CHAPTER II.

FEVER AND DYSENTERY IN IRELAND.

The history of the public health in Ireland has been so remarkable that it

may be useful to take a continuous view of it in a chapter apart, so far

as concerns flux, or dysentery, and typhus with relapsing fever.

Ireland is a country which would have given Hume, had he thought of it,

the best of all his illustrations of the difficult problem handled in the

essay “Of National Characters”--how far the habits, customs, temperaments

and, he might have added, morbid infections have been determined by

climate, and how far by laws and government, by revolutions in public

affairs, or by the situation of the nation with regard to its neighbours.

Not only is there something special and peculiar in the actual

epidemiology of Ireland, but its political and social history has been apt

to borrow the phrases of medicine in a figure. “First the physicians are

to take care,” says Burke, “that they do nothing to irritate this

epidemical distemper. It is a foolish thing to have the better of the

patient in a dispute. The complaint, or its cause, ought to be removed,

and wise and lenient arts ought to precede the measures of vigour[410].”

And this singular use of the imagery of disease in Irish history might be

illustrated from many other passages of the same orator and essayist, just

as it may be seen any day in the columns of newspapers in our own time.

Giraldus Cambrensis began it, within a few years of the first English

conquest of Irish territory by Henry II. Writing of that singular effect

upon the English settlers by contact with the native Irish, whereby they

became, in the words of another medieval author, _ipsis Hibernis

hiberniores_, he resorts to the medical figure of “contagion” as the best

way to account for it. So again, to overleap six centuries, Bishop

Berkeley in his query “whether idleness be the mother or daughter of

spleen[411],” is trying upon the Irish both Hume’s problem of national

character and the use of the medical figure. And, to take a modern

instance, Lord Beaconsfield used the same figure of the old humoral

pathology, and gave his adhesion to a theory of national characters

adverse to the sense of Hume, when he ascribed the habits and manners of

the Irish, and the course of their national history, to their propinquity

to a “melancholy” ocean.

As far back as we can go in the history, two diseases are conspicuous--the

flux or “the country disease,” and the sharp fever or “Irish ague.” When

Henry II. invaded Ireland in 1172, his army suffered from flux, which the

contemporary chronicler, Radulphus de Diceto, dean of St Paul’s, set down

to the unwonted eating of fresh meat (_recentium esus carnium_), the

drinking of water, and the want of bread[412]. Less than a generation

after, Giraldus of Wales wrote his “Topography of Ireland,” wherein he

remarks that hardly any stranger, on his first coming to the country,

escapes the flux by reason of the juicy food (_ob humida

nutrimenta_)[413]. At that time Ireland was almost wholly a pastoral

country, and a pastoral country it has remained to a far greater extent

than England or Scotland. It is to this comparative want of tillage, an

almost absolute want when Giraldus was there, that we shall probably have

to look in the last resort for an explanation of the two national maladies

that here concern us--the “country disease” and the “Irish ague.” The same

dietetic reason that the dean of St Paul’s gave in 1172 for the prevalence

of flux in the army of Henry II., the want of bread and the eating of

fresh meat, can be assigned for the country disease long after, and, in

some periods, on the explicit testimony of observers. As to the Irish

ague, or typhus fever, Giraldus mentions it in the medieval period; and

Higden, copying him exactly, says: “The inhabitants of Ireland are vexed

by no kind of fever except the acute, and that seldom”--the word _acuta_

being the original of “the ague,” or, as in another translation of the

passage, “the sharp axes[414].” In this pastoral country, according to

Giraldus, there was little sickness and little need of physicians; but

there is hardly an instance of military operations by the English

unattended with sickness among the troops, and famine with sickness among

the native Irish.

The generalities of Fynes Moryson, a traveller of the time of James I.,

who included Ireland among the many countries that he visited and

described, throw light upon the dietetic peculiarities of the Irish.

Having little agriculture, and at that time no general cultivation of the

potato (although they adopted it much sooner than the English and Scots),

they lived, says Moryson, mostly on milk (as Giraldus Cambrensis also

records in the twelfth century), and upon the flesh of unfed calves, which

they cooked and ate in a barbarous fashion. “The country disease” is also

noted. The experience in Ireland from time immemorial, that a bellyful was

a windfall, must have been the origin of a habit observed by Moryson:

“I have known some of these Irish footemen serving in England to lay

meate aside for many meales to devoure it all at one time.” And again:

“The wilde Irish in time of greatest peace impute covetousnesse and

base birth to him that hath any corne after Christmas, as if it were a

point of nobility to consume all within these festivall dayes.” The

Irish slovenliness or filthiness in their food, raiment and lodging

was apt, he says, “to infect” the English who came to reside in their

country[415].

About a generation after we come to the earliest medical account of the

sicknesses of Ireland, by Gerard Boate, compiled during the Cromwellian

occupation[416]. The following occurs under the head of The Looseness:

The English have given it the name of the Country Disease. The

subjects of it are often troubled a great while, but take no great

harm. It is easily cured by good medicines: “But they that let the

looseness take its course do commonly after some days get the bleeding

with it; ... and last it useth to turn to the bloody flux, the which

in some persons having lasted a great while, leaveth them of itself;

but in far the greatest number is very dangerous, and killeth the most

part of the sick, except they be carefully assisted with good

remedies.”

The other reigning disease is the “Irish Ague,” a continued fever of the

nature of typhus:

“As Ireland is subject to most diseases in common with other

countries, so there are some whereunto it is peculiarly obnoxious,

being at all times so rife there that they may justly be reputed for

Ireland _endemii morbi_, or reigning diseases, as indeed they are

generally reputed for such. Of this number is a certain sort of

malignant feavers, vulgarly in Ireland called Irish agues, because

that at all times they are so common in Ireland, as well among the

inhabitants and the natives, as among those who are newly come thither

from other countries. This feaver, commonly accompanied with a great

pain in the head and in all the bones, great weakness, drought, loss

of all manner of appetite, and want of sleep, and for the most part

idleness or raving, and restlessness or tossings, but no very great

nor constant heat, is hard to be cured.” If blood-letting be avoided

and cordial remedies given, “very few persons do lose their lives,

except when some extraordinary and pestilent malignity cometh to it,

as it befalleth in some years.” Those who recover “are forced to keep

their beds a long time in extreme weakness, being a great while before

they can recover their perfect health and strength.”

The occasion of Boate’s writing was the subjugation of Ireland by

Cromwell, in the course of which we hear from time to time of sickness.

The greatest of the calamities was the utter destruction of the prosperity

of Galway by the frightful plague of 1649-50, and by the suppression of

the Catholics, who had brought the port of Connaught to be a place of

foreign commerce[417].

Cromwell’s troops in 1649 incurred dysentery through the hardships of

campaigning. On 17 September, 1649, the Lord General writes from Dublin to

Mr Speaker Lenthall after the storming of Tredah or Drogheda: “We keep the

field much; our tents sheltering us from the wet and cold. But yet the

country-sickness overtakes many: and therefore we desire recruits, and

some fresh regiments of foot, may be sent us.” And on 25 October, “Colonel

Horton is dead of the country-disease[418].”

Another general reference to the “country disease” of Ireland, by Borlase,

is very nearly the same as Boate’s. It is introduced early in the history,

on the occasion of the death in 1591 of Walter, Earl of Essex, earl

marshal of Ireland:

“The dysentery, or flux, so fatal to this worthy person, is commonly

termed the country disease; and well it may, for it reigns nowhere so

epidemically as in Ireland; tainting strangers as well as natives. But

whether it proceeds from the peculiar disposition of the air, errour

in diet, the laxity and waterishness of the meat, or some occult

cause, no venomous creature living there to suck that which may be

thought (in other countries) well distributed amongst reptilious

animals, I shall not determine, though each of these circumstances may

well conduce to its strength and vigour. Certain it is that regular

diet preserves most from the violence, and many from the infection of

this disease; yet as that which is thought very soveraign--I must say

that the stronger cordial liquors (viz. brandy, usquebeh, treacle and

Mithridate waters) are very proper, or the electuaries themselves, and

the like[419].”

From the Restoration to the Revolution little is known of epidemics in

Ireland. It is probable that Dublin and the other considerable towns fared

much the same as English towns. A Dublin physician writing to Robert Boyle

on 27 February, 1682, speaks of a petechial fever, marked by leaping of

the tendons, which had been fatal to very many in that city for these

twelve or fourteen months[420]. With the Revolution the troubles of the

country begin again, and enter on their peculiarly modern phase. For our

history, two characteristic incidents come at the very beginning of the

new period of disorder among the Irish--the sicknesses of the siege of

Londonderry and the unparalleled havoc of disease among the troops of

Schomberg in the camp of Dundalk. In both, the old “country disease,”

which had affected Cromwell’s troops, was the primary malady, occurring,

of course, in circumstances special enough to have bred it anywhere; in

both, the dysentery was attended or followed by typhus fever, the old

“Irish ague;” and although the epidemics of Londonderry and Dundalk in

1689 are properly examples of war sickness, yet the circumstances of each

may help to realize the connexion between dysentery and typhus in the

ordinary history of the Irish.

