It would, then, seem well established, that the semen may be discharged without pleasure, without erection, and without ejaculation; and that this discharge may give rise to accidents analogous to those observed after all free discharges of this fluid, arising from any cause whatever. This fact, however, has been contested by different authors. Boerhaave says positively, that he has never known the semen to escape spontaneously, without solicitation; and that when such a case has been suspected, the fluid discharged was not probably semen; and that, farther, if this kind of spermatorrhœa exists, it must be very rare. Swammerdam, Hunter, and Haller, have expressed a similar opinion: the latter admits that a discharge may take place from the penis, under the circumstances mentioned above; he thinks, also, that this discharge comes from the prostate gland and seminal vesicles. But the fluid which escapes is only the mucus secreted by these parts--it is not semen; and unless opinions had been made up from wrong evidence, wrong consequences, it would not have been attributed to it. At present, the opinion that all cases of spermatorrhœa are only blenorrhœas, is still very prevalent. Descamps, physician at Castilliones, having brought before the Medical Society, in 1821, two cases of spermatorrhœa, the consequences of masturbation; Chantourelle, who was the reporter, raised some doubts, which the society seemed to admit, as to the nature of the discharge, thinking it was mucous, rather than spermatic. We, however, are disposed to think, that when the subject of diurnal pollution is better understood, it will be observed more frequently, and then its existence will not be denied. It is with the hope of contributing to this result, that we have dwelt so long on the subject.