To Dr. Baylies, Physician and Privy-Counsellor to his Prussian
Majesty at Berlin.
London, March 10, 1777.
Dear Sir,
Please to accept my thanks for a very polite letter and a book, both
which I received from my learned friend, Dr. Watson. But I am greatly
chagrined to find, on the perusal of the French translation of my
answers to the queries, that by the insertion of words, not to be found
in what I wrote, not only the sense of my answer is perverted, but I am
made to speak what is not true, and to give an opinion contrary to my
own sentiments, and the experience of every one in the least acquainted
with the small-pox.
What follows will convince you, Sir, that my complaint is well founded,
and I confide in your honour, for taking the most effectual steps to
prevent the injury my character would sustain, if the mistake should
not be rectified.
You will please to observe, that at the conclusion of the case
transmitted to me, there were three queries, to each of which I
gave distinct answers. The third query is: “Or were the _pustulary
eruptions_ that shewed themselves on the 12th day of the disease, a
critical discharge of a putrid, or other kind of fever?” In my answer,
having first remarked that the patient passed through the inoculated
disease in a regular manner, I say in reply to the above-mentioned
query.
“After which he was seized with a disease, that I have not the least
doubt was a fever of the putrid kind; but I do not think that _the
pustulary eruptions_ can with propriety be deemed critical, as _they
did not terminate_ the disease: I rather esteem them to have been marks
or tokens of great malignity and anger.”
The French translation stands thus.
Q. “Ou les pustules qui ont paru le 12me jour de la maladie ont elles
été l’evacuation critique d’une fievre putride, ou d’une autre espece
de fievre?”
Reponse. “Ce n’est qu’au bout de ce tems qu’il a été attaqué d’une
maladie, que je crois, sans balancer, avoir été une espece de fievre
putride. Il ne faut cependant pas, selon moi, considerer _les pustules
de la petite vérole_, comme une crise, parce _qu’elle ne leve pas_ la
maladie; au contraire je les regarde comme les marques d’une grande
malignité et d’un grand danger, ouse trouve le patient.”
The perusal of the above will certainly satisfy you of the justness of
my complaint, and I shall wait with impatience for your answer, which
I make no doubt will be such as is consistent with your honour and
character.
It gives me real concern to find, on reading the book you favoured
me with, that you meet with such opposition in the practice of
inoculation, notwithstanding it is so apparently beneficial to mankind;
and particularly, that gentlemen of the first rank in the medical
profession, should find it so difficult to divest themselves of
unreasonable prejudices: but in the end truth will prevail.