LAENNEC, MARTYR TO SCIENCE.

On August 13, 1826, there died at Quimper in Brittany at the early age

of forty-five, one of the greatest physicians of all time. His name,

Rene Theodore Laennec, was destined to be forever associated with one

of the most fruitful advances in medicine that has ever been made, and

one which practically introduced the modern era of scientific

diagnosis. At the present time the most interesting phase of medical

development is concerned with the early recognition and the prevention

of tuberculosis. To Laennec more than to any other is due all the data

which enable the physician of the twentieth century to make the

diagnosis of tuberculosis with assurance, and to treat it with more

confidence than before, and so prevent its spread as far as that is

possible.

The history of pulmonary consumption in its most modern phase is

centred around the names of three men, Laennec, Villemin, and Koch. To

Laennec will forever belong the honor of having fixed definitely the

clinical picture of the disease, and of having separated it by means

of auscultation and his pathological studies from all similar

affections of the lungs. Villemin showed that it was an infectious

disease, absolutely specific in character, and capable of transmission

by inoculation from man to the animal. To Koch the world owes the

knowledge of the exact cause of the disease and consequently of the

practical method for preventing its spread. The isolation of the

bacillus of tuberculosis is the great triumph of the end of the

nineteenth century, as the separation of the disease from all others

by Laennec was the triumph of the beginning of that century. There is

{136} still room for a fourth name in the list, that of the man who

will discover a specific remedy for the disease. It is to be hoped

that his coming will not be long delayed.

The estimation in which Laennec was held by the most distinguished

among his contemporaries, may be very well appreciated from the

opinions expressed with regard to him and his work by the best-known

Irish and English clinical observers of the period. Dr. William

Stokes, who was himself, as we shall see, one of the most important

contributors to our clinical knowledge of diseases of the heart and

lungs in the nineteenth century, said with regard to the great French

clinician whom he considered his master:

"Time has shown that the introduction of auscultation and its

subsidiary physical signs has been one of the greatest boons ever

conferred by the genius of man on the world.

"A new era in medicine has been marked by a new science, depending

on the immutable laws of physical phenomena, and, like the

discoveries founded on such a basis, simple in its application and

easily understood--a gift of science to a favored son; one by which

the ear is converted into the eye, the hidden recesses of visceral

disease open to view; a new guide to the treatment, and a new help

to the ready detection, prevention and cure of the most widely

spread diseases which affect mankind."

Dr. Addison, who is best known by the disease which since his original

description has been called by his name, was no less enthusiastic in

praise of Laennec's work. He said:

"Were I to affirm that Laennec contributed more toward the

advancement of the medical art than any other single individual,

either of ancient or of modern times, I should probably be advancing

a proposition which, in the estimation of many, is neither

extravagant nor unjust. His work, {137} _De l'Auscultation Mediate_,

will ever remain a monument of genius, industry, modesty and truth.

It is a work in perusing which every succeeding page only tends to

increase our admiration of the man, to captivate our attention, and

to command our confidence. We are led insensibly to the bedside of

his patients; we are startled by the originality of his system; we

can hardly persuade ourselves that any means so simple can

accomplish so much, can overcome and reduce to order the chaotic

confusion of thoracic pathology; and hesitate not in the end to

acknowledge our unqualified wonder at the triumphant confirmation of

all he professed to accomplish."

These tributes to Laennec, however, from men who were his

contemporaries across the channel, have been more than equalled by

distinguished physicians on both sides of the Atlantic at the end of

the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century. While we

might hesitate to accept the opinions of those who had been so close

to him at the beginning of the new era of physical diagnosis, there

can be no doubt now, after the lapse of three-quarters of a century,

of what Laennec's influence really was, and the tributes of the

twentieth century place him among the few great geniuses to whom

scientific medicine owes its most important advance.

At the annual meeting of the State Medical Society of New York held in

Albany at the end of January, 1903, the president of the society,

Doctor Henry L. Elsner, of Syracuse, in his annual address devoted

some paragraphs to a panegyric of Laennec. He wished to call attention

to what had been accomplished for scientific medicine at the beginning

of the last century by a simple observant practitioner. In the course

of his references to Laennec and his work he said:

"It is by no means to be considered an accident that, {138} among

the greatest advances in medicine made during the century just

closed, the introduction of pathological anatomy and auscultation

into the practice of medicine at the bedside were both effected by

the same clear mind, Laennec. He is one of the greatest physicians

of all time."

He then quoted the opinion of a distinguished English clinician,

Professor T. Clifford Allbutt, who is well known, especially for his

knowledge of the history of medicine. Professor Allbutt is the Regius

Professor of Physic (a term about equivalent to our practice of

medicine) of Cambridge University, England, and was invited to this

country some years ago as the representative of English medicine to

deliver the Lane lectures in San Francisco. During his stay in this

country he delivered a lecture at Johns Hopkins University on

"Medicine in the Nineteenth Century," in which he said, "Laennec gives

me the impression of being one of the greatest physicians in history;

one who deserves to stand by the side of Hippocrates and Galen, Harvey

and Sydenham. Without the advances of pathology Laennec's work could

not have been done; it was a revelation of the anatomy of the internal

organs during the life of the patient."

Rene Theodore Hyacinthe Laennec, who is thus conceded by twentieth

century medicine a place among the world's greatest medical

discoverers, was born February 17, 1781, at Quimper in Bretagne, that

rocky province at the north of France which has been the sturdy

nursing mother of so many pure Celtic Frenchmen who have so mightily

influenced the thought not only of their own country but of all the

world. The names of such Bretons as Renan and Lamennais have a

universal reputation and the province was even more distinguished for

its scientists.

