I conclude with best wishes, Your most devoted, S. HAHNEMANN.
Kothen, 28th Sept., 1832.
Dr. Gross reported to Hahnemann:
Juterbogk, October 20th, 1832.
If the Leipsic physicians have complimented Clarus on the hospital they are stupid and deserve a sharp rebuke, and I will send it off to-day, to M. Muller, the Director of the Association. What has Clarus to do with it? I cannot overlook that, unless they did it ironically in order to annoy the fool since he was obliged to agree, nolens volens, with a permission already granted by the Government.
Hahnemann wrote later to von Boenninghausen in connection with the signature on the diplomas:
Kothen, June 17th, 1833.
Those demoralised people in Leipsic put before me long ago a scheme for a diploma such as you have received, and asked for my signature in order to have it lithographed, before I knew of their grasping scheme to ask five thalers for each diploma-a really low importunity (for they will certainly never give an account of having received these beggarly pennies). When I heard all this I protested against the misuse of my name, and requested them to publish, in the “Allgem. homoeopathische Zeitung,” the withdrawal of my name. But they excused themselves, saying that they could not do that, and my protest has not become known to anyone. Now, since, I am sorry for these avaricious and empty headed people, I have not published my protest in any other paper, but would first like to hear your opinion on the subject.
SUPPLEMENT 130
THE ULTIMATE REASON FOR THE ARTICLE IN THE “LEIPSIC TAGEBLATT.” C.H. Reclam, Publisher and Bookseller, wrote to Hahnemann:
Leipsic, November 6th, 1832.
I have been a keen admirer of homoeopathy for many years, after having once found how beneficial and curative it was in many cases of illness, and I shall never depart from it, on the contrary I consider it a great boon to humanity, and will continue to do so until the end of my life nor will I ever return to the old school.
But since a physician can never prolong the life of a human being beyond the span of time which fate has allotted to it, no matter to what school of medicine he belongs, a father may be forgiven when he sees his beloved child at death’s door, if he takes advantage of the help which the old and the new schools offer him. You, yourself, esteemed Hofrath, were once in this desperate position when your wife was near death, and you tried to save her life by venesection. ( Hahnemann strenuously denies this false statement in an essay in the “Allgem. hom. Ztg.” (1833, Vol. II, No. I of March, 1833) when he says: “For forty years I have not drawn one drop of blood from a single patient. (See Supplement 133).)
According to information received, Dr. Schubert has communicated to you an altogether wrong rendering of the history of my beloved daughter’s illness and death-whatever his purpose, may God forgive him-and through that you were induced to have that essay published in the local paper, which I wish had never emanated from your pen.
My daughter, who was very intellectual, but of delicate health, had been suffering for a long time from a continual cold, suddenly became ill and fainted during the mid-day meal. After she had been put to bed her period came on slightly; Dr. Schubert treated the matter lightly and thought that he would be able to cure her in a few days. Yet already on the third day slight delirium set in and no remedy seemed to help.
My friend Dr. Hornburg, who was passing my warehouse, and to whom I gave a description of the illness, inquired if Dr. Schubert had given Aconite. I said “no,”; “well tell him to,” said Hornburg. The following morning I asked Schubert if he would not like to give Aconite-he did not think so as the illness was more of the character of a nervous disorder. The illness became increasingly grave, and my children considered that it was my duty to have further medical advice, and my friend Dr. Muller was called into consultation, with the consent of Dr. Schubert. He insisted upon Aconite being given immediately after the first visit, and the patient had three doses of it at suitable intervals, after which she felt better and was quieter. Muller wanted to continue with Aconite, but Schubert gave Pulsatilla which did not act and neither did other remedies that were given. Her strength began to fail, the delirium became more violent, and on the sixteenth day of the illness, during the morning visit, Muller said to Schubert, in Latin, that as a last resource leeches should be tried. After this Schubert said to me and to my youngest daughter,” if the remedy that has been given now has no effect, we will apply eight leeches at four o’clock. Schubert also said the same to Hofrath Bruckner and printer Gluck (?), whom he met in the street. At one o’clock in the day the congestion of the head was so severe, and the delirium so violent that I sent for Schubert and Muller. The former was not at home, but Muller came and immediately ordered the leeches as previously arranged. The next morning at nine o’clock they were both of the same opinion, I believe, and gave Phosphorus, but her hours were numbered, and human help was vain.