Dysentery and Fever at Londonderry and Dundalk, 1689.

The siege of Londonderry[421] by the Catholic Irish army of James II.

began in April and ended on 28 July, having lasted 105 days. On 19 April

the garrison numbered 7020 men, and the total of men, women and children

in the town was estimated at 30,000, a number which included refugees from

the neighbouring country and would have been more but for many Protestants

at the beginning of the siege leaving the city and taking “protection” at

the hands of the besiegers. On 21 May, a collection was made for the poor,

who began to be in want. Sickness is heard of on 5 June, when several that

were sick were killed in their beds by the enemy’s bombs. The dread of the

bombs in the houses caused the people to lie about the walls or in places

remote from the houses all night, so that many of them, especially the

women and children, caught cold, which along with the want of rest and

failing food, threw them into fluxes and fevers. The pinch of hunger began

to be felt before the middle of June, about which time and for six weeks

after the fluxes and fevers were rife. A great mortality spread through

the garrison as well as the inhabitants; fifteen captains and lieutenants

died in one day, and it was estimated that ten thousand died during the

siege, “besides those who died soon after.” The want, the dysentery, the

fever and the vast numbers of dead every day must have produced a horrible

state of things; when, on 2 July, five hundred useless persons were put

outside the walls, to disperse as they best could, the besiegers are said

to have recognized them when they met them “by the smell.”

About the middle of June large quantities of provisions were found in

cellars and places of concealment under ground; after that the garrison

had always bread, although the allowance was small. An ingenious man

discovered how to make pancakes of starch and tallow, of which articles

there was no lack; the pancakes not only proved nutritious, but are said

to have been an infallible cure of the flux, or preservative from it. At

length, on 28 July some of the victuallers and ships of war which had been

in Lough Foyle since the 15th of June, sailed up to the head of the Lough

on the evening flood tide, finding little resistance from the enemy’s

batteries and none from “what was left of” the tide-tossed boom of logs

across the mouth of the river. Provisions poured in, and the siege was

raised; but it is clear that the infection continued for some time after,

having been found among such of the released garrison as repaired to

Schomberg’s camp at Dundalk.

The Catholic army is said (by the Protestants) to have lost 8000 or 9000

before the walls of Londonderry, “most by the sword, the rest of fever and

flux, and the French pox, which was very remarkable on the bodies of

several of the dead officers and soldiers[422].”

Not far off, at Dundalk, there began, a few weeks after, an extraordinary

outbreak of war-sickness, which, unlike the pestilence in Londonderry, was

altogether inglorious in its circumstances. In many respects it resembled

the disaster to Cromwell’s troops at the first occupying of Jamaica in

1655-56[423]; but it was worse than that, and it is probably unexampled in

the military annals of Britain[424].

Supplies had been voted in Parliament for quelling the Catholic rebellion

in Ireland, and an expedition was got together under the illustrious

Marshal, Duke of Schomberg. The force consisted of some ten thousand foot,

most of them raw levies from the English peasantry, with one regiment of

seasoned Dutch troops (“the blue Dutch”), and cavalry. While the bulk of

the force was undisciplined, their clothes, food, tents and other

munitions of war were bad or insufficient through the fraud of

contractors. The expedition embarked at Hoylake on the Dee and landed on

the 15th of August, 1689, nearly three weeks after the relief of

Londonderry, at Bangor, on the south side of Belfast Lough. Schomberg took

Carrickfergus, and began to advance on Dublin; but finding the towns

burned and the country turned into a desert, he threw himself into an

entrenched camp around the head of Dundalk Bay, nearly a mile from the

town of Dundalk. His camp was on a low moist bottom at the foot of the

hills. The Irish Catholic army took up a position among the hills “on high

sound ground,” not more than two miles distant from the English lines,

and, being in superior force, in due time they offered battle, which was

declined. Schomberg, who had been joined by the Enniskillen regiments of

dragoons and by men from Londonderry, had under him some 2000 horse and

not less than 12,000 foot at the time when James II. offered battle. The

undisciplined state of his English troops and the suspected treachery of a

body of French Protestants were among the causes that held Schomberg back;

but he had to reckon also with sickness almost from the moment of sitting

down at Dundalk. At a muster on 25 September, several of the regiments

were grown thin “by reason of the distemper then beginning to seize our

men.” The distemper was dysentery and fever. The two maladies were mixed

up, as they usually are in war and famines, the flux commonly preceding

the fever, and perhaps affording the virulent matters in the soil and in

the air upon which the epidemic prevalence of the fever depends. It was

easy to account for the dysentery among the troops at Dundalk; but as to

the fever, there was an ambiguity at the outset which Story is careful to

note: “And yet I cannot but think that the feaver was partly brought to

our camp by some of those people that came from Derry; for it was

observable that after some of them were come amongst us, it was presently

spread over the whole army, yet I did not find many of themselves died of

it.” Where the cause of death is specially named, it is fever, as in the

cases of Sir Thomas Gower, Colonel Wharton and other officers on the 28th

and 29th October. The fever was a most malignant form of typhus, marked by

the worst of all symptoms, gangrene of the extremities, so that the toes

or a whole foot would fall off when the surgeon was applying a

dressing[425].

It seems probable that most of the enormous mortality was caused by

infection, and not by dysentery due to primary exciting causes.

The primary exciting causes were obvious, but seemingly irremovable.

Schomberg had a great military reputation, but he was now over eighty, and

it does not appear that he made himself personally felt in the camp,

although he issued incessantly orders to inspect and report. As the

mortality proceeded apace during the six or eight weeks of inactivity,

murmurings arose against the commander. He was unfortunate in his choice

of a camping ground, and in an unusually cold and wet season. The newly

raised English troops seem to have been lacking equally in intelligence

and in moral qualities. Their foul language and debauchery were the

occasion of a special proclamation; their laziness and inability to make

themselves comfortable called forth numerous orders, but all to no

purpose. The regiment of Dutch troops were so well hutted that not above

eleven of them died in the whole campaign; but the English would not be

troubled to gather fern or anything else to keep themselves dry and clean

withal: “many of them, when they were dead, were incredibly lousy.”

The camping ground not only received the drainage of the hills, but,

strange to say, the rain would be falling there all day while the camp of

the enemy, only a few miles farther inland, would not be getting a drop.

On 1 October the tents on the low ground were moved a little higher up. On

the same date there were distributed among the regiments casks of

brandy--Macaulay says it was of bad quality--which appears to have been

the trusted remedy against camp sickness, as in the Jamaica expedition of

1655. There were twenty-seven victuallers or other ships riding in Dundalk

Bay; but the stores were bad, and the regimental surgeons had come

unprovided with drugs that might have been useful in flux or fever. While

the weather continued cold and wet, there was also a scarcity of firing

and forage. On 14 October all the regimental surgeons were ordered to meet

at ten in the morning to consult with Dr Lawrence how to check the

sickness[426]. Several officers having died on the 16th and 17th, the camp

was shifted on the 20th to new ground, the huts being left full of the

sick. Gower’s regiment had sixty-seven men unable to march, besides a good

many dead before or sent away sick. Story, the chaplain, went every day

from the new camp to visit the sick of his regiment in the huts, and

always at his going found some dead. He found the survivors in a state of

brutal callousness, utterly indifferent to each other, but objecting to

part with their dead comrades as they wanted the bodies to sit or lie on,

or to keep off the cold wind. The ships at anchor had now received as many

sick as they could hold, and the deaths on board soon became as many as on

shore. On 25-27 October, the camp was again shifted, but the sickness

continued apace. At length on 3 November, the Catholic army having

dispersed to winter quarters, the sick were ordered to be removed to

Carlingford and Newry. “The poor men were brought down from all places

towards the Bridge End, and several of them died by the way. The rest were

put upon waggons, which was the most lamentable sight in the world, for

all the rodes from Dundalk to Newry and Carlingford were next day full of

nothing but dead men, who, even as the waggons joulted, some of them died

and were thrown off as fast.” Some sixteen or seventeen hundred had been

left dead at Dundalk. The ships were ordered to sail for Belfast with the

first wind, and the camp was broken up. There was snow on the hills and

rain in the valleys; on the march to Newry, men fell out of the ranks and

died at the road side. When the ships weighed anchor from Dundalk and

Carlingford, they had 1970 sick men on board, but not more than 1100 of

these came ashore in Belfast Lough, the rest having died at sea in coming

round the coast of County Down. Such was the violence of the infection on

board that several ships had all the men in them dead and nobody to look

after them whilst they lay in the bay at Carrickfergus. An infective

principle, once engendered in circumstances of aggravation such as these,

is not soon extinguished. Belfast was the winter quarters, and in the

great hospital there from 1 November, 1689, to 1 May, 1690, there died

3762, “as appears by the tallies given in by the men that buried them.”

