Dr. Elisha Perkins was born at Norwich, Connecticut, in the year 1740.

He had practised his profession with a good local reputation for many

years, when he fell upon a course of experiments, as it is related,

which led to his great discovery. He conceived the idea that metallic

substances might have the effect of removing diseases, if applied in

a certain manner; a notion probably suggested by the then recent

experiments of Galvani, in which muscular contractions were found to be

produced by the contact of two metals with the living fibre. It was in

1796 that his discovery was promulgated in the shape of the Metallic

Tractors, two pieces of metal, one apparently iron and the other brass,

about three inches long, blunt at one end and pointed at the other.

These instruments were applied for the cure of different complaints,

such as rheumatism, local pains, inflammations, and even tumors, by

drawing them over the affected part very lightly for about twenty

minutes. Dr. Perkins took out a patent for his discovery, and travelled

about the country to diffuse the new practice. He soon found numerous

advocates of his discovery, many of them of high standing and influence.

In the year 1798 the tractors had crossed the Atlantic, and were

publicly employed in the Royal Hospital at Copenhagen. About the same

time the son of the inventor, Mr. Benjamin Douglass Perkins, carried

them to London, where they soon attracted attention. The Danish

physicians published an account of their cases, containing numerous

instances of alleged success, in a respectable octavo volume. In the

year 1804 an establishment, honored with the name of the Perkinean

Institution, was founded in London. The transactions of this institution

were published in pamphlets, the Perkinean Society had public dinners

at the Crown and Anchor, and a poet celebrated their medical triumph in

strains like these:

“See, pointed metals, blest with power t' appease

The ruthless rage of merciless disease,

O'er the frail part a subtle fluid pour,

Drenched with invisible Galvanic shower,

Till the arthritic staff and crutch forego,

And leap exulting like the bounding roe!”

While all these things were going on, Mr. Benjamin Douglass Perkins was

calmly pocketing money, so that after some half a dozen years he left

the country with more than ten thousand pounds, which had been paid him

by the believers in Great Britain. But in spite of all this success, and

the number of those interested and committed in its behalf, Perkinism

soon began to decline, and in 1811 the Tractors are spoken of by an

intelligent writer as being almost forgotten. Such was the origin and

duration of this doctrine and practice, into the history of which we

will now look a little more narrowly.

Let us see, then, by whose agency this delusion was established and kept

up; whether it was principally by those who were accustomed to medical

pursuits, or those whose habits and modes of reasoning were different;

whether it was with the approbation of those learned bodies usually

supposed to take an interest in scientific discoveries, or only of

individuals whose claims to distinction were founded upon their position

in society, or political station, or literary eminence; whether the

judicious or excitable classes entered most deeply into it; whether, in

short, the scientific men of that time were deceived, or only intruded

upon, and shouted down for the moment by persons who had no particular

call to invade their precincts.

Not much, perhaps, was to be expected of the Medical Profession in the

way of encouragement. One Dr. Fuller, who wrote in England, himself

a Perkinist, thus expressed his opinion: “It must be an extraordinary

exertion of virtue and humanity for a medical man, whose livelihood

depends either on the sale of drugs, or on receiving a guinea for

writing a prescription, which must relate to those drugs, to say to

his patient, 'You had better purchase a set of Tractors to keep in your

family; they will cure you without the expense of my attendance, or the

danger of the common medical practice.' For very obvious reasons medical

men must never be expected to recommend the use of Perkinism. The

Tractors must trust for their patronage to the enlightened and

philanthropic out of the profession, or to medical men retired from

practice, and who know of no other interest than the luxury of relieving

the distressed. And I do not despair of seeing the day when but very few

of this description as well as private families will be without them.”