At 10 o’clock Dr. Schubert came to me in the warehouse, and, Sir, I hope you will not ask me to relate to you how heartless his behaviour was. An hour later I wrote to him that his attendance would no longer be required.
Dr. Gross wrote to Hahnemann on the same subject:
Juterbogk, October 31st, 1832.
I also belong to those who do not think too highly of homoeopathy as practised in Leipsic; I know there are yet many defects to be corrected. The case of Reclam’s daughter is really very bad. I do not know the history very well, and have not been able to get an accurate account from the Leipsic physicians. A Director for the Leipsic Clinic has not yet been elected other- wise I ought to know about it. But as the Institution is to be erected in Leipsic, I cannot quite see whom they can choose. Franz is always ailing; we are always on bad terms with Schubert, and because Schweikert is not a native the others do not want him. There is already a secret dissension about it. It would be best in this instance if you were to say something definite about it yourself. Because of course everything depends upon who directs the Clinic, and how it is managed.
I dislike the Dresden lot even more, because they have a much higher opinion of themselves, and will not accept instructions from anyone no matter how sound they are. I could give many instances of that. And certainly your preface acted upon them the other day like an exploding bomb.
Kretzschmar is the most honest of them all. It is true he some-times treats this or that patient whom he considers incurable, by allopathy, because he will not obey, etc., and for other reasons he does not wish to lose him; but when I consider how he has gradually lifted himself out of the allopathic mire, and the sacrifices he brings in carrying out and spreading our science, I cannot be very angry with him, and also I am certain that he will gradually free himself from all the allopathic dross. You will certainly learn to like him on account of his German honesty, and the regardless way in which he pursues that which he has recognised to be right.
SUPPLEMENT 131
DEMONSTRATIONS TO HAHNEMANN.
My most esteemed Master, What a scandal has recently been revealed by the Leipsic Zeitung! I should never have expected such things from homoeopathic physicians. I hope that it may have its good side, and sweep away the old leaven.
With kind regards and best wishes to you, my dear teacher.
H. BETHMANN.
Burgk, near Schleiz, December 3rd, 1832.
Hahnemann to Boenninghausen:
Cothen, December 15th, 1832.
Whilst you unceasingly strive to raise our science, I have my troubles with the pseudo-homoeopathic rabble of Leipsic, the swollen-headed Mor. Muller, Haubold and their associates, who dishonour our science, make use of allopathic treatment entirely because it pays better (so that they may maintain their large establishments) and even in their homoeopathic treatment apply leeches, and call in consultation physicians who openly declare they are allopaths (not homoeopaths). Now these have arrogated to themselves the control of the Leipsic Hospital. But by means of the enclosed sharp letter (“A word to the pseudo-homoeopaths” in the Leipsic Tageblatt-R.H.) I forced them to leave the administration of that Institution in the hands of Dr. Schweikert. Trinks and Wolff of Dresden, and Rummel of Merseburg are not any better. From desire for money, and lack of charity, because they are frightened of hard work and having to think, and also are afraid of losing the good will of the allopaths. A wicked gang who make our maiden science into a prostitute.
SUPPLEMENT 132
AGAINST MORITZ MULLER.
Dr. Wilhelm Meyne wrote:
Leipsic, Reichstrasse 399,
April 1st, 1833.
Since the beginning of this year I have taken the place of Dr. Hartlaub, jnr., for the purpose of practising homoeopathy with Dr. Moritz Muller. I did not find what I thought I should, a strict adherence to your teachings, and that is why I shall separate from him. Should you be able to provide me with an immediate appointment elsewhere I shall be glad to hear from you.
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