rofessor, whose
lectures I long attended, was included in these audacious claims; but
after the specimens I have given of the accuracy of the foreign
correspondence of the "Homoeopathic Examiner," any further information I
might obtain would seem so superfluous as hardly to be worth the postage.

Homoeopathy may be said, then, to be in a sufficiently miserable
condition in Paris. Yet there lives, and there has lived for years, the
illustrious Samuel Hahnemann, who himself assured my correspondent that
no place offered the advantages of Paris in its investigation, by reason
of the attention there paid to it.

In England, it appears by the statement of Dr. Curie in October, 1839,
about eight years after its introduction into the country, that there
were eighteen Homoeopathic physicians in the United Kingdom, of whom only
three were to be found out of London, and that many of these practised
Homoeopathy in secret.

It will be seen, therefore, that, according to the recent statement of
one of its leading English advocates, Homoeopathy had obtained not quite
half as many practical disciples in England as Perkinism could show for
itself in a somewhat less period from the time of its first promulgation
in that country.

Dr. Curie's letter, dated London, October 30, 1839, says there is "one in
Dublin, Dr. Luther; at Glasgow, Dr. Scott." The "distinguished"
Chrysaora writes from Paris, dating October 20, 1839, "On the other hand,
Homoeopathy is commencing to make an inroad into England by the way of
Ireland. At Dublin, distinguished physicians have already embraced the
new system, and a great part of the nobility and gentry of that city have
emancipated themselves from the English fashion and professional
authority."

But the Marquis of Anglesea and Sir Edward Lytton Bulwer patronize
Homoeopathy; the Queen Dowager Adelaide has been treated by a
Homoeopathic physician. "Jarley is the delight of the nobility and
gentry." "The Royal Family are the patrons of Jarley."

Let me ask if a Marquis and a Knight are better than two Lords, and if
the Dowager of Royalty is better than Royalty itself, all of which
illustrious dignities were claimed in behalf of Benjamin Douglass
Perkins?

But if the balance is thought too evenly suspended in this case, another
instance can be given in which the evidence of British noblemen and their
ladies is shown to be as valuable in establishing the character of a
medical man or doctrine, as would