There was published [Footnote 2] a few years ago in France a detailed

{139} history of Breton physicians. This work sketches the lives of

the physicians of Breton birth from the sixteenth to the twentieth

century. Only those of the nineteenth century concern us, but the list

even for this single century includes such distinguished names as

Broussais, whose ideas in physiology dominated medicine for nearly

the whole of the first half of the nineteenth century; Jobert, the

famous French surgeon whose reputation was world-wide; Alphonse

Guerin, another distinguished surgeon, whose work in the protection of

wounds in some respects anticipated that of Lister; Chassaignac, to

whose inventive genius surgery owes new means of preventing hemorrhage

and purulent infection, and who introduced the great principle of

surgical drainage; finally Maisonneuve, almost a contemporary, whose

name is a household word to the surgeons of the present generation;

without mentioning for the moment the subject of this sketch, Laennec,

the greatest of them all. Six greater men never came from one province

in the same limited space of time.

[Footnote 2: Les Medecins Bretons par Dr. Jules Roger. Paris, J. B.

Bailliere, 1900.]

Bretagne, "the land of granite covered with oaks" as the Bretons love

to call it, may well be proud of its illustrious sons in the century

just past. Taken altogether they form a striking example of how much

the world owes to the children of the countryside who, born far from

the hurrying bustle of city life, do not have their energies sapped

before the proper time for their display comes. These Bretagne

physicians, illustrious discoverers and ever faithful workers, are at

the same time a generous tribute to the influence of the simple,

honest sincerity of well-meaning parents whose religious faith was the

well-spring of humble, model lives that formed a striking example for

their descendants. The foundations of many a great reputation were

laid in the simple village homes, far from the turmoil and the

excitement of the fuller {140} life of great cities. The Bretons are

but further examples of the fact that for genuine success in life the

most precious preparation is residence in the country in childhood and

adolescent years. The country districts of Normandy, the province

lying just next to Bretagne, have furnished even more than their share

of the Paris successes of the century, and have seen the Norman

country boys the leaders of thought at the capital.

Laennec's father was a man of culture and intelligence, who, though a

lawyer, devoted himself more to literature than his case books. His

poetry is said to recall one of his better known compatriots,

Deforges-Maillard. Laennec was but six years old when his mother died.

His father seems to have felt himself too much preoccupied with his

own work to assume the education of his son, and so the boy Laennec

was placed under the guardianship of his grand-uncle, the Abbe

Laennec, and lived with him for some years in the parish house at

Elliant.

A relative writing of Laennec after his death says that the boy had

the good fortune to be thus happily started on his path in life by a

hand that was at once firm and sure. The training given him at this

time was calculated to initiate him in the best possible way into

those habits of application that made it possible for him to make

great discoveries in after life. The boy was delicate besides, and the

house of the good old rector-uncle was an excellent place for him,

because of its large and airy rooms and the thoroughly hygienic

condition in which it was kept. Household hygiene was not as common in

those days as in our own and child mortality was higher, but the

delicate boy thrived under the favorable conditions.

Besides the parish house was situated in the midst of a beautiful

country. The perfectly regular and rather serious {141} life of the

place was singularly well adapted to develop gradually and with due

progression the precious faculties of a young, active mind and

observant intelligence. This development was accomplished besides

without any excitement or worry and without any of the violent

contrasts or precocious disillusions of city life.

The boy passed some four or five years with his grand-uncle the priest

and then went to finish his studies with a brother of his father, Dr.

Laennec, a physician who has left a deservedly honored name. At this

time Dr. Laennec was a member of the Faculty of Medicine at the

University of Nantes. The growing lad seems to have been wonderfully

successful in his studies, and a number of prizes gained at school

show how deeply he was interested in his work. During this time he

learned English and German and became really ready to begin the study

of the higher sciences. Besides working at his academic studies,

Laennec paid some attention to his uncle in his professional work, and

by careful observation laid the foundation of his medical studies. His

character as an observer, rather than a student of books, showed

itself very early. He devoted himself to the clinical investigation of

cases in the military hospital and was especially interested in the

study of anatomy.

In 1800, at the age of nineteen, he went to Paris. It was typical of

the man and his careful, thoroughness all through life that the first

impulse when he found himself free to work for himself, was to try to

make up for what he considered defects in his elementary studies. It

must not be forgotten that the ten years of Laennec's life, from his

tenth to his twentieth year, came in the stormy time of the French

Revolution, and that school regularity was very much disturbed. His

first care then was to take up the study of Latin again. He learned to

read and write the language with elegance and {142} purity. Later on,

occasionally, he delivered his clinical lectures, especially when

foreigners were present, in Latin. We shall have the occasion to see

before the end of this article, with what easy grace he learned to use

it from some passages of the preface of his book written in that

language.

He did not allow his accessory studies, however, to interfere with his

application to his professional work. He was one of those rare men who

knew how to rest his mind by turning it from one occupation to

another. When scarcely more than a year in Paris, Laennec secured the

two first prizes for medicine and surgery in the medical department of

the University of Paris. In 1804 he wrote two medical theses, one of

them in Latin, the other in French. The subject of both was

Hippocrates, the great Greek father of medicine, whom Laennec admired

very much and whose method of clinical observation was to prove the

key-note of the success of Laennec's own medical career.

At this time the Paris school of medicine had two great rival

teachers. One of them was Corvisart, who endeavored to keep up the

traditions of Hippocrates and taught especially the necessity for

careful observation of disease. The other was Pinel, famous in our

time mainly for having stricken the manacles from the insane in the

asylums of Paris, but who was known to his contemporaries as a great

exponent of what may be called "Philosophic Medicine." Corvisart

taught principally practical medicine at the bedside; Pinel mainly the

theory of medicine by the analysis of diseased conditions and their

probable origin.

