| char- be an adents jon to other ing in runate » that elpful sician ae Wooster Beach and the Early Eclectics Auex Beracan, Ph.D. ment sprang up mainly as a reaction against the heroic therapeut regular phy HE Eclectic medical practitioners constituted an important segment of the 19th century botanico-medical movement in this country. This move- s of the jans' and flourished in the social and educational milieu of the Jacksonian era. By the 1850's, the Eclectics had completely overshadowed their Botanic rivals, the Neo-Thomsonians,* and had succeeded in developing a distinctive pharmacy of their own based on indigenous plant remedies. WOOSTER EACH, 1794-1868 In some ways, Wooster Beach, the acknowledged founder of Eclecticism, forcibly reminds one of Elias Smith (1769-1846), the controversial preacher, ‘Thomsonian physician, and ardent supporter of President Jackson, Both were engaged in religious and medical controversy, warring against the regular theological and medical beliefs of the day; both had Messianic complexes, and both were acutely conscious of the value of publ ‘ty. Beach’s personality and outlook are best revealed in his crusading articles against the “craft of Doctors and Priests,” published in his religious newspaper, The Telescope, during the late 1820's. The laudatory statements about him which later ap- peared in the Eclectic press do not give the same picture. ‘The salient features of Beach’s life have been provided by Wilder and Felter, He was born in Trumbull, Connecticut, in 1794. As a young man, he became obsessed ith the idea of reforming current religious and medical practices. Learning of the alleged medical prowess of Jacob Tidd, a herb doctor who lived a secluded section of New Jersey, Beach lost no time in visiting this gentleman to request that he be accepted as Tidd’s student, ‘Though at first reluctant, Tidd finally consented. After a period of tutelage, Beach, in his own words, “attended a course of lectures in the University of the State of New York during the time Drs. Post, Hosack, Mott, and others were professors. I concluded this was best, were it only to detect the errors of the modern practice; and subsequently I obtained a diploma, ac- cording to the law of the State, which should any wish to peruse, they will find it recorded in the County Clerk’s Office, in the City Hall, New York.”* About 1825, we find Beach a member of the New York County Medical Society, pursuing a busy medical practice in New York City, and instructing students. In 1827, he announced opening of a ical institution which he designated by the grandiose title of United States Infirmary. Two years later, Beach founded a medical school, first called the Reformed Medical Academy From the College of Pharmacy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Dr. Berman is Assistant fessor of Pharmacy and Pharmacist in the University Health Servic. 277tation denominaed the Stats Ioienary has ben founded (em the most istered motives) lr the trstnent of emer srncaly by 0 now end prove we ||tbe. “The remedial sonres are cyt be rive rom the see kid ; Whig tat the production of ar ovw conte te Scent to counteract the dsolrs ince foi ‘The bai is eated m Plage ie, bn, ad Bremen iesinadpesant part of the ey "he aon en psc ner he sapermtendence of» physcan wi es bee ‘egasty bd to the pes of Mer cori othe Law othe Ses By meh every nltional beset ean be detved rom theprsen pence of Medicine “a tesa te of tretnent ese spe moe ef UNTRD raves 1xFmDwARr. For the trate of duu src, by oe and proved Medd pan New-Your, Jou, 1817, ||" ‘Te liemary, is neve oped; where the os many_ yearn whe nly oft ed wil a, Ser inced, both from experience and obsers ation, | ee the present kee of Pree se cae aot founded on corset and ratooall secateat, axp urixo-ts’ piares: Precip "Phe teams male use otra : force ek tbat ae not aba ood sur, Gcials bat on the contrary are produe-| “Tye publ will b ivf ery perio, spt eneqeeny|, ch Rabe wil er ore ge Taio 4 other | zstitated ia connection with t ie te Lancet Mercury ad atber| States ade de on ton et dees ser ctrl led ereaby PM | oemeat Net-Vet Tee ee ee is wed Sargeant remo of a meen ae See gt ne Da ari ‘diseases sme, — pets re entleman of this eity, eminently fermur comeences. realy Oe Te eee captors soch rac at I's retro ean ee Eg eve experience In sree bcobrizac to al “the uafortomte 1 sig-a erweny whe tr poor i 6 tet i domed Jo undergo the most pant tended Setcinaly seein eee sl deogrows persone ander | pedo thew of fea oH, i,t ad ata, te se pach metas Inthe Sarge department, the gr ob ict wil be Co moi The tif, and ths Beit dtc ergeon to the mere ‘Wes operons salle Cod weevil thee lb performed hy iy hie dhe so sicily. Mewar eh omy ind ine the dey, wi lly atenled to, Fr the ew ae hs inirmacy tata, wl be aay edge ee DISPESSARY YoR ‘ruz PooK. [commensurate withthe imrtance ofthe sul ect, have been take, to introduce a better] ical aad Sarseal precce this intone a Disper wear gn nde fee of ee lace of rede Announcement of the opening of Beach's United States Infirmary. Reproduced from his religious newspaper, The Telescope, Vol. 4, No. 86, 1827. 