QUALIFICATIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS. Homoeopathy is an Art, and not one art only, but a countless number of arts, and every practitioner of it must master the one his own genius selects. But if a practitioner has not the holy spirit of genius to inspire and inform his work he will be far wiser to confine himself to the kind of work for which he has the requisite talents.

 WE have had illuminating articles in our pages of late on Homoeopathic Progress in France, and again on Homoeopathy in Germany, and now we have received a lengthy document in the form of a “Memorandum” from an eminent member of the British Homoeopathic Association, which may be regarded as the apologia pro vita sua of that institution. The document is too prolix for publication in full, so we will make a few salient extracts. “Our whole problem,” says the writer,” is to attract QUALIFIED men,” The capitals are the writers. The supposition appears to be that having been once “attracted,” duly qualified medical persons will immediately be consumed with a devouring appetite to be taught the art of curing homoeopathically.

“How are we to induce them to come?” That is the “next” problem if it is not in reality the same and we are told that we must be “careful” not to bait the trap set to catch the unwary graduates, with “abuse”; which we do not suppose any sane person outside the B.H.A. ever thought of doing. Another thing we are told is that “boasting” will not catch them; and we never imagined that that would “attract” anybody either; but the B.H.A. seems to think that it might.

What then is the all-potent “attraction” guaranteed to draw the qualified? Here it is: “Steady work and infinite patience, with quick grasping of opportunities.” And we are told which is news to us that “That is Natures way.” We have seen and heard a good deal of “Nature,” but we have never observed her on the “grasp,” or on the grab, as our friends of the B.H.A. seem to have done.

“Will advertising do it?” Yes; the “right kind,” of course; that is to say advertisements in the orthodox medical papers! These advertisements pay the papers very well indeed, and do them no sort of harm, the sight of its own advertisements of its medical course “in column with the rest of the Medical Schools” fills the super-modest breast of the B.H.A. with a most ecstatic glow. Indeed this “has entirely changed the status of Homoeopathy in this country”.

The result of this change of status is that “we have now got the largest staff of homoeopathic physicians that the L.H.H. has ever known.” But it seems there is a “bitter cry” from somewhere that London is served whilst the provinces starve. Nevertheless “with us” by “us” we presume that the Council of the B.H.A. is meant “Homoeopathy has always been the aim even world-wide Homoeopathy never London Homoeopathy”.

The chief agencies in producing this happy change apart from increasing the advertising receipts of the allopathic journals are the Sir Henry Tyler Scholarships and the Paid Clinical Clerkships, the result of which is that the country is flooded with fully instructed men (and women, we suppose, though this is not mentioned) “very keen, and doing excellent work”.

This is all news to us, and we hope it is true. But there are other signs of victory: “For the first time in history one of the leading medical journals a couple of years ago “ASKED FOR” note the capitals! “ASKED FOR and published a paper on Homoeopathy.” If the sky didnt fall on that tremendous event it surely ought to have done!.

After such a glorious piece of patronage and condescension it is only fair that the Allopathic journals should be still further placated by sending them more and more highly profitable advertisements profitable, that is, to the journals. The London University having scornfully rejected Lady Durning-Lawrences bequest, the money is still to go into allopathic offers, thanks to the “turn the other cheek” policy of the B.H.A. This is how it is to be done:

“With the Durning-Lawrence money, no need to stint advertisements because of their cost.” Certainly not!.

Now, what does all this amount to? We can call it nothing else but snobbery of a peculiarly nauseous kind. The custodians of Truth prostrating themselves before Established Ignorance, licking its boots until not a particle of blacking is left in sight, with the aim of attracting a patronising smile, if not an embrace!.

The basic fallacy and folly at the root of all this is a quasi ecclesiastical notion that “Established Medicine” has some divine right embodied in it which homoeopaths are bound to respect; that the General Medical Council has a divine mission to keep the morals of the profession pure.

The G.M.C. has its uses, very important, not to say essential ones. But it has no divine inspiration behind it such as our B.H.A. friends seem to imagine. It is, in fact, nothing more than our own creation the child of our votes. We can tell a little story of the G.M.C. which illustrates the point. A good many years ago a friend of ours had been informed against by a homoeopathic member of the Medical Ogpu of the day, doubtless consumed with zeal for purity in professional life, as having been guilty of the heinous crime of “covering” an unqualified practitioner.

J H Clarke
John Henry Clarke MD (1853 – November 24, 1931 was a prominent English classical homeopath. Dr. Clarke was a busy practitioner. As a physician he not only had his own clinic in Piccadilly, London, but he also was a consultant at the London Homeopathic Hospital and researched into new remedies — nosodes. For many years, he was the editor of The Homeopathic World. He wrote many books, his best known were Dictionary of Practical Materia Medica and Repertory of Materia Medica