Lecture by Mr. Trousseau,

Given at the Polytechnic Association for the Free Instruction of Workers on the 18th and 25th of May 1862. (In-8º pamphlet.)

(Summary)

Kardec speaks of the pretensions of Mr. Trousseau, a man of science, to unmask the Spiritists.

In his lecture Dr. Trousseau speaks of the charlatans of Mr. de Sartines and of certain members of the Institute.

Mr. Trousseau cites a case involving Béranger, his intimate friend, cured of an ophthalmia by an empirical formula of a Polish priest.

Mr. Trousseau expounds on somnambulism and on the magnetism of Mesmer, whom he calls a German empiric.

and 4. Two examples of cure through somnambulism cited by Allan Kardec:

The case of a boy whose physician had recommended immediate amputation of the leg because of a tumor in the knee.

Kardec, almost blind twelve years earlier , manages to restore his sight through treatment with a somnambulist.

The end of Mr. Trousseau's lecture, which treats Spiritism as a stupidity without a name. Kardec replies: He seems to be unaware that this stupidity without a name did not last seven or eight months, but lasts forever and spreads more and more everywhere.

– If they have used the devil's horns in vain to demolish Spiritism, here is a reinforcement arriving for the adversaries: it is Dr. Trousseau, who has just delivered the coup de grâce to the Spirits. Unfortunately, if Mr. Trousseau does not believe in the Spirits, neither does he believe in the devil. But little does the helper matter, provided he strikes the enemy. No doubt this new champion will say on the subject the last word of Science: at least that is what one expects from a man so highly placed by his learning. Attacking new ideas, he will not wish to leave a single argument without rebuttal; he will not desire to be accused of speaking of things he does not know; no doubt he will take up one by one all the phenomena, investigate them, analyze them, comment upon them, explain them, demolish them, demonstrating from a to b that they are illusions. Ah! Spiritists! Let us hold firm! If Mr. Trousseau were not a learned man or, at the very least, a half-learned man, he might well be capable of forgetting something. But an upright scholar will not wish to leave the task half done. Generally skillful, he will desire complete victory. Let us listen and tremble! After a tirade against the persons who allow themselves to be carried away by advertisements, he expresses himself thus:

– “In truth, the persons capable of judging anything whatever are not the most numerous. Mr. de Sartines wished to send to prison a charlatan who sold his drugs on the Pont-Neuf and was doing fine business. He had him summoned and asked him: Rascal, how do you manage to attract so many people and earn so much money? The man answered: Sir, how many people do you think pass daily over the Pont-Neuf? – I do not know. – I will tell you: roughly ten thousand. Of this number, how many do you think are intelligent? Oh! oh! perhaps a hundred, said Mr. de Sartines. – That is a great many, but I leave them to you and keep the nine thousand nine hundred for myself. “The charlatan was very modest and Mr. de Sartines very severe toward the Parisian population. Most certainly more than a hundred intelligent persons cross the Pont-Neuf, and the most intelligent perhaps stop before the stall of the drug merchant with as much confidence as the crowd. For, gentlemen, I will say that the upper classes suffer the influence of charlatanism.

“Among our scientific societies I will cite the Institute. I will cite the section of the Academy of Sciences which contains, certainly, the elite of the scientists of our country. Of these learned men about twenty turn to the charlatans.”

Evident proof of the great confidence they have in the learning of their colleagues, since to them they prefer the charlatans.

“It is true that they are persons of great merit. Merely because they are eminent mathematicians, chemists, or naturalists, they conclude that they are very good physicians and, for that reason, suppose themselves perfectly capable of judging the things they completely ignore.”

If this proves in favor of their science, it does not prove much in favor of their modesty and their judgment. They have hurled many satirical darts against the learned men of the Institute. We know of none more biting. It is probable, then, that the professor, joining example to precept, speaks only of what he knows.

“With us we sometimes have that modesty: being nothing more than physicians, when great theorems of mathematics or mechanics are proposed to us, we confess to know nothing and we acknowledge our incompetence. But the true learned men never decline their competence, above all in what concerns Medicine.”

