Calomel in some shape, in various quantities, after various intervals, alone or combined, has long been the most popular remedy for cholera; and, from the concurrent testimony of many witnesses, it has properly gained its reputation. The practitioner has not always, perhaps, considered very carefully the grounds on which he prescribed, nor the channel through which he expected its remedial agency, being satisfied with the result. It is certain, however, that the result from it—as from other things—has been too often the reverse of satisfactory. It is equally certain, that if an auxiliary accelerating agent is a desideratum in the precipitous fevers of the West Indies, it is much more so in dealing with the yet more precipitous disease under consideration. Looking at the matter in this light; believing that calomel, as it is commonly administered, in the worst and most suddenly fatal cases of cholera, seldom passes beyond the stomach; and being satisfied that to act as a remedy it must enter the circulation, and reach secreting extremities, the method of treatment specified above was adopted. The results on the whole were satisfactory. Though not such as were desired or even hoped for, they at least exhibited a full average amount of success, inspired confidence, and tended to support the belief, that the practice was founded on right principles. Of 37 cases admitted 12 terminated in death, the remainder in complete recovery. {9} All the cases in the above number were considered to belong strictly to the epidemic cholera of the season, characterized chiefly by depression of vital power, suppression of biliary and urinary secretion, and great tendency to death. Pains were taken to exclude from it allied affections, especially bilious, or as it is sometimes called, English cholera, of which there were many, and some grave cases. Want of care in this respect renders useless comparisons of the respective value of different modes of treatment; and it is suspected that it is more to such carelessness, to use no strange word, than to superior skill in the practitioner, that the high proportion of cures claimed in some instances should be ascribed. This is said without meaning to insinuate that one method of management is not better than another, or wishing to damp the inquiry in which so many men are now anxiously engaged, as to how more may be done than has yet been effected for choleral patients. In attempting to balance the respective merits of different lines of practice, it is also necessary, in order to render the comparison fair or instructive, to know whether as a whole, the cases treated by each were equally severe.