Part 1

AN INAUGURAL ESSAY ON THE SEAT OF ANIMAL LIFE.

AN ATTEMPT TO INVESTIGATE THE SEAT OF ANIMAL LIFE.

SUBMITTED TO THE EXAMINATION OF CHARLES ALEXANDER WARFIELD, M. D.

The President, and Medical Faculty OF THE COLLEGE OF MEDICINE OF MARYLAND.

FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHYSIC.

By Henry Curtis ... of Virginia, VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE BALTIMORE MEDICAL SOCIETY.

... The spacious earth, And all the teeming regions of the world, Hold not an object to the curious flight Of knowledge, half so tempting, or so fair, As man to man. AKENSIDE.

Baltimore: PRINTED BY BENJAMIN EDES. Corner of South and Market-Streets. 1812.

TO WILLIAM FOUSHEE, SENIOR M. D. AND TO JNO. H. FOUSHEE, M. D. OF RICHMOND, VIRGINIA.

GENTLEMEN,

Actuated by the finest feelings of gratitude, I embrace with peculiar pleasure this opportunity of acknowledging and making, in some degree, public, my many obligations to you, who, with parental care, directed the gradual unfoldings of my mind through the morning of youth, and kindly afforded those means of improvement, calculated to raise industry to eminence, and crown it with success.

Should this first effort evince an advancement in the knowledge of the profession to which I devote my life. Accept its dedication as a tribute of grateful respect, from

Your much obliged,

H. CURTIS.

To the zealous and able friends of science, JNO. B. DAVIDGE, A. M. M. D. and JAMES COCKE, M. D. Joint Professors of Anatomy, Surgery, &c. In the College of Medicine of Maryland; These pages are inscribed as a Sincere testimony of Respect and esteem, By the AUTHOR.

PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS.

As a subject for my inaugural dissertation, I am induced rather to offer some general opinions on the state of the animal system, than to enter into particular disquisitions on given points.

The time allotted, in general, for the production of inaugural essays, and the peculiar circumstances under which I have to write, preclude the hope of my advancing the science of medicine; I am therefore chiefly anxious not to embarrass its progress by hasty conclusions or fanciful chimeras. The opinions I have thought proper to bring forward are advanced with as much perspicuity and order as my application to other engagements would permit; and although they are founded, I trust, on manifest facts or inductions from established propositions, still I must submit them with diffidence: and should the ground, I have taken, prove untenable, I have to regret that my opportunities have not placed me on a more advantageous stand.

THESIS.

The capacity and aptitude for motion, observable in man, naturally lead us to an enquiry into the general principle of his corporeal functions. To a disquisition of which I devote the following pages.

Aware of the intricacy of my subject, and that the operations of the animal body necessarily embrace agents not within the range of our senses, I cannot indulge in the hope that I shall be altogether successful in an examination of the laws of its economy. Where so many enlightened and able intellects have labored in vain, it would require an excess of vanity in me to expect to succeed; and, I trust, should I leave some of the difficulties unsurmounted and inequalities unsmoothed, I shall not be fairly chargeable with temerity or indiscretion.

Amidst our contemplation of the various simple and compound actions, of which the human body is capable, and in which it is perpetually engaged, we are unavoidably led to ask――whence is the peculiar power or capacity, so admirably diffused throughout its numerous parts, by which those actions are performed? Is it by any peculiarity of organization? or by properties different according to the nature of the various constituent parts? or a particular principle, not strictly inherent in any one part, but diffused to all? It cannot be in the organization, although it does not manifest itself without organization, for, if so, there would uniformly be a difference between the texture of dead and living parts, which frequently is not the fact. Nor have we full and satisfactory evidence on which to found the opinion that it is owing to properties differing in their essential natures according to the parts concerned. That the principle of life or capacity of acting, or being acted on, is strictly the property of one part, and is by diffusion communicated to the rest, we have much reason to conclude from the phenomena of both health and disease.

Until experimental philosophy and inductive reasoning shall be separated from fanciful and hypothetical speculations, the science of medicine can meet with but slow success. And as we have not all the advantages attendant on the other physical sciences, having the operations of a living machine, if I may use the expression, to calculate, we must be content to move with a slower step. Nor must we commit our barque to the full and easy flowing stream of conjecture and hypothesis. Conjectures are ever vague and hypothesis seldom leads to the discovery of truth.

Some physiologists, and those of no mean note, have considered the operations of the human frame as a circle of functions governed by mechanical organic laws, as we discover in an hydraulic machine, or automaton, so admirably formed, as by the mere force of its construction to perform and continue the vital motions.

In confutation of such an opinion we have nothing to do more than to introduce the words of the justly celebrated Doct. Whytt. “It seems” (says that writer) “to be incumbent on those philosophers who ascribe the motion of the heart to mechanical causes alone, to demonstrate the possibility of a perpetuum mobile, since as long as life lasts, an animal appears to be really such.” And it needs scarcely be added that perpetual motion is demonstrably without the laws of mechanics, and far above the power of mechanism. These considerations are, I judge, sufficient to put to rest all idea of an independent organic life: If others are wanted, it may be shewn that life, sense, and self-action, are inconsistent with the general properties of matter.

Others, writers of much reputation and celebrity, have contended for the existence of an innate independent principle of life in the muscles, and the plausible ingenuity with which these opinions were supported, could not fail to procure many advocates, and has indeed enlisted in its cause such a body of respectable talents, as to induce me to hesitate in my intended opposition: Nor do I now venture presumptuously to undertake the settlement, but shall only offer such reasons in objection to the doctrine, as have been suggested by various circumstances. It is not my intention to engage in all the minuteness of particular discussion. That would require more time and attention than I can at present devote to such an undertaking; but I shall content myself by briefly stating all the arguments which have fallen within my reading, most insisted on by the strenuous defenders of the above doctrine, and on which alone it seems to rest.――Then, by considering the arguments separately, endeavour to shew wherein they are fallacious, and point out the difficulties calculated, in my opinion, to oppose such specious reasoning.

The punctum saliens, or the first visible point in motion being the heart;

The birth of full grown Fœtuses without brains;