Judicious nomenclature is of immense importance in the framework of science, and a want of care in this has probably done as much as anything to impede the course of rational investigation. There is nothing, perhaps, in the whole range of science more to be lamented than many—indeed, I might say all—parts of medical nomenclature. If our ignorance prevents us from giving a name to a thing which is descriptive of its nature, we might easily avoid applying such as are calculated to mislead. We can imagine the confusion which would result from a druggist labelling a bottle of water, "poison;" and a vessel containing poison, "water;" yet we doubt whether he would more imperfectly express the true relations of these fluids, than the terms "fever" and "inflammation" do the real nature of the conditions which they are employed to designate.
Abernethy's arrangement of tumours not only illustrates his disposition to seize on the more salient points of a subject, but also his inclination to seek for the essential relations of (so-called local) disease in the general condition of the body. He consistently, therefore, mentions them in an order founded on such relations. He places those first which he had found least dangerous in their nature, least destructive in their effects, and which appeared to him to have been attended by the least disturbance to the general economy. In like manner he placed those which had manifested more malignant or dangerous characters, in the order of their severity; inferring their characters respectively from the disturbance of the constitution, the resistance of the disease to treatment, and the variety of structures destroyed in its progress.
Between these two extremes, he placed, as the step of transition, that tumour which he had observed to partake most strongly of intermediate characters. But, besides the desire to throw some light on the subject of tumours generally, he had another special object in view. Few diseases exemplify the absence of scientific research more than tumours. In regard to most of these morbid depositions, it may be remarked that, even now, whenever a patient with one of these so-called tumours applies for advice, the practicability of removal is too often the only thing thought of; and it must be obvious to common sense that the mere cutting away of a deposition of this kind (however proper under some peculiar circumstances), can hardly ever exert any influence on the causes of its production. Indeed the manner in which these diseases are continually removed, without any previous inquiry that is really worthy of the name, is amongst the many grounds on which we found the opinion expressed in the sequel on the present state of medical surgery, as contrasted with that in which it was left by Abernethy. Now, while the gravity of the subject rendered the consideration of all tumours important, there was one which in an especial manner had eluded all efforts to expose its nature and dependencies—this was the justly-dreaded cancer. In regard to this, Mr. Abernethy hoped that further information might be obtained, by investigating other tumours more closely, and thus bringing, as he expresses it, collateral knowledge to bear on it, "like light shining from various places to illustrate the object of our researches."