To the first of these comments we reply, that Dr. PHYSICK, to the great regret of his countrymen, has never been in the habit of publishing; but still possesses many useful improvements in medicine and surgery, which he has not committed to the press. On the other hand, however, he has taught this operation annually, to from three to four hundred pupils, in his lectures, during about twelve successive years; and this is no mean substitute for a publication in types. M. ROCHE'S memory will supply him with an instance of an eminent French surgeon, whom we shall not attempt to defraud of his laurels, who also made it his practice to leave the publication of his observations and improvements to his pupils. To the second remark, the above is also a sufficient reply; but we will add that it was recorded in the case book of the Pennsylvania Hospital in 1809. Our comment on the third observation of Mr. ROCHE may be brief. It is that we promise an account of the case for the next number of this Journal. In the mean time, the patient was well known to us and to many persons now living. The operation was performed in 1809. In reply to that portion of the last observation, which we have marked with italics, we can assure the reviewer that he is mistaken; at least with regard to this side of the ocean. We Americans are a very peculiar people, and but little affected, as yet, with the cacoethes scribendi; a malady which the present work, in its humble sphere, is designed to disseminate. We are not in the habit of frequently publishing, and above all, of publishing volumes. Books are dear, private libraries small, public ones few, and encouragement for even the best original publications but limited. Of this we have known some melancholy instances. It is impossible for either a Frenchman or an Englishman to judge correctly of a country, which, in many important respects, is in such a different situation from his own. It is a thing of by no means uncommon occurrence here, to make a valuable discovery or improvement in the healing art, and not to make it public. A striking instance of this fact, at least with the exception of the insertion of an imperfect account in the Eclectic Repertory, which very probably never reached England, is mentioned in our last number. We allude to the extirpations of diseased ovaria, by Dr. M'DOWALL, of Kentucky. Here a unique and brilliantly successful operation was performed, successful as yet beyond European imitations, and still the inventor and achiever of it did not possess vanity or industry sufficient to treat the public with a full account of it. M. ROCHE may find it hard to explain modesty of this species; but we can promise him, should these sheets ever reach his eye, and he still continue skeptical, abundance of proofs, and some more instances of the same kind.