_Of the Secret Antimonial Medicines, and particularly of the
fever-powder._
If the difficulty of conducting the operation of antimony, renders the
general application of it, in regular practice, dangerous, it must, as
a secret remedy, in the hands of those who have no medicinal skill, be
still more pernicious. But as some secrets, now, universally extolled,
are avowed, by their proprietors, to be preparations of antimony, let us
next proceed to examine their claim to the high character which they have
obtained. For this purpose the fever-powder may be selected, since if the
impropriety and danger of its general use should be demonstrated, the
arguments in favour of less celebrated secrets will not require a serious
refutation.
Unpleasing as the task may be, and however odious, to some, it may render
the man who undertakes it, yet the great importance of life and health
requires, that the precepts of the most illustrious physicians should not
pass without examination, nor secret and mysterious remedies be adopted
with implicit faith.
The devout solemnity with which the fever-powder is ushered into the
world, the exorcisms against detractors and malicious persecutors, and
the invocation of God to support his own work, being in the usual stile
of the mystical chymists, require no comment. _As there may be some_,
says the Inventor, _whose lucrative views may tempt them to persecute me,
and the method I propose, with all the detraction and falsehood which
may be expected from self-interest and unprovoked revenge, these I shall
advise to save themselves a good deal of unnecessary trouble, and to let
it alone; for if it be of men it will come to nought, but if it be of
God ye cannot overthrow it_[72]. When magical chymistry and superstition
reigned over the dark ages of ignorance, this charm would have secured it
from all enquiry. But as the sober light of religion and philosophy hath
now illuminated the world, and displayed the absurdity of that servile
bondage which obstructed all improvement, we may, notwithstanding this
solemn prohibition, with candor and modesty, proceed to examine the real
merit of this boasted arcanum.
The process for making it has been carefully concealed, while its being
an antimonial preparation, hath, with industry and ostentation, been
universally published. From the view which has already been given of
the natural history of antimony, its analysis and chymical properties,
its preparations and their medical effects, it has, I think, been
clearly proved, that however efficacious it may have been in particular
circumstances, and under judicious management, yet there is not, in
unskilful hands, a medicine more dangerous and destructive.
By a judicious regulation of the doses of different preparations of
antimony, by guarding against the pernicious effects which might arise
from the virulent particles which it contains, by directing such
food, drink, and medicines as may promote its salutary operation, and
prohibiting those by which it might be rendered noxious; skilful and
experienced physicians have been able, in singular instances, to render
it a safe and efficacious remedy: but when it has been accidentally
or imprudently given in too large doses[73], or joined with such food
or medicines as excite its poisonous qualities[74], it has not only
proved too violent in its operations, but has been productive of fatal
consequences.
Had, therefore, the Inventor discovered a method of divesting this
Proteus-like mineral of all pernicious qualities, and rendering it a
medicine invariably safe and efficacious, however combined with other
remedies, or mixed with a variety of humours, food, and drink in the
stomach, his powder would have been more proper for common use, and might
have been trusted, in unskilful hands, with less danger, than other
antimonial preparations. But it does not in this respect lay any claim to
superiority. _Supposing_, says the Inventor, _physicians perfectly well
skilled in the preparation and uses of it, that knowledge will inform
them, that nothing can be added to it that will in any degree increase
its virtues; or rather that no addition can be made to it that will not
diminish them_[75].
By this frank declaration we understand that the fever-powder retains
the mutability of antimony, and is, from slight accidents, changed from
a salutary medicine to a noxious substance; and hence proceeds the
Inventor’s anxiety to prevent improper combinations. But the dread of
dangerous consequences, or some other cause, has led him unwarily and
inconsistently to depreciate his powder, and reduce it below all other
antimonial preparations; for though by certain additions the virtues of
antimony may be diminished, yet by others they may be improved; and this,
it is probable, from the known properties of that mineral, will also hold
with the fever-powder, although the contrary is here expressly asserted.
But, lest the assertion should give unfavourable impressions, it is
immediately retracted; and we are told that, _occasion may sometimes
occur of employing, advantageously, a regimen, or even medicine, when
judgment directs and integrity presides_[76]. and again: _It sometimes
happens, when little or no putrid bile is contained in the stomach,
bowels, &c. &c. that the powder, though given in the largest doses, will
have no sensible operation of any kind whatever. In these cases half, or
a whole paper should be repeated every four or six hours. But on those
occasions, it will be proper to procure two stools in twenty four hours,
either by a clyster, which is the most easy way, or by giving, with every
dose of the powder, from five to ten grains of rhubarb_[77]_. But in
some constitutions where a putrid bile has very much abounded, and for
this reason the stimulus of the medicine, added to that of the bile, has
been apt to operate more than was sufficient, it has been necessary to
reduce the dose so low as two or three grains_[78]: and thus, after a
series of contradictions, the fever-powder, as might have been expected,
is declared to require the addition of other medicines, and to be as
uncertain in its operation as other antimonials.
