SAMUEL GARTH was of a good family in Yorkshire, and from some school in
his own county became a student at Peter House, in Cambridge, where he
resided till he became Doctor of Physic on July the 7th, 1691. He was
examined before the College at London on March the 12th, 1691–2, and
admitted Fellow June 26th, 1693. He was soon so much distinguished by
his conversation and accomplishments as to obtain very extensive
practice; and, if a pamphlet of those times may be credited, had the
favour and confidence of one party, as Radcliffe had of the other. He is
always mentioned as a man of benevolence; and it is just to suppose that
his desire of helping the helpless disposed him to so much zeal for “The
Dispensary;” an undertaking of which some account, however short, is
proper to be given.
Whether what Temple says be true, that physicians have had more learning
than the other faculties, I will not stay to inquire; but I believe every
man has found in physicians great liberality and dignity of sentiment,
very prompt effusion of beneficence, and willingness to exert a lucrative
art where there is no hope of lucre. Agreeably to this character, the
College of Physicians, in July, 1687, published an edict, requiring all
the Fellows, Candidates, and Licentiates to give gratuitous advice to the
neighbouring poor. This edict was sent to the Court of Aldermen; and, a
question being made to whom the appellation of the _poor_ should be
extended, the College answered that it should be sufficient to bring a
testimonial from the clergyman officiating in the parish where the
patient resided.
After a year’s experience the physicians found their charity frustrated
by some malignant opposition, and made to a great degree vain by the high
price of physic; they therefore voted, in August, 1688, that the
laboratory of the College should be accommodated to the preparation of
medicines, and another room prepared for their reception; and that the
contributors to the expense should manage the charity.
It was now expected that the apothecaries would have undertaken the care
of providing medicines; but they took another course. Thinking the whole
design pernicious to their interest, they endeavoured to raise a faction
against it in the College, and found some physicians mean enough to
solicit their patronage by betraying to them the counsels of the College.
The greater part, however, enforced by a new edict, in 1694, the former
order of 1687, and sent it to the Mayor and Aldermen, who appointed a
committee to treat with the College and settle the mode of administering
the charity.
It was desired by the aldermen that the testimonials of churchwardens and
overseers should be admitted; and that all hired servants, and all
apprentices to handicraftsmen, should be considered as _poor_. This
likewise was granted by the College.
It was then considered who should distribute the medicines, and who
should settle their prices. The physicians procured some apothecaries to
undertake the dispensation, and offered that the warden and company of
the apothecaries should adjust the price. This offer was rejected; and
the apothecaries who had engaged to assist the charity were considered as
traitors to the company, threatened with the imposition of troublesome
offices, and deterred from the performance of their engagements. The
apothecaries ventured upon public opposition, and presented a kind of
remonstrance against the design to the committee of the City, which the
physicians condescended to confute: and at last the traders seem to have
prevailed among the sons of trade; for the proposal of the College having
been considered, a paper of approbation was drawn up, but postponed and
forgotten.
The physicians still persisted; and in 1696 a subscription was raised by
themselves according to an agreement prefixed to “The Dispensary.” The
poor were, for a time, supplied with medicines; for how long a time I
know not. The medicinal charity, like others, began with ardour, but
soon remitted, and at last died gradually away.
About the time of the subscription begins the action of “The Dispensary.”
The poem, as its subject was present and popular, co-operated with
passions and prejudices then prevalent, and, with such auxiliaries to its
intrinsic merit, was universally and liberally applauded. It was on the
side of charity against the intrigues of interest; and of regular
learning against licentious usurpation of medical authority, and was
therefore naturally favoured by those who read and can judge of poetry.
In 1697 Garth spoke that which is now called “The Harveian Oration;”
which the authors of “The Biographia” mention with more praise than the
passage quoted in their notes will fully justify. Garth, speaking of the
mischiefs done by quacks, has these expressions: “Non tamen telis
vulnerat ista agyrtarum colluvies, sed theriaca quâdam magis perniciosâ,
non pyrio, sed pulvere nescio quo exotico certat, non globulis plumbeis,
sed pilulis æque lethalibus interficit.” This was certainly thought fine
by the author, and is still admired by his biographer. In October, 1702,
he became one of the censors of the College.
Garth, being an active and zealous Whig, was a member of the Kit-Cat
Club, and, by consequence, familiarly known to all the great men of that
denomination. In 1710, when the government fell into other hands, he
writ to Lord Godolphin, on his dismission, a short poem, which was
criticised in the _Examiner_, and so successfully either defended or
excused by Mr. Addison that, for the sake of the vindication, it ought to
be preserved.
At the accession of the present family his merits were acknowledged and
rewarded. He was knighted with the sword of his hero, Marlborough; and
was made Physician-in-Ordinary to the King, and Physician-General to the
army. He then undertook an edition of Ovid’s “Metamorphoses,” translated
by several hands; which he recommended by a preface, written with more
ostentation than ability; his notions are half-formed, and his materials
immethodically confused. This was his last work. He died January 18th,
1717–18, and was buried at Harrow-on-the-Hill.
His personal character seems to have been social and liberal. He
communicated himself through a very wide extent of acquaintance; and
though firm in a party, at a time when firmness included virulence, yet
he imparted his kindness to those who were not supposed to favour his
principles. He was an early encourager of Pope, and was at once the
friend of Addison and of Granville. He is accused of voluptuousness and
irreligion; and Pope, who says that “if ever there was a good Christian,
without knowing himself to be so, it was Dr. Garth,” seems not able to
deny what he is angry to hear and loth to confess.
Pope afterwards declared himself convinced that Garth died in the
communion of the Church of Rome, having been privately reconciled. It is
observed by Lowth that there is less distance than is thought between
scepticism and Popery; and that a mind wearied with perpetual doubt,
willingly seeks repose in the bosom of an infallible Church.
His poetry has been praised at least equally to its merit. In “The
Dispensary” there is a strain of smooth and free versification; but few
lines are eminently elegant. No passages fall below mediocrity, and few
rise much above it. The plan seems formed without just proportion to the
subject; the means and end have no necessary connection. Resnel, in his
preface to Pope’s Essay, remarks that Garth exhibits no discrimination of
characters; and that what any one says might, with equal propriety, have
been said by another. The general design is, perhaps, open to criticism;
but the composition can seldom be charged with inaccuracy or negligence.
The author never slumbers in self-indulgence; his full vigour is always
exerted; scarcely a line is left unfinished; nor is it easy to find an
expression used by constraint, or a thought imperfectly expressed. It
was remarked by Pope, that “The Dispensary” had been corrected in every
edition, and that every change was an improvement. It appears, however,
to want something of poetical ardour, and something of general
delectation; and therefore, since it has been no longer supported by
accidental and intrinsic popularity, it has been scarcely able to support
itself.