The numbers of those who died of fevers from the year one thousand seven hundred and thirty-eight, to one thousand seven hundred and fifty, including a series of thirteen years, is fifty-five thousand four hundred and ninety, and those in a like series of years, immediately succeeding, is thirty-six thousand three hundred and seventy-two; consequently nineteen thousand one hundred and eighteen fewer have died in the latter than in the former period, and this has, with some appearance of justice, been urged as a proof of the efficacy of the fever-powder. But if this decrease in the funerals were actually owing to that medicine, it should have been still more observable in the last ten years, when the powder has been more universally used. But, in that period, thirty-five thousand four hundred and ninety-four have died, and consequently, the number of deaths, by fevers, have increased eight thousand seven hundred and eighty; and if inflammation, rash, and sore-throat, which were included in the former calculations, are added, the number will amount, nearly, to ten thousand, and therefore, on an average, _one thousand, or near one-third_ more have died, of fevers, _every year_, in the last ten years, while the medicine has been universally used, than in the thirteen immediately preceding. The proof, therefore, from the bills of mortality is fatal to the fame of the fever-powder, and the decrease in the funerals during the thirteen years to which the Inventor appeals for the success of his antimonial powder, must be attributed to the desertion of the antimonial practice, and not to its prevalence. But an appeal to the sum-total of the funerals, to prove the efficacy of the fever-powder, is unfair and inconclusive, since a great number of deaths happen from disorders, accidents and casualties with which it cannot possibly have any connection. That it might have a fair trial, our calculation has been restricted to fevers; and if the other diseases, in which it is recommended, had been included, the evidence would have been still more unfavourable. Another argument in favour of the powder is, _if it had not been attended with general success, it could not, amidst the opposition of Physicians, have grown into reputation_. But transitions, from the highest approbation of antimony, to the absolute condemnation of it, have been so frequent, and are so familiar to those acquainted with its history, that no conclusion can be drawn from its casual reputation, or transitory condemnation; and since, in the course of our enquiry, no advantage has been taken of the penal laws enacted against its use, nor of the public edicts by which it has been prohibited, neither can any concession be made on account of the transient applause, _artfully_, obtained to some of its preparations.