278 (1820), la of New Ye York, and Under during 183 of the Uni chartered 1 to make av Medicine.” such as Jo major role In subs ing, publis Ishmaclite writing, pp ican Practi fessor of ¢ made a nur of the Nat Felter met Eclectic mi Beach's influence f about by @ leadership, retirement, 4 The est by the foll the future | in the Unit Cincinnati, few years { In 1836, th entitled Th Tt was jected to d superior rq with cold ¢ cine were But to hava Eee (1829), later changed in 1830 to the Reformed Medical College of the Cit of New York. This medical school was never chartered by the State of New York, and it finally closed in 1838. Under the leadership of Beach, there was organized in New York City during 1829 a national organization called the Reformed Medical Society of the United States. One of the first acts of the Society was to establish a chartered medical school at Worthington, Ohio, in 1830, whose purpose was to make available to the people of the West “a scientific knowledge of Botanic Medicine.” Along with Beach, several of the charter members of this Societ such as John King, T. V, Morrow, and I. G. Jones, were destined to play major roles in the history of Eclecticism. In subsequent years, Beach became involved in religious polemical writ- ing, publishing at least two other periodicals, The Battle-Axe and The Ishmaelite. Despite this activity, he found time to engage in extensive medical writing, producing in 1833 his very popular three-volume work, The Amer- ican Practice of Medicine. Two other works by Beach were well received Botanic circles, his Medical and Botanic Dictionary (1847) and An Im- proved System of Midwifery (1847). Beach lectured briefly at the Eclectic Medical Institute in 1845 as Pro- fessor of Clinical Surgery and Medicine. In 1848 he visited England made a number of converts to his cause. During 1855 he was elected president of the National Eclectic Medical Association. After this date, Wilder and Felter mention that his relations with other teachers of “Reformed” and Eclectic medicine were not cordial. The reasons for this are not clear. Beach's life after 1855 seems to have been uneventful, and his personal influence faded out almost completely. Both mental despondency, brought about by a tragedy in his family, and his inability to maintain his former leadership, forced him first into partial obscurity and then into complete retirement, until his death in 1868. AMERICAN ECLECTICISM: A BRIEF HISTORICAL APPRAISAL ‘The establishment in 1830 of a teaching institution in Worthington, Ohio, by the followers of Beach, was to have extremely important repercussions in the future of the Eclectic group. This first chartered sectaria in the United States was the forerunner of the Eclectic Medical Institute of Cincinnati, the acknowledged fountainhead of American Eclecticism. For a few years the school, despite its share of vicissitudes, made modest progress. In 1836, the professors of the institution began publishing a monthly journal entitled The Western Medical Reformer. It was to be expected that the new school at Worthington would be sub- jected to derision and harassment at the hands of its rivals, the numerically superior regulars and Thomsonians. Thomson himself treated the institution with cold contempt. “I am, therefore, satisfied,” he wrote, “that if my medi- cine were taken from them, their Institution would not be worth a cent But to have bought the right,” he added sarcastically, “would have been too medical school xmean for such dignitaries; but, to steal it from a quack, was, perhaps, in their estimation more honorable! ! !”