as a neurotrophic, when given in long continued, small, and diminishing doses.

We shall detain our readers but a moment in noticing "certain questions relating to the pathology of paralysis." Passing over the propositions that there is no evidence to show that the paralyzing lesions in paralysis, when accompanied or unaccompanied by morbid muscular contractions, or by morbid sensations, or by an increased disposition to reflex movement, are of a congestive or inflammatory character-and if so, the pathological and therapeutical significance of the facts—we must note the author's remarks on "late rigidity" in paralysis-which is that permanent condition into which paralyzed muscles eventually pass; and is to be distinguished from "early rigidity," referable to a state of irritation somewhere in the nervous system, which is occasional, and ends in relaxation. Both forms were noticed by the late Dr. Todd. In all prolonged cases of uncured paralysis we have "late rigidity" as a persistent terminal symptom, coming on very gradually, after much wasting of the muscles, and when they have ceased to respond to galvanism. Dr. Todd believed that this form of contraction was due to the shrinking by cicatrization of the brain substance, which, acting on the neighboring healthy tissue, kept up a slow irritation, and, propagated to the muscles, excited in them corresponding gradual contraction, their nutrition at the same time becoming seriously impaired by the want of proper exercise, and by the general depressing influence of the lesion. Dr. Radcliffe's explanation, in accordance with his view of muscular action, is much simpler and more satisfying-namely, "that the muscles have lost their innate electricity and vitality when the rigidity comes on, and that they contract and remain contracted in consequence of this loss" (p. 271). In other words, "late rigidity" is nothing less nor more than the anticipation of rigor mortis-rigor mortis in vitâ.

According to the premises, the signs which are indicative of a congestive or inflammatory character in paralysis must be read in a contrary sense. We have here a new field in the therapeutics of paralysis soon to be opened up. It follows that the class of cases in which strychnia can be given with advantage may be enlargeda view sustained by experience. Dr. Radcliffe thinks he gives us but very little evidence in the way of cases to support his hopes and his doctrine-very satisfactory results from employing electricity, in one of three ways, may be anticipated in the treatment of paralysis

"By charging the body with statical positive electricity, by drawing sparks in the course of the disabled nerves, or by using shocks of VOL. III.-No. 13.

5

the coil machine until the operation is followed by a sufficient degree of vascular reaction. In chronic cases, I think it may be possible, by the latter means, to improve the nutrition in the faulty nerve centre by producing a state of vascular reaction there, for it may be supposed that the shocks of the machine will affect the nerve acted upon throughout its course, and that for this reason the vaso-motor nerves of the vessels of the nerve centre will not be out of reach of this action" (p. 274).

We would counsel great caution in the exercise of this procedure, when attempted.

Finally, the using of various movements and manipulations of the affected limbs is recommended, and the opinion expressed, that to omit them "in these cases is to deprive the patient of a most important aid to recovery."

The physiologist, pathologist, and practical physician will each find much that is interesting and instructive in this work; and we recommend its careful study to them. It is eminently suggestive, and is written carefully, honestly, and in the best scientific spirit. Dr. Radcliffe states all his propositions and deductions with great clearness as well as conciseness. He leads his reader on step by step, and if there are any flaws or gaps in the evidence or reasoning on which he dogmatizes, there is no attempt to gloss or bridge them over. If we are not quite prepared to be at one with him in all his views of innervation and muscular action, it is rather from their being yet "not proven," than from any positive attachment to the theories he essays to overturn. On many points the author's physiological views are not novel, and this he very candidly acknowledges, though he tells us he worked independently and in ignorance of the labors of others in the same direction. Of those who have held the same hypothesis of nervous contraction, Dr. West, of Alford, must be first named; in 1832 he maintained that muscular contraction can only take place when by an act of the will nervous influence is suspended. About the same time, Sir Charles Bell seems to have suggested, in a lecture at the Royal College of Surgeons, that relaxation and not contraction might be the act. Subsequently, Dugès, of Montpelier, Prof. Matteucci, Engel, of Vienna, and Staunius, of Rostock, arrived at similar conclusions-the grounds for their opinion being the coexistence of spasmodic action with nervous debility; the efficacy of stimulants as anti-spasmodics; the fact that the muscles of frogs are more prone to contract when cut off from the influence of the nervous centres; and the supervention of the permanent contrac

tion of rigor mortis, when all signs of nervous irritation are extinguished.

The book is nicely printed, on good paper, but we regret to see it disfigured by the barbaric spelling of Webster.

The Physiology of Man: designed to represent the existing state of Physiological Science, as applied to the Functions of the Human Body. By AUSTIN FLINT, JR, M.D., Professor of Physiology and Microscopy in the Bellevue Hospital Medical College, etc. Introduction: The Blood; Circulation; Respiration. New York: Appleton & Co. 1866.

