Setting of bones wholly mechanical. There cannot be an _innate_ skill in this, any more than there can be in any other kind of mechanics. Explanation of bone-setting. Skill obtained in this just as in anything else. Bone-setter _learns_ all that he actually knows, by his own observation, and from others. It is not _born_ with him. Gets some of his knowledge by stealth. _Errors committed by natural bone-setters._ Supposing a fracture to be a dislocation. Injuries of joints in which there is neither dislocation nor fracture—harm sometimes done in such cases by the bone-setter. Failure in the _medical_ part of the treatment in some cases. Failure in the management of fractures. Physicians not all good bone-setters. Mechanical tact requisite. Though so many cases of mal-practice can be found among the patients of natural bone-setters, generally supposed by the community to be infallible. Difficulty in getting a verdict of damages against them. _Reasons why they, in spite of their errors, acquire a reputation for skill._ Setting sprains. Facility of the imposition practised. Breaking up old adhesions. Stiff joints and contracted tendons—efficacy of rubbing. Imagined tenderness and inability of motion. Sub-luxations—random pulling. False reports of cases. CHAPTER VIII. GOOD AND BAD PRACTICE, 172 Not easy to distinguish between good and bad practice by results. If it were, would not be such differences of opinion among physicians and in the community. Examples of these differences. Stimulating and depleting measures. Homœopathy, Hydropathy, Thompsonism. Quacks aware of the difficulty in estimating comparative results—act accordingly. No mode of practice wholly good—none wholly bad. Some good points in all modes. Exclusive systems. Distinctions between good and bad practice pointed out. Cases in which the question of life and death immediately affected by practice. Failure of unskilfulness in such cases. Interesting case. Seldom is the influence of bad practice so manifest as in this case. Difficulty of culling out from the mass cases which are dangerous from the first. Various causes of this. Difficulty inherent. Cases misrepresented by mistake or wilfully. Some said to be _very sick_ when not so. Light cases made bad by treatment—though appear grave, apt to recover. Illustrations. Comparisons between rival physicians as to results. Public often mistake in such comparisons. Notice some less direct effects of bad practice. Unnecessary complications of disease. State of system after recovery. General state of health in families. Length of sickness. Summing up of differences in results between good and bad practice. Two requisites for observing these correctly. 1. Sufficient amount of evidence. 2. Skill in observation. Community deficient in these. Confident appeals of quacks to alleged results. Show what the