accompanied with diagrams illustrating my views of the classification of medicines. I shall be happy to explain it to the Institute, and I leave it to the judgment of others whether to have it embodied with the report on the materia medica.

DR. THAYER moved that Dr. Morgan be requested to exhibit his diagrams, and read his paper. The motion was agreed to, and the paper was read.

C. J. HEMPEL, M.D: I would like very much to have a chance to study this a little better. These ideas are so novel, and the classifications presented in this paper so entirely different from anything we have had heretofore, that I am very anxious to see this a little more clearly; and I should like, therefore, to have it in print. Though I have studied materia medica considerably, I confess this paper has completely surprised me. I should not like to have anything done, however, which would hold the Institute responsible for any views that this paper expresses.

THE PRESIDENT: That, I believe, is generally understood. DR. THAYER: I have been so much pleased with what has been read, and with the explanations given, that I also would like to see it in print; and I move that it be accepted, and referred to the Committee on Publication.

R. MCMURRAY, M.D.: I wish to ask what would be the effect of the motion to accept this paper?

THE PRESIDENT: It simply puts it into the possession of the Institute.

DR. MCMURRAY: Does Dr. Morgan propose to leave it there? He may want to use it for his own purposes. It may be proper to pass a vote of thanks for the favor of hearing it, but whether it is to belong to the Institute is another question.

DR. MORGAN: I wish to say that I have presented it here with a good deal of hesitation and diffidence. I know that I am presenting views which must undoubtedly conflict with those of many gentlemen whose opinions I highly respect, and I therefore would not urge the paper upon the attention of the Insti

tute. My desire, if I know myself, is, more than anything else, to do good with the product of my mind. If the Institute really think that it will be of any use to the profession, I shall be very happy to submit it to their service.

Dr. Morgan's paper was accepted, and referred to the Committee on Publication.*

BUREAU OF ORGANIZATION, REGISTRATION, AND STATISTICS.

HENRY M. SMITH, M.D., of New York, Chairman of the Bureau, presented a report, which was accepted. — (Section VI., Art. 5.)

On motion of Dr. Beebe, the recommendations of the Bureau were laid upon the table.

The report was accompanied by several reports from homoeopathic institutions, which were received, and referred to the Committee on Publication.— (Section VI., Art. 8.)

T. F. ALLEN, M.D., of New York, one of the surgeons of the New York Ophthalmic Hospital, was invited to give a verbal report of that institution, which had recently changed from allopathic to homœopathic care. (Section VI., Art. 8.)

He briefly detailed the manner in which this change was accomplished, which was after the discovery that a large majority of the trustees were homeopaths. For the report of the Institution, see the "New York Ophthalmic Hospital" (Section VI., Art 8.)

C. J. HEMPEL, M.D., of Grand Rapids, Mich.: From Dr. Allen's report, I see he wants to get our public institutions into the hands of homoeopaths by converting the trustees. That is precisely what we are doing in the State of Michigan. We have converted six out of eight of the Board of Regents of our State University, and I trust the consequence will be that the whole University will ultimately fall into our hands. It is in a fair way of doing so.

*The paper was never received by the Publication Committee. It may be found in the Transactions of the New York Homœopathic Medical Society for 1868.

Dr. FRANKLIN: I propose to offer the following resolutions, for which I do not think there could be a more appropriate time than the present:

Resolved, That this Institute views with feelings of pleasure and satisfaction the position of homoeopathy in the University of the State of Michigan, as represented by Prof. C. J. Hempel.

Resolved, That this Institute indorses and approves the action of the Regents of the Michigan University in appointing Dr. Hempel to a Professorship in said University.

After reciting the history of the struggle (Section VI., Article 8, Report of Michigan Homœopathic Institute), he added: I would like to bave these resolutions passed simply to strengthen the hands of the Regents, who have thus boldly stepped out in defiance of the displeasure of the allopaths who have been formerly connected with the institution. I fear that, if any amendments are brought before us, they may so far mutilate the resolutions that they will fail to attain the ends to which I aim in offering them. I trust, if any are offered, that they will tend further to strengthen the position of our friends, and enable Prof. Hempel to go on in the University as he has begun.

