugar of milk, by which the patient was cheated. In this manner the most difficult point- the giving of plain powders, in order to let one dose continue acting for six, eight, or ten days, as I believe, would be over- come in the most certain way. You would require to have at least twelve such differently marked small boxes in your cupboard. The Leipsic homoeopaths and others who have to make up their medicines at the apothecary’s, have not yet got this arrangement; I wish they had it, because it would then no longer be necessary to give a patient daily something different or let the patient go for several days without a dose.

Richard Haehl
Richard M Haehl 1873 - 1932 MD, a German orthodox physician from Stuttgart and Kirchheim who converted to homeopathy, travelled to America to study homeopathy at the Hahnemann College of Philadelphia, to become the biographer of Samuel Hahnemann, and the Secretary of the German Homeopathic Society, the Hahnemannia.

Richard Haehl was also an editor and publisher of the homeopathic journal Allgemcine, and other homeopathic publications.

Haehl was responsible for saving many of the valuable artifacts of Samuel Hahnemann and retrieving the 6th edition of the Organon and publishing it in 1921.
Richard Haehl was the author of - Life and Work of Samuel Hahnemann