Needless to say, Laennec's sympathies were all with Corvisart. He

became a favorite pupil of this great master, who did so much for

scientific medicine by introducing the method of percussion, invented

nearly half a century before by Auenbrugger, but forgotten and

neglected, so that it {143} would surely have been lost but for the

distinguished Frenchman's rehabilitation of its practice. Corvisart

was a man of great influence. He had caught Napoleon's eye. The great

Emperor of the French had the knack for choosing men worthy of the

confidence he wished to place in them. His unerring judgment in this

matter led him to select Corvisart as his personal physician at a

moment when his selection was of the greatest service to practical

medicine, for no one was doing better scientific work at the time, and

this quasi-court position at once gave Corvisart's ideas a vogue they

would not otherwise have had.

Corvisart's most notable characteristic was a sympathetic

encouragement of the work of others, especially in what concerned

actual bedside observation. Laennec was at once put in most favorable

circumstances, then, for his favorite occupation of studying the

actualities of disease on the living patient and at the autopsy. For

nearly ten years he devoted himself almost exclusively to the care and

study of hospital patients. In 1812 he was made physician to the

Beaujon Hospital, Paris. Four years later he was transferred to the

Necker Hospital, where he was destined to bring his great researches

to a successful issue. To the Necker Hospital, before long, students

from all over the world flocked to his clinical lectures, to keep

themselves in touch with the great discoveries the youthful master was

making. In spite of rather delicate health Laennec fulfilled his

duties of physician and professor with scrupulous exactitude and with

a self-sacrificing devotion that was, unfortunately, to prove

detrimental to his health before very long.

One of his contemporaries says of him:

"Laennec was almost an ideal teacher. He talked very easily and his

lesson was always arranged with logical method, clearness and

simplicity. He disdained utterly {144} all the artifices of oratory.

He knew, however, how to give his lectures a charm of their own. It

was as if he were holding a conversation with those who heard him

and they were interested every moment of the time that he talked, so

full were his lectures of practical instruction."

Another of his contemporaries says, naively: "At the end of the lesson

we did not applaud, because it was not the custom. Very few, however,

who heard him once, failed to promise themselves the pleasure of

assisting at others of his lectures."

The work on which Laennec's fame depended and the discovery with which

his name, in the words of our great American diagnostician, Austin

Flint, the elder, will live to the end of time was concerned with the

practice of auscultation. This is the method of listening to the

sounds produced in the chest when air is inspired and expired in

health and disease, and also to the sound produced by the heart and

its valves in health and disease. Nearly two centuries ago, in 1705,

an old medical writer quoted by Walshe, in his "Treatise on the

Disease of the Lungs and Heart" said very quaintly but very shrewdly:

"Who knows but that one may discover the works performed in the

several offices and shops of a man's body by the sounds they make and

thereby discover what instrument or engine is out of order!"

It was just this that Laennec did. He solved the riddle of the sounds

within the human workshop, to continue the quaint old figure, and

pointed out which were the results of health and which of disease. Not

only this, but he showed the difference between the sounds produced in

health and disease by those different engines, the lungs and the

heart. The way in which he was led to devote his attention originally

to the subject of auscultation is described by Laennec himself with a

simplicity and directness so charmingly characteristic {145} of the

man, of his thoroughly Christian modesty, of his solicitude for even

the slightest susceptibility of others and of his prompt inventive

readiness, that none of his biographers has been able to resist the

temptation to quote his own words with regard to the interesting

incident, and so we feel that we must give them here.

He says:

"In 1816 I was consulted by a young person who was laboring under

the general symptoms of a diseased heart. In her case percussion and

the application of the hand (what modern doctors call palpation)

were of little service because of a considerable degree of

stoutness. The other method, that namely of listening to the sounds

within the chest by the direct application of the ear to the chest

wall, being rendered inadmissible by the age and sex of the patient,

I happened to recollect a simple and well-known fact in acoustics

and fancied it might be turned to some use on the present occasion.

The fact I allude to is the great distinctness with which we hear

the scratch of a pin at one end of a piece of wood on applying our

ear to the other.

"Immediately on the occurrence of this idea I rolled a quire of

paper into a kind of cylinder and applied one end of it to the

region of the heart and the other to my ear. I was not a little

surprised and pleased to find that I could thereby perceive the

action of the heart in a manner much more clear and distinct than I

had ever been able to do by the immediate application of the ear.

"From this moment I imagined that the circumstance might furnish

means for enabling us to ascertain the character not only of the

action of the heart, but of every species of sound produced by the

motion of all the thoracic viscera, and consequently for the

exploration of the respiration, the voice, the _rales_ and perhaps

even the fluctuation of fluid effused in the pleura or pericardium.

With this conviction I forthwith {146} commenced at the Necker

Hospital a series of observations from which I have been able to

deduce a set of new signs of the diseases of the chest. These are

for the most part certain, simple and prominent, and calculated

perhaps, to render the diagnosis of the diseases of the lungs, heart

and pleura as decided and circumstantial as the indications

furnished to the surgeons by the finger or sound, in the complaints

wherein these are of use."

This is the unassuming way in which Laennec announces his great

discovery. He did not in modern fashion immediately cry "Eureka!" and

announce the far-reaching importance of his method of diagnosis. For

two years he devoted himself to the patient study of the application

of his method and the appreciation of its possibilities and its

limitations. Then he presented a simple memoir to the French Academy

of Sciences on the subject. A committee of three, then distinguished

members of the Academy, Doctors Portal, Pelletan and Percy were named

to investigate the new discovery.

