THE PRINCES OF SERENDIP



We are aware that the early history of homoeopathy in Europe was identical with his life and work and that he was stimulated to go forward against great odds and in the face of persecution by the revolting practices then in vogue in orthodox medicine.

We are aware of his earliest experiments with Peruvian bark and his monumental work with other remedies which followed. His contributions were destined to have a most profound and beneficial effect upon the practice of medicine generally. We have seen and felt this effect. His was the greatest contribution and sacrifice.

We are aware and respectful of the accomplishments of his distinguished follower, Constantine Hering, one of the most brilliant of the early founders of homoeopathy in this country and particularly in Philadelphia. How in 1823, Hering returned from South America with his live specimen of the snake Lachesis, the venom of which he introduced into medicine. We recall his arrival in Philadelphia and how he helped to organize the Hahnemann Society, was one of the prime movers in the Allentown attempt and finally became one of the great participants in the organization and development of the Hahnemann Medical College of Philadelphia.

As for an accounting concerning our heritage, we who have followed have done very little in comparison. There have been times when we should have been positively ashamed. Because of the merit of Hahnemanns original work and that of his early students, not because of anything we have done, homoeopathy still smoulders as a separate entity in medicine. Orthodox medicine of this day has recognized the merits of many of his principles and without giving him due credit has embraced them as their own. This does not disturb us except that it is unfair. It was not Hahnemanns idea to establish a separate school of medicine. Circumstances forced him to do so.

We have the same qualities and the same shortcomings to deal with in medical men today. It is the science of medicine which has made the progress.

Never before in the 103 years that the American Institute of Homoeopathy has existed was there more need for strong, clear thinking men among its membership.

Never before in the history of medicine was there greater need for strong medical organizations. Many of our finest homoeopathic graduates are members in good standing of all medical societies. This includes membership in their city, state and national homoeopathic societies as well. A physicians primary obligation is to the organization to which he owes his professional origin. HE SHOULD NEVER FORGET THAT OBLIGATION neither should he prostitute it.

In our accounting we may well omit the mistakes of the past, profit by them perhaps, and look forward ideologically to the betterment of our school of medicine and promulgation of Hahnemanns principles.

Here and there over the country we still have organized efforts and institutions which are attempting to carry on Hahnemanns work. It would be impossible to do more than mention a few such centres; viz, in California at the University, in New York at the New York Medical College, in Boston at the Homoeopathic Hospital, in Cleveland at Huron Road Hospital, in Chicago through their society, and in Philadelphia at the Hahnemann Medical College.

No more fitting words could be chosen for our concluding remarks than the quotations from John Hemmeter. Joseph Henry Joseph Henry, 1797-1879, foremost American physicist. and Walter B. Cannon:.

“These experience of great men which are said to follow so- called accidents, chance, lucky thoughts, or to be the consequence of some fortuitous circumstances, are nothing but the final catalytic stimulus which sets into a form a mass of conscious and sub-conscious thoughts and ideas that have antedated the supposed lucky thought.”.

“The seeds of great discoveries are constantly floating around us, but they only take root in minds well prepared to receive them.”.

“Many a man floated in water before Archimedes; apples fell from trees as long ago as the Garden of Eden (exact day unknown); and the outrush of steam against resistance could have been noted at any time since the discovery of fire and its use under a covered pot of water. In all three cases it was done before the significance of these events was perceived. Obviously a chance discovery involves both the phenomenon to be observed and the appreciative, intelligent observer.”.

Journal of the Ame. Inst. of Homoeo. Vol. 40, No. 7.

Victor C. Laughlin