These numbers together make fully six thousand deaths, which agrees with

the general statement that Schomberg lost one half of the men whom he had

embarked at Hoylake in August. The Irish Catholic army began to sicken in

their camp in the hills above Dundalk Bay just before they broke up, and

they are said to have lost heavily by sickness in their winter quarters.

The war ended with the Treaty of Limerick, in 1691. The Seven Ill Years

followed,--ill years to Scotland, in a measure to England, and almost

certainly to Ireland also; but it does not appear that the end of the 17th

century was a time of special sickness and famine to the Irish, and it may

be inferred from the fact of Scots migrating to Ireland during the ill

years that the distress was not so sharp there. The epidemiology of

Ireland is, indeed, a blank until we come to the writings of Dr Rogers, of

Cork, in some respects the best epidemiologist of his time, which cover

the period from 1708 to 1734. His account of the dysentery and typhus of

the chief city of Munster in the beginning of the 18th century will show

that the old dietetic errors of the Irish, noted in medieval times, had

hardly changed in the course of centuries.

A generation of Fevers in Cork.

Rogers is clear that typhus fever was never extinct, while the three

several times when it “made its appearance amongst us in a very signal

manner,” are the same as its seasons in England, namely 1708-10, 1718-21

and 1728-30[428]. His experience relates only to the city of Cork, and, so

far as his clinical histories go, only to the well-to-do classes therein;

and although those seasons were years of scarcity and distress all over

Ireland, yet Rogers does not seem to associate insufficient food with the

fever, and never mentions scarcity. The fevers were in the winter, for the

most part, and were usually accompanied by epidemic smallpox of a bad

type, which in 1708 “swept away multitudes.” Nothing is said of dysentery

for the earliest of the three fever-periods; but for 1718 and following

years we read that “dysentery of a very malignant sort, frequently

producing mortification in the bowels,” prevailed during the same space;

and that the winters of the third fever-period, namely, those of 1728,

1729 and 1730 were “infamous for bloody fluxes of the worst kind.” It is

clear that the fever spread to the richer classes in Cork, for his five

clinical histories are all from those classes. The following is his

general account of the symptoms:

The patient is suddenly seized with slight horrors or rather

chilliness, to which succeed a glowing warmth, a weight and fixed pain

in the head, just over the eyebrows; soreness all over his flesh, as

if bruised, the limbs heavy, the heart oppressed, the breathing

laboured, the pulse not much altered, but in some slower; the urine

mostly crude, pale and limpid, at first, or even throughout, the

tongue moist and not very white at first, afterwards drier, but rarely

black. An universal petechial effloresence not unlike the measles

paints the whole surface of the body, limbs, and sometimes the very

face; in some few appear interspersed eruptions exactly like the

_pustulae miliares_, filled with a limpid serum. The earlier these

petechiae appear, the fresher in colour, and the longer they continue

out, the better (p. 5). The fixed pain in the head increasing, ends

commonly in a coma or stupor, or in a delirium with some. Some few

have had haemorrhage at the nose, a severe cough, and sore throat. In

some he had observed a great tendency to sweats, even from the

beginning: these are colliquative and symptomatic, not to be

encouraged. In but few there have appeared purple and livid spots, as

in haemorrhagic smallpox: some as large as a vetch, others not bigger

than a middling pin’s head, thick set all over the breast, back and

sometimes the limbs, the pulse in these cases being much below normal.

The extremities cold from the 6th or 7th day, delirium constant,

tongue dry and black, urine limpid and crude, oppression greater, and

difficulty of breathing more. It is a slow nervous fever (p. 18).

Rogers believed that mere atmospheric changes could not be the cause of

these epidemics: “they may favour, encourage and propagate such diseases

when once begun; but for the productive cause of them we must have

recourse to such morbid effluvia as above described [particles of all

kinds detached from the animal, vegetable and mineral kingdoms]; or

resolve all into the θεῖον τί so often appealed to by Hippocrates[429].”

But, as regards Cork itself, special interest attaches to the following

“four concurring causes:”

“1st, the great quantities of filth, ordure and animal offals that

crowd our streets, and particularly the close confined alleys and

lanes, at the very season that our endemial epidemics rage amongst

us.

2nd, the great number of slaughter-houses, both in the north and south

suburbs, especially on the north ridge of hills, where are vast pits

for containing the putrefying blood and ordure, which discharge by the

declivities of those hills, upon great rains, their fetid contents

into the river.

3rd, the unwholesome, foul, I had almost said corrupted water that

great numbers of the inhabitants are necessitated to use during the

dry months of the summer.

4th, the vast quantities of animal offals used by the meaner sort,

during the slaughtering seasons: which occasion still more mischief by

the quick and sudden transition from a diet of another kind.”

In farther explanation of the fourth concurring cause, he says that in no

part of the earth is a greater quantity of flesh meat consumed than in

Cork by all sorts of people during the slaughtering season--one of the

chief industries of the place being the export of barrelled beef for the

navy and mercantile marine. The meat, he says, is plentiful and cheap, and

tempts the poorer sort “to riot in this luxurious diet,” the sudden change

from a meagre diet, with the want of bread and of fermented liquors, being

injurious to them[430].

Famine and Fevers in Ireland in 1718 and 1728.

Thus far Rogers, for the city of Cork in the three epidemic periods,

1708-10, 1718-21, and 1728-30, two of which, if not all three, were

periods of dysentery as well as of typhus. But it was usual in Ireland for

the country districts and small towns to suffer equally with the cities.

The circumstances of the Irish peasantry in the very severe winter of

1708-9 are not particularly known; if there was famine with famine-fever,

it was not such as to have become historical. But for the next

fever-period, 1718-20, we have some particulars. Bishop Nicholson, of

Derry, writes: “Never did I behold even in Picardy, Westphalia or

Scotland, such dismal marks of hunger and want as appeared he

countenances of most of the poor creatures I met with on the road.” One of

the bishop’s carriage horses having been accidentally killed, it was at

once surrounded by fifty or sixty famished cottagers struggling

desperately to obtain a morsel of flesh for themselves and their

children[431].

This was a time when the population was increasing, but agriculture, so

far from increasing in proportion to the number of mouths to feed, was

positively declining, unless it were the culture of the potato. In a

pamphlet of about 1724, on promoting agriculture and employing the poor,

the complaint is of beef and mutton everywhere, and an insufficiency of

corn. “Such a want of policy,” says one, “is there, in Dublin especially,

on the most important affair of bread, without a plenty of which the poor

must starve.” Another, a Protestant, has the following threat for the

clergymen of the Established Church: “I’ll immediately stock one part of

my land with bullocks, and the other with potatoes--so farewell

tithes[432]!” From this it is to be inferred that potatoes were not made

tithable until a later period, pasture being exempted to the last. For

whatever reason, grazing, and not corn-growing, was then more general in

Ireland than in the generations immediately preceding, much land having

gone out of tillage. The culture of the potato was driven out of the

fertile lowlands to the hill-sides, so as to leave the ground clear for

ranges of pasture. Rack-renting was the rule, doubtless owing to the same

reason as afterwards, the competition for farms. While the Protestants

emigrated in thousands, the Catholics multiplied at home in beggary. A

pamphleteer of 1727 says: “Where the plough has no work, one family can do

the business of fifty, and you may send away the other forty-nine.” Thus

we find the pasturing of cattle preferred to agriculture long after the

barbaric or uncivilized period had passed, preferred indeed by English

landlords or farmers[433].

There were three bad harvests in succession, 1726, 1727 and 1728,

culminating in a famine in the latter year. Boulter, archbishop of Armagh,

who then ruled Ireland, was able to buy oats or oatmeal in the south and

west so as to sell it below the market price to the starving Protestants

of Ulster, an interference with the distribution of food which led to

serious rioting in Cork, Limerick, Clonmel and Waterford in the first

months of 1728[434]. No full accounts of the epidemic fever of that famine

remain. Rutty, of Dublin, says it was “mild and deceitful in its first

attack, attended with a depressed pulse, and frequently with

petechiae[435];” while, according to Rogers and O’Connell[436], the

epidemic fever of Munster was the same. Of the famine itself we have a

glimpse or two. Primate Boulter writes to the Duke of Newcastle on 7

March, 1727:

“Last year the dearness of corn was such that thousands of families

quitted their habitations to seek bread elsewhere, and many hundreds

perished; this year the poor had consumed their potatoes, which is

their winter subsistence, near two months sooner than ordinary, and

are already, through the dearness of corn, in that want that in some

places they begin already to quit their habitations[437].”

