User Tools

Site Tools



This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

en:hphys:hphys01-a-false-accusation-159-11072 [2013/06/04 17:39] (current)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +====== A FALSE ACCUSATION. ====== ​
 +{{anchor:​s2}}//​The Homoeopathic Physician://​ A Monthly Journal of Medical Science. {{anchor:​s3}}Philadelphia.
 +{{anchor:​s4}}THIS recent addition to the periodical literature of homoeopathy is, we believe, intended to supply the void created by the sudden demise of the Anglo-American Journal, called //The Organon.// {{anchor:​s5}}Its articles are of much the same quality,//​its sneers at all physicians who do not believe in the marvellous efficacy of C. M.//’ //s fully as contemptuous as were those of its predecessor.//​
 +{{anchor:​s6}}Of the medical men who took part in the International Homoeopathic Convention the modest editor says, they “have never practiced homoeopathically,​” and, “for the most part,” they “know nothing of the homoeopathy of Hahnemann.{{anchor:​s7}}” The moral they seek to derive from the proceedings is “the great necessity for the //​International Hahnemannian Association.//​”
 +{{anchor:​s8}}English practitioners who like literature of this type may be interested in hearing that Mr. Heath, of Ebury street, is the agent for its sale.{{anchor:​s9}}— //M. H. Review.//
 +{{anchor:​s10}}[Will the //M. H. Review// kindly //quote// passages showing that THE HOMOEOPATHIC PHYSICIAN “sneers at all physicians who do not believe in the marvellous efficacy of C. M.’s.”? {{anchor:​s11}}Prove your accusations,​ gentlemen!]
 +^ Source: | The Homoeopathic Physician Vol. 01 No. 11, 1881, pages 550-551 |
 +^ Description:​ | A FALSE ACCUSATION. |
 +^ Author: | HPhys01 |
 +^ Year: | 1881 |
 +^ Editing: | errors only; interlinks; formatting |
 +^ Attribution:​ | Legatum Homeopathicum |
en/hphys/hphys01-a-false-accusation-159-11072.txt · Last modified: 2013/06/04 17:39 (external edit)