In these days of improved statistical inquiry, it would be a curious document which should give us the comparative number of persons who are now bled, and that of only fifty years ago; and whilst it would present very instructive data as to the progress of medical science, it would give also some significant hints as to the relations of fashionable remedies. First, almost every barber was a bleeder; and within my own recollection, a lady, who for any serious ailment consulted the most eminent physician in the neighbourhood in which she lived, would allow no one to bleed her but the barber. Formerly, multitudes of people lost a little blood every "spring and fall." Accidents of all kinds afforded a fine opportunity for bleeding. The papers announced accidents generally by the usual—"It is with regret that we learn that Sir Harry —— was thrown from his horse in the Park. It was feared that the honourable baronet had sustained serious injury; but, fortunately, Mr. Sharpe was on the spot, so that the patient was immediately bled. He was conveyed home, and we rejoice to hear that he is doing well. The accident, which it had been feared was a fracture, proved to be only a 'dislocation.'" The questions in regard to bleeding were said to be—who, when, and how much (_quis, quando, quantum?_); but, to our minds, Aretæus has a better saying: "When bleeding is required, there is need of deliberation (_cum sanguinem detrahere oportet, deliberatione indiget_)." We like this better; because, in addition to the little words quoted above, it suggests another, more important than either—namely, _cur?_ why—on many occasions, a favourite inquiry of Abernethy's. We recollect a surgeon being called to a gentleman who was taken ill suddenly, and he found two or three servants and the medical attendant struggling very vigorously with the patient. Whilst this was continuing, the first question put to the surgeon by the medical attendant was: "Shall I bleed him, Sir?" "Why should you desire to bleed him?" "Oh! exactly; you prefer cupping?" "Why should he be cupped?" "Then shall I apply some leeches?" This, too, was declined; in short, it never seemed to have occurred that neither might be necessary, still less that either might therefore do mischief. It is the most curious thing to see the force of a well-grown conventionalism. As long as it led to moderately bleeding plethoric baronets in recent accidents, no great harm would have been done; but the frequency in other cases, in which bleeding was instituted with "apparent impunity," was too commonly construed into "bleeding with advantage," until the practice became so indiscriminate as to be extensively injurious. _Now_, comparatively, few persons are bled; and some few years ago I had a curious illustration of it.