Quitting their habitations to beg was a regular thing at a later time of

the year. It was in the course of these bad years, in 1729, that Swift

wrote his ‘Modest Proposal for preventing the Children of Poor People in

Ireland from being a Burden to their Parents or Country.’ The scheme to

use the tender babes as delicate morsels of food for the rich, was a

somewhat extreme flight of irony, not so finished as in Swift’s other

satires, but the circumstances out of which the proposal grew were more

real than usual.

“It is a melancholy object,” says the Dean of St Patrick’s, “to those

who walk through this great town, or travel in the country, when they

see the streets, the roads and cabin doors crowded with beggars of the

female sex followed by three, four, or six children, all in rags, and

importuning every passenger for an alms.” Having ventilated his

project for the children, he proceeds to show that “their elders are

every day dying and rotting by cold and famine, filth and vermin, as

fast as can be reasonably expected.”

All the while there was a considerable export of corn from Ireland. In the

beginning of 1730, two ships laden with barley were stopped at Drogheda by

a fierce mob and were compelled to unload[438].

The interval between those years of epidemic typhus in Ireland and the

next, 1740-41, was filled, we may be sure, with at least an average amount

of the endemial fever. Rutty specially mentions it in Dublin in the autumn

and winter of 1734-35: “We had the low fever, called nervous (and

sometimes petechial from the spots that frequently attended, although

probably not essential).” He then adds: “It is no new thing with us for

this low kind of fever to prevail in the winter season;” and gives figures

from the Dublin Bills of Mortality for forty years. He mentions the

petechial fever as being frequent next in January and February, 1736,

corresponding to a bad time of it in Huxham’s Plymouth annals. In 1738 and

1739 the type of the Dublin fever was relapsing, in part at least, the

same type having been seen at Edinburgh shortly before.

* * * * *

The economics of Ireland, at this time, gave occasion to Berkeley’s

_Querist_, a series of weekly essays written in 1737 and 1738, and

collected in 1740, on the eve of the next great famine and mortality[439].

A few of the bishop’s sarcasms, in the form of queries, will serve to show

how anomalous was the economic condition of the country, and how easily a

crisis of famine and pestilence could arise.

“169. Whether it is possible the country should be well improved while

our beef is exported, and our labourers live upon potatoes?

“173. Whether the quantities of beef, butter, wool and leather,

exported from this island, can be reckoned the superfluities of a

country, where there are so many natives naked and famished?

“174. Whether it would not be wise so to order our trade as to export

manufactures rather than provisions, and of those such as employ most

hands?

“466. Whether our exports do not consist of such necessaries as other

countries cannot well be without?

“353. Whether hearty food and warm clothing would not enable and

encourage the lower sort to labour?

“354. Whether in such a soil as ours, if there was industry, there

would be want?

“418. Whether it be not a new spectacle under the sun, to behold in

such a climate and such a soil, and under such a gentle government, so

many roads untrodden, fields untilled, houses desolate, and hands

unemployed?

“514. Whether the wisdom of the State should not wrestle with this

hereditary disposition of our Tartars, and with a high hand introduce

agriculture?

“534. Why we do not make tiles of our own, for flooring and roofing,

rather than bring them from Holland?

“539. Whether it be not wonderful that with such pastures, and so many

black cattle, we do not find ourselves in cheese?”

In several of his queries (381, 383) Bishop Berkeley is driving at the

expediency of domestic slavery. It was two hundred years since the same

expedient had been tried by Protector Somerset in England, during the

intolerable state of vagabondage which followed the rage for pasture

farming under the first Tudors. In Scotland, it was hardly more than a

generation since the institution of domestic slavery had commended itself

to Fletcher of Saltoun, as the only expedient that could free that country

from the vagabondage of a tenth, or more, of the population. England had

surmounted the difficulty long ago, Scotland got over it easily and

speedily when she was admitted to the English and colonial markets for her

linen manufacture by the Treaty of Union[440]. But in Ireland in the year

1740, and until long after, disabilities of all kinds, not only economic,

but political and religious, were fastened upon the weaker nation by the

stronger, the unfortunate cause of their long continuance having been the

costly inheritance of loyalty to James II. and the Mass.

The Famine and Fever of 1740-41.

At the time when the bishop of Cloyne was issuing his economic queries

from week to week (not much to the satisfaction of Primate Boulter),

things were making up for the greatest crisis of famine and pestilence

that Ireland experienced in the 18th century. There had been relapsing

fever among the poor in Dublin in the autumn of 1738, and it appeared

among them again in the summer and autumn of 1739. Rutty’s account of it

is as follows:

“It was attended with an intense pain in the head. It terminated

sometimes in four, for the most part in five or six days, sometimes in

nine, and commonly in a critical sweat. It was far from being mortal.

I was assured of seventy of the poorer sort at the same time in this

fever, abandoned to the use of whey and God’s good providence, who all

recovered. The crisis, however, was very imperfect, for they were

subject to relapses, even sometimes to the third time, nor did their

urine come to a complete separation.”

In October 1739, there appeared some dysenteries in Dublin.

The winter of 1739 set in severely with cold and wet in November, and

about Christmas there began a frost of many weeks’ duration which was

more intense than anyone remembered. It is said to have made the ground

like iron to the depth of nine inches; the ice on all the rivers stopped

the corn mills, trees and shrubs were destroyed, and even the wool fell

out of the sheep’s backs. In January 1740 the destitution was such that

subscription-lists were opened in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Waterford,

Clonmel, Wexford and other places. Bishop Berkeley distributed every

Monday morning twenty pounds sterling among the poor of Cloyne (near Cork)

besides what they got from his kitchen. One morning he came down without

powder on his wig, and all the domestics of the episcopal palace followed

suit[441]. The distress became more acute as the spring advanced. The

potato crop of 1739 had been ruined, not by disease as in 1845-46, but by

the long and intense frost. It was usual at that time to leave the tubers

in the ridges through most of the winter, with the earth heaped up around

them. The frost of December found them with only that slight covering, and

rotted them: “a dirissimo hoc et diuturno gelu penitus putrescebant,” says

Dr O’Connell. Besides putrid potatoes, the people ate the flesh of cattle

which had died from the rigours of the season. Owing to the want of sound

seed-potatoes, the crop of 1740 was almost a blank. The summer was

excessively dry and hot. In Dublin, the price of provisions had doubled or

trebled, and some of the poor had died of actual starvation. In July

dysenteries became common, and extended to the richer classes in the

capital. Smallpox was rife at the same time, and peculiarly fatal in Cork.

Dysentery continued in Dublin throughout the autumn and winter of 1740

(the latter being again frosty), and became the prevailing malady

elsewhere.

On 8 February, 1741, Berkeley writes that the bloody flux had appeared

lately in the town of Cloyne, having made great progress before that date

in other parts of the country. A week after he writes (15 Feb.), “Our

weather is grown fine and warm: but the bloody flux has increased in this

neighbourhood, and raged most violently in other parts of this and the

adjacent counties[442].” This prevalence of dysentery, and not of fever,

as the reigning malady of the winter of 1740-41 in Munster is confirmed

by Dr Maurice O’Connell, who says that the typhus of the previous summer

gave place to it. Dysentery in the winter and spring, preceding the fever

of summer, was also the experience in the famine of 1817. Berkeley treated

the subjects of dysentery, not with tar water, but with a spoonful of

powdered resin dissolved in oil by heat and mixed in a clyster of

broth[443].

As the year 1741 proceeded, with great drought in April and May, typhus

fever (which had appeared the autumn before) and dysentery were both

widely epidemic, so that it is impossible to say which form of disease

caused most deaths. In Dublin during the month of March, 1741, the deaths

from dysentery reached a maximum of twenty-one in a week, “though it was

less mortal than in the country, to which the better care taken of the

poor and of their food undoubtedly contributed.” Bishop Berkeley writes on

the 19th of May:

“The distresses of the sick and poor are endless. The havoc of mankind

in the counties of Cork, Limerick and some adjacent places, hath been

incredible. The nation probably will not recover this loss in a

century. The other day I heard one from county Limerick say that whole

villages were entirely depeopled. About two months since I heard Sir

Richard Cox say that five hundred were dead in the parish where he

lives, though in a country I believe not very populous. It were to be

wished that people of condition were at their seats in the country

during these calamitous times, which might provide relief and

employment for the poor[444].”

It was said that there were twenty-five cases of fever in the bishop’s own

household, which were cured by the panacea, tar-water, drunk copiously--a

large glass, milk-warm, every hour in bed, the same method being practised

by several of his poor neighbours with equal success[445]. In a “Letter

from a country gentleman in the Province of Munster to his Grace the Lord

Primate[446]” it is said:

“By a moderate computation, very near one-third of the poor cottiers

of Munster have perished by fevers, fluxes and downright want.... The

charity of the landlords and farmers is almost quite exhausted.

