A Few days ago I received from Dr. Austin, physician at Edinburgh, the
case of the Rev. Mr. Simson, drawn up by himself, in the form of a
letter to Dr. Austin; and which you may remember was alluded to by Dr.
Whytt, in the paper read at the last meeting of the Society.
As I am at liberty to communicate this account to others, I thought
it would not be unacceptable to the gentlemen of the Society, to have
another well-attested instance laid before them of the virtues of soap
in dissolving the stone, or, at least, in removing all those painful
symptoms, which usually accompany that distemper.
To the patient’s own narration I have subjoined an extract from Dr.
Austin’s letter to me, containing the sequel of the case from the date
of Mr. Simson’s letter to his death; with an account of the state of
his bladder, as it appeared to Dr. Austin upon dissection. I am,
SIR,
Your most obedient humble Servant,
John Pringle.
Pall-Mall, 27 April, 1757.
_A Letter from the Rev. Mr._ Simson, _Minister at_ Pencaitland, _to
Dr._ Adam Austin, _Physician in_ Edinburgh.
[Read April 28, 1757.]
Dear Sir,
ACcording to your desire, I send you the history of my case; which is
as follows:
I was of an healthy constitution till the year 1730, when I was seized
with a frequent inclination to make water, without any previous pain
in the kidneys or ureters. This symptom continued till the year 1733,
without giving me much uneasiness.
In June 1733, as I was riding from Edinburgh to my own house at
Pencaitland, I was seized with a great difficulty and pain in making
water, which went off when I got home.
In the month of July, having again got on horseback, I was seized with
the same complaint, but more violent; for then some drops of blood
came away. From this time, if I rode eight or ten miles, I passed some
blood, but without pain.
In September I made a journey of 60 miles on horseback; but every two
miles was obliged to dismount, and made some bloody water.
I continued much in the same way all the year 1734, as the preceding;
only had one additional complaint, of a pain in the glans after making
water, and likewise in the neck of the bladder. The only thing I did
for it was, to drink plentifully of warm milk and water; and gave over
riding, on account of the bloody urine.
In the month of August I was sounded by my nephew, Dr. Simson,
professor of medicine in the university of St. Andrew’s; but he found
no stone, which he attributed to a wrong posture I was in, when he
sounded me.
During the winter, if I walked more than usual, I was sure to have a
return of the bloody urine and strangury.
In November 1735, I was sounded by Mr. Balderstone, surgeon, in
Edinburgh, a gentleman very expert in that operation, and likewise by
Dr. Drummond of Perthshire. They both distinctly felt a stone: and I
myself took hold of the catheter, when it was in my bladder, and felt
the stone as distinctly, as if it had been in my hand.
About Christmas I was seized with a pain along the left ureter, and
violent vomitings; but, upon using a turpentine clyster and opiates, it
went off.
During the year 1736, I continued much the same as the preceding year,
always drinking great plenty of milk and water; which gave me great
relief, as to the bloody urine.
I was advised by my nephew, Dr. Simson, to go to London, and be cut
by Mr. Cheselden; the rest of my friends advising me to be cut by Mr.
Smith, a lithotomist at Perth. However, I deferred the operation, and
continued much the same all the year 1737, having severe fits now and
then.
In the year 1738 Sir Alexander Gibson, of Addiston, informed me, that
he had been in my condition, had passed several small stones, and had
found incredible service from the use of soap pills: for, from not
being able to get out of bed, in the space of two months after using
the soap he was able to go a hunting. However, for some time I was
afraid to try the soap, not knowing what effects it might have on a
confirmed stone; Sir Alexander Gibson’s case being only that of small
stones. But the Rev. Mr. Lundie, of Salton, by experiments convinced
me of the efficacy of soap in dissolving a confirmed stone out of the
bladder; for the stone gradually grew smoother and smoother, and at
last was quite dissolved.
On the 12th of February 1739, I first began the use of the soap, and
in the beginning took only a drachm in the 24 hours. The first week it
made me a little qualmish: however, I gradually increased the dose; so
that in six weeks I took six drachms a day, without its disagreeing in
the least with me. I made it up into pills, and washed them down with a
draught of warm milk and water.
From the time I began to use the soap, my gravelish symptoms gradually
abated; but, upon walking two or three miles, I made bloody urine.
However, that symptom gradually abated; and in the year 1743 all the
symptoms of a stone quite vanished, insomuch that I could walk, ride,
or go in a machine, as well as ever.
From February 1739, to July 1743, I took every day five or six drachms
of soap: but after that time I diminished the dose to half an ounce;
and never after had any return of a gravelish symptom, tho’ I still
imagine the stone is not intirely dissolved; for after sitting some
time, I find as it were something come to the neck of the bladder, but
which gives me no uneasiness.
