observe that the chief impediment to a more rapid amelioration of the system pursued has been the prevailing idea of the necessity of delaying the tendency of nature to close the wound, in order that the supposed poison might be eliminated from the constitution. The openings of entrance and exit and track of the ball were incised; the wound dilated by tents or other means, and terebinthinates, or even boiling oil, poured into it; irritating compounds and ointments applied where superficial dressings were practicable; and it was only after the wound was considered to be fully purged of its venom and foul humors by the extensive suppurative action thus kept up, that cicatrization was permitted to be established. It required long years of observation in many conflicts, and the exercise of much industry, not to mention moral courage in opposing authorized custom and prejudice, before a simpler and more rational mode of practice was followed. It is satisfactory to know that though Continental surgeons have written more voluminously on the subject of gunshot wounds, the older English military surgeons and writers stand forth conspicuously in leading the way to a more practical knowledge of their nature and proper treatment. Although, however, much that was erroneous was removed by the earlier surgeons, the light of science can hardly be said to have penetrated this important province of military surgery until the great and last work of John Hunter, on the Blood, Inflammation, and Gunshot Wounds, was published in 1794. This distinguished philosopher filled some of the highest positions in the British service, having been appointed in 1776 Surgeon Extraordinary to the Army, in 1786 Deputy Surgeon–General, and subsequently Surgeon–General; but he only served abroad about three years, and then only had the opportunity of seeing active service as staff–surgeon in the expedition to Belleisle. Had the field of his practical observation been more extensive, there can be no doubt that his zealous and scientific mind would have turned the advantage to the most valuable results for humanity. The physiological principles which he enunciated, based on extensive study and observation in civil life, cannot be controverted; but their practical application, so far as regards the treatment of gunshot wounds, has been greatly modified since his treatise on the subject was published. There cannot be a better illustration of the special position in which this department of military surgery is placed, from the peculiar circumstances under which it is practiced, than the fact that, though men of the highest mental attainments have discussed the subject of gunshot wounds, we are nevertheless indebted to practical experience in military campaigns for every improvement, some few of recent date excepted, that has occurred in their treatment. Thus John Hunter was led to advocate very strongly the delay of amputation, after severe gunshot wounds, for weeks, that