It is rather interesting to notice, though almost needless to say,

that the names of these men would be now absolutely unremembered in

medical history but for the fortuitous circumstance that made them

Laennec's investigators. Such is too often the ephemeralness of

contemporary reputation. Fortunately for the committee, they reported

favorably upon Laennec's discoveries. It is not always true of new and

really great advances in medicine that they are received with proper

appreciation upon their first announcement. Even Harvey said of his

discovery of the circulation of the blood that he expected no one of

any reputation in his own generation to accept it. It is not very

surprising to find then in the matter of the Laennec investigators

that there is a cautious reserve in their report, showing that they

were not too ready {147} to commit themselves to a decided opinion on

the importance of the new discovery, nor to any irretrievable

commendation.

The important part of the discovery was supposed to consist in the use

of the wooden cylinder which Laennec came to employ instead of the

roll of paper originally used. This wooden cylinder, now familiar to

us under the excellent name invented for it by Laennec himself is the

modern single stethoscope. This instrument is of great service. The

really important part of Laennec's work, however, was not the

invention of the stethoscope, but the exact observation of the changes

of the breath sounds that could be noted with it in various forms of

chest diseases.

Laennec succeeded in pointing out how each one of the various diseases

of the heart and lungs might be recognized from every other. Before

his time, most of the diseases of the lungs, if accompanied with any

tendency to fever particularly, were called lung fever. He showed the

difference between bronchitis and pneumonia, pneumonia and pleurisy,

and the various forms of tuberculosis and even the rarer pathological

conditions of the lung, such as cancer, or the more familiar

conditions usually not associated with fever, emphysema, and some of

the forms of retraction.

With regard to heart disease, it was before Laennec's discovery almost

a sealed chapter in practical medicine. It was known that people died

from heart disease often and, not infrequently, without much warning.

The possibility that heart conditions could be separated one from

another, and that some of them could be proved to be comparatively

harmless, some of them liable to cause lingering illness, while others

were surely associated with the probability of sudden fatal

termination, was scarcely dreamed of. It is to Laennec's introduction

of auscultation that modern medicine owes all its exacter knowledge of

heart lesions and their {148} significance. He himself did not solve

all the mysteries of sound here as he did in the lungs; indeed, he

made some mistakes that render him more sympathetic because they bring

him down to the level of our humanity. He did make important

discoveries with regard to heart disease, and his method of diagnosis

during his own life was, in the hands of the Irish school of medicine,

to prove the key to the problems of disease he failed to unlock.

Almost at once Laennec's method of auscultation attracted widespread

attention. From Germany, from Italy, from England, even from the

United States, in those days when our medical men had so few

opportunities to go abroad, medical students and physicians went to

Paris to study the method under the direction of the master himself

and to learn from him his admirable technique of auscultation. Those

who came found that the main thing to be seen was the patient

observation given to every case and Laennec's admirably complete

examination of each condition. The services to diagnosis rendered by

the method were worthy of the enthusiasm it aroused. Only the work of

Pasteur has attracted corresponding attention during the nineteenth

century. Physicians practice auscultation so much as a matter of

course now that it is hard to understand what an extreme novelty it

was in 1820, and how much it added to the confidence of practitioners

in their diagnosis of chest diseases.

Bouilland said, with an enthusiasm that does not go beyond literal

truth, "A sense was lacking in medicine and I would say, if I dared,

that Laennec the creator, by a sort of divine delegation of a new

sense, supplied the long-felt want. The sense which medicine lacked

was hearing. Sight and touch had already been developed in the service

of medical diagnosis. Hearing was more important than the other two

senses, and in giving it to scientific medicine Laennec disclosed a

new {149} world of knowledge destined to complete the rising science

of diagnosis."

Henri Roger said: "Laennec in placing his ear on the chest of his

patient heard for the first time in the history of human disease the

cry of suffering organs. First of all, he learned to know the

variations in their cries and the expressive modulations of the

air-carrying tubes and the orifices of the heart that indicate the

points where all is not well. He was the first to understand and to

make others realize the significance of this pathological language,

which, until then, had been misunderstood or, rather, scarcely

listened to. Henceforth, the practitioner of medicine, endowed with

one sense more than before and with his power of investigation

materially increased, could read for himself the alterations hidden in

the depths of the organism. His ear opened to the mind a new world in

medical science."

The freely expressed opinions of distinguished German, English and

American physicians show that these enthusiastic praises from his

French compatriots are well deserved by Laennec for the beautifully

simple, yet wonderfully fecund method that he placed before the

medical profession in all its completeness.

The first employment of the stethoscope by rolling up sheets of paper

is of itself a sign of his readiness of invention. He made his own

stethoscopes by hand and liked to spend his leisure time fashioning

them carefully and even ornately. One of the stethoscopes certainly

used by him and probably made by himself is to be seen at the Museum

of the College of Physicians of Philadelphia.

After three years of study and patient investigation of the use of

auscultation in pulmonary and cardiac diagnosis, Laennec wrote his

book on the subject. This is an immortal work--a true classic in its

complete treatment of the subject. {150} We have had thousands of

books written on the subject since Laennec's time, and yet no

physician could do better at the present moment than study Laennec's

two comparatively small volumes to learn the art of physical

diagnosis.

It is a characteristic of genius to give a completeness to work that

endows it with an enduring independent vitality. Almost innumerable

disciples follow in the footsteps of a teacher, and each thinks that

he adds something to the fulness of the revelation made by the master.

