GENERAL GRANT’S CASE.

“SOMEONE HAS BLUNDERED!”—CAN IT BE POSSIBLE?

The New York Herald says: “If General Grant should recover from a disease which should prove not to have been what it has been described, then his medical attendants * * * will be expected to explain the reasons for one of the most remarkable instances of discrepancy ever recounted in the history of medical practice.”

The other day an eminent young physician in the last stages of consumption, unable to longer talk, called for pen and paper and indistinctly wrote this advice to his physicians: “Make dying comfortable.”

This seems to have been the sole purpose of General Grant’s attending physicians. They were making dying comfortable, but they were not curing their patients. He amazes them by getting better!

The utter failure rightly to diagnose and properly to treat General Grant’s disorder was a serious blunder, emphasizing what has so often been said, that professional treatment, being purely experimental, is just as likely to be wrong as right.

Had the general an ulcer on his arm the physicians would have treated it scientifically, very scientifically. He might have recovered or they might have cut his arm off. Some dear old soul of a grandmother, however, might have treated the sore by some “old woman’s remedy” and healed it, but there would have been no “professional license” in such a proceeding, as her remedy would not be one recognized by the code!

The general’s physicians excuse themselves, we are told, because the condition of the throat was hidden from sight. There are thousands of cases where disease is hidden from sight, where the symptoms are very obscure and conflicting. The physicians will treat everyday’s symptoms but they do not cure, and finally the patient dies. Then they discover they have made a mistake! A horrible mistake! The other day a prominent merchant in a neighboring city was found dead in bed. A post mortem examination revealed the fact that one of his other vital organs was entirely decayed, and yet his physicians had been treating him for heart disease!

Some one had blundered.

For weeks the American public have been waiting the unwelcome tidings of General Grant’s death. To-day the General is up and around and riding out.

People get well often in spite of what their doctors say and do. Why? By will power? No. By faith? No.

They live because outside the medical profession and medical pretense there are effective remedial agencies in nature which, though “unrecognized” by the code, have supreme power over disease, and in thousands of cases win triumphs where the so-called scientific treatment utterly fails.

A prominent ex-Cabinet officer is to-day on the very edge of the grave, suffering from an extreme disorder of the liver. His doctors know they cannot cure him. They simply are making dying comfortable.

The agony of death in many cases is read by surrounding friends in screams of pain, in convulsions of nerve, in spasms of torture-the fixed eye, the chilly breath, the dreadful coughing, the bloody sweat–the supreme inflictions of pitiless disease upon a helpless body,–indicate the limitations of professional skill.”

Seven-tenths of the deaths of this country every year are from hepatic and renal disorders, over which physicians have so little power. They will give this, that and the other thing to make dying comfortable, but they know they cannot cure and yet they will not permit the use of remedies “unauthorized” by their code, whether they are allopathic or homeopathic. If the system, as is common at this time of the year, has no tone, and one has tired and depressed feelings, the doctor will tellyou that the blood needs purifying, but he will not tell you what he knows to be true, that the blood is impure because the liver and kidneys are not performing their blood purifying functions.

The failure of the physicians in General Grant’s case ought to have an eye-opening effect upon the public. It ought to see the fatality of trusting entirely in a profession whose practice is so largely experimental. The test of merit is success and when any agency has won a record proved by the testimony of prominent men and women in all ranks of society, it stands to reason thta such a preparation is worthy of universal confidence. Who has not heard of it? Who has not used it? Who can gainsay the statement that it has wrought greater benefit for mankind than anything ever discovered inside the ranks of the medical profession.” And yet many physicians who are bound hand and foot to their code will not allow nor will they prescribe the use of Warner’s safe cure. Nevertheless, spite of their small-minded bigotry, it multiplies instances of its singular merit by thousands every day, rests satisfied with the record it has won, and challenges comparison with the record of the most reputable physician.

It is a terrible thing to lose our friends, especially if we find out afterwards that they might have been saved.

We are glad General Grant is getting well. He deserves to live and in living he will emphasize the fact that physicians do not have a monopoly over disease; that “scientific medicine,” so called, is not infallible; that all remedial agencies were not born with doctors and will not die with them.

I happened across your most interesting site while trying to answer a friend’s question. He is an amateur historian and archeologist in Lake County, California, and had posted a photo of a barn bearing an ad for Dr Pierce’s Medical Discovery. The ad you have posted from a weekly Chico, California newspaper provides the complete answer to my friend’s question, which came down to: “What did Dr. Pierce discover?”