Since physicians decline their competence in that which they do not know, we have a guarantee that Mr. Trousseau, above all in a public lesson, will not deal with questions linked to psychology, since he is not profoundly versed in those matters. No doubt this knowledge will furnish him with irresistible arguments in support of his judgment.

“The healers – it is sad to say – have always had much access to intelligent persons. I had the supreme honor of being the intimate friend of the illustrious Béranger.

“In 1848 he was suffering from a small ophthalmia, for which Mr. Retonneau had advised him an eyewash. The ophthalmia was cured; but, as Béranger read and worked a great deal and as he was somewhat dartrous, n the illness recurred. He then turned to a Polish priest who cured ailments of the eyes with a secret remedy. At that time I was president, at the Faculty, of the jury charged with the examination of the health officers. As the Polish priest had accounts to settle with the police, because he had blinded some patients, he wished to settle them. With this object he went to seek out Béranger and asked him whether, through his influence, he might be recognized as a health officer, in order to be in a position to treat people's eyes and put them out at will.” Since Mr. Béranger had been cured by Mr. Bretonneau, why should he turn to another? It is natural to have more confidence in the one who cured us, who has more experience of our temperament than a stranger.

Indeed, the diploma is a safe-conduct that not only permits health officers to gravely injure the eyes of patients, but physicians to kill them without remorse and without responsibility. It is no doubt for this reason that their learned colleagues, as Mr. Trousseau confesses, are so inclined to turn to the healers and the charlatans.

“Béranger sought me out and said to me: “My friend, render me a great favor. See to it that they qualify this poor devil. He occupies himself only with ailments of the eyes and, although the examinations for health officers comprise all the branches of the art of healing, act with indulgence and gentleness. He is a refugee and, besides, he cured me: there is the best reason.” I answered him: Send me your man. The Polish priest came to my house. You are recommended, I said to him, by a man to whom I owe many favors; he is the dearest of my friends. Moreover, it is Béranger, which is worth still more. Two of my colleagues, to whom I have spoken, and I, are resolved to do what is possible; only the examinations are public, and it costs nothing to stop one's ears a little. And I added: Come now, I shall be accommodating; I will take lessons in anatomy, and it will not be difficult for you to know as much anatomy as I. I will question you about the eye. “Our man seemed disconcerted. I continued: Do you know what the eye is? – Very well. – Do you know what the eyelid is? – Yes. – Have you an idea of what the cornea is?… He hesitated. The pupil? – Ah! sir, the pupil, I know well. – Do you know what the crystalline lens is, the vitreous humor, the retina? – No, sir; what would that serve me for? I occupy myself only with diseases of the eyes. I say to him: That serves for something; and I assure you that it would be almost necessary to suspect the existence of a crystalline lens, above all if you wish, as you sometimes do, it seems to me, to operate on cataracts. – I do not operate. – But if you took the whim to extract one… There was no way out. The wretch wished to exercise the art of the oculist without the slightest notion of the anatomy of the eye.” It is truly difficult to show oneself less demanding in giving this wretch the right to legally put out the eyes of patients. Nevertheless, it seems that he did not perform operations – although the temptation might have dragged him to it – and that he merely possessed a remedy to cure ophthalmias, whose application, absolutely empirical, requires no special knowledge; this does not consist exactly in practicing what is called the art of the oculist. In our view, it was more important to be sure that the remedy contained nothing offensive; it had in its favor the presumption of the cure of Mr. Béranger and, in the interest of Humanity, it might be useful to permit him its use. That man could have had the anatomical knowledge required and obtained his diploma, without that making the remedy good, were it bad. Nevertheless, thanks to the diploma, he could have prescribed it with all safety, however dangerous it might be. Jesus Christ, who cured the blind, the deaf, the mute, and the paralytic, probably knew no more than that man concerning anatomy. And Mr. Trousseau would unquestionably have refused him the right to perform miracles. Today, how many fines would Jesus not have to pay if he could not cure without a diploma! None of this has much to do with the Spirits, but these are the premises of the argument with which he is going to crush their partisans.