* The “right” referred to was Thom- son’s patented system of medicine, which could be purchased for twenty dollars. Intensely embarrassed by the community's inability to distinguish be- tween the genteel professors of Worthington and the numerous uncouth, fanatical disciples of Thomson who had overrun the area, the “Reformed” faculty issued the following statement:* Since Samuel Thomson obtained letters patent to enable him to steam and pepper the sick legally and to authorize others to do the same, his system (if indeed it can be called fone,) has been s0 industriously puffed by interested agents or sub-agents, almost without hnumber, that there can scarcely an individual be found, who bas not heard more or less of the ‘Thomsonian or steam practice. Henee, when any system or course of practice is mentioned as differing from the ordinary fashionable routine practice of the day, whether tinder the name of Reformed, Eclectic, or any other ttl, it is immediately referred by the great mass of community through lack of the proper knowledge, to the Thomsonian or steam system, a8 being identical with it, or a branch of it. «The tendency and aim of the Thomsonian System, is a total subversion of all medical science and a substitution of a limited patent system of practice, founded upon ignorance, prejudices, and dogmas of a single individual. The title of medical revolutionsts assumed by some of the most prominent individuals of the Thomsonian fraternity, is very appropriate, and may, with propriety, be applied generally to the advocates of the steam and pepper system. For such individuals to be styled medical reformers, whether by them= selves oF others, is slanderous and calculated grossly to deceive and misguide the public rind, ‘The Medical Department of Worthington College, as the school was known, ceased to exist in 1839. It had been seriously affected by the nation- wide depression of 1837. But the blow which sealed the school’s fate was struck in 1839, when a mob, infuriated by reports of “resurrectionist” acti ties at the college, looted and sacked the building. During its relatively brief existence, eighty-eight practitioners had been graduated from the Worthington School. Under the leadership of T. V. Morrow (1804-1850), who had been the guiding spirit at Worthington, the “Beachites” managed to secure a charter in 1845 for the Eclectic Medical Institute in Cincinnati over the strong opposition of the regulars. In many ways, the history of this medical college, the most important of the sect, illustrates the vagaries of American Eclecti- cism. During its very first session (1845-46), the school catalogue announced that “theory and practice of Homeopathy, and also Hydropathy, will not only be discussed by the professors . . . but will be specially illustrated by a brief course of lectures from gentlemen well acquainted with these methods of practice.” Joseph B. Buchanan (1814-1899) lectured for a number of years on “phrenology, anthropology, and kindred topics.” In 1849, a strange coalition with the Homeopaths took place when the first chair in Principles and Practice of Homeopathy in the West was established at the Institute. ‘The popularity of this course so alarmed Dr. Morrow and his associates that the chair was summarily abolished, but not before six students had graduated from the Institute with joint degrees in Homeopathic and Eclectic medicine. Speaking of the confused state of teaching at the Institute, Pickard and 280ps, in hom- wenty h be- south, med per the called vithout or less tice is shether red by of all | upon ionists steam, them- public | was ation- e was tiv brief ngton n the parter trong, lege, slecti- unced I not ed by thods er of range ciples Buley wrote: “Drawing for ideas and materials as the faculty did upon the whole field of Botanic practice as well as that of the regulars, each instructor ‘as inclined to become a system unto himself. One can imagine the complica hh might result from using Eberle’s On the Theory and Practice of tions whic! cluding lectures ‘Medicine, a standby of the regulars, and at the same time ‘on the elements of homeopathy ‘The nineteenth century was certainly not lacking in strange healing cults whose tenets, no matter how bizarre, were at least consistent, But the feverish porrowing and the tortuous policies of the Eclectics never ceased to amaze the devotees of other schools of medicine. Alva Curtis, spokesman for the Physio-Medical practitioners, accused the Eclectics of “becoming all things to all men.” He apologized to his readers for his inability to give a lucid account of the principles of Eclecticism on the ground that “we should not expect order in a description of the inmates and operatives of bedlam.” ‘The Homeopaths described Eclecticism as “merely a general and indiscriminate appropriation of the intellectual property of others—bringing together a heterogenous mass of borrowed matter, destitute of all originality.” As for the regulars, their sarcasm knew no bounds All the “ies,” “tics,” “lies,” “isms,” “cisms; compounded into what is called Eclectic, which’ is therefore the most comprehensive of them all, and at the sume time the least original. Most other fallacies spring up at once, freate a great sensition and often stagger and stun the intelligent, by the startling novelty Of their propositions, bewilder the unwary by the immensity of their premises, and then ie out, But the Eclectics keep themselves alive by swallowing everything which happens to turn up, until they have become like Macbeth's caldron, an extraordinary conglomeration of such incompatibles as Injun doctoring, Dutch homeopathy, water cure, clectropathy. Physiomedicalism, ete. With sich a variety of baits they hope to allure those of every Naviety of medical taste. And they have colleges, too, to manufacture the article. These fre mills which bring forth real “yarb doctors” from the crudest material in an incredibly Short time, reminding us of a machine said to be recently invented, into which one end oes the whole hog and speedily from the other comes out “linked! sweetness” in the shape of sausages. For the first ten years of its existence, the Eclectic Medical Institute prospered. Tts graduates, numbering 593, went out into the world to spread the nebulous doctrine of selecting and adopting “whatever is most beneficial.” In 1856, however, the college was torn by violent dissension, which took three years to mend, By 186r, the Institute as well as the Eclectic profession in general were confronted with a serious crisis involving their entire medical status. The loss of faith in the efficacy of “concentrated remedies,” on which the Eclectics had pinned such great hopes a decade before, contributed heavily to the demoralization which set in. A graphic picture of this near- debacle has been given by J. M. Scudder (1829-1894), one of the outstand- ing Eclectic leaders of the period:"* We reached the lowest ebb about 186r, just before the breaking out of the war, when it did seem as if our school would be merged into the others, a portion going back to the ‘old school and a portion going to the Homeopaths . . . the Eclectic Medical Institute hhad been so badly managed that its classes had dwindled down until the receipts would. hardly pay the expenses. The Eclectic Medical Journal had run down from 1,800 to soo subscribers, and suspended for six months in 1861. We were overweighted with men who, sts," and “pathies” are said to be 281whilst claiming to be Eclectics, talked and acted something else; with a lot of miserable “concentrated medicines,” with a poor pharmacy, and druggists that sought to make things cheap rather than good . . . and worse than all, our profession had lost faith and was badly demoralized. It was John Milton Scudder, “the most conspicuous man in modern Eclecticism,”” who is generally conceded to have lifted the Institute and his profession out of the morass into which it had sunk. His efforts were greatly aided by John King (1813-1893), whose forte was the Eclectic materia medica, and Andrew Jackson Howe (1825-1892), the most prominent of the Eclectic practitioners and teachers of surgery. The triumvirate of Scud- der, King, and Howe virtually dominated the Eclectic world after the Civil War.'* Scudder’s great influence after 1869 was in therapeutics. His doctrine of “specific medication,” first formally enunciated in 1869,"* was quickly ac- cepted by the Eclectic profession and continued to be popular with the sect’s practitioners well into the twentieth century. “We use the term specific with relation to definite pathological conditions, and propose to say that cet- tain well-determined deviations from the healthy state will always be corrected by specific medicines.” No sooner had this doctrine been announced, than the adversaries of the Eclectics, as usual, were quick to cry “Plagiarism!” Wilder admits that the Homeopathic influence on “specific medication” was strong." While it is true that Scudder did not employ infinitesimal dosing, nor subscribe to Hahnemann’s Simla Similibus Curantur, he did advocate fairly high dilu- tions. In this connection, it is interesting to note that more than four decades later, a prominent Eclectic leader’ urged a coalition of the Eclectic and, Homeopathic practices on the following grounds: ‘The Homeopaths believe in and practice specific medication; we believe in and practice specific medication, The Homeopaths believe in and practice attenuation; not exactly in ‘our way, but in a way that is possibly equally as scientific as ours, if not more so ‘The difference between us is