At the end of a century the fourth generation finds that scarcely

anything has been added and that the master's work alone stands out,

not merely as the great central fact of the new theory or doctrine,

but as the absolute vital entity to which the other supposed

discoveries are only adventitious and not entirely indispensable

accessories.

Dr. Austin Flint, the elder, admittedly one of the greatest

diagnosticians in pulmonary and heart diseases that we have ever had

in America, said on this subject: "Suffice it to say here that,

although during the forty years that have elapsed since the

publication of Laennec's works the application of physical exploration

has been considerably extended and rendered more complete in many of

its details, the fundamental truths presented by the discoverer of

auscultation not only remain as a basis of the new science, but for a

large portion of the existing superstructure. Let the student become

familiar with all that is now known on this subject, and he will then

read the writings of Laennec with amazement that there remained so

little to be altered or added."

Laennec's unremitting devotion to his hospital work finally impaired

his health. He was never robust and strangers who came to Paris and

saw him for the first time wondered that he should be able to stand

the labor he required of himself. The portraits of him give a good

impression of {151} his ascetic delicacy; they convey besides a

certain wistfulness, the look of one close to human suffering, and

unable to do all that he would wish to relieve it. Long before his

discovery of the mysteries of auscultation, he had accomplished

results that of themselves, and without his subsequent master

discovery, would have given him an enduring name in medical

literature. Laennec's genius enabled him to make a really great

discovery, but Laennec's talent, the principal part of which was an

inexhaustible faculty for untiring labor, an infinite capacity for

taking pains with all that he did, enabled him to make a number of

smaller discoveries any one of which would have given a great

reputation to a lesser man.

Some idea of the amount of work that he did in preparing himself for

the observations that were to result in his discovery may be gathered

from details of his earlier career. During the first three years of

his attendance at La Charite Hospital in Paris he drew up a minute

history of nearly four hundred cases of disease. As early as 1805 he

read a paper on hydatid cysts. These cysts were formerly thought to be

hollow tumors formed within the tissues themselves somewhat as other

cystic tumors are formed. Laennec showed conclusively that their

origin was entirely due to certain worms that had become parasites in

human beings. The cysts instead of being tumors were really one stage

of the worm's existence, and had an organization and an independent

existence of their own. He gave an exact description of them and even

showed that there were several types of the parasite, and described

the different changes that various forms produced in the human

tissues. This study of the hydatid parasites remains a remarkable

contribution to medicine down even to our own day.

During these early years Laennec devoted himself particularly to the

study of pathology. Like all the men who {152} have made great

discoveries in medicine he understood that all true medical advance

must be founded on actual observation of the changes caused by disease

in the tissues, and that this knowledge can only be obtained in the

autopsy room. For years he devoted himself to the faithful study of

the tissues of patients dead from various forms of disease. He wrote

as the result of this work a treatise on peritonitis that was a

distinct advance over anything known before his time and which, in the

words of Benjamin Ward Richardson, "as a pathological study was

shrewdly in anticipation of the later work of one who became his most

formidable rival, the famous Broussais."

From the peritoneum his attention was attracted to the liver. As early

as 1804 he wrote a description of the membranes of the liver.

Pathological changes in the liver continued to occupy his attention

for some time, and it is to him we owe the name cirrhosis of the

liver, as a term for the changes which are produced by alcohol in this

gland. Alcoholic cirrhosis is often spoken of as Laennec's cirrhosis

of the liver, and he was the first to point out the significance of

the changes in the organ, their etiology and the reason for the

symptoms that usually accompany this condition. This work alone would

have been sufficient to have made Laennec's name a permanent fixture

in medical literature.

During the early years of Laennec's career at Paris, the French

Anatomical Society was founded and Laennec became a prominent member

of it. Corvisart, who was the moving spirit in the society, was at

this time--the early years of the nineteenth century--doing his great

teaching at the medical school of the University of Paris. He was

Laennec's master, and was at the height of his glory. It was a

constant source of surprise to his students to note how well the

master's diagnosis agreed with postmortem findings. This is, after

{153} all, the only true criterion of scientific diagnosis. It is not

surprising that the strict application of this practical method of

control of medical theory soon gave rise to a series of distinct

advances in medical knowledge of the greatest importance.

Discussions of cases were frequent and Laennec took a prominent part

in them. His knowledge of medicine was broadening in this great field

of practice, and he was chosen as one of the contributors to the

_Dictionnaire des Sciences Medicales_. His articles for this work

contained much original matter of great value and suggestive views of

notable importance. Laennec was the first to give a description of

carcinoma encephaloides and certain especially malignant forms of

cancers. He showed the distinction between pigmented spots of

benignant character and those that were due to malignant disease.

"After all, however," says Benjamin Ward Richardson, "the grand

reputation of Laennec must rest on his one immortal work. It is not

too much to say that any man of good intelligence could have written

the other memoirs. No one less than Laennec could have written the

'Treatise on Mediate Auscultation and the Use of the Stethoscope.' The

true student of medicine, who never wears out, reads this original

work of Laennec once in two years at least, so long as he is in

practice and takes a living interest in the subject of which it

treats. It ranks equally with the original works of Vesalius, Harvey

and Bichat and as a section of medical literature is quite equal to

any section of Hippocrates." [Footnote 3]

[Footnote 3: The full title of this work of Laennec's is "De

l'auscultation mediate ou traite du diagnostic des maladies des

poumons et du coeur par R. T. H. Laennec." Its modest motto is the

Greek sentence: [Greek Text], (The most important part of an art is

to be able to observe properly.) The book was published in Paris by

J. A. Brosson et J. S. Chande, rue Pierre-Sarrazin, No. 9, 1819.]

{154}

Some quotations from the Latin preface to the book will serve to show

that Laennec appreciated the value of the discovery he had made for

the diagnosis of chest diseases, yet that he did not expect it to be

taken up enthusiastically at once, and in his modest way he adds that

he shall be satisfied if it should serve to save but one human being

from suffering and death. [Footnote 4]

[Footnote 4: "Imo neminem hanc methodum expertum deinceps cum

Baglivio dicturum esse spero: O quantum difficile est diagnoscere

morbos pulmonum."