“I sought out Béranger and told him the story. Béranger exclaimed: Poor man!…”

It is probable that he also said, speaking to himself: And yet he cured me! – Far be it from us to make the apology of charlatans and panaceas; we wish only to say that there may be efficacious remedies outside the formulas of the pharmacopoeia; that the savages, who have infallible secrets against snake bites, know neither the theory of the circulation of the blood nor the difference between venous blood and arterial blood. We should like to know whether Mr. Trousseau, bitten by a rattlesnake or by some other venomous reptile, would refuse the help of those men, merely because they have no diploma.

In the next article we shall speak especially of the various categories of healing mediums which, it seems, have lately multiplied.

“I said to him: “My dear Béranger, I have been your physician for eight years. Today I am going to collect my fees. – What fees? – You will make me a song and dedicate it to me, but I will give the refrain. – Ah! yes!… and the refrain? – Ah! how foolish clever people are!” – We agreed that from then on we would no longer speak of the Polish priest. Is it not sad to see a man like Béranger, to whom I recounted such things, fail to understand that his protege could do much harm and was absolutely incapable of accomplishing anything whatever of use for the simplest diseases of the eyes?”

It seems that Béranger was not very convinced of the infallibility of the diplomaed doctors and could repeat the refrain: Ah! how foolish clever people are!

“As you see, gentlemen, intelligent persons are the first to let themselves be caught. Remember what was happening at the end of the last century. – A German healer employs electricity, still poorly known at that time. He submits some delicate women to the action of the fluid; small nervous accidents occur, which he attributes to a fluid emanating from himself; he establishes a bizarre theory, called at the time mesmerism. He comes to Paris, installing himself at the Place Vendôme, in the center of the city, where the richest persons, belonging to the highest aristocracy of the capital, come to take their place around Mesmer's tub. I could not say how many cures were attributed to Mesmer, who, moreover, is the inventor and the importer, among us, of this marvel called somnambulism, that is to say, one of the most shameful sores of empiricism. “What indeed shall I tell you of somnambulism? Hysterical wenches, generally lost, in collusion with some famished charlatan, simulating ecstasy, catalepsy, sleep and, with the most ridiculous assurance, exhibiting more ineptitudes than one could imagine, ineptitudes well paid, well accepted, believed with a faith more robust than the counsels of the most enlightened clinician.”

What is intelligence good for, if intelligent persons are the first to let themselves be caught? What is needed in order not to let oneself be caught? To be learned? – No. – To be a member of the Institute? – No, since a good number of them have the weakness to prefer the charlatans to their colleagues. It is Mr. Trousseau who tells us so. – To be a physician? – No either, for many likewise give themselves over to the absurdity of magnetism. – What, then, is necessary in order to have good sense? – To be Mr. Trousseau.

No doubt Mr. Trousseau is free to express his opinion, to believe or not in somnambulism. But is it not to exceed the limits of good breeding to treat all somnambulists as lost wenches, in collusion with charlatans? That in this, as in everything, there are abuses, is inevitable, from which official medicine itself is not exempt. No doubt there are pretenses of somnambulism, but, because there are false devotees, can one say that there is no true devotion? Is Mr. Trousseau unaware that among professional somnambulists there are married and very respectable women; that the number of those who do not put themselves forward is far greater? That there are such women in the most honorable and most highly placed families? That many physicians, duly diplomaed, of incontestable learning, are today declared champions of magnetism, which they employ with success in a number of cases rebellious to traditional medicine? We shall not attempt to make Mr. Trousseau change his opinion by proving to him the existence of magnetism and of somnambulism, for it is probable that we should waste our time. Besides, this is not our intention. We shall say, however, that if mockery and sarcasm are weapons little worthy of Science, it is still more unworthy of it to drag through the mud a science today spread throughout the entire world, recognized and practiced by the most distinguished men, and to hurl upon those who profess it the most coarse insults that can be found in the vocabulary of abuse. We can only lament to hear expressions of such triviality, made to inspire disgust, descending from the chairs of teaching.

