DBook III OF SVPHILIS 279

preference select the old wood. Also, when new, it has more
drying power, but then it dries rather by its essential quality
of dryness than by the dryness that comes from heat. Hence,
when new, it is actually less drying than the old wood, since the
active process of drying that is due to the quality of dryness,
is less effective than the active dryness due to heat.'** On the
other hand, it is better for strengthening the patient, on account
of its astringency. Hence when the patient!s constitution is
rather delicate and the substance is rather volatile, and you
want to strengthen the organs, you should choose the new wood.
Many doctors use the bark indiscriminately, because they think
it dries more thoroughly, (for it seems drier), but it is certain
that the bark also is drier with the dryness that is an essential
quality, and by absorbency, not the dryness due to heat. Hence
it has less power to liquefy, volatilise and dissolve the substance,
and is less provocative of sweat. So what I said about the
wood when new applies equally to the bark. From the old
wood they used to make & much more transparent and sharper
decoction, because, on account of the close texture of that wood,
there was less dust (i. e. from filings) in the mixture; and it was
much sharper, because the old wood is hotter. When made of
new wood and of the bark, there is more dust in the mixture,
and therefore the water is more clouded and more bitter but
less sharp, because that is the nature of the new wood and the
bark. Also less froth is skimmed from it than from the old
wood, which contains more black substance in which there is
more resin. I have often wondered why there has been such
a great change in regard to the use of this wood, and hovw it is
that the bark which used to be thrown away has now become
so costly. It must be because it is characteristic of doctors to
be always introducing novelties, since they thus acquire greater
authority and make more money. It is this desire for novelty
which made them give up concocting with water and use wine
instead, a practice which when followed as it is without dis—
eretion by many of them, is very dangerous. I have observed
many eases where patients drank this wine and were made ill
by it, and lapsed into a condition beyond cure. 'Therefore
patients who have a warm, dry temperament with an enfeebled
condition, and the substance of the disease somewhat parched,
(adust), ought to beware of drinking that decoction made with
wine. However, those who are of a dense and moist constitu—