"Nostra enim _aetas incuriosa_ quoque _suorum_ (the italics are

Laennec's own); et si quid novi ab homine coaevo in medio ponitur,

risu ut plurimum ineptisque cavillationibus excipiunt; quippe

facilius est aspernari quam experiri."

"Hoc mihi satis est quod bonis doctisque viris nonnullis acceptam

aegrotisque multis utilem, hanc methodum fore confidere possim;

hominem unum ereptum orco dulce dignumque meae atque etiam majoris

operae pretium praemium fore existimem."

"I may say that no one who has made himself expert with this method

will after this have occasion to say with Baglivi, Oh! how difficult

it is to diagnose disease of the lungs."

"For our generation is not inquisitive as to what is being

accomplished by its sons. Claims of new discoveries made by

contemporaries are likely for the most part to be met by smiles and

mocking remarks. It is always easier to condemn than to test by

actual experience."

"It suffices for me if I can only feel sure that this method will

commend itself to a few worthy and learned men who will make it of

use to many patients. I shall consider it ample, yea, more than

sufficient reward for my labor, if it should prove the means by

which a single human being is snatched from untimely death."]

Unfortunately, as we have said, Laennec's untiring devotion for nearly

twenty years to medical investigation caused his health to give way.

It is painful to think that in the full tide of the success of his

great labors, when the value of his work was only just beginning to be

properly appreciated and when he had attained a position which would

satisfy even lofty ambitions, his nerves gave way and he had many

{155} of the typical melancholic symptoms that disturb the modern

neurasthenic. Fortunately, his habits of life, always extremely

abstemious, and his liking for outdoor sports had been a safeguard for

him. He retired to the country and for nearly two years spent most of

his time in the open air.

It was not long before surcease from intellectual labor and indulgence

in field sport restored him to health and to activity. He foresaw,

however, that to go back to the city and to his scientific work would

almost surely lead to another breakdown. One of his biographers states

that it was the great regard which he had for his family and the

powerful influence of his religious principles which alone had

sufficient weight to make him leave his retreat in the country. After

an absence of two years, he returned to Paris and once more took up

his hospital duties.

Soon after his return he received the appointment of physician to the

Duchesse de Berri. One of the main objections to this position in

Laennec's mind seems to have been the necessity for occasionally

wearing court dress with a sword and regalia. Ordinarily he went

dressed very plainly, and it was noted that, when men of much less

authority and much less practice used their own carriages, he usually

took a hired cab. His position at court gave him enough influence to

bring about the proper recognition of his merit as a teacher. At this

time his lectures on auscultation, though he held no regular

professorship, were crowded by students from all nations. The year

after his return to Paris he was appointed Professor of Medicine in

the College of France, and afterward of clinical medicine at the

Hospital La Charite where he had made his own studies as a medical

student.

About this time he was offered a position of importance as a member of

the Royal Council of Public Instruction. This he refused, however,

because it would deprive him of {156} some of the precious time that

he wished to devote to the further investigation of important subjects

in clinical medicine and especially to the elaboration of his method

of auscultation.

One of the most striking features of Laennec's character was his

absolute placidity and lack of personal ambition. His life was passed

in the most complete calm. He devoted himself to his work, and had the

supreme joy of duty accomplished, seeming to look for no other

enjoyment in life. Those who knew him best said that they had never

seen him angry or even impatient. In the midst of his discussion with

Broussais, it might have been expected that there would occasionally

have been some flashes of impatience, for the great protagonist of

medical theory was a man of satiric character, and his supposedly

scientific discussion was stained by some very bitter personalities.

In spite of all Broussais' sarcasm, Laennec remained absolutely

unmoved. Occasionally his friends saw a smile at some of Broussais'

emphatic asseverations, but Laennec simply continued at his work, and

looked straight ahead, convinced that what he was doing was for the

cause of truth, and the truth would finally prevail.

He was known for the kindness of his disposition, and his readiness to

help his friends whenever it was possible. He was never known to

injure anyone, and a certain quiet elevation of spirit preserved him

from all conceit. One of his most intimate Breton friends, Kergaradec,

said, "I have never heard Laennec express by a single word, or even by

the slightest insinuation, anything that might seem to indicate pride

in what he had accomplished or that might provoke a listener to say

something in praise of him." The friends he made were bound to him

with hoops of steel. They were not many, for he had not the time to

waste on many friends. He was too devoted to his work, and too {157}

deeply interested in the great problem whose solution he foresaw meant

so much for the good of humanity, to have much time for anything but

his studies and his patients.

With regard to Laennec's personal character, his most recent

biographer Dr. Henri Saintignon, has said: [Footnote 5]

[Footnote 5: Laennec, Sa vie et son oeuvre. Par Dr. Henri

Saintignon. Paris, J. B. Bailliere et Fils, 1904.]