Multitudes have perished, and are daily perishing, under hedges and

ditches, some by fevers, some by fluxes, and some through downright

cruel want in the utmost agonies of despair. I have seen the labourer

endeavouring to work at his spade, but fainting for want of food,”

etc.

The loss of life must have been great also in Connaught. A letter of 8

July, 1741, from Galway, says: “The fever so rages here that the

physicians say it is more like a plague than a fever, and refuse to visit

patients for any fee whatever[447].” The Galway Assizes were held at

Tuam[448], the races also being transferred to the same neighbourhood, not

without their usual evening accompaniments of balls and plays.

Of this famine and sickness it might have been said, in the stock medieval

phrase, that the living were hardly able to bury the dead[449].

As in later Irish famines, there appear to have been, in 1740-41, three

main types of sickness--dysentery, relapsing fever and typhus fever. In

Dublin, as we know from the direct testimony of Rutty, there was relapsing

fever in 1739, before the distress had well begun, and again in the summer

of 1741, when the worst was over. So much is said of dysentery that we may

well set down to it, and to its attendant dropsy, a great part of the

deaths, as in the famine of 1846-47. But it is probable that true typhus

fever, sometimes of a malignant type, as at Galway, was the chief

infection in 1741, which was the year of its great prevalence in England.

It was characterized by a mild and deceitful onset, like a cold. Spots

were not invariable or essential; they were mostly of a dusky red,

sometimes purple, and sometimes intermixed with miliary pustules.

O’Connell mentions, for Munster, bleeding from the nose, a mottled rash as

in measles, and pains like those of lumbago. One of the worst features of

the Irish epidemic of 1740-41 was the prevalence of fever in the gaols. At

Tralee above a hundred were tried, most of them for stealing the means of

subsistence; the gaol was so full that there was no room to lie down, and

fifty prisoners died in six weeks. Limerick gaol had dysentery and fever

among its inmates, and the judge who held the Munster Circuit died of

fever on his return to Dublin[450].

Rutty says that the fever fell most upon strong middle-aged men, less upon

women, and least of all upon children. The number of orphans was so great

after the famine that Boulter, the Anglican primate, seized the

opportunity to start the afterwards notorious Charter Schools for the

education of the rising generation according to the Protestant creed. In

all the subsequent Irish famines it was the enormous swarms of people

begging at a distance from their own parishes that spread the infection of

fever; and there seems to have been as much of beggary in 1741, when

Ireland was underpeopled with two millions, as in 1817-18, when it was

overpeopled with six millions. A few years after the famine, Berkeley

wrote in 1749:

“In every road the ragged ensigns of poverty are displayed; you often

meet caravans of poor, whole families in a drove, without clothes to

cover, or bread to feed them, both which might be easily procured by

moderate labour. They are encouraged in their vagabond life by the

miserable hospitality they meet with in every cottage, whose

inhabitants expect the same kind reception in their turn when they

become beggars themselves.”

The estimates of the Irish mortality in 1741 varied greatly, as they have

done in the Irish famines of more recent times. One guessed a third of the

cottiers of Munster, another said one-fifth; and it is known that, whereas

in Kerry the hearth-money was paid in 1733 by 14,346, it was paid in 1744

by only 9372[451]. The largest estimates are 200,000 deaths or even

400,000 deaths in all Ireland in a population of less than two millions.

But Dr Maurice O’Connell, who practised in Cork, and saw in Munster the

mortality at its worst, estimated the deaths in all Ireland, in the two

years 1740 and 1741, from fevers, fluxes and absolute want, at 80,000.

Those who saw the famine, fever and dysentery of 1817-18 in a population

increased by three times were inclined to doubt whether even the smallest

estimate of 80,000 for 1740-41 was not too large; but it is clear that the

famished and fever-stricken in the 18th century were in many places

allowed to perish owing to the indifference of the ruling class or the

exhaustion of their means, so that a much higher rate of fatality may be

assumed for that epidemic than for the first of the 19th century Irish

famines.

* * * * *

The distress came to an end before the winter of 1741, when food was so

cheap in Dublin that a shilling bought twenty-one pounds of bread. The

subsequent prevalence of typhus fever and dysentery in Ireland, whether

epidemic or endemic, is very imperfectly known to the end of the century.

It may be inferred that there was in that period no epidemic so great as

that of 1740-41; but it is clear from the records kept by Rutty in Dublin

down to 1764, and by Sims in Tyrone to 1772, that the indigenous fevers

and fluxes of the country were never long absent, being more common in

some years than in others[452].

The year 1744 was remarkable for a destructive throat distemper among

children, described elsewhere, and the year 1745 for smallpox dispersed by

swarms of beggars. In 1746 and 1748, the Dublin fever was relapsing in

part, “terminating,” says Rutty, “the fifth, sixth, seventh or eighth day

with a critical sweat. A relapse commonly attended, which however was

commonly carried off by a second critical sweat.” In 1748, though the

season was sickly, the diseases were not mortal, several of the fevers

being “happily terminated by a sweat the fifth or sixth day.” But there

were also fevers of the low kind, sometimes with petechiae, sometimes with

miliary pustules, though not essentially with either. In the autumn of

1754 Rutty begins to adopt the language of the time concerning a “putrid”

constitution, identifying the fever with the dangerous remittents which

Fothergill was then writing about in London; “it is probable that ours was

akin to them and owing to the same general causes.” In February, 1755, the

fevers were fatal to many, raising the deaths to double the usual number;

they attacked all ages, were of the low, depressed kind, and commonly

attended with miliary pustules. He again identifies them with the low,

putrid fever in London. From that time on to 1758, Rutty has frequent

references to the same fever, under the names of low, putrid, petechial

and miliary. It was at its worst in 1757, and was marked by the remarkable

tremors described by Johnstone at Kidderminster, as well as by miliary

eruptions and by a gangrenous tendency at the spots where blisters had

been applied. In November, 1757, it was fatal to not a few of the young

and strong in Dublin, “and we received accounts of a like malignity

attending this fever in the country[453].” It was still prevalent in the

North and West of Ireland in the spring of 1758. He describes also an

unusual amount of fever in the end of 1762. Sims, of Tyrone, an

epidemiologist in the same manner as Rutty, does not begin his full annals

until 1765; but he sums up the years from 1751 to 1760 as unhealthy by

agues in spring, dysenteries and cholera morbus in autumn, and “low,

putrid or nervous fevers throughout the year[454].” He adds:

“To the unhealthiness of these years the bad state and dearth of

provisions might not a little contribute; the poor, being incapable to

procure sufficient sustenance, were often obliged to be contented with

things at which nature almost revolted; and even the wealthy could not

by all their art and power render wholesome those fruits of the earth

which had been damaged by an untoward season.”

Much of the distress, however, was owing to the continual spread of

pasture-farming, which made the labour of villagers unnecessary[455].

The nearest approach to a great Irish epidemic in the second half of the

18th century was in 1771, as described by Sims, the type of fever being

clearly the same low, putrid or nervous fever, with offensive sweats and

muscular tremors, that was commonly observed in England also in the middle

third of the 18th century. Early in the summer of 1771 a fever began to

appear which, as autumn advanced, raged with the greatest violence; nor

was it overcome by a severe winter. It claimed the prerogative of the

plague, almost all others vanishing from before its presence. It began

twelve months sooner in the eastern parts of the kingdom, pursuing a

regular course from East to West. Some symptoms suggest cerebro-spinal

fever.

The symptoms were languor, precordial oppression, want of appetite,

slight nausea, pains in the head, back and loins, a thin bluish film

on the tongue, turbid urine, eyes lifeless and dejected. After the

fourth day, constant watchfulness, the eyes wild, melancholy,

sometimes with bloody water in them, constant involuntary sighing, the

tendons of the wrists tremulous, the pulse quick and weak, most

profuse sweats, small dun petechiae principally at the bend of the arm

and about the neck. At the height of the fever, on the ninth or tenth

day, the tremulousness of the wrists spread to all the members,

“insomuch that I have seen the bed-curtains dancing for three or four

days to the no small terror of the superstitious attendants, who on

first perceiving it, thought some evil spirits shook the bed. This

agitation was so constant a concomitant of the fever as to be almost a

distinguishing symptom.” The patients lay grinding their teeth; when

awake, they would often convulsively bite off the edges of the vessel

in which drink was given them. They knew no one, their delirium being

incessant, low, muttering, their fingers picking the bed covering. The

face was pale and sunk, the eyes hollow, the tongue and lips black and

parched. Profuse clammy sweats flowed from them; the urine was as if

mixed with blood: the stools were involuntary. Petechiae almost black

came out, having an outer circle with an inner dark speck; sometimes

there were the larger vibices. Bleedings at the nose were frequent.

