SECTION II.

WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THOSE POISONS WHICH MOST RESEMBLE THE MORBID POISONS IN THEIR EFFECTS ON THE BODY?

In the early part of this book, I considered the nature of poisons generally, and had occasion to remark upon the characters which separated poisons into two distinct classes. 1st, Those which have the power of self multiplication; and 2nd, Those destitute of this property.

Of the first we have seen that the poisons of epidemic diseases multiply both in and out of the body.

The poisons of infectious diseases, not usually epidemic, do the same. Those of endemic affections, such as ague and some fevers, usually become multiplied out of the body only, but under some circumstances, and peculiar atmospheric conditions, they may be also multiplied within the body. The amount of these poisons necessary to produce their specific effects, may be inappreciable. Of the second class, there are two kinds, those derived from the organic kingdom and those derived from the inorganic kingdom. Of these, the amount necessary to produce their specific effects is appreciable and pretty well known.

But among those poisons, consisting of organic {167} products, there is one which seems to hold an intermediate place. This is derived from one of the Fungals, and as it takes this remarkable position as a link of connexion between the two classes of poisons, I may be excused quoting a passage of some length upon this agent, from Dr. Lindley's Vegetable Kingdom. "One of the most poisonous of our fungi, is the Amanita muscaria, so called from its power of killing flies, when steeped in milk. Even this is eaten in Kamchatka, with no other than intoxicating effects, according to the following account by Langsdorf, as translated by Greville. This variety of Amanita muscaria, is used by the inhabitants of the north-eastern parts of Asia in the same manner as wine, brandy, arrack, opium, &c. is by other nations."--"The most singular effect of the amanita is the influence it possesses over the urine. It is said, that from time immemorial, the inhabitants have known that the fungus imparts an intoxicating quality to that secretion, which continues for a considerable time after taking it. For instance, a man moderately intoxicated to-day, will by the next morning have slept himself sober, but (as is the custom) by taking a teacup of his urine, he will be more powerfully intoxicated than he was the preceding day. It is, therefore, not uncommon for confirmed drunkards to preserve their urine, as a precious liquor against a scarcity of the fungus. The intoxicating property of the urine is capable of {168} being propagated; for every one who partakes of it has his urine similarly affected. Thus with a very few amanitae, a party of drunkards may keep up their debauch for a week."

This property of the amanita, at once places it in a separate category from all other organic poisons, it has yet to be shewn upon what this intoxicating fungus depends for its activity. Whether some secretion is formed in the tissue of the plant, or whether some new arrangement of the particles of matter or modification of the sporules, is brought about by entering the system, it is impossible to say. Langsdorf states that the small deep-coloured specimens of amanita, and thickly covered with warts, are said to be more powerful than those of a larger size and paler colour. As the effect is not produced until from one to two hours after swallowing the bolus, and as a pleasant intoxication may be obtained by this agent for a whole day, and from one dose only, there is a defined line between this and the ordinary narcotics and stimulants in common use. That the digestive powers of the stomach have no influence over the intoxicating properties of the plant, is manifested in the fact, that the active principle passes into the urine, not only not deteriorated but apparently increased, for, as we have seen, a teacup of the urine from a man, intoxicated by taking the amanita into his stomach, will cause him to be more powerfully intoxicated than by the {169} original dose. We have, therefore, but two conjectures left for consideration, either the original intoxicating principle is excreted from the system in a condensed form, in which case its indestructibility by digestion, makes it approach the ordinary organic poisons, or there must be an increase of the toxic agent, in which case we must suppose a reproductive process having taken place in the system. "There is," says Dr. Mitchell, "in the wild regions of our western country, a disease called the milk sickness, the trembles, the tires, the slows, the stiff-joints, the puking fever, &c." The animals affected with this disease, "stray irregularly, apparently without motive;" they lose their power of attention, and finally tremble, stagger, and die. "When other animals--men, dogs, cats, poultry, crows, buzzards, and hogs, drink the milk or eat the flesh of a diseased cow, they suffer in a somewhat similar manner." This disease is attributed by Dr. Mitchell to the animals having grazed on pasture contaminated with mildew, and the resemblance to the effects of the amanita, together with the persistence of the specific principle within the fluids and tissues of the body, render it more than probable that to some fungoid growth, is due the peculiar toxic effects here noticed. Further: "The animals made sick by the beef of the first one, have been in their turn the cause of a like affection in others; so that three or four have thus fallen victims successively." De Graaf states, that butter {170} made from the milk of diseased cows, though heated until it caught fire, did not lose its deleterious properties. The urine of diseased animals, collected and reduced by evaporation, produced the characteristic symptoms. All these facts point to some peculiarity in the properties of matter not yet investigated or at least not explained. If we may assume that reproduction is here an element of the persistence and apparent multiplication of active matter, I know only of one instance to compare with it. A gentleman about to deliver a lecture on the properties of arsenic, and its history generally, made two solutions of a given quantity of arsenious acid, in the following manner. He took a certain amount of distilled water, and the same of filtered Thames water, and made his solutions of arsenic by separate boilings, he then as soon as possible placed the liquids in identical bottles, carefully prepared for their reception. In the one which contained the arsenic boiled in river water, the hygrocrocis is now growing, while that boiled in distilled water remains perfectly limpid and free from any vegetable production. There can scarcely be a doubt, that the filtration of river water was not sufficiently purifying to remove the minute spores of some lower forms of vegetation, which not only live in arsenic but have resisted the temperature employed in boiling an arsenical solution to saturation.