The present volume, although complete in itself, is the first of a series in which the author intends to discuss all of the subjects usually presented in systematic treatises upon physiology. It is therefore a far more ambitious effort in this direction than any former issue of the press on this side of the Atlantic. Even in England no work of like pretensions has appeared since the great Cyclopædia of Anatomy and Physiology, which, however, was the result of the labors of many, and is now out of date. Numerous systems of physiology have appeared in France and England. Of those of English birth we have but two of importance, the work of Prof. Carpenter and that of Todd and Bowman. The former is an admirable compilation, and is best just where we should expect it to be, in the psychological chapters, and in the discussion of general questions. Elsewhere, it is only a closet book, the clever digest of other men's labors, without that authoritative criticism which can come only from one who has become familiar in the laboratory, through direct experiment, with the processes by which modern science is daily groping her way toward larger and broader truths.

Like comment in another direction applies justly to the second book named above. Todd and Bowman, especially the latter, were good anatomists and micrographers, and hence we find the microscopic anatomy of the tissues wonderfully well described and delineated, so that from this side they have cast new light on many obscure points in biology. Beyond this, in the regions of physiological chemistry and corporeal physics, their work is not to be compared to those of several continental laborers. In point of fact, it is not to be expected that a country which produces at present no working physiologists—if we except a most able man, Dr. Richardson-should originate first class books on this subject.

This criticism does not apply to the French treatises as a class. The works of Beraud and Longet were written by men to whom the manipulations of the biologist's laboratory were of daily familiarity. Milne Edwards' cyclopædic work, on the other hand, is more devoted to general than to human physiology, and betrays the naturalist rather than the working biologist. While expressing this opinion, that the best treatise on this, as on any subject, will usually proceed from a person who has made discoveries in the branch of knowledge referred to, and who has practically embraced the results of others by repeating and varying these modes of research-while holding, we say, to this view, we by no means assert that to be a working physiologist gives a man all the abilities required to produce a first class summary of the present state of information upon his science. There are now living, savans who are well known for researches and discoveries, but who want the special qualities required to produce a text-book.

None of the qualifications above indicated are wanting to the author of the volume before us. He has taught and lectured for several years, and has learned, therefore, the art of clearly stating facts. He has made several investigations of original character, and one in especial, of remarkable merit-so excellent, indeed, as to make us regret that he has resolved to use for this book so many years which might have been applied to original inquiry in paths which, in this country, so very few have trodden. To the book itself we must look as the test of his power to collate and compare facts, judicially decide as to mooted questions, and to state with precision and clearness the conclusions he has reached. It is not out of place to add that his facts are not alone clearly, but also pleasantly stated, as to which quality, by the way, there is a vast difference among physiological treatises. Carpenter's book is delightful reading, and at the other end of the scale Brown-Séquard's various monographs are perhaps the dryest and most difficult reading a doctor is likely to encounter. Among the American text-books for students, Dr. Dalton's is the most agreeable, and we may instance his chapter on generation as the most pleasantly written essay on the subject with which we are acquainted. To conclude these brief allusions to our native books without some mention of Prof. Dunglison, would be unfair to this most extensive of medical writers. His physiology has the defect which always must exist in any book which is written by a person unaccustomed to pursue experimental inquiries. It is what a practice of medicine would be if penned by a person who had not a clinical experience; otherwise it is, or was-for there is no late edition-a book

remarkable for a pleasant and clear style and for great erudition. Its bibliographical stores are indeed so great that it has, and will always have, value as a work for reference.

With a brief notice of vital properties and a judicious neglect of that curious load of definitions which encumbers most physiologists, Dr. Flint goes on, in his Introduction, to consider the various elements, simple and compound, drawing largely upon the great work of Robin and Verdeil. Chapter i. to Chapter ix., inclusive, treats of the blood and the circulation. We have looked it through with care, and are satisfied that it is the most complete statement in that direction to be met with in any physiology. The latest experiments of Marey and Bernard and others are recorded, and full credit is given to American observers, and to some of the older classical authorities, whose works are too much lost sight of in many modern works. The chapter on Peculiarities of Circulation and that on Asphyxia are among the best. We have noted a few omissions, and some parts which would have been better for fuller details, but, on the whole, this section leaves little to be desired.

The third portion of the volume is devoted to the consideration of Respiration. It compares favorably with like portions of other works, but did not strike us as being so complete as the preceding chapters.

In all of the sections the author alludes frequently to his having verified certain statements of former writers by repetition and modifications of their experiments. It is this form of criticism which gives greatest value to a book on an experimental science, and, as we have said before, places it on a much higher level than any compilation can possess without it.

The wood-cuts in Dr. Flint's book are few in number, but, so far as we know, the student gets very little aid from such small anatomical cuts as profusely adorn many of our treatises, while for the physician they are literally of no use. Diagrams and drawings of apparatus are more useful, and we should like to have seen even more of these than are given in Dr. Flint's volume. The paper and binding are excellent, and are very superior to those of the wretched American reprints of Prof. Carpenter's handsome English books, or the like reproductions of some of Churchill's neat and handy treatises.

We regret that we have not space enough to allow of a longer criticism upon Dr. Flint's work. We have said sufficient, however, to show that we think it well entitled to a place in the libraries of such doctors as like thorongh books, clearly written and neatly printed.