Those who were put to bed and sweated almost all died. Death took

place about the 13th day.

Curiously enough this disease showed itself even among the middle ranks of

the people, especially those who lived an irregular life, used flesh diet

and drank much. Among the poorer sort, who used vegetable food, the fever

was more protracted and less malignant, but in the winter and spring it

made much greater havoc among them. “Bleeding, that first and grand

auxiliary of the physician in treating inflammatory disorders, seemed here

to lose much of its influence.” It was, indeed, the long prevalence of

this low or nervous type of fever in Britain and Ireland in the middle of

the 18th century that drove blood-letting in fevers out of fashion until

the return of a more inflammatory type (often relapsing fever) in the

epidemic of 1817. In 1770, while such fevers more or less nervous, putrid,

miliary, were beginning to be prevalent among the adults, there was a good

deal of “worm fever” among children. They suffered from heat, thirst,

quick, full pulse, vomiting, coma, and sometimes slight convulsions,

universal soreness to the touch, and a troublesome phlegmy cough. When not

comatose they were peevish. The fever was remitting, the cheeks being

highly flushed at its acme, pale in its remission. It lasted several days,

but seldom over a week, nor was it often fatal. In children under five or

six years, it could hardly be distinguished from hydrocephalus

internus[456]. The same association of the worm fever or remittent fever

of children with the putrid or nervous fever of adults had been noticed at

Edinburgh in 1735. Neither the fever of the adults nor that of the

children will be found, on close scrutiny, to have had much in common with

our modern enteric fever.

The Epidemic Fevers of 1799-1801.

Sims left Tyrone to practise as a physician in London, and with his

departure what seems to have been the only contemporary record of

epidemics in Ireland ceased. The last quarter of the 18th century in

Ireland had probably as much epidemic fever as in England; but it is not

until the years 1797-1801 that we again hear of fever and dysentery, on

the testimony of the records of the Army Medical Board, of the Dublin

House of Industry, and of the Waterford Fever Hospital. At the end of the

year 1796 the health of the regiments in Ireland was everywhere good; but

in December of that year, and in January 1797, the poor in the towns began

to suffer more than usual from fever, and in the course of the year 1797

fever appeared in several cantonments of troops--at Armagh as early as

February or March, at Limerick, at Waterford and in Dublin[457]. The

summer and autumn were unusually wet, so that the peasantry of the

southern and western counties were unable to lay in their usual supply of

turf for fuel. In the course of the winter 1797-98 a considerable increase

of fever and dysentery was remarked among them, and these two maladies

appeared in various regiments in the early months of 1798. This was the

year of the rebellion in the south-east of Ireland, pending the efforts

for the union with England. The British troops were much engaged with the

insurgents throughout the summer, and got rid in great part of the

maladies of their quarters while they were campaigning. But in the end of

the year fever began to spread, both among the inhabitants and among the

troops. It was nothing new for English and Scots regiments to suffer from

fever or dysentery during the greater part of their first year in Ireland;

but the epidemics in the end of 1798 were more than ordinary. The

Buckinghamshire Militia quartered in the Palatine Square of the Royal

barracks, Dublin, lost by “malignant contagious fever” 13 men in October,

13 in November, and 15 in December. From November to January, the Warwick

regiment suffered greatly in the same barrack. The Herefordshire regiment,

833 strong, lost 47 men at Fermoy, mostly from fever contracted in bad

barracks; the Coldstream Guards at Limerick, the 92nd regiment at Athlone,

and the Northamptonshire Fencibles at Carrick-on-Shannon, also lost men by

fever. In July, 1799, not a single regiment in Ireland was sickly; but a

wet and very cold autumn made a bad harvest, aggravating the distresses of

the poor and causing much sickness, which the troops shared. The county of

Wexford, the principal scene of the rebellion, suffered most, and next to

it the adjacent county of Waterford. The fever-hospital of the latter

town, the earliest in Ireland[458], was projected in 1799; the statement

made in the report of a plan for the new charity, that fifteen hundred

dependent persons suffered from contagious fever every year there, showed

that the need for it was nothing new, although hardly a tenth part of the

number sought admission to the hospital when it was at work. Next year,

1800, the managers of the newly-opened hospital gave some particulars of

the causes of fever in Waterford--want of food, causing weakness of body

and depression of mind, but above all the excessive pawning of clothes and

bedding, whereby they suffered from cold and slept for warmth several in a

bed. In the winter and spring of 1799-1800 the poor of Waterford had

epidemic among them fever and dysentery, as well as smallpox. In

Donagh-a-gow’s Lane nine persons died of dysentery between October 1799

and March 1800. The harvest of 1800 was again a failure, from cold and

wet, bread and potatoes being dear and of bad quality. In the autumn and

winter the distress, with the attendant fever and dysentery, became worse.

At that time in Dublin all fever cases among the poor were received into

the House of Industry (the Cork Street and Hardwick Hospitals were soon

after built for fever-cases), at which the deaths for four years were as

follows:

Died in the Dublin

Year House of Industry

1799 627

1800 1315

1801 1352

1802 384

The enormous rise of the deaths in 1800 and 1801 shows how severe the

epidemic of fever must have been. Compared with the epidemic of 1817-18,

it has few records, perhaps because the political changes of the union

engrossed all attention. But the significant fact remains that the deaths

in the Dublin House of Industry in 1800 and 1801 were nearly as many as in

all the special fever-hospitals of Dublin during the two years, 1 Sept.

1817 to 1 Sept. 1819. At Cork, in 1800, there were 4000 cases of fever

treated from the Dispensary; at Limerick the state of matters is said to

have been as bad as in the great famine of 1817-18; and there is some

reason to think that the same might have been said of other places. All

the relief in 1800-1801 came from private sources, the example of Dublin

in opening soup-kitchens having been followed by other towns. The troops

shared in the reigning diseases, especially at Belfast and Dublin; in the

latter city, the spotted fever was severe both among the military and all

ranks of the civil population in August, 1801. The harvest of 1801 was

abundant, and the fever quickly declined. It had been often of the

relapsing type[459]. Dysentery appeared in the end of September, and

became severe in many places in October and November, being attributed to

the rains after a long tract of dry, hot weather. Ophthalmias and

scarlatinal malignant sore-throats were common at the same time.

The Growth of Population in Ireland.

When the history of the great famine and epidemic sicknesses of 1817-18

was written, it was found that this calamity had fallen upon a population

that had grown imperceptibly until it had reached the enormous figure of

over six millions, the census of 1821 showing the inhabitants of Ireland

to be 6,801,827. The increase from an estimated one million and

thirty-four thousand in 1695 was, according to Malthus, probably without

parallel in Europe. According to Petty, the inhabitants in 1672 numbered

about one million one hundred thousand, living in two hundred thousand

houses, of which 160,000 were “wretched, nasty cabins without chimney,

window or door-shut, and wholly unfit for making merchantable butter,

cheese, or the manufacture of woollen, linen or leather.” In 1695, the war

on behalf of James II. having intervened, the population as estimated by

South was 1,034,000. When the people were next counted in 1731, by a not

incorrect method in the hands of the magistracy and Protestant clergy,

they were found to have almost doubled, the total being 2,010,221. This

increase, the exactness of which depends naturally upon the accuracy of

Petty’s and South’s 17th century estimates, had been made notwithstanding

the famines and epidemics of 1718 and 1728, and an excessive emigration,

mostly of Protestants, to the West Indian and American colonies, which was

itself attended by a great loss of life through disease. For the rest of

the 18th century, the estimates of population are based upon the number of

houses that paid the hearth-tax. In the following figures six persons are

reckoned to each taxed hearth:

Year Persons

1754 2,372,634

1767 2,544,276

1777 2,690,556

1785 2,845,932

The hearth-money was not altogether a safe basis of reckoning, for the

reason that many were excused it on account of their poverty by

certificate from the magistrates, and that hamlets in the hills, perhaps

those which held their lands in rungale or joint-lease, often compounded

with the collectors for a fixed sum; so that cabins might multiply and no

more hearth-tax be paid[460]. It is probable that a considerable increase

had taken place which was not represented in the books of the

tax-collectors; for in 1788, only three years from the last date given,

the number of hearths suddenly leapt up to the round figure of 650,000

(from 474,322), giving a population of 3,900,000, at the rate of six

persons to a cabin or house. But it is undoubted that a new impulse was

given to population in the last twenty years of the 18th century, firstly

by the bounties on Irish corn exported, dating from 1780, which caused

much grazing land to be brought under the plough, and secondly by the

gradual removal, after 1791, of various penalties and disabilities which

had rested on the Roman Catholics since the reign of Anne, affecting their

tenure of land, and serving in various ways to repress the multiplication

of families. Accordingly we find the hearths rated in 1791 at the number

of 701,102, equal to a population of 4,206,612. The estimates or

enumerations from 1788, to the census of 1831, show an increase as

follows:

Year Persons

1788 3,900,000

1791 4,206,612

1805 5,395,456

1812 5,937,856

1821 6,801,827

1831 7,784,539

The secret of this enormous increase was the habit that the Irish

peasantry had begun to learn early in the 17th century of living upon

potatoes. From that dietetic peculiarity, it is well known, much of the

economic and political history of Ireland depends. At the time when it was

losing its tribal organization (rather late in the day, although not so

late as in the Highlands of Scotland), the country was in a fair way to

pass from the pastoral state to the agricultural and industrial. It is

conceivable that, if Ireland had peacefully become an agricultural

country, wheaten bread would have become the staple food of the people, as

in England in early times and again in later times; or that the standard

might have been oatmeal in the northern province, as in Scotland: in which

case one may be sure that the population would not have increased as it

did. “Since the culture of the potatoes was known,” says a topographer of

Kerry in 1756, “which was not before the beginning of the last century,

the herdsmen find out small dry spots to plant a sufficient quantity of

those roots in for their sustenance, whereby considerable tracts of these

mountains are grazed and inhabited, which could not be done if the

herdsmen had only corn to subsist on[461].” Twenty years later Arthur

Young found an enormous extension of potato culture, the pigs being fed on

the surplus crop[462]. The motive, on the part of the landlord or the

farmer, was to have the peat bogs on the hill-sides reclaimed by the

spade; the surface of peat having been removed, a poor subsoil was

exposed, which might be made something of after it had grown several crops

of potatoes, but hardly in any other way. Another motive was political;

namely, the multiplication by landlords of forty-shilling freeholder

dependent votes among the Catholics as soon as they became free to

exercise the franchise[463].

Malthus relied so much upon statistics, that he found the case of Ireland,

notable though it was, little suited to his method, and dismissed it in a

few sentences. But he indicated correctly the grand cause of

over-population:

“I shall only observe, therefore, that the extended use of potatoes

has allowed of a very rapid increase of population during the last

century (18th). But the cheapness of this nourishing root, and the

small piece of ground which, under this kind of cultivation, will in

average years produce the food for a family, joined to the ignorance

and depressed state of the people, which have prompted them to follow

their inclinations with no other prospect than an immediate bare

subsistence, have encouraged marriage to such a degree that the

population is pushed much beyond the industry and present resources of

the country; and the consequence naturally is, that the lower classes

of people are in the most impoverished and miserable state.”

In another section he showed that the cheapness of the staple food of

Ireland tended to keep down the rate of wages:

“The Irish labourer paid in potatoes has earned perhaps the means of

subsistence for double the number of persons that could be supported

by an English labourer paid in wheat.... The great quantity of food

which land will bear when planted with potatoes, and the consequent

cheapness of the labour supported by them, tends rather to raise than

to lower the rents of land, and as far as rent goes, to keep up the

price of the materials of manufacture and all other sorts of raw

produce except potatoes. The indolence and want of skill which usually

accompany such a state of things tend further to render all wrought

commodities comparatively dear.... The value of the food which the

Irish labourer earns above what he and his family consume will go but

a very little way in the purchase of clothing, lodging and other

conveniences.... In Ireland the money price of labour is not much more

than the half of what it is in England.”

Lastly, in a passage quoted in the sequel, he showed how disastrous a

failure of the crop must needs be when the staple was potatoes; the people

then had nothing between them and starvation but the garbage of the

fields[464].

What the growth of population could come to on these terms was carefully

shown for the district of Strabane, on the borders of Tyrone and Donegal,

by Dr Francis Rogan, a writer on the famine and epidemic fever of

1817-18[465]. Strabane stood at the meeting of the rivers Mourne and Fin

to form the Foyle; and in the three valleys the land was fertile. All

round was an amphitheatre of hills, in the glens of which and among the

peat bogs on their sides was an immense population. The farms were small,

from ten to thirty acres, a farm of fifty acres being reckoned a large

holding. The tendency had been to minute subdivisions of the land, the

sons dividing a farm among them on the death of the father:

“The Munterloney mountains,” says Rogan, “lie to the south and east of

the Strabane Dispensary district. They extend nearly twenty miles, and

contain in the numerous glens by which they are intersected so great a

population that, except in the most favourable years, the produce of

their farms is unequal to their support. In seasons of dearth they

procure a considerable part of their food from the more cultivated

districts around them; and this, as well as the payment of their

rents, is accomplished by the sale of butter, black cattle, and sheep,

and by the manufacture of linen cloth and yarn, which they carry on to

a considerable extent.”

These small farmers dwelt in thatched cottages of three or four rooms, in

which they brought up large families[466]. Besides the farmers, there were

the cottiers, who lived in cabins of the poorest construction, sometimes

built against the sides of a peat-cutting in the bog. The following table

shows the proportion of cottiers to small farmers on certain manors of the

Marquis of Abercorn, near Strabane, at the date of the famine in 1817-18

(Rogan, p. 96):

Number of Families

Manor Farmers Cottiers

Derrygoon 368 335

Donelong 243 322

Magevelin and

Lismulmughray 319 668

Strabane 302 415

Cloughognal 328 279

The cottiers rented their cabins and potato gardens from the farmers,

paying their rent, on terms not advantageous to themselves, by labour on

the farm. For a time about the beginning of the century the practice by

farmers of taking land on speculation to sublet to cottiers was so common

that a class of “middlemen” arose. One pamphleteer during the distress of

1822 speaks of the class of middlemen as an advantage to the cottiers, and

regrets that they should have been personally so disreputable as to have

become extinct. It is not easy to understand how they served the interests

of the cottiers: for the latter were answerable to the landlord for the

middleman’s rent, and were themselves over-rented and underpaid for their

labour. The system of middlemen did not in matter of fact answer; they

hoped to make a profit from the tenants under them, and neglected to work

on their own farms; it appears that they were a drunken class, and that

they were at length swallowed up in bankruptcy. After the first quarter of

the century the cottiers and the landlords (with the agents and the tithe

proctors) stood face to face; but at the date of the famine of 1817 there

was subletting going on, of which Rogan gives an instructive instance in

his district of Ulster[467].

Under this system of subdividing farms and subletting potato gardens with

cabins to cottiers, the following enormous populations had sprung up in

four parishes within the Dispensary district of Strabane and in four

manors of the Marquis of Abercorn adjoining them, but not included in the

Dispensary District:

Town of Strabane 3896

Parish of Camus 2384

" " Leck 5092

" " Urney 4886

Manor of Magevelin and Lismulmughray 5548

Manor of Donelong 3126

" " Derrygoon 2568

" " Part of Strabane 2796

In the language of the end of the 19th century, this would have been

called a “congested district” of Ireland; but all Ireland was then

congested to within a million and a half of the utmost limit, so that the

famine, which we shall now proceed to follow in this part of Ulster, has

to be imagined as equally severe in Connaught, in Munster, and even in

parts of Leinster.

The Famine and Fevers of 1817-18.

The winter of 1815-16 had been unusually prolonged, so that the sowing and

planting of 1816 were late. They were hardly over when a rainy summer

began, which led to a ruined harvest. The oats never filled, and were

given as green fodder to the cattle; in wheat-growing districts, the grain

sprouted in the sheaf; the potatoes were a poor yield and watery; such of

them as came to the starch-manufacturers were found to contain much less

starch than usual. The peat bogs were so wet that the usual quantity of

turf for fuel was not secured[468]. This failure of the harvest came at a

critical time. The Peace of Paris in 1815 had depressed prices and wages

and thrown commerce into confusion. During the booming period of

war-prices, from 1803 to 1815, farms and small holdings had doubled or

even trebled in rent, and had withal yielded a handsome profit to the

farmers and steady work to the labourers. When the extraordinary war

expenditure stopped, this factitious prosperity came to a sudden end. The

sons of Irish cottiers were not wanted for the war, and the daughters were

no longer profitable as flax-spinners to the small farmers. Weavers could

hardly earn more than threepence a day, and labourers who could find

employment at all had to be content with fourpence or sixpence, without

their food. A stone of small watery potatoes cost tenpence; but the value

of cattle fell to one-third, and butter brought little. By Christmas the

produce of the peasants’ harvest of 1816 was mostly consumed. “Many

hundred families holding small farms in the mountains of Tyrone,” says

Rogan, “had been obliged to abandon their dwellings in the spring of 1817

and betake themselves to begging, as the only resource left to preserve

their lives[469].” At Galway, in January, a mob gathered to stop the

sailing of a vessel laden with oatmeal. At Ballyshannon the peasants took

to the shore to gather cockles, mussels, limpets and the remains of fish.