Whether the motives assigned by this medical man to his professional

brethren existed or not, it is true that Dr. Perkins did not gain a

great deal at their hands. The Connecticut Medical Society expelled him

in 1797 for violating their law against the use of nostrums, or secret

remedies. The leading English physicians appear to have looked on with

singular apathy or contempt at the miracles which it was pretended were

enacting in the hands of the apostles of the new practice. In looking

over the reviews of the time, I have found little beyond brief

occasional notices of their pretensions; the columns of these journals

being occupied with subjects of more permanent interest. The state of

things in London is best learned, however, from the satirical poem

to which I have already alluded as having been written at the period

referred to. This was entitled, “Terrible Tractoration!! A Poetical

Petition against Galvanizing Trumpery and the Perkinistic Institution.

Most respectfully addressed to the Royal College of Physicians, by

Christopher Caustic, M. D., LL. D., A. S. S., Fellow of the Royal

College of Physicians, Aberdeen, and Honorary Member of no less than

nineteen very learned Societies.” Two editions of this work were

published in London in the years 1803 and 1804, and one or two have been

published in this country.

“Terrible Tractoration” is supposed, by those who never read it, to be

a satire upon the follies of Perkins and his followers. It is, on the

contrary, a most zealous defence of Perkinism, and a fierce attack upon

its opponents, most especially upon such of the medical profession

as treated the subject with neglect or ridicule. The Royal College of

Physicians was the more peculiar object of the attack, but with this

body, the editors of some of the leading periodicals, and several

physicians distinguished at that time, and even now remembered for

their services to science and humanity, were involved in unsparing

denunciations. The work is by no means of the simply humorous character

it might be supposed, but is overloaded with notes of the most seriously

polemical nature. Much of the history of the subject, indeed, is to be

looked for in this volume.

It appears from this work that the principal members of the medical

profession, so far from hailing Mr. Benjamin Douglass Perkins as another

Harvey or Jenner, looked very coldly upon him and his Tractors; and it

is now evident that, though they were much abused for so doing, they

knew very well what they had to deal with, and were altogether in the

right. The delusion at last attracted such an amount of attention as to

induce Dr. Haygarth and some others of respectable standing to institute

some experiments which I shall mention in their proper place, the result

of which might have seemed sufficient to show the emptiness of the whole

contrivance.

The Royal Society, that learned body which for ages has constituted

the best tribunal to which Britain can appeal in questions of science,

accepted Mr. Perkins's Tractors and the book written about them, passed

the customary vote of thanks, and never thought of troubling itself

further in the investigation of pretensions of such an aspect. It is

not to be denied that a considerable number of physicians did avow

themselves advocates of the new practice; but out of the whole catalogue

of those who were publicly proclaimed as such, no one has ever been

known, so far as I am aware, to the scientific world, except in

connection with the short-lived notoriety of Perkinism. Who were

the people, then, to whose activity, influence, or standing with

the community was owing all the temporary excitement produced by the

Metallic Tractors?

First, those persons who had been induced to purchase a pair of

Tractors. These little bits of brass and iron, the intrinsic value of

which might, perhaps, amount to ninepence, were sold at five guineas a

pair! A man who has paid twenty-five dollars for his whistle is apt to

blow it louder and longer than other people. So it appeared that when

the “Perkinean Society” applied to the possessors of Tractors in the

metropolis to concur in the establishment of a public institution for

the use of these instruments upon the poor, “it was found that only five

out of above a hundred objected to subscribe, on account of their want

of confidence in the efficacy of the practice; and these,” the committee

observes, “there is reason to believe, never gave them a fair trial,

probably never used them in more than one case, and that perhaps a

case in which the Tractors had never been recommended as serviceable.”

“Purchasers of the Tractors,” said one of their ardent advocates, “would

be among the last to approve of them if they had reason to suppose

themselves defrauded of five guineas.” He forgot poor Moses, with his

“gross of green spectacles, with silver rims and shagreen cases.” “Dear

mother,” cried the boy, “why won't you listen to reason? I had them a

dead bargain, or I should not have bought them. The silver rims alone

will sell for double the money.”

