That these assertions are true, at least of the obvious discharge produced by mercury, will not be refused by any advocate for its action as an evacuant. To this, indeed, they may think it a satisfactory answer, that the influence of mercury as an evacuant cannot be judged of from the apparent discharge. It may be alledged, and indeed with some appearance of reason, that the greatest discharge produced by mercury is by insensible perspiration; that mercury, in consequence of this, is a more powerful evacuant than many other medicines by which a greater obvious evacuation is produced; and that it has the effect to increase perspiration in a more remarkable degree, when it increases no other discharge than when it induces the greatest obvious evacuation. But although it cannot be denied, that the use of mercury does increase insensible perspiration; and that evacuation in this way may, on some occasions, be greater than what would arise from salivation or any other obvious discharge; yet these facts by no means tend to any conclusion which will remove the difficulty formerly stated. Nor can it from thence be supposed, that mercury always evacuates most powerfully in those cases where it produces the most successful cure. The degree of evacuation which takes place from the employment of any medicine cannot indeed, in every case, be ascertained by the obvious discharge. But, where the judgment formed from this test would be fallacious, the marks of inanition consequent upon the use of any medicine are always certain tests for determining the degree of evacuation. From these it is evident, that the suppositions here advanced, that mercury operates more powerfully as an evacuant than any other medicine, and that it always produces a greater discharge when it acts by the skin, than when it affects the salivary glands, or any other excretory, are entirely without foundation. From the marks of inanition appearing in the system, it is demonstratively proved, that, from a variety of other means, a greater evacuation can be produced than from mercury. In such circumstances, however, by mercury the venereal disease is cured, by these other evacuants it is not. And farther, where the cure of _lues venerea_ has been retarded by a salivation occurring early, or where no cure has taken place after salivation has been continued for a considerable time, there is every mark of a much higher degree of inanition than when the disease has been removed by mercury without any sensible evacuation. There can remain no doubt, then, that the cure of _lues venerea_ is by no means in proportion to the evacuation which it produces. This, however, should necessarily be the case, were the cure effected by evacuation.