This, Sir, according to the best of my memory, is my case: and if it
can be of any benefit to you, in the cure of this painful disease, it
will give great pleasure to,
Dear Sir,
Your most obedient Servant,
Matthew Simson.
Nov. 20th, 1749.
_The Extract from Dr._ Austin’_s Letter to Dr._ Pringle.
[Read April 28, 1757.]
THE Rev. Mr. Simson’s letter to me as written in the year 1749; about
which time he told me, that he had ridden 40 miles in a day, without
any bad symptom ensuing.
In the year 1752 he broke his thigh-bone at the neck; by a fall from
his horse, and continued for six weeks in great pain; but after that
time he grew easier, and was able to put his foot to the ground. One
day, as his servant was helping him to walk across the room, he let
him fall; upon which Mr. Simson felt a severe pain: the broken leg
became then evidently shorter than the other; and by that misfortune
he was confined to his bed for near two years. However, about six
months before he died, he was so well recovered, as to be able to go to
church, and to perform divine service.
About the beginning of May 1756, Mr. Simson was seized with a diarrhæa,
which resisted all medicine, and carried him off in the 83d year of his
age. From the date of his letter to his death he had never discontinued
the use of the soap (except during the time of his last illness), tho’
he had not been troubled with any painful symptom of a stone since the
year 1743.
I obtained leave of his friends to open the body, but found no stone
or gravel in the bladder; that part appearing to be, in every respect,
in a natural state, except at the neck, where the coats seemed to be
schirrous, and were about a quarter of an inch thick.
It is probable, that the stone had been of a softer texture, and more
easily dissolved, than ordinary; otherwise five or six drachms of soap
taken daily, even for so long a time, could not have dissolved it
intirely; for many have used that medicine in much larger doses, and at
the same time have drank lime-water plentifully, without obtaining such
effects; tho’ all their painful symptoms were removed by that course,
as Dr. Whytt has shewn in his treatise on this subject.
I shall only add, that Mr. Simson’s son, who is now minister at Fala,
was present at the opening of the body, and can attest, that there was
no stone found in the bladder.
Adam Austin.
Edinburgh, 15 April 1757.
_A Letter from Dr._ Adam Drummond _to Dr._ Adam Austin, _relating to
the Rev. Mr._ Matthew Simson’_s Case. Communicated by_ J. Pringle,
_M.D. F.R.S._
[Read June 23, 1757.]
I Have yours; and was present when Mr. Balderstone sounded Mr.
Simson; and both of us perceived, very distinctly, a large stone: and
Mr. Simson himself felt it; which we were the more sollicitous he
should do, as he was sounded before by Dr. Simson, who had declared
there was no stone. But the particular magnitude of it we could not
well determine at the end of a long catheter; tho’ I remember Mr.
Balderstone, who was well versed in that business, conjectured it to
be pretty large. He was sounded only once by us, as the urethra was a
little hurt by turning the catheter. There is only one circumstance
in the case, which Mr. Simson seems to have omitted; that, from the
first symptoms of the stone, he passed a great deal of _mucus_ mixed
with _pus_, as well as blood; and great quantities of gritty red sand,
all in single grains, never any concreted into small stones. I take
the more notice of this, as I do not remember, that, after he used the
soap, he ever passed any sand, but a good deal of _mucus_, in which
the soap was discoverable by its frothing. Could the gritty particles
of sand be again suspended in the urine, so as to become invisible? or
were they wrapt up in the soapy liquid, so as to escape observation? I
have seen several stones of a soft consistence dissolved into mucilage
by soap: but the sand passed by Mr. Simson, before he used the soap,
seems to indicate his stone of a harder nature, tho’ indeed it felt
obtuse at the end of the catheter.
I shall rejoice, if many instances of this kind are found afterwards:
but this seems to be the only one yet, of a stone in the bladder being
dissolved by soap alone. I am,
Dear Doctor,
Your most humble Servant,
Adam Drummond.
Bandeeran, June 5. 1757.
XXVIII. _An Account of the Impressions of Plants on the Slates
of Coals: In a Letter to the Right Honourable_ George _Earl of_
Macclesfield, _President of the R.S. from Mr._ Emanuel Mendes da Costa,
_F.R.S._
[Read April 28, 1757.]
My Lord,
I Have the honour to address this letter to your Lordship, in order to
be communicated to the Royal Society, if your Lordship deems it worthy
the attention of that learned and illustrious assembly.