very trifling ‘The doctrine of “specific medication” supplied a definite need for the Eclectics, coming as it did on the heels of the great disillusionment with concentrated remedies, Scudder wrote in 1879 that many Eclectic physicians had concluded by the time of the Civil War that the majority of the con- centrated medicines were worthless and were not as effective as the crude plant drugs. But since they had dropped the crude plant medicinals, he added, “they were loath to take them up again, and so many gradually drifted into the habit of using a routine of podophyllin, quinine, and morphia, as many of their competitors used calomel, quinine, and morphia. It was a poor prac- tice, and it was no wonder that those who pursued it thought there was little in maintaining a distinct organization.” But it should be emphasized that the adoption of concentrated medicines by the Eclectics had in turn also supplied a need. It had replaced the remedial procedures in vogue under the earlier “doctrine of substitution” when the Eclecties, like the regulars, had entertained ideas of “phlogosis” (inflamma- 282miserable ike things and was modern and his greatly materia inent of if Scud- he Civil trine of ly ace ‘ith the specific hat cer- orrected s of the hat the decades tic and practice cactly in for the it with ssicians 1e con- - crude added, ed into many r prac- re was dicines medial en the amma- tion) and “antiphlogistic treatment” (method designed to counteract fever and inflammation). Thus the evolution of a century of Eclectic therapeutic concepts appears to fall into three phases x. The “antiphlogistie” period, roughly 1830-50; 2, The span of years during which the “concentrated preparations” pre- dominated, roughly from 1850 to the Civil War; 43. The era of “specific medication” which extended from 1869 into the twentieth century, By 1879, there had been some ten Eclectic medical schools chartered in the United States besides the Eclectic Medical Institute, and by 1893, there had been as many as eighteen incorporated,’ many of which had been short- lived. In 1939, the Eclectic Medical Institute (known as the Eclectic Med College after 1910), the chief center for Eclectic education in this country, finally closed after an existence of 94 years, or 109 years in continuity with Worthington. Two Eclectic schools were implicated in a diploma-selling scandal.* One medical college, incorporated in Mlinois in 1868, called itself “The Bennett College of Eclectic Medicine and Surgery” after Dr. John Hughes Bennett of Edinburgh, a pillar of allopathic respectability, who is credited with demonstrating the harmfulness of the age-old concept of anti- phlogistic treatment. The prospectus of this institution stated that “the scientific principle of conservative Eclectic medicine, first enunciated and so ably defended by Professor Bennett, of the University of Edinburgh, some years ago, has established true Eclecticism upon a basis which cannot be controverted.”"* This was undoubtedly news to Dr. Bennett. Dr. J. M. Scud- der, amazed at the action of his colleagues, referred to the prospectus of the Bennett College as “a singular statement of faith.”** Toward the end of the century, the Eclectics claimed that they numbered 10,292 practitioners, as compared with 72,028 regular physicians, 9,648 Homeopaths, and 1,553 Physio-Medical doctors."® In evaluating the nature and caliber of Eclectic practice in the light of what has been presented, its dominant characteristics appear to have been lack of originality frequently bordering on plagiarism, and an almost all- pervasive mediocrity. Even in the investigation of the indigenous plant materia medica, the Eclectics, with few exceptions, evinced a singular lack of scientific acumen. EARLY ECLECTIC PHARMACY OF THE “ANTIPHLOGISTIC” PERIOD ‘The “Beachites” attempted to ape the “antiphlogistic” treatment of the regulars by administering their own distinctive remedies. Thus, while the ‘Thomsonians had built their therapeutics around a distinctive pathology of their own,!” the early Eclectics accepted the prevailing approach to disease causation and the concept of “phlogosis” and “antiphlogisties,"** never ques- tioning, at this time, the correctness of heroic thinking. Like the regulars, they felt it necessary to make a “profound impression” on the patient. Where 283they differed from orthodox physicians was in attempting to substitute less lethal remedies, usually vegetable, to accomplish the same ends. Instead of bloodletting, some of the old Eclectics advocated cording the limbs. By this method, even