The trial of the case took five bitter fighting. Indeed, a biased government prosecuting attorney was so incensed during the trial one day that he had a very severe attack of acute indigestion on his return to curt after eating dinner in that angry stage of mind. They were about to adjourn court, when having my pocket case of 60x (B. & T.) with me, I offered to prescribe, which assistance the lawyer very graciously accepted while the dozen or more government physicians and other physicians called to testify from Washington and elsewhere, looked on in amazement.
For several days I had been of the opinion that this lawyer needed a dose of Nux vomica for his disposition and now I knew he needed it, so I gave it to him on his tongue, and so certain was I of the result that I stated aloud so that everyone could hear that that one powder would relieve him within five minutes. One of our defense witnesses (an ex-president of the American Institute of Homoeopathy) arose from his seat and exploded, “Dr. Schwartz, I would not say that”. “Why not?” I asked in reply. “It cannot always be done”, he answered, “Oh yes”, said I, “when you give the right medicine”.
I had hardly more than reached my seat when the government prosecuting attorney called across the court room, “Dr.Schwartz, I am entirely relieved”. It is needless to say that homoeopathy itself won her own case although the statutes still forbid the word “cure” on bottles of medicine or advertising matter sent through the mail. And the government chemist from the Department of Agriculture is still wondering why he could not find any medicine in Ensigns homoeopathic sugar. “Believe it or not”, it is a matter of record.
ORIGIN OF SUSCEPTIBILITY
I still maintain that our conceptions of disease are vague. We are always tending to get away from the law which is the foundation of our method, and from everything that the law implies.
First, the law deals with action and reaction alone. This in itself rules out the material except so far as the material is a conductor, vessel or instrument through which the force acts. it implies Newtons third law, that to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
Therein lies the danger of the so-called physical methods in therapy. How can we measure the force of the reaction in advance? How can we know how much stimulation to apply in the first place? If we are still at sea regarding potency how can we estimate the effects of cruder methods?.
It seems to me that in the dynamic state with a certain amount of potential the reaction is greater than the original stimulus. The matter of potential and its factors are of more concern than even the law itself, for they are the conditions under which the law acts. If it be true that energy cannot be destroyed we may cause to worry about the energy itself and look to those factors which modify its action.
What we know as impaired or reduced vitality is not a diminution of the strength of the force but a leaking away of it. Life may be compared to a fully charged storage battery (a simile better than that of an engine, I think). This fully charged storage battery has a certain potential. If all the wiring from this battery is well connected and insulated the proper function of the battery results, but if there is a short circuit, function is impaired although the potential and actual strength of the battery is normal. Under proper conditions the strength and potential of the battery may be restored-D. PULFORD.