But it is an undeniable fact, that many persons of considerable

standing, and in some instances holding the most elevated positions in

society, openly patronized the new practice. In a translation of a work

entitled “Experiments with the Metallic Tractors,” originally published

in Danish, thence rendered successively into German and English, Mr.

Benjamin Perkins, who edited the English edition, has given a copious

enumeration of the distinguished individuals, both in America and

Europe, whose patronage he enjoyed. He goes so far as to signify that

ROYALTY itself was to be included among the number. When the Perkinean

Institution was founded, no less a person than Lord Rivers was elected

President, and eleven other individuals of distinction, among them

Governor Franklin, son of Dr. Franklin, figured as Vice-Presidents. Lord

Henniker, a member of the Royal Society, who is spoken of as a man

of judgment and talents, condescended to patronize the astonishing

discovery, and at different times bought three pairs of Tractors. When

the Tractors were introduced into Europe, a large number of testimonials

accompanied them from various distinguished characters in America, the

list of whom is given in the translation of the Danish work referred to

as follows:

“Those who have individually stated cases, or who have presented their

names to the public as men who approved of this remedy, and acknowledged

themselves instrumental in circulating the Tractors, are fifty-six in

number; thirty-four of whom are physicians and surgeons, and many of

them of the first eminence, thirteen clergymen, most of whom are doctors

of divinity, and connected with the literary institutions of America;

among the remainder are two members of Congress, one professor of

natural philosophy in a college, etc., etc.” It seemed to be taken

rather hardly by Mr. Perkins that the translators of the work which he

edited, in citing the names of the advocates of the Metallic Practice,

frequently omitted the honorary titles which should have been annexed.

The testimonials were obtained by the Danish writer, from a pamphlet

published in America, in which these titles were given in full. Thus

one of these testimonials is from “John Tyler, Esq., a magistrate in the

county of New London, and late Brigadier-General of the militia in

that State.” The “omission of the General's title” is the subject of

complaint, as if this title were sufficient evidence of the commanding

powers of one of the patrons of tractoration. A similar complaint is

made when “Calvin Goddard, Esq., of Plainfield, Attorney at Law, and

a member of the Legislature of the State of Connecticut,” is mentioned

without his titular honors, and even on account of the omission of the

proper official titles belonging to “Nathan Pierce, Esq., Governor and

Manager of the Almshouse of Newburyport.” These instances show the great

importance to be attached to civil and military dignities, in qualifying

their holders to judge of scientific subjects, a truth which has not

been overlooked by the legitimate successors of the Perkinists. In Great

Britain, the Tractors were not less honored than in America, by the

learned and the illustrious. The “Perkinistic Committee” made this

statement in their report: “Mr. Perkins has annually laid before the

public a large collection of new cases communicated to him for that

purpose by disinterested and intelligent characters, from almost every

quarter of Great Britain. In regard to the competency of these vouchers,

it will be sufficient simply to state that, amongst others whose names

have been attached to their communications, are eight professors, in

four different universities, twenty-one regular Physicians, nineteen

Surgeons, thirty Clergymen, twelve of whom are Doctors of Divinity, and

numerous other characters of equal respectability.”

It cannot but excite our notice and surprise that the number of

clergymen both in America and Great Britain who thrust forward their

evidence on this medical topic was singularly large in proportion

to that of the members of the medical profession. Whole pages are

contributed by such worthies as the Rev. Dr. Trotter of Hans Place,

the Rear. Waring Willett, Chaplain to the Earl of Dunmore, the Rev.

Dr. Clarke, Chaplain to the Prince of Wales. The style of these

theologico-medical communications may be seen in the following from a

divine who was also professor in one of the colleges of New England.