syncope could be produced without loss of blood. ‘The blood then could be slowly returned from the corded extremities into the general circulation. Many early followers of Beach belived that strong cathartics and diuretics could also be used to achieve the “antiphlogistic” effects of bloodletting. Similarly, podophyllin or leptandra were used by the “Beachites” in place of the conventional calomel, allegedly to induce biliaty secretion. Since the regulars often considered salivation and involvement of the gums de- sirable in mercury therapy, the Eclectics attempted to produce these condi- tions by using iris, According to Fyfe," “the doctrine of substitution was the bane of the new school . . .” To illustrate further, the heroic purging of the regulars was aped by the Eclectics in their use of gamboge, scammony, and colocynth. Instead of using tartar emetic as a nauseant expectorant for respiratory: dis- orders, the “Beachites” used lobelia and sanguinaria, but at the same time were reluctant to part with the traditional ipecac of the “calomel doctors.” Like the regulars, they believed in strong counter-irritants and blistering, sub- stituting, however, vegetable irritating plasters for tartar emetic ointment and plaster, but retaining cantharides. In the case of “stimulant expectorants,” they could think of no substitutes, and so continued to use the orthodox remedies—squill, senega, and tolu. As Fyfe so aptly puts it, “The doctrine of substitution ramified in every direction, and in some cases it was so slight that there was no real difference.” From the foregoing, it can be readily seen that powerful depletion with plant purgative and emetic medicinals was strongly advocated and practiced by Beach as a substitute for calomel and bloodletting. As indicated in his American Practice of Medicine (1833), he was also fond of diaphoretics. In “remittent fever,” for example, in addition to emetics and purgatives, he suggested a dram each of Virginia snakeroot, saffron, ipecac, camphor, and opium, added to eight ounces of “best gin.” He advocated a similar treatment for “inflammatory fever,” saying: “It is necessary to deplete the system, not by bloodletting, which will often bring on typhus and other serious conse- quences, but by promoting all the secretions and excretions.” In addition, chemical ingredients were utilized in moderation in some of the early Eclectic pharmaceutical preparations, and this continued to be the policy with later practitioners as well. The American Practice of Medicine lists the following typical chemicals: Sulfuric acid (diluted for internal use) Ether (diluted for internal use) Lime (to make lime water) Copper sulfate (externally as an astringent, and for piles) Corrosive sublimate (“We use it only as a caustic, and as an external application,” Ammonium chloride (for external application in solution for inflammation) 284ute less. ling the f blood. ies into - strong logistic” ites” in n. Since ims de- > condi- of the regulars locynth, ory dis- ne time octors,”” ng, sub- ent and prants,”” rthodox joctrine o slight Eclectic th later lowing n.”) Potassium nitrate (as a diuretic) ‘Red oxide of lead (for external use in ointments and plasters) Lead acetate (externally as an astringent) Cream of tartar (laxative and diuretic) Potassium bicarbonate (internal use) Borax (used externally as astringent) Flowers of sulfar (internal and external use) “Ammonium catbonate (internal use) Zine sulfate (externally in astringent eye wash) ‘We cannot say with assurance which system at this time offered the most worable chances of survival to the unfortunate patient who perforce had to between the violent ministrations of the regular physicians and the sh-shod treatment of the sectarian Botanics. One is inclined to think, how- , that the Botanic practitioner gave his patient a better fighting chance ring the time when heroic medication was in vogue. ‘The vast majority of the early Eclectic physicians compounded their own ‘medicines for their saddle bags and home stock. Ingredients were obtained several ways: through wholesale botanic houses, from the Shakers and ‘their agents, by personally gathering plant medicinals in the field, or through ‘regular drug channels. In 1879 J. M. Scudder gave a good description of ‘early Eclectic remedies: ‘The fathers of Eclecticism had a very good knowledge of the medicinal plants of the ‘country, and . . . they used many of them for the purposes we now use them. They’ ‘were particular that the crude medicines should be gathered at the proper season, should ‘be well preserved, and then