The lady used to call on Abernethy when she came to town; and after his death she came to me—as she said, just to report her condition. She had at times various disturbances of her digestive organs; but always from some imprudence; for, although habitually very simple in her habits, she would be sometimes careless or forgetful. She died at a very advanced age—between seventy and eighty—but there had been no return of the disease for which she had originally consulted Abernethy, nor had she undergone any operation. It is a significant circumstance, too, that she had a sister who died of cancer. The whole of the cases are, however, scarcely less valuable. In the fifth section, he treats of disorders of parts having continuity of surface with the alimentary canal, certain affections of the nose, of the eye, and of the gullet or œsophagus. His observations on the latter are especially valuable. They strike at that meddling practice which is too common in the treatment of diseases of these parts. Many of us have recommended a practice which, without neglecting either, relies _less_ on manipulatory proceedings, and more on measures directed to the general health, in such cases; as producing effects which are not to be obtained by other means; but, if we are to judge from the medical periodicals, without much success; so inveterate is the habit of imagining that, whatever the causes of disease may be, if the _results_ be but _mechanical_, mechanical means can alone be applicable. Public attention, and the perusal of such cases as those of Abernethy, can alone correct these errors. Lastly, he describes the results of his dissections as bearing on the whole subject. Here he shows, that whilst disordered function may take place coincidentally with, or as a consequence of, change of structure, yet that such change, so _as to afford visible or detectable departures_ from natural appearances, is by no means necessary, in _organs which, during life_, had afforded the most incontrovertible evidence of impaired function. He also shows that disease has _terminated_ in _disorder_ which had its original seat in the digestive organs. And again—that, in cases where the cause of death had been in the abrogated _function_ of the brain, he found no actual _disease_ in that organ, but in the _abdominal viscera_. He very justly observes that the conclusions he has drawn can be _neither_ ascertained nor disproved by anatomical evidence _alone_. He mentions especially, and illustrates by a remarkably successful case, how _diseases of the lungs_ may be engendered by disorders of the digestive organs, and _entirely_ subdued by correction of that disorder.