G. D. BEEBE, M.D., of Chicago: I heartily second everything that Dr. Franklin has said: still, I must say that all wishes for the success of the Michigan University are not centered in my friend, Dr. Franklin, nor are they all embodied in the resolutions presented by him. I therefore offer, as an amendment, the following substitute:

Whereas The members of this Institute have watched with profound interest the progress of the controversy with reference to the teaching of homœopathy in the Michigan University; and

Whereas The exclusion of such teaching has been in violation of the laws of the State of Michigan, and the expressed will of the people: therefore, as the sense of the homœopathic profession here represented, be it

Resolved, That the interests of homoeopathy and the welfare of the community demand that the principles of homœopathy shall be taught in the § I.-17

University of Michigan, at Ann Arbor, and that difference of opinions among members of the two schools of medicine ought not to operate to the exclusion of either from a university founded and sustained by the people for a general diffusion of knowledge.

Resolved, That, should any or all of the allopathic chairs of the medical department of the said university be vacated, and the Board of Regents see fit to appoint homœopathic medical men to fill these chairs, the homœopathic profession of America will pledge its influence and support to the medical department of that university in sustaining such action.

Now, the resolutions of Dr. Franklin do not quite express the sympathy that we feel for the institution. I have had a prolonged interview with one of the Regents, and he has expressed his preference for more homœopathic professors than have already been appointed. Six of the Regents are strong homoeopaths; and, if they can feel assured of the support of the public in placing the medical department under homœopathic teaching, then the time will speedily come when all the medical teaching there will be homoeopathic. But the Regents fear lest, the teachers of the allopathic school being suddenly withdrawn, their benches will be empty, the department will dwindle down to an insignificant number, and the institution suffer materially. What the Regents need, then, is something to support them in this movement,- some assurance that the homœopathic public will so sustain them that, if they lose seven hundred allopathic students, they will get in their place a reasonable number of homœopaths. I think, if we can agree to pledge the homoeopathic profession of America to support the institution under a homoeopathic regime, we shall not have long to wait for this happy change.

Dr. FRANKLIN: There is a controversy now going on between the Regents and the competent authorities, with which the Institute should not interfere. The Regents want to know if the Institute approves their acts. Now, the wider extent of the amended resolutions and the amount of matter embraced have almost entirely swallowed up my original resolutions, and they

really cover no further ground. The questions of law are for the Regents to settle, and not the Institute. We approve and indorse the action of the Regents in their legal fight over this question. Now, if the gentleman says, "We pledge ourselves to sustain you," I am perfectly willing; but it strikes me that, outside of this, the series of resolutions travels over ground to which we really have no right.

D. S. SMITH, M.D., of Chicago: I rise to second the amendment offered by Dr. Beebe. The remarks of my friend, Prof. Franklin, seem to me to make it more necessary that an amendment of this kind should go with his.

J. C. MORGAN, M.D., of Philadelphia: I am afraid the very clause which Prof. Franklin is willing to admit as a part of his resolutions is one that requires more discussion than any other. Pledging ourselves to sustain any school whatever, is a very serious matter. It might possibly be best that all our colleges should be merged into that one; and, if it is the wish of the profession, I, as the representative of one college, would not object but I think it should first be well considered.

A. E. SMALL, M.D., of Chicago: I have watched with a great deal of interest the course that has been taken in complying with the law of Michigan in providing for a chair of homoeopathy in this university. I think it is important that this Institute should indorse the efforts to carry out the provisions of that law, and for this reason: it is the first legal recognition of homœopathy coming from the people in this vast country. I mean not to insinuate that the homœopathic colleges which have been chartered are not legal institutions, and legally authorized to confer the degree of Doctor of Medicine; nor to undervalue private colleges that have been established by unincorporated bodies. But here is an institution that is sustained by the public, by a tax upon the property, and by endowments in the State of Michigan. The Legislature has established in it this