they used them... either in infusion, weak tincture, or in syrup. Many times they were given singly, but sometimes they were given in combina- tion, two or more together. They employed lobelia, sanguinaria, podophyllum, asarum, ‘macrotys, helonias, actaea, apocynum, eupatorium, iris, phytolaces, and a score oF more ‘of others... Whilst the earlier Eclectic practice was a very successful one, it was Lnpleasant on account of the large doses of unpleasant medicines required. The sick had ‘no appetite for pints of infusions and decoctions, or teaspoonfuls of powdered roots, barks, = or herbs. By the 184o’s, it is fairly commonplace to find Beach’s remedies adver- - tised with those of Thomson and Horton Howard in the Botanic “depots” and Shaker agencies of the period. Thus, for example, A. Warner, agent for the Shakers in New York City, advertised in 1848 that “we keep on hand a general assortment of the various preparations introduced by Beach, Thom- son, Howard, Smith and others.”** Similarly, Law and Boyd of New York City advertised the “many favorite compound preparations such as the prep- arations of Drs. Thomson and Beach.” Although Beach's remedies were frequently prescribed by “Reformed” and early Eclectic physicians, a serious drawback to their wide public ac- ceptance was their nauseating taste, and the large, crude dosage forms. In this respect, Beach's medicines were similar to those of Thomson. According to Loyd, one of Beach's remedies, “neutralizing cordial,” in somewhat revised form, later found a place in the U.S. Pharmacopoeia, and subsequently in the _ National Formulary. Lloyd wrote: “Formulas of Beach have furnished num- berless opportunities for advertisers of liniments, of cough syrups, and of -catharties, to such an extent that one would be astonished over the financial 285returns that have come to the advertisers.” Many of Beach's recipes turned up in King’s American Dispensatory and eventually in pharmaceutical litera- ture in general. 23. 4 REFERENCES, Berman, Alex: The Heroic Approach in Nineteenth Century Therapeutics. Bull, Amer. Soc. Hosp. Pharm, 11:320 (Sept.-Oct.) 1954. Also: Social Roots of the roth Century. Botanico-Medical Movement in the United States, in Actes du VIII’ Congrés Inter- national d'Histoire des Sciences, 1956, pp. 56: ". Berman, Alex: Neo-Thomsonianism in the United States. J. Hist. Med. and Allied Sci. 14:135-155, 1956, Felter, H. W.: History of the Eclectic Medical Institute, Cincinnati, 1902. ‘Thomson, Samuel: New Guide, Boston, 1835, Worthington College Medical Professors: The Western Medical Reformer 3:43, 1838, ). Felter, H. W.: OP. cil. See also Forman, Jonathan: The Worthington School and Thomso: > Bull, Hist. Med. 21:772-787, 1947; and Waite, F. C.: American Sectarian Medical Colleges before the Civil War, Bull. Hist, Med, 29:148, 1946. Pickard, M. B., and Buley, R. C.: The Midwest Pioneer, His Ils, Cures, and Doctors. New York, 1946. Curtis, Alva: A Fair Examination of All the Medical Systems in Vogue, Cincinnati, 1855. Cited in Eclectic M. J. 20:58r, x85. Medical and Surgical Reporter 2:27, 1850, Scudder, J. M.: A Brief History of Eclectic Medicine. Eclectic M. J. 30:305, 1879. See also Lloyd, J. U.: A Treatise on the American Alkaloids, Resins, Resinoids, Oleo-Resins and Concentrated Principles (So-Called Eclectic Concentrations) ; Drug, ‘Treatise No. 24, Cincinnati, x999. Lloyd, J. U. Biographies of John King, Andrew Jackson Howe, and John Milton Scudder, Ete, Bulletin No. 19 (Pharmacy Series No. 5), Cincinnati, 1912, ‘Scudder, J. M.: On Specific Action of Medicines. Eclectic M. J, 29:393, 1869. Wilder, A.: History of Medicine. Augusta, Maine, 904. Webster, H. T.: How About a Coalition ? Eclectic M. J. 75:405) 1915. Scudder, J. M.: In the Eclectic M. J. 39:305, 1879. . Eclectic M. J. 39:301~2, 1879; and 53:210, 1893. - Tid. 30:302, 1879, . Mid. $4396, 1894. Berman, Alex: The Thomsonian Movement and Its Relation to American Pharmacy: and Medicine. Bull. Hist. of Med. 25:405-428; 519-838, 1951 Fyfe, J. W.: Specific Diagnosis and Specific Medication, Cincinnati, 1909. See also Seudder, J. M.: Doctrine of Substitution, in Specific Medication and Specific Medi- cines, Cincinnati, 1877. Eclectie M. J. 39:300-304, 1879. Catalogue of Shaker Herbs, Roots, and Medicinal Plants . . . Raised, Manufactured, ‘and Put Up by the Shakers of New Lebanon . . . Sold by their Agent, A. Warner, 107 John St., New York, 1848. This catalogue is in the library of the New York Academy of Medicine. Lloyd, J. U.: New Medicines and Old Eclectic Compounds. The Druggists Circular 63:7, 1919. 286