On the other hand I need not remind you of what the homoeopath has to endure. Just recall what you have heard with your own ears, or have read here and there. Would you court such martyrdom? I do not advise you to do so.
The second purpose, the readier transaction of business, you cannot reach as certainly as by the usual way. There are enough prescriptions of a prescribed from for all specified diseases, and if some disease has no name it is given a prescribed one, and there is applied to it the medical formula given to it by the learned man who wrote on that particular disease. Everything is at hand, and we have only to imitate; if anyone censures or condemns the treatment he is referred to the book. Then he has to be silent. How easy it is to commit to memory a certain number of formulas, which one need only recall to mind at the bedside of the patient in order to jot down one thing or other on a slip of paper. This scarcely requires two minutes. The apothecary prepares the prescription to see his tongue, to feel his pulse, in order to know what is the ailment. In this way a dozen patients are prescribed for, and got rid of in an incredibly short space of time, and then you can have almost the whole day to yourself. With hits method the apothecary remains favourably disposed towards you; and who does not know how important and indispensable his favour is to the physician?
How badly a homoeopath fares! He must take the trouble to injured into all, even the smallest, details concerning the patient in order to be able to select a suitable remedy. This entails loss of time, at least at the first visit, as in this time the ordinary physician can prescribe for three times as many patients, providing them with a good number of full bottles, jars, and boxes, of a fair size, etc. The sick are accustomed to that; they like to have many and of different kinds; on the other hand, the small doses given by the homoeopath hardly gain the confidence of the sick. It would be foolish to reply that the homoeopathic physician can charge a higher fee, because notwithstanding the loss of time in questioning and considering, the helps the patient in a shorter time tan does the allopath. Whom will he be able to help particularly his patients from him? I too, know well the might of innumerable lashing tongues, which can prescribe one homoeopathic physician. May my worldly wisdom protect me from this vituperation, as I think it will.
And as regards that trifling amount of conscience which the homoeopath is asked to keep pure, and develop by his precise delineation of disease, his selection of the exactly fitting remedy, as also by the conviction that he himself can best furnish the correct remedy to the patient in the right dose, the ordinary physician has to give account to no one on that score. He thinks that it cannot be so bad and sinful, since there are so many others who do the same, and that if there is any future beyond the grave, and people are made responsible for their doings, then he can think, I shall be where all the other thousands of physicians are, and who knows if there is a future life, as so many jovial brethren say, “ede, bibe, lude, post mortem nulla voluptas” (eat, drink and be merry, for there is no pleasure beyond the grave-R.H.). Would it not be good if that trifling amount of conscience could be brushed aside at times with a good glass of wine?
In fact anyone who has led the jovial, unconcerned and easy- going life of the ordinary practitioner for a few years, will not desires a so-called conscientious, or at least painstaking system of treatment, such as homoeopathy-as we can see everyday. For what is more unchallenged and more easy and comfortable than the usual method of treatment?
The third purpose, the larger income, is wholly on the side of the ordinary physician. Bear in mind: he remains nicely in the customary groove, does not give offence either to the patients or to his colleagues, or to the apothecaries with innovations. Why should he ever lack customers? The apothecary recommends patients to go to the doctor who gives plenty of full prescriptions, and the physicians do not oppose themselves to this, for the prescriber only thinks as they do.
And how many patients can the doctor visit every four or six hours a day and provide with a new prescription. The more patients he can deal with in a short time the more visits and prescriptions he will have to be paid for. In that way there can be no lack of income as the quantity brings it.
But if for the sake of curiosity you wish to pay attention to what the man has written, who with personal sacrifice dared to contradict all that medical art and science had considered right and useful for many centuries, I respectfully refer you to the following few books:
The “Organon,” which you already possess, describes the various diseases, and the remedial virtues of medicines viewed from a new standpoint, and applied very differently from what has been don hitherto.
The “Fragmenta de viribus medicamentorum positivis” (Leipsic, 1805, by Ambr. Barth) teaches the few peculiar effects of medicines that I have discovered, and without the knowledge of which I think that we cannot use a medicine properly and rationally in any ailment.
An amplification of this teaching is the “New Materia Medica Pura” (first part by Arnold in Dresden and also by Bruder in Leipsic, 18110, but it contains only a small part of the medicines, and the publication of the second part was delayed by the sleepiness of the publishers. I cannot suggest anything else that seems to belong here, unless it is the book you are inquiring about. The title is “Treasury of Medicine” (1800, by Wilhelm Fleischer) which contains some observations of mine, as I translated, it, on the meaning of the science of prescribing, in its annotations.
My contemporaries must resort to these few books, in order to make themselves familiar with homoeopathy, for I have not the time to tell each personally what is necessary to make a good homoeopath.
However if I can be of assistance to you in understanding some points on the subject, I will gladly give you an interview any forenoon from 10-30 to 11 o’clock. My leisure time is very limited during the rest of the day.
S. HAHNEMANN.
Hahnemann’s letter seems to have acted as a deterrent, as Dr. Robbi who first praised Hahnemann very highly, later on him and homoeopathy in the most spiteful way, even in the political daily press-the Leipsic “Tageblatt.”
SUPPLEMENT 102
HOME MEDICINES CHESTS AND POCKET CASES FOR HOMOEOPATHIC MEDICINES.
Dr. Haubold wrote to Hahnemann:
Leipsic, September 30th, 1831.
Before executing your order, I must ask you approximately how many small bottles the case is to hold, and what size is to be, so that I may procure what you desire.
I have a case of 150 bottle sin store, should this suit you I could fill it at once. The bottles have the size of 12 inches and the thickness of a large quill. The case is very comfortable, 64 inches in length and 2 inches thick.
Hahnemann’s marginal note says: “Haubold shall send it together wit the bill.”
Haubold answered: Leipsic, October 12th, 1831.
I take the liberty to send you the homoeopathic case, hoping it will justify your expectations. As regards the remedies contained, I have prepared them myself in accordance with those instructions which have brought so much blessing, and I can answer for their genuineness. The cost of the empty case with bottles is 7r. 12gr. My fee for filling them I leave to you, and mention at the same time that I always have in stock a variety of these cases, including much larger ones, in wooden boxes containing 60 to 300 bottles, each bottle holds approximately 3″. During the last few days I have sent 4 to Lahr, and 3 large ones to Lyon.
Hahnemann’s marginal note: “October 22nd, sent cheque for 15 Rthlr. to Haubold.”
Dr. L. Biett of Paris, writing on September 4th, 1832, requires the most important of the medicines for the hospital of St. Louis, where he has four wards of skin patient:
The homoeopathic method is such an exceptional event in the medical world, and the results it promises are so great, that it is the duty of every unprejudiced therapeutist to prove these results. The principles of your Materia Medica Pura will always guide me in all my experiments.
Hahnemann remarked on this: “Sent off homoeopathic medicine chest requested 100 francs in exchange.”
On August 2nd, 1832, Dr. Schreter of Lemberg, asked for a small medicine chest for a homoeopathic veterinary surgeon, and again seeks advice for several cases of disease.
The first chemist who, from inner conviction, made himself familiar with the preparation of homoeopathic medicines was Th. Lappe of Neudietendorf, a Herrnhuter Community from a district of Gotha. He enjoyed the full confidence of Hahnemann, who regularly ordered homoeopathic tinctures from him, and repeatedly gave him special instructions for the preparation of specified medicines.
The following letter contains, for instance, instructions for preparing Causticum.
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