DEATH, it is necessary to take into consideration several circumstances; as the phenomena attending on this state; certain diseases or conditions of the living body, which resemble death, and may be mistaken for it; certain experiments that have been recommended in order to ascertain the reality of death. It must be confessed that this is occasionally a question of more difficulty than might be at first supposed; and that the means of enabling us to form a decision, are for the most part very inadequate and imperfect. The methods proposed for this purpose are, as our author justly remarks, individually, altogether fallacious, while even the concurrence of them all will sometimes prove unsatisfactory. The pulsations of the heart, and the performance of respiration, are generally considered as indicative of the existence of life; and, indeed, so essential to it, as to cease only with its termination; but it cannot be doubted, that in certain states of the animal frame, circulation and respiration are more or less perfectly, sometimes altogether suspended, without the extinction of life being the consequence. In such instances we have no clue to guide our determinations, all is uncertainty and doubt. It has often appeared to us a singular and inexplicable circumstance, why in these cases the total suspension of these two functions, sometimes for a considerable period, should be compatible with the restoration of life and action; whilst under other circumstances, a temporary and inconsiderable interruption of either of them shall prove permanently fatal. Putrefaction is certainly the only proof of the occurrence of death, which can be considered as conclusive every other circumstance, however strong as presumptive evidence, certainly affords no grounds for a positive evidence. The cessation of circulation and respiration, coldness and rigicity of limbs, taken separately, are of no importance; and even when combined, leave an opening (slight it may be granted,) for a doubt,

We must here conclude our imperfect notice of a work equally creditable to its author, and likely to be useful to those to whom it is presented. The view we have given of the subjects treated of, and the assurance that it displays talent and judgment, must stand in the, room of more copious extracts, and more extended criticism."

1

WELLER AND TRAVERS

ON THE DISEASES OF THE EYE.

Is it true that the Germans excel 'ús in the treatment of the eye? Almost every work we open, and almost every journal we glance over, proclaim their boasted superiority, and talk degradingly of our English knowledge and our English practice. Now we are anxious to come at the facts of this superiority, if so it is; to compare the knowledge and practice of each country, in order to discover and make up for our deficiency if it exist; and if not, to repel indignantly the insinuations against our character. The two works of M. Weller and Mr. Travers give us an excellent opportunity for such comparison, though they are not quite parallel cases, the German work being confessedly a compilation, and the English one having the higher pretensions of experience and observation for its basis. The difference indeed in arrangement and manner is most striking: and here at least we boldly claim the palm for our able countryman, whose simplicity and distinctness form a very strong contrast to the pedantic stiffness, and endless and useless divisions of the German Mr. Travers puts down in the plainest and most gentlemanly English what he has seen, what he has done, and what he has thought; while M. Weller contents himself with piecing together what he has read. Mr. Travers is a practical surgeon; M. Weller is a mere book-maker. He has however succeeded in making a good book of reference; though to those who possess Cooper's Dictionary, the Manuel of Weller will give but little additional knowledge, while the work of Mr. Travers is valuable from the accuracy and originality of its observations.

Another point, on which we cannot too highly praise Mr. Travers is, his pointed rejection of the countless farago of new coined terms, which the Germans and their imitators, now think indispensable to science. Many of Weller's

A Mannal of the Diseases of the Human Eye intended for Surgeons com, mencing practice, from the best nat onal and foreign works, and in particular those of Professor Beer, with the observations of Dr. Charles H. Weller, Berlin, 1819. Translated from the German, and illustrated with cases and observations, by G, [C. Monteath, M. D. &c. &c. 2 vols. 8vo, Glasgow, 18211. viąpblue varia 1 A Synopsis of the Diseases of the Eye and their Treatment, to which are pre xed a short Anatomical Description, and a Sketch of the Physiology of that Organ. By B. Travers, F.R.S. &c. 2d edit. 8vo. 1821.

names our English organs at least, can with the greatest difficulty pronounce, and our unlearned heads find it equally difficult to comprehend. As we conceive that we cannot render the profession a greater service, than do what we can to resist the present barbarous influx of German and French Greek into our practical books (Mason Good may do as he pleases with his Sanscrit and Arabic), we shall here exhibit a few from Weller and others with unqualified reprobation; and we call on the profession to aid us in banishing them. I do to viac beIN

L

1

"

We begin our list with the new name for the surgery of the eye-Ophthalmology, and extend our vituperation to all the ologies: therapology, symptomatology, etiology, diagnology, pharmacology, prognology, &c. &c. though we fear: pathology is established beyond hope. We go on to blepharopthalmitis, ophthalmia neonatorum (in the name of wonder what is this ) anchylops, tylosis, chlazion, ptosis, blepharosphasmus, lagophe thalmus, symblepharon, trichiasis, dacryothysis, dacryops, dacry+ adenitis, phlebitis (quasi fleabites), atresia, pacheablepharosis, conjunctivitis, keratokelé, synchysis, uecrotomy, diplopia, leucitis, synechia, cirrophthalmia, dacryoblennorrhea, ophthalmoblennor rhoea-syphilitico-scorbutico!!!oniteid as fail.de odepress Our pen almost refused to write this last sesquipedalian barbarism, and we shall not now take the trouble of putting down another; but, we here give warning to all abettors of this conspiracy of name-coining against classical simplicity, that they shall not escape the full weight of our severest animadversions-no, not even Dr. George Monteath himself, whose good sense, and extensive practical knowledge deserve a better fate, than to be thrown, among this horde of barbarians.18.00 2.961 But we must now go on to something practical mobs almát PURULENT OPHTHALMIA IN INFANTS begins in the conjunctiva palpebralis, to which it is often confined. According to Mr. Travers the cornea when the disease is mild is not endangered, unless it be neglected or exasperated by stimulants very slight haze of the cornea is the worst direct result of it. But how does it happen, we ask, that a very slight haze of the cornea should thus operate so unfavourably? This point has been well explained by Mr. Saunders, and by Weller. If the inflammation have been too severe, and the secretion of puriform mucus considerable, then the cornea exfoliates, and is eonverted into a mass of matter, which at last bursts in the centre, either suddenly under severe pain, or slowly without pain, and the aqueous humour being now discharged, the iris, comes to fle in the aperture. Should the ravages proceed further, the iris may even fall out of the eye, along with a greater or smaller