“I have used the Tractors with success in several other cases in my

own family, and although, like Naaman the Syrian, I cannot tell why

the waters of Jordan should be better than Abana and Pharpar, rivers

of Damascus; yet since experience has proved them so, no reasoning

can change the opinion. Indeed, the causes of all common facts are, we

think, perfectly well known to us; and it is very probable, fifty or

a hundred years hence, we shall as well know why the Metallic Tractors

should in a few minutes remove violent pains, as we now know why

cantharides and opium will produce opposite effects, namely, we shall

know very little about either excepting facts.” Fifty or a hundred years

hence! if he could have looked forward forty years, he would have

seen the descendants of the “Perkinistic” philosophers swallowing

infinitesimal globules, and knowing and caring as much about the

Tractors as the people at Saratoga Springs do about the waters of Abana

and Pharpar.

I trust it will not be thought in any degree disrespectful to a

profession which we all honor, that I have mentioned the great zeal

of many clergymen in the cause of Perkinism. I hope, too, that I may

without offence suggest the causes which have often led them out of

their own province into one to which their education has no special

reference. The members of that profession ought to be, and commonly are,

persons of benevolent character. Their duties carry them into the midst

of families, and particularly at times when the members of them are

suffering from bodily illness. It is natural enough that a strong desire

should be excited to alleviate sufferings which may have defied

the efforts of professional skill; as natural that any remedy which

recommends itself to the belief or the fancy of the spiritual physician

should be applied with the hope of benefit; and perfectly certain that

the weakness of human nature, from which no profession is exempt,

will lead him to take the most flattering view of its effects upon the

patient; his own sagacity and judgment being staked upon the success of

the trial. The inventor of the Tractors was aware of these truths. He

therefore sent the Tractors gratuitously to many clergymen, accompanied

with a formal certificate that the holder had become entitled to their

possession by the payment of five guineas. This was practised in our

own neighborhood, and I remember finding one of these certificates,

so presented, which proved that amongst the risks of infancy I had to

encounter Perkins's Tractors. Two clergymen of Boston and the vicinity,

both well known to local fame, gave in their testimony to the value

of the instruments thus presented to them; an unusually moderate

proportion, when it is remembered that to the common motives of which

I have spoken was added the seduction of a gift for which the profane

public was expected to pay so largely.

It was remarkable, also, that Perkinism, which had so little success

with the medical and scientific part of the community, found great favor

in the eyes of its more lovely and less obstinate portion. “The lady of

Major Oxholin,”--I quote from Mr. Perkins's volume,--“having been lately

in America, had seen and heard much of the great effects of Perkinism.

Influenced by a most benevolent disposition, she brought these Tractors

and the pamphlet with her to Europe, with a laudable desire of extending

their utility to her suffering countrymen.” Such was the channel by

which the Tractors were conveyed to Denmark, where they soon became the

ruling passion. The workmen, says a French writer, could not manufacture

them fast enough. Women carried them about their persons, and delighted

in bringing them into general use. To what extent the Tractors were

favored with the patronage of English and American ladies, it is of

course not easy to say, except on general principles, as their names

were not brought before the public. But one of Dr. Haygarth's stories

may lead us to conjecture that there was a class of female practitioners

who went about doing good with the Tractors in England as well as in

Denmark. A certain lady had the misfortune to have a spot as big as a

silver penny at the corner of her eye, caused by a bruise, or some such

injury. Another lady, who was a friend of hers, and a strong believer in

Perkinism, was very anxious to try the effects of tractoration upon

this unfortunate blemish. The patient consented; the lady “produced the

instruments, and, after drawing them four or five times over the spot,

declared that it changed to a paler color, and on repeating the use of

them a few minutes longer, that it had almost vanished, and was scarcely

visible, and departed in high triumph at her success.” The lady who

underwent the operation assured the narrator “that she looked in the

glass immediately after, and that not the least visible alteration had

taken place.”