In some parts the seed potatoes were taken up and consumed. The people

wandered about in search of nettles, wild mustard, cabbage-stalks and the

like garbage, to stay their stomachs. It was painful, says Carleton, to

see a number of people collected at one of the larger dairy farms waiting

for the cattle to be blooded (according to custom), so that they might

take home some of the blood to eat mixed with a little oatmeal. The want

of fuel caused the pot to be set aside, windows and crevices to be

stopped, washing of clothes and persons to cease, and the inmates of a

cabin to huddle together for warmth. This was far from being the normal

state of the cottages or even of the cabins, but cold and hunger made

their inmates apathetic. Admitted later to the hospitals for fever, they

were found bronzed with dirt, their hair full of vermin, their ragged

clothes so foul and rotten that it was more economical to destroy them and

replace them than to clean them.

Some months passed before this state of things produced fever. The first

effect of the bad food through the winter, such as watery potatoes eaten

half-cooked for want of fuel, had been dysentery, which became common in

February, and was aggravated by the cold in and out of doors. It was

confined to the very poorest, and was not contagious, attacking perhaps

one or two only in a large family. Comparatively few of those who were

attacked by it in the country places came to the Strabane Dispensary; but

the dropsy which often attended or followed it brought in a larger number.

The following table of cases at the Dispensary shows clearly enough that

dysentery and dropsy preceded the fever, which became at length the chief

epidemic malady[470]:

_Cases at Strabane Dispensary._

1817 Dropsy Dysentery Typhus

June 23 2 10

July 107 31 60

August 40 22 206

September 9 23 287

At a few of the larger towns in each of the provinces typhus had risen in

the autumn of 1816 somewhat above the ordinary low level which

characterized the years from 1803 to 1816 in Ireland as well as in

Britain. At that time there was steadily from year to year a certain

amount of typhus in the poorest parts of the towns and here or there among

the cabins of the cottiers. Statistically this may be shown by the table

of regular admissions to the fever hospitals of some of the chief towns

from the date of their opening.

_Admissions to Irish Fever Hospitals, 1799-1818._

Dublin, Dublin Cork Waterford Limerick Kilkenny

Cork St. House of Fever Fever Fever Fever

Year Hospital Industry Hospitals Hospital Hospital Hospital

1799 -- -- -- 146 -- --

1800 -- -- -- 409 -- --

1801 -- -- -- 875 -- --

1802 -- -- -- 419 446 --

1803 -- -- 254 188 86 73

1804 415 82 190 223 95 80

1805 1024 709 200 297 90 69

1806 1264 1276 441 165 86 56

1807 1100 1289 191 166 84 81

1808 1071 1473 232 157 100 96

1809 1051 1176 278 222 109 116

1810 1774 1474 432 410 120 135

1811 1471 1316 646 331 196 153

1812 2265 2006 617 323 146 156

1813 2627 1870 550 252 227 183

1814 2392 2398 845 175 221 236

1815 3780 2451 717 403 394 249

1816 2763 1669 1026 307 659 162

1817 3682 2860 4866 390 2586 1100

1818 7608 17894 10408 2729 4829 1924

In 1812 the first step was taken towards the adoption of the Poor Law,

namely the division of the country into Dispensary Districts, which

remained the units of charitable relief until 1839, when the old English

system of a poor-rate and parochial Unions was applied to Ireland. During

that intermediate period much was left to the medical profession, which

contained many well-educated and humane men, to the priests and clergy,

and to charitable persons among the laity. There was fever in many places

where there were no fever hospitals. A physician at Tralee reported that

the back lanes of the town, crowded with cabins, were seldom free from

typhus. Rogan gives two instances from the Strabane district in the summer

and winter of 1815, at a time when the district was remarkably healthy. A

beggar boy was given a night’s lodging by a cottier at Artigarvan, three

miles from Strabane. Next morning he was too ill to leave; he lay three

weeks in typhus, and gave the disease to twenty-seven persons in the eight

cabins which formed the hamlet. A few months after, about a mile from

Strabane, a mother fell into typhus and was visited many times by her two

married daughters and by others of her children at service in the

neighbourhood. Nineteen cases were traced to this focus; “but the actual

number attacked was probably more than three times this, as the disease,

when once introduced into the town, spread so widely among the lower

orders as to create general alarm, and led to the establishment of the

small fever ward attached to the Dispensary.” It was in April, 1816, that

this was done, two rooms, each with four beds, having been provided at

Strabane for fever cases; but at no time until the summer of 1817 were

they all occupied at once.

The epidemic really began there in May, 1817, in a large house which had

been occupied during the winter by a number of families from the

mountains; they had brought no furniture with them, nor bedding except

their blankets, and lay so close together as to cover the floors. Each

room was rented at a shilling a week, the tenant of a room making up his

rent by taking in beggars at a penny a night. The floors and stairs were

covered with the gathered filth of a whole winter; the straw bedding,

never renewed, was thrown into a corner during the day to be spread again

at night. Every crevice was stopped to keep out the cold; the rain came in

through the roof, the floors were damp, and the cellars of the house full

of stagnant water turned putrid. Meanwhile more than a fourth part of the

families resident in Strabane, to the number of 1026 persons, were being

fed from a soup-house opened early in the spring of 1817, while there were

others equally destitute but too proud to ask relief. The rumour of this

charity soon brought crowds of people from the surrounding country, with

gaunt cheeks, says Carleton, hollow eyes, tottering gait and a look of

“painful abstraction” from the unsatisfied craving for food. In the crowd

round the soup-shop, the timid girl, the modest mother, the decent farmer

scrambled “with as much turbulent solicitation and outcry as if they had

been trained, since their very infancy, to all the forms of impudent cant

and imposture.” These soup-shops were opened in all the Irish towns. At

Strabane some of the richer class lent money to procure supplies, for sale

at cost price, of oatmeal, rice and rye-flour, the last being in much

request in the form of loaves of black bread.

The fever, having begun among the houseful of vagrants above mentioned,

made slow progress until June, when it spread through the town, and in the

autumn became a serious epidemic. Meantime the soup-kitchen was closed,

the supplies having ceased, and the country people returned to their

cabins carrying the infection of typhus everywhere with them. By the

middle of October, 1817, the epidemic was general in the country round

Strabane.

The following table shows the rise and decline of the epidemic of typhus

in the town itself.

_Cases of Fever attended from Strabane Dispensary_[471].

1817 1818

Jan. 9 83

Feb. 13 46

March 6 60

April 13 48

May 3 39

June 10 71

July 60 106

Aug. 206 90

Sept. 287 57

Oct. 233 49

Nov. 193 40

Dec. 140 38

The exact particulars from the Dispensary district of Strabane show

clearly how famine in Ireland is related to fever. The epidemic of typhus

was an indirect result of the famine, and was due most of all to the

vagrancy which a famine was bound to produce in Ireland, in the absence of

a Poor Law. In the spring of 1817, said a gentleman near Tralee, “the

whole country appeared to be in motion.” “It was lamentable,” said Peel,

in the Commons debate, on 22 April, 1818, “at least it was affecting, that

this contagion should have arisen from the open character and feelings of

hospitality for which the Irish character was so peculiarly remarkable.”

They gathered also at funerals, and, as Graves said of a later epidemic,

they were “scrupulous in the performance of wakes.” The concourse of

people at the daily distributions of soup was another cause of spreading

infection, many of them having come out of infected houses[472]. Of such

houses, the lodging-houses of the towns, we have several particular

instances. At Strabane, there were four such, which sent ninety-six

patients to the fever hospital in eighteen months. At Dublin, a house in

Cathedral-lane sent fifty cases to the fever hospitals in a twelvemonth;

the house No. 4, Patrick’s close sent thirty cases in eight months; No.

52½ Kevin-street sent from five rooms nineteen persons in six weeks.

The spread of the disease was much aided by the ordinary annual migration

of harvest labourers. It was the custom every year for cottiers in

Connaught to shut up their cabins after the potatoes were planted, and to

travel to the country round Dublin in search of work at the hay and corn

harvests, leaving their families to beg; in the same way there was an

annual migration from Clare to Kilkenny, from Cavan, Longford and Leitrim

into Meath, and from Derry into Antrim, Down and Armagh[473]. In the

summer of 1817 some parishes of Derry were left with only four or five

families. The keeper of the bridge at Toome, over the Bann, counted more

than a hundred vagrants every day passing into Antrim, from the middle of

May to the beginning of July; and the same might have been seen at the

other bridge over the Bann at Portglenone.

A History of Epidemics in Britain, Volume 2 (of 2) From the Extinction of Plague to the Present Time · 第 6 / 24 章