– You marvel that ineptitudes, as it pleases you to call them, are believed with a faith far more robust than the counsels of the most enlightened clinician. The reason for this lies in the innumerable quantity of errors committed by the most enlightened clinicians, of which we shall cite two examples.

A lady of our acquaintance had a son of four or five years, stricken with a tumor in the knee, in consequence of a fall. The ailment became so grave that she resolved to consult a medical celebrity, who gave his opinion for the amputation of the limb, judged urgent and indispensable, in order to save the child's life. The mother was a somnambulist. Unable to decide upon the operation, whose result was doubtful, she resolved to treat him herself. At the end of a month the cure was complete. A year later, with the son already strong and healthy, she went to see the physician and said to him: “Here is the boy who, in your opinion, was to die if his leg were not cut off. – What would you have? he answered, Nature has resources so unforeseen!”

– The other case is personal. About ten years ago I became almost blind, to the point of being unable to read or write and of not recognizing a person to whom I gave my hand. I consulted the notabilities of Science, among others Dr. L…, professor of clinic for ailments of the eyes. After a very attentive and conscientious examination, he declared that I was suffering from an amaurosis and that I must resign myself. I went to see a somnambulist, who told me that it was not amaurosis, but an apoplexy in the eyes, which could degenerate into amaurosis if not properly treated. She declared that she would answer for the cure. In fifteen days, she said, you will experience a discreet improvement; in a month you will begin to see and, within two or three months, you will be cured. Everything came to pass as she had foreseen, and today my sight is completely restored.

– Mr. Trousseau continues:

“Even today you have an American who evokes the Spirits, making Socrates, Voltaire, Rousseau, Jesus Christ, and whomever one wishes speak! In what places? In the dives of some drunkards?”

The professor's choice of expressions is truly remarkable.

“No; he makes them speak in palaces, in the Senate, in the most aristocratic salons of Paris. There are honorable persons who say: “But I saw it; I received a slap from an invisible hand; the table rose up to the ceiling!” They tell you so and repeat it. And during seven or eight months the rapping Spirits marveled the men, astounded the women, and provoked nervous attacks in them. This stupidity has a name; this stupidity which the coarsest of men would be ashamed to accept was accepted by enlightened people and, worse still, by the upper classes of Parisian society.”

Mr. Trousseau could add: and of the entire world. He seems to be unaware that this stupidity without a name did not last seven or eight months, but lasts forever and spreads more and more everywhere; that the evocation of the Spirits is not the privilege of an American, but of thousands of persons of both sexes, of all ages, and of all countries. In sound logic, up to the present the adherence of the masses and of enlightened persons had been considered as of a certain value. It seems that this is no longer the case and that the only sensible opinion is that of Mr. Trousseau and of those who think as he does. As for the others, whatever their category, their social position, their instruction, though they dwell in palaces and hold seats in the foremost positions of the State, they are below the coarsest of men, since the coarsest of men would be ashamed to accept their ideas. When an opinion finds itself as widespread as that of Spiritism, when, instead of diminishing, it progresses with a rapidity bordering on the prodigious, when it is accepted by the elite of society, if it is false and dangerous it is necessary to oppose to it a dike, to combat it with contrary proofs. Now, it seems that Mr. Trousseau has no other argument to oppose to it but this: “Ah! how foolish clever people are!” [1] [Armand Trousseau, born on the 14th of October 1801, in Tours, and deceased on the 27th of June 1867 in Paris, was a French physician. With an initial formation as a teacher of classical literature, he began his medical studies in his native city of Tours, under the supervision of Pierre Fidèle Bretonneau, with whom he learned the methods of clinical observation of a general hospital. He became a Doctor in 1825, then Professor Attached to the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Paris in 1827.]