"I have shown in the course of this life just what was the character

of Laennec and his intellectual and moral qualities, so that it will

not be necessary for me to dwell at length on this subject, in

concluding. His great piety, which had never been abandoned from his

earliest infancy, was his main guide during all his life. Without

ostentation, yet without any weakness, absolutely ignoring human

respect, he obeyed with utter simplicity the prescriptions of his

faith. While he did not conceal his convictions when during the

first empire they might have proved a source of lessened esteem, or

positive prejudice, he made no noise about them when under the

Restoration they might have proved the means of advancement and of

fortune. He had not in the slightest degree what is so often

objected to, in devoted persons, namely, the love of making

proselytes. The words of Prof. Desgenettes might very well have been

applied to him: as he did not believe himself to have any mission to

lead others to his opinions, he limited himself to preaching by

example. The reproach of being rabidly clerical or propagandist,

which was urged against him, when he first became a member of the

faculty of medicine, was absolutely unjustified. Laennec never

occupied himself with politics nor with religion in public. As a

physician he devoted himself exclusively to his profession,

receiving at his clinic all those who desired to follow his

teaching, whatever might be their opinions or their beliefs."

{158}

It was not long, however, before Laennec's many labors in Paris began

to tell on his health once more. His practice after his return to

health and his attachment to the court became large and lucrative. It

is characteristic of the man and his ways that he frequently refused,

owing to lack of time, to go to see wealthy patients, from whom he

would have received large fees, but it is said that he never refused

to go to see a poor patient. His hospital patients always received the

most solicitous attention, and his time was almost entirely at their

disposal. It was not long before Laennec himself, who had taught

modern physicians so much about the diagnosis of pulmonary diseases,

began evidently to suffer from pulmonary disease himself. There seems

no doubt now that almost constant association with tuberculous

patients in an overworked subject inclined naturally to be of

underweight, and therefore especially susceptible, led to the

contraction of the disease.

After about four years in Paris, a dry, hard cough developed

insidiously, gradually increased in annoyance, and finally grew so

serious as to demand a return once more to his native Bretagne. He

lost flesh, became subject to intermittent attacks of fever and

suffered from some pleuritic and pulmonic pains. For some time after

his return to his native air he improved. He was treated by the usual

method employed at the time whenever fever accompanied any ailment.

Venesection was the main part of what was then called the

antiphlogistic treatment. It is needless to say he did not improve. He

was suffering from exhausting disease and the treatment became really

an accessory to further exhaustion.

At last there could be no longer any doubt that the end was

approaching. The old cure of the village came often to visit him, and

brought him all the consolations of religion. {159} With his sincere

Christian faith and firm conviction, it was not hard for Laennec to

find the moral force and the calm necessary to secure an easy death.

Finally one day, on August 13th, his wife saw him take off his fingers

one after another the rings he wore, and place them softly upon the

table. When she asked him why he did so, he replied, "It will not be

long now before someone else would have to do this service for me, and

I do not wish that they should have the trouble." Even in death he was

thinking of others rather than of himself, and he was calmly facing

the inevitable, thoroughly prepared for it. Two hours afterward, at

five o'clock in the afternoon, without there having been at any time

the slightest loss of consciousness, Laennec passed away.

How faithfully his family had watched over him, and how simple was the

feeling of Christian confidence in all of them, may very well be

gathered from the letter of his cousin Ambrose to Laennec's brother

Meriadec in Paris.

"My dear Meriadec:--Poor Rene is no more. His life was passed in the

midst of labor and of benevolence. While he had all the virtues of

the true Christian, and a wisdom far beyond what was usually granted

to men, they have not sufficed to obtain for him the grace of a

longer life. Somehow it was ordained that this glory and ornament of

our family was not to remain with us. What a sad reflection it is on

our restless eagerness in this life, and on the vanity of our hopes,

that a genius like this must perish just when it was about to

receive the fruit of its labors! He leaves to us a name, a name

difficult to sustain and the example of virtues that it will not be

easy to imitate. Let us hope that he will watch over us in the

future as he has done in the past, and that he will still continue

to aid us after his death. Although I have been prepared for this

sad event, I could not suspect how much grief I was to experience in

losing my {160} second master, my friend from earliest infancy, and

him whom I had become accustomed to consider as my eldest brother. I

must confess that for some years now we have all had to pay dear for

the short intervals of happiness that it has pleased heaven to

accord to us."

Laennec's burial took place in the cemetery of Ploare. The attendance

at the funeral was very large. Practically the entire population of

the countryside came to mourn for the benefactor that they loved so

much. He had made friends even among the simplest of the country

people and knew most of them by name. After his return to the country,

he had improved somewhat in appearance, and the neighbors had been

very glad to express their feelings of gratitude for his apparent

improvement in health. Undoubtedly not a little of this state of

better spirits was due to the fact that he liked Brittany and the

peasants of the neighborhood so well, and always felt so much at home

among them.

He was mild and agreeable in his manners, and of a quiet and even

temper. His conversation was lively and full of quiet humor, and his

friends often said that they never came away from a conversation with

him without having learned something. Toward the end of his life, when

his great reputation caused him to be honored by medical men from all

over the world, and when his reputation made him the lion of the hour,

he lost none of his natural affability and kindness of heart. He was

remarkable, especially, for his great kindness and courtesy to

foreigners, and he is said to have taken special care to make himself

understood by English-speaking medical visitors.

It must be confessed that he was somewhat less popular with his

contemporaries who did not belong to his immediate circle of friends

and students. One of the reasons for this was his genius, which no

generation seems ready to {161} acknowledge in any of its members.

Another reason was his continued misunderstanding with Broussais.

Broussais was the medical theorist of the hour, and medical theories

have always been popular, while medical observation has had to wait

for due recognition. There were undoubtedly good points in Broussais'

theories that Laennec failed to appreciate. This is the only blot on a

perfect career, taking it all in all, whether as man or as physician.