1

A

part of the vitreous humour, and complete colliquation of the latter ensue. The disease does not always stop here, for even in less destructive degrees of this affection, children often in consequence become consumptive. The cornea however will not pass into a sloughy state in every instance, in which during the course of this disease it is affected with opacity: on the const trary, opacity is frequently the sign of a commencing healthy action, and ought to be hailed as a happy omen. But the duskis ness alluded to by Mr. Travers, which is so dangerous in itse consequences, commences during the progressive state of the inflammation, which is, as Mr. Saunders has remarked, antecedent to any loss of substance, though a sure indication of it

As to the SCARIFICATION of the inner surface of the con junctiva lining the eyelids, recommended by Ware and Reil no opinion is given, either by Mr. Travers or M. Weller. Dr. Monteath however speaks of it in high terms, as a method which he almost invariably practices. It is a point which can only be settled by experience: that of Mr. Saunders was decidedly at variance with what Dr. Monteath has observed. According to him, scarifications, as far as he has seen them employed in the active state of the inflammation, are certainly injurious: they have manifestly aggravated the symptoms, and he conceives that the infliction of mechanical injury on a part already actively in flamed, can scarcely be advantageous. His argument is plau sible: a similar practice does not obtain in surgery in the other parts of the body,

Læsion of the frontal nerve in injuries of the scalp, is mentioned from Hippocrates downwards, as Mr. Travers informs us, among the occasional causes of AMAUROSIS. This affection may however vary in degree, from a weakness of sight, even to a complete amaurosis, in which the iris is immoveable, and the pupil either uncommonly dilated or contracted. Professor Beer ascribes the disease to the tension of the branches of the supra-orbitary nerve, caused by a cicatrix, and cures it by bold incisions down to the bone, close to the supra-orbitary foramen. Although we by no means doubt the success of this, we much doubt the explanation which is given, notwithstanding the great authority of Beer; but we leave the subject to the decision of our readers. Amaurosis, succeeding wounds of the eye-brows, may form, 1. By powerful laceration and extension of the larger branches of the superciliary nerve, in which case the amaurosis shews itself, either during the formation or soon after the completion of the cicatrix. 2. By actual laceration of the retina, and by displacement and dislocation of several other internal structures of the eye-ball. In both these cases the

a

blindness manifests itself immediately after the wound, in the first it appears more as a mere weakness of sight, while in the second it is always a perfect amaurosis. 3. By contusion and imperfect dilaceration of the branches of the superciliary nerve. Even here weakness of sight, more rarely perfect amaurosis follows closely on the accident, but never so quickly as in the foregoing case. 4. By mere concussion of the eye-ball, and of its surrounding parts, and contusion, and tearing asunder of thes superciliary nerve at the same time; here the amaurosis arises/ at the very moment of the accident.

These consequences are not confined to wounds only, for they are also produced in some instances, when the injury takes place in the lower region of the eye, and when the infra-orbitary nerve, or its branches are divided or contused. Any opinion, therefore, as to the event of such accidents, requires the greatest caution, and a prognosis should be declined till the extent of the injury has been completely ascertained. eirovat sanmls of

If the wound is accompanied with great force, the amaurotic affection takes place in both eyes, from the communion of the anterior part of the brain. In such instances, when the weak-i ness of sight increases, if the eyes meanwhile be irritated by light, if the patient complain of more continued head-ache,í and if his brain become affected, not only may a complete amau rosis take place, but the life of the patient may stand in danger. After directions for the treatment of the patient, till good matter be formed, the necessity of having recourse to the above mentioned practice of Beer is again urged. But would there not be some difficulty in cutting across all the branches of the. nerves? For in addition to that branch, which passes to the forehead through the superciliary notch, there is another which after going to the inner side of the orbit, also turns up in the > same direction; so that for the complete division of all the branches, a very extensive incision down to the bone would be necessary.

Neither M. Weller nor Mr. Travers have been so particular as we could have wished, in distinguishing from incipient amau rosis, those various and anomalous affections of vision arising from disordered digestion. Mr. Travers in enumerating the I symptoms of amaurosis, mentions spectra, like flakes of sooty or insects' wings; and sometimes bright, like a chain formed of small globules of quicksilver, which are usually the forerunners > of violent headache. This he says, is an unpromising affection? It may be so, and often is so undoubtedly. But this statement requires considerable qualifications; for all these symptoms may