As to the first class, or truly reproductive and {171} morbid poisons, the most heterogenous ideas have from all time existed. I have introduced the notice of the above poisons, viz. the Amanita, and that which engenders the milk sickness, to compare the results of the morbid poisons on the human body with them, and also to associate them with the effects of diseased grain. From the Amanita and that other fungoid matter which is said to produce the milk sickness, there appears to be a purely toxic action on the system, but in the instance of diseased grain, a blood disease, ending in gangrene, or a specific and peculiar action of the generative organs is the consequence, and where the latter occurs, the poison usually expends itself on these parts, either by inducing abortion, or augmenting the catamenial secretion.

Now, the morbid poisons, if studied only in their results, shew that there is a combination of these two actions. There is usually, in the first place, a toxic or poisonous action, and secondly, a deteriorating or decomposing action on the blood, by which there is a tendency to low or asthenic inflammation and gangrene. It matters not what form of fever we take as an illustration, whether intermittent, pestilential, or exanthematous, either will serve the purpose of shewing how completely the effects of vegetable organic poisons resemble those which for the sake of distinction (I suppose) have been denominated Morbid Poisons.

Take an attack from the paludal poison. It is {172} usually ushered in with head-ache, weariness, pains in the limbs, and thirst, with other symptoms; all these are indicative of a poisonous agent in the blood: then come the full phenomena of the disease at a longer or shorter interval, and tending ultimately to destroy some organ of the body. The mind suffers during the course of the attack, and delirium occasionally happens. In severe cases of this disease, which were more frequent formerly than now, coma, delirium, and frenzy were observed at the commencement of the attack, and a tendency to rapid disorganization of one or several of the viscera.

If we take the effects of poison of Erysipelas, of Scarlet Fever, or Plague, in each we find at the onset more or less general derangement of the system, usually with cerebral disturbance and disordered action of all the dynamic forces of the body, which clearly indicate the action of a poison; then, unless some favourable symptoms arise, the blood exhibits a steady advance towards disorganization, and sphacelation of one or more tissues or parts of the body ensues. In Erysipelas the force of the diseased action is expended on the skin, and subcutaneous cellular tissue; in Scarlet Fever the fauces ulcerate, and slough and the parotids suppurate; in the Plague there is a general tendency to putrefaction, and the formation of glandular abscesses with sphacelas. Without going any further into this matter, for my present intention is merely to draw {173} notice to certain facts, let me now ask, whether or not, do the poisons of the Ergot, the Uredo, and the Amanita, exhibit more analogy in their action on the nervous system, the blood and the tissues, than any other poisonous agents with which we are acquainted? If the whole range of the lower fungi could be examined in reference to their operation on the blood, as decomposers of organic compounds,--if experiments could be made, by which the properties of fungoid matter could be detected, I would venture to say the whole of the phenomena of these diseases could be readily comprehended and their intricacies unravelled.

We know that the fungi are poisonous, that at times and seasons, and under variations of climate, they vary in their effects, and perhaps lose altogether these properties. We know that the fungi produce gangrene of the tissues, and disorganization of the blood; we know that their spores pervade the atmosphere, and are ready, under favouring conditions, to increase and multiply; we know that they are ubiquitous, and that those conditions most favourable to their development, are exactly such as are proved to foster and engender disease, and above all, they have been proved to be the elements of some diseases in man, in animals, and in plants. Can as much be said of any other known agents, animate or inanimate, comprised in our category?

It has been said, we do not see after death,--the {174} interlacing mycilium, or the sprouting pileus; therefore the fungi are not the agents of disease--it has been said that carbonic acid and alcohol are not found as products of diseased action--consequently disease is not a fermentative process. "In all cases," says Liebig, "where the strictest investigation has failed to demonstrate the presence of organic beings in the contagion of a miasm, or contagious disease, the hypothesis that such beings have cooperated, or do cooperate in the morbid process, must be rejected as totally void of foundation and support." Much as I admire the genius of this great man, it is difficult to refrain from remarking, that I doubt if any of his great discoveries would have been made, if, in the first instance, hypotheses had not formed the basis of all his researches. It has been said, "that casual conjunctions in chemistry, gave us most of our valuable discoveries:" and it is from casual conjunctions that hypotheses are usually formed, the working out proves either their fallacy or their truth, but to say that an hypothesis has no foundation, until demonstrated to be true, is rather knocking down argument. And who, let me ask, has been more prolific of hypotheses than our continental neighbour? Yet he, according to his mode of reasoning, would sweep away all such words from the vocabularies of philosophers. What foundation has the chemical hypothesis of disease, when it fails to explain the most important element {175} of contagious and infectious diseases: viz. the reproductive property of their germs?

It is perhaps necessary to say something in explanation of the sudden deaths arising from morbid poisons. They may occur from two causes. One being the result of a concentrated amount of poison germs being inhaled into the lungs, and acting as an ordinary toxic agent; and the other, which I put only hypothetically, the consequence of the rapid evolution of gas in the vessels arising from a sudden decomposition of blood, as it passes through the lungs. The only authority I have for this supposition, is the fact that the blood after death, from pestilential affections, is found to be far advanced towards decomposition; that in Paris last year, two patients were bled while suffering from Cholera, and with the small quantity of blood which flowed, bubbles of air also escaped: and besides this, it was demonstrated by Mr. Herapath, that ammonia was given off from Cholera patients, both by the lungs and skin. These facts, though they are not conclusive, nevertheless render it probable that such an explanation is not entirely out of reason--especially too, when we know how fatal are the effects of uncombined air, when it enters the vessels near to the heart.

* * * * *

{176}