The impressions of various kinds of plants are frequently, I might
say always, found in some of the strata lying over coal; but more
particularly in a stratum of earthy slat, which, in my History of
Fossils, page 168. Species IV. I have synonymed _Schistus terrestris
niger carbonarius_, and which always lies immediately upon the
coal-stratum, not only in the coal-pits of this kingdom, but of many
other parts of Europe, _e.g._ France, Saxony, Bohemia, Silesia, _&c._
Most of these impressions, my Lord, are of the _herbæ capillares et
affines_, the gramineous, and the reed tribes: but, however, among
them many rare and beautiful impressions undoubtedly of vegetable
origin, and impressed by plants hitherto unknown to botanists, are not
unfrequently met with.
Besides these, my Lord, found over coal-pits, there are likewise found
in some parts of this kingdom, as at Robinhood’s-bay in Yorkshire,
Coalbrookdale in Shropshire, _&c._ many curious impressions of the
fern tribe in regular nodules of iron-stone; and, in the latter place,
not only impressions of plants, but even the cones or iuli of some
kinds of trees are met with, very perfect and fair, and curiously
imbedded in masses of iron-stone.
[Illustration: _Philos. Trans. Vol. L._ TAB. V. _p. 229_.
_J. Mynde sc._ ]
The most part of the impressions of ferns, grasses, _&c._ are easily
recognizable, they so minutely tally to the plants they represent.
Others indeed, tho’ they do not exactly answer any known species, yet
have characters so distinctly expressed, that they are easily arranged
under their respective genera[139]. Therefore I shall not trouble
your Lordship with any further remarks on all such, but shall only
touch on those elegant and extraordinary impressions, probably of
unknown vegetables, above-mentioned: for that they are the parts and
impressions of vegetables, I think clearly evinced, if we attentively
and with a philosophical mind consider them, and reflect on the various
circumstances, which attend them in the places, where they now lie
buried.
I have therefore the honour, my Lord, to exhibit the drawings of seven
such extraordinary impressions, and the fossiles themselves, for your
Lordship’s and this learned body’s inspection (_See_ TAB. V.). The
impressions figured Nº. 1. is from Mr. Mytton’s collieries at Drilt,
near Oswestry, in Shropshire; as are also those figured Nº. 2, 4, and
7: they are found sometimes two feet in length, and are generally
covered with a thin crust of coal. The specimina Dr. Woodward exhibits,
Catalogue B, pages 106, 107. specimina _q._ 22. and _q._ 32. are
analogous to this, tho’ not exactly the same. The Doctor’s fossiles
were from Haigh in Lancashire; and he imagines the impressions to be
made by vegetables of the fir kind. Volckman also, in his _Silesia
subterranea_, tab. 22. fig. 2. figures a branch with a rhomboidal work
on it, and with three long narrow leaves, which seems akin to this
impression.
Nº. 2. seems of the reed tribe: the knobs placed in rows, which are
like the vesicles on the _quercus marina_, and some other _algæ_,
are very remarkable. Woodward, Catalogue B. page 9. specimen _a._ 1.
exhibits an impression akin to this, which he imagines to be of the
fern kind.
Nº. 3. from a coal-pit in Yorkshire. I cannot but think this impression
is owing to somewhat of the fir kind. Dr. Woodward, who exhibits such
a like impression, Catalogue B. p. 16. specimen _a._ 108. imagines the
same: his words are, “The impression is much like what might be made by
the branches of the common fir, after the leaves are fallen or stript
off.”
Nº. 4. seems to be of the same kind as Nº. 2.
Nº. 5. This extraordinary impression is from Mostyn-colliery in
Flintshire. It is a little obscured; but, when attentively viewed,
exhibits a reticular impression, the meshes whereof are rhomboidal
hollows, and the sides of the rhombs, or the net-work, are raised, or
in relief.
Nº. 6. is from Newcastle. Volckman, ibid, part 3. tab. 4. fig. 9. seems
to be of this kind.
Nº. 7. The same author, Volckman, figures a somewhat-like impression,
ibid. fig. 5.
Only these seven extraordinary impressions I have presumed, my Lord,
to treat of at this present time; but I have many more in my cabinet
equally curious, some few of which I here exhibit to the Society,
without taking any further notice of them: only I shall add, that many
extraordinary impressions occur in Woodward’s and other collections,
and many are iconed in authors, worthy the attention of the curious.
These impressions, my Lord, are not only met with in small pieces;
but large evident branches, some feet in length, have been found. I
have, in the collieries of Derbyshire, frequently traced branches with
(what seemed to me) long narrow leaves proceeding from them, and parts
of other vegetables, above a foot’s length: but the hardness of the
substance they are immersed in renders it impossible to get them out
without breaking them to pieces[140].
