80 Scutellaria lateriflora.
and nearly membranaceous. The branch-leaves are generally in
the proportion of one-half the size of those of the stem, partaking
of their variation in size, and becoming, like those of the stem,
semi-membranaceous in the shade. In exposed situations all the
leaves are strongly veined and somewhat wrinkled. This indeed
is an invariable character When the plant has enjoyed its natural or
favourite situations; any variation from it, as observable in the tall,
debile specimens obtained from dark-shaded places, being caused
by the influence of an uncongenial soil, and constant protection from
the sun. The proper juice of this plant is not uncommonly of a red
colour: hence the point of origin of the branches from the stem, the
petioles, and under sides of the leaves, and other parts of the herbage,
are often tinged with this hue.
Grows in damp places—in meadows, along the edges of pools, the
margins of ditches, rivulets, and the borders of larger waters, from
Canada to Carolina—very common. Flowers from July to September.
This is the second species of the genus Scutellaria described in this
work, and to the chapter on the first, S. hyssopifolia, reference is
made for an account of the genus. The present species has obtained
a notoriety which seldom falls to the lot of a plant so undeserving
of any esteem. It has been long held up to the public as possessing
Scutellaria lateriflora. 81
the power of preventing and curing hydrophobia. Nothing, however,
could be more vain or illusory than the expectation of accomplishing
by it either of these desirable objects, and considered in reference
to these ends, it is utterly worthless. For the reasons which justify
this assertion, the reader is referred to my essay on this subject
published in the February number of the Philadelphia Journal of the
Medical and Physical Sciences. By the facts there stated, it will
appear, that the boasted prophylactic and curative virtues of this
plant, in relation to the violent disease of hydrophobia, had their
origin many years ago, in charlatanical practice. And notwithstanding
the strenuous efforts which have been made to win professional
confidence in its reputation, very few educated physicians have been
seduced into so dangerous a delusion. Indeed, only two physicians,
well known to the members of the profession as being highly respectable,
have published any thing of importance in favour of the
plant. One of these, the author of a pamphlet published in New
York in October, 1819, containing such an exposition of the subject,
as justified the opinion, that he himself believed in its reputed
virtues, has, since its publication, declared, peremptorily, his
entire disbelief in its preventive or curative efficacy. Hence his publication
is nugatory. The other, a respectable compiler of a dispensatory,
has, unfortunately for the interests of medicine, and inconsistently
with his professional standing, afforded the authority of his name
and credence, to the preposterous story. It cannot be doubted, how