It can easily be understood with what impatience Laennec, entirely

devoted himself to observation, would take up the study of what he

considered mere theory, and it is easy to forgive him his lack of

appreciation.

Benjamin Ward Richardson says: "It was a common saying regarding

Laennec by his compeers that, while he was without a rival in

diagnosis, he was not a good practitioner; which means that he was not

a good practitioner, according to their ideas of practice, heroic and

fearful. To us, Laennec would now be a practitioner very heroic; so

much so, that I doubt if any medical man living would, for the life of

him, take some of his prescriptions. But in his own time, when so

little was known of the great system of natural cure, he would be

easily out of court. It was amply sufficient against him that he had a

glimmering of the truth as to the existence of a considerable run of

cases of organic disease, for which the so-called practice of remedial

cure by drugs, bloodlettings and other heroic plans, could do no good

but was likely to do grievous harm." We are reminded of Morgagni's

refusal to permit bloodletting in his own case, though he practised it

himself on others. Like Laennec, Morgagni seems to have doubted the

efficacy of bloodletting at a time when unfortunately all medical men

were agreed that it was the sovereign remedy.

If Laennec was not popular with his immediate {162} contemporaries,

succeeding generations have more than made up for the seeming neglect.

Less than twenty-five years after his death, Austin Flint, here in

America, hailed him as one of the five or six greatest medical men of

all times. Forty years after his death, Professor Chauffard, himself

one of the distinguished medical men of the nineteenth century, said:

"Without exaggeration we can call the glory which has come to French

medicine because of the great discovery of auscultation a national

honor. It must be conceded that for a long time before Laennec, the

great man of medicine, those to whom medical science owed its

ground-breaking work did not belong to France. Harvey, Haller and

Morgagni had made the investigations on which are founded the

circulation of the blood, experimental physiology, and pathological

anatomy, in other lands than ours. It almost seemed that we were

lacking in the fecund possibilities of daring and successful

initiative. Auscultation, however, as it came to us perfect from the

hands of Laennec, has given us a striking revenge for any objections

foreigners might make to our apathy. This discovery has rendered the

scientific medicine of the world our tributary for all time. It was an

immortal creation, and its effects will never fail to be felt. More

than this, it will never be merely an historical reminiscence,

because of the fact that it guided men aright, but it will in its

actuality remain as an aid and diagnostic auxiliary. Auscultation

will not disappear but with medical science itself, and with this

stage of our civilization which guides, directs and enlightens it."

Laennec was known for his simple Bretagne faith, for his humble piety,

and for uniformly consistent devotion to the Catholic Church, of which

he was so faithful a member. His charity was well known, and while his

purse was very ready to assist the needy, he did not hesitate to give

to the {163} poor what was so much more precious to him, and it may be

said to the world also, than money--his time. After his death, and

only then, the extent of his charity became known.

Dr. Austin Flint said of him: "Laennec's life affords an instance

among many others disproving the vulgar error that the pursuits of

science are unfavorable to religious faith. He lived and died a firm

believer in the truths of Christianity. He was a truly moral and a

sincerely religious man."

Of his death, his contemporary, Bayle, who is one of his biographers,

and who had been his friend from early youth, said:

"His death was that of a true Christian, supported by the hope of a

better life, prepared by the constant practice of virtue; he saw his

end approach with composure and resignation. His religious principles,

imbibed with his earliest knowledge, were strengthened by the

conviction of his maturer reason. He took no pains to conceal his

religious sentiments when they were disadvantageous to his worldly

interests, and he made no display of them when their avowal might have

contributed to favor and advancement." Surely in these few lines is

sketched a picture of ideal Christian manhood. There are those who

think it wonderful to find it in a man of genius as great as Laennec.

It should not be surprising, however, for surely genius can bow in

acknowledgment to its Creator.

Shortly after the death of Pasteur it was well said that two of the

greatest medical scientists of the nineteenth century have given to

the physicians of France a magnificent, encouraging and comforting

example. It is almost needless to say these two were Laennec and

Pasteur, and their example is not for France alone, but for the whole

medical world. They were living nineteenth century answers to the

advocates of free thought, who would say that religious belief and

{164} especially Catholic faith make men sterile in the realm of

scientific thought.

No better ending to this sketch of Laennec's life seems possible than

the conclusion of Dr. Flint's address to his students in New Orleans,

already so often quoted from. It has about it the ring of the true

metal of sincere Christian manhood and unselfish devotion to a

humanitarian profession:

"The career of the distinguished man whose biography has been our

theme on this occasion is preeminently worthy of admiration. In his

character were beautifully blended the finest intellectual and moral

qualities of our nature. With mental powers of the highest order

were combined simplicity, modesty, purity and disinterestedness in

such measure that we feel he was a man to be loved not less than

admired. His zeal and industry in scientific pursuits were based on

the love of truth for its own sake and a desire to be useful to his

fellow-men. To these motives to exertion much of his success is to

be attributed. Mere intellectual ability and acquirements do not

qualify either to make or to appreciate important scientific

discoveries. The mind must rise above the obstructions of self-love,

jealousy and selfish aims. Hence it is that most of those who have

attained to true eminence in the various paths of scientific

research have been distinguished for excellencies of the heart as

well as of the head. The example of Laennec is worthy of our

imitation. His superior natural gifts we can only admire, but we can

imitate the industry without which his genius would have been

fruitless. Let us show our reverence to the memory of Laennec by

endeavoring to follow humbly in his footsteps." _Quod faustum

vertat!_

{165}

Makers of Modern Medicine · 第 40 / 54 题