As these remains of vegetables are very extraordinary, I would
recommend to the curious in botany to take notice of them, as an
_Appendix Plantarum adhuc incognitarum_. For my part, I am so very
little skilled in botany, that I hardly presume to offer my opinion;
which is, that they are impressions and parts of species of the firs
and pines, of the tithymals, the cereus’s, and other arborescent
plants, and of large reeds; for some of the said kind are embellished
with ribbed, studded, and reticulated works; _e.g._ the Hercules’
club, or _rubi facie senticosa planta Lobelii_, described by Dr. Grew,
_Museum Reg. Soc._ p. 221. the _cerei, &c._
I further exhibit to the Society some few specimina of iron-stones with
cones or iuli imbedded in them. These, my Lord, are from veins of ball
iron-stone, in the lands of Lord Gower, at Okenyate, a village on the
Roman road of Watling-street; and from the iron-works at Coalbrookdale
in Shropshire. The cones are frequently met with in fragments, but
rarely so intire, and are never found but in the strata of iron-stone.
I have added to these a figured fossile body, much like a cone, found
sometimes in our chalk-pits in England, but chiefly in the pits at
Cherry-Hinton in Cambridgeshire. Dr. Woodward, Catalogue B. p. 22.
specimen _b._ 72. calls them cones seeming to be of the larix; and
imagines they were not come to ripeness or maturity. They certainly
have some resemblance to cones, tho’ I much doubt them to be so; but
they most exactly resemble the roots of the _cyperus rotundus vulgaris_
of botanists.
I shall finish this paper, my Lord, by acquainting your Lordship and
the Society, that I firmly believe these bodies to be of the vegetable
origin, buried in the strata of the earth at the time of the universal
deluge recorded by Moses. It is, I must confess, with regret, that
I find there are some, who reject the burial of these bodies at
that fatal catastrophe, but substitute partial deluges to account
for it. Did those gentlemen consider, or maturely weigh, the many
remarkable and strong evidences of an universal deluge, every-where
obvious in the bowels of the earth, they certainly would abandon their
imaginary system: for, my Lord, it is not only the immense quantities
of marine remains, dispersed in all terrestrial strata, which are
to be considered (that circumstance alone might give some reasoning
to their system of partial deluges), but the following more weighty
circumstances are likewise to be added and flung into the scale. 1º.
The heavings, displacings, trappings, and breaks of the metallic veins,
and the loads of rubble, met with at vast depths, and where no marine
remains were ever found; and such heavings, _&c._ are not rare in
metallic or mineral works: of which, to give your Lordship an idea, I
have presumed to sketch the following plan of such a phænomenon.
[Illustration: These cross-loads are not unfrequent in the mines on
North Downs, near Redruth, in Cornwall. Wheal-Widden copper-work there,
in 1750, was about 60 fathoms deep. The load was 20 feet over; and has
many cross-loads two or three feet over, which sometimes heave the
metallic load from one to five or six fathom. These cross-loads are
generally filled with fragments of stone, minerals and other rubble.]
2º. If these effects proceed from local deluges, recedings of the sea,
gulphs atterrated, _&c._ we should then indeed find marine remains: but
how will that account for the vast quantity of remains of terrestrial
vegetables and animals, equally met with, and in like manner as the
marine remains, in the bowels of the earth? And, 3º. Were local or
partial deluges the cause, we should then find only the animals and
plants of the climates or places, where such deluges have happened;
whereas in these fossil remains it is quite the contrary: the remains
of those plants and animals, we know, are of animals and plants, the
inhabitants of the most remote climes from those, where they now lie
buried; _e.g._ the rhinoceros-bones, in the cave called Baumans-hole,
in the Hartz Forest in Germany; the strange bones in the Antra Draconum
in Hungary; the horns of the moose-deer, and other prodigious horns,
and elephants bones, found in England, Ireland, Germany, Sibiria,
and even America, _&c._ of vegetables, parts of the arbor tristis in
France; bamboo’s, or great Indian reeds, frequent in England; with
numbers of other such examples. And of those remains even of the marine
shells, yet unknown to us, all appear exotic to the climes where they
now lie deposited; _e.g._ the cliffs at Harwich in Essex abound with
a species of _buccinum heterostrophum_, and other shells, never yet
discovered in the adjacent waters. The _ammonitæ_ of so many species,
and the innumerable variety of _conchæ anomiæ_, with which this island
abounds, are yet unknown to be inhabitants of our seas, and appear
exotic to this climate. Therefore, my Lord, I reasonably conclude
partial or local deluges could never have produced such effects.
However, unprejudiced to any opinion, if the learned, who favour the
system of partial deluges, will either confute these my assertions,
or give solid reasons for the facts alleged to be producible by local
deluges, atterrations, _&c._ I will joyfully embrace the truth: but
till then, my Lord, I would recommend to those systematical gentlemen,
not to pervert that excellent maxim of the great Lord Bacon, and,
instead of _Non fingendum neque excogitandum, sed inveniendum quid
natura faciat, aut ferat_, not to corrupt it into _fingendum atque
excogitandum, non inveniendum quid natura faciat, aut ferat_.