Another feature of the case in aid of our position consists in its entire accordance with the modes of treatment which have been most successful in the cure of cholera. The two formulas cited above, and now most universally adopted in Europe and India, are based on a similar principle. So in this country 1832,-33 and 34, the successful modes of treatment consisted in the adoption of a principle essentially similar. Hence we infer from the teachings of this experiment, and from all the collateral facts on the subject, that the general principle to be observed in the treatment of this disease is a prompt and diffusive stimulant; and hence we deduce the doctrine already apparent, that every form of treatment, to be successful, must be based on a prompt and effective stimulant of sufficient power to meet as speedily the indications required, as did the free caloric in the experiment to which we have referred. Here we might pause for a moment and examine the suggestion and doctrines advanced by the learned Drs. Bell, Johnson, and many other eminent practitioners in India and Europe. We might further investigate the principles and trace the practical philosophy of such eminent surgeons, as Drs. Mackintosh, Thompson, Wallis Maxwell, Massy, Hill and Brady, all of whom have had opportunity of investigating the nature and character of the disease and extensive experience in its treatment. We might also, in a further examination of the subject, embrace a host of American authors whose works teem with every shade of doctrine, and almost every variety and description of practice, some evincing a degree of skepticism on the subject more wonderful and marvelous than is becoming the great apostles of medicine. It would seem as if the guiding light of science and experience had forsaken them in this, the hour of their need; that facts and arguments had failed to illumine their minds, or direct their inquiries in the proper course for the discovery of "the truth." Their conclusions on this subject are, therefore, marvelously inconsistent and conflicting. Over this mass of specious and conflicting testimony we might long ponder, without deriving any very valuable information worthy an elaborate effort, or making any discovery to aid in the establishment of a general principle of practice for the cure of cholera. But this investigation must be deferred to another occasion, when time may permit a more thorough and critical examination of their doctrines and practice than can be presented in this brief essay. We would, however, remark in passing, that in some instances their philosophy, doctrines, and results may lead us to the same conclusion to which we have arrived from other sources as above, and from our regard and belief in the progress of science, feel compelled to advocate the same, as offering the best hope of success in the treatment of this disease.