It would be a very interesting question, what was the intellectual

character of those persons most conspicuous in behalf of the Perkinistic

delusion? Such an inquiry might bring to light some principles which

we could hereafter apply to the study of other popular errors. But the

obscurity into which nearly all these enthusiasts have subsided renders

the question easier to ask than to answer. I believe it would have

been found that most of these persons were of ardent temperament and

of considerable imagination, and that their history would show

that Perkinism was not the first nor the last hobby-horse they rode

furiously. Many of them may very probably have been persons of more than

common talent, of active and ingenious minds, of versatile powers and

various acquirements. Such, for instance, was the estimable man to whom

I have repeatedly referred as a warm defender of tractoration, and

a bitter assailant of its enemies. The story tells itself in the

biographical preface to his poem. He went to London with the view

of introducing a hydraulic machine, which he and his Vermont friends

regarded as a very important invention. He found, however, that the

machine was already in common use in that metropolis. A brother Yankee,

then in London, had started the project of a mill, which was to be

carried by the water of the Thames. He was sanguine enough to purchase

one fifth of this concern, which also proved a failure. At about the

same period he wrote the work which proved the great excitement of his

mind upon the subject of the transient folly then before the public.

Originally a lawyer, he was in succession a mechanician, a poet, and an

editor, meeting with far less success in each of these departments

than usually attends men of less varied gifts, but of more tranquil and

phlegmatic composition. But who is ignorant that there is a class of

minds characterized by qualities like those I have mentioned; minds with

many bright and even beautiful traits; but aimless and fickle as the

butterfly; that settle upon every gayly-colored illusion as it opens

into flower, and flutter away to another when the first has dropped its

leaves, and stands naked in the icy air of truth!

Let us now look at the general tenor of the arguments addressed by

believers to sceptics and opponents. Foremost of all, emblazoned at the

head of every column, loudest shouted by every triumphant disputant,

held up as paramount to all other considerations, stretched like an

impenetrable shield to protect the weakest advocate of the great cause

against the weapons of the adversary, was that omnipotent monosyllable

which has been the patrimony of cheats and the currency of dupes from

time immemorial,--Facts! Facts! Facts! First came the published cases

of the American clergymen, brigadier-generals, almshouse governors,

representatives, attorneys, and esquires. Then came the published

cases of the surgeons of Copenhagen. Then followed reports of about

one hundred and fifty cases published in England, “demonstrating the

efficacy of the metallic practice in a variety of complaints both upon

the human body and on horses, etc.” But the progress of facts in Great

Britain did not stop here. Let those who rely upon the numbers of their

testimonials, as being alone sufficient to prove the soundness and

stability of a medical novelty, digest the following from the report

of the Perkinistic Committee. “The cases published [in Great Britain]

amounted, in March last, the date of Mr. Perkins's last publication,

to about five thousand. Supposing that not more than one cure in three

hundred which the Tractors have performed has been published, and the

proportion is probably much greater, it will be seen that the number, to

March last, will have exceeded one million five hundred thousand!”

Next in order after the appeal to what were called facts, came a series

of arguments, which have been so long bruised and battered round in the

cause of every doctrine or pretension, new, monstrous, or deliriously

impossible, that each of them is as odiously familiar to the scientific

scholar as the faces of so many old acquaintances, among the less

reputable classes, to the officers of police.

No doubt many of my hearers will recognize, in the following passages,

arguments they may have heard brought forward with triumphant confidence

in behalf of some doctrine not yet extinct. No doubt some may have

honestly thought they proved something; may have used them with the

purpose of convincing their friends, or of silencing the opponents

of their favorite doctrine, whatever that might be. But any train

of arguments which was contrived for Perkinism, which was just as

applicable to it as to any other new doctrine in the same branch of

science, and which was fully employed against its adversaries forty

years since, might, in common charity, be suffered to slumber in the

grave of Perkinism. Whether or not the following sentences, taken

literally from the work of Mr. Perkins, were the originals of some of

the idle propositions we hear bandied about from time to time, let those

who listen judge.

The following is the test assumed for the new practice: “If diseases are

really removed, as those persons who have practised extensively with

the Tractors declare, it should seem there would be but little doubt

of their being generally adopted; but if the numerous reports of their

efficacy which have been published are forgeries, or are unfounded,

the practice ought to be crushed.” To this I merely add, it has been

crushed.

Medical Essays, 1842-1882 · 第 2 / 31 段