These contradictions are suspicious, but if the efficacy of the medicine
is confirmed by authentic facts, the Inventor may still be intitled to
our confidence; and for this purpose some cases are related in which
it was successfully used: the first is that of Mrs. Morton, on which
it is remarked, that _many gentlewomen were present during her whole
disorder, saw her take the medicine, observed the effects, and are ready
to give their testimony to the truth of what has been asserted_. From
what has been advanced on this subject, it clearly appears, that the
operation of antimony is precarious, and its effects uncertain. Not
only the most skilful physicians have given various and contradictory
opinions concerning it, but the judgment of the same person has varied
at different times[79]: it is not therefore to be expected, that a fact,
which has not yet been agreed upon by the most intelligent and attentive
practitioners, should be ascertained by these charitable _gentlewomen_,
who, however sincere and humane their intentions might be, cannot be
supposed to have any pretensions to that critical and discriminating
skill which is necessary to determine a question so intricate. The
Inventor therefore, in offering to the publick a proof so incompetent,
must have relied on that credulity which, though generally abused, is
still continued.
But though the cases had been attested by competent judges, yet the
inferences in favour of the powder are not warranted by the circumstances
related. Thus Mr. French of St. Albans street, late Surgeon of his
Majesty’s ship the Levant, “_having given tartar emetic and other
medicines unsuccessfully, prescribed the powder on the fourth day of
the fever: it was continued on the fifth, and on the evening of that
day, the fever being entirely removed, on account of the lowness and
weakness of the patient, a drachm of bark was given every hour in a
glass of Madeira_[80].” The misrepresentation, in this case, is evident,
since the cure must be attributed, by candid and intelligent judges,
not to the powder, but to the bark and Madeira; and the slovenliness of
the deception is an insult to the credulity of the publick, as this is
perhaps the only instance in which it has been pretended, on account of
lowness and weakness, to give every hour a drachm of bark in a glass of
Madeira.
These are not the only circumstances in which the evidence is deceitful;
successful cases are industriously published, while those ending fatally
are carefully concealed. The medicine is frequently given in slight
disorders which could not, even by improper management, be rendered
dangerous, and when the sick recover, its praise is loudly proclaimed.
Those who use it often become insensibly interested in advancing its
reputation, and are not only incompetent judges, but partial in their
testimony. Thus some who, with horror and remorse have applied for
assistance, accusing themselves of murder, and vowing, for ever, to
renounce quackery, have afterwards triumphed and assumed the credit of
cures of which they had absolutely despaired, though the sick were, by
other means, rescued from the danger incurred by the severe operation of
this violent remedy; while others, shocked by the fatal consequences of
their facility and misplaced confidence, wish to banish it for ever from
their remembrance. The cases must therefore be dismissed as insufficient
to justify the claim of infallibility to this antimonial preparation.
A proof of its salutary influence is attempted to be drawn from the
bills of mortality. Fewer having, on an average, died in the space of
thirteen years, from the year one thousand seven hundred and fifty,
to the year one thousand seven hundred and sixty-three, than in the
preceding thirteen years; this decrease in the funerals amounting to
sixty-two thousand, two-hundred and sixty-six, is attributed to the
fever-powder[81].
It might with some plausibility be objected, that the bills of mortality
being collected from the reports of incompetent judges, cannot be
admitted as proper evidence of the fact; but as no extraordinary skill
seems necessary for the employment, and as the bills cannot be supposed
to be made up with any partial intention, this argument must be
admitted; and if the deaths, by fevers, shall be found to have decreased,
in so great proportion, since the powder has been in general use, its
reputation will be established by the most desirable evidence.
In collecting this proof, the whole circle of disorders, accidents
and casualties has been calculated, though the powder was then only
recommended for fevers. It has, indeed, been since extended to other
diseases, but our examination shall be restricted to fevers, during the
period to which the Inventor refers.
Though some of the cases which he relates happened in the year one
thousand seven hundred and forty-one, yet the medicine was not much
known till one thousand seven hundred and fifty, the æra from which its
auspicious influence on the bills of mortality is dated. But antimonial
medicines were more in fashion before the powder came into general use,
than at any future time. Dr. Huxham having, in the year one thousand
seven hundred and thirty-seven, recommended, in the highest strain of
panegyric, the vinum benedictum, it was universally adopted, though
expressly condemned by the Inventor of the fever-powder. _Great numbers_,
says he, _of those whose employment it is to attend the sick, cunningly
exhibited to their patients something, which they asserted was like the
fever-powder, and would do as well. I leave it to the relations of those
who took the something, to judge the consequence, for I suppose few or
none of them who were thus treated survive_[82].
The something, it is well known, was essence of antimony or tartar
emetic, medicines under the direction of prudent practitioners, similar
in their operation and in their effects, not only to each other, but
also to the fever-powder; and though the Inventor has perhaps too much
indulged his indignation against his competitors in the antimonial
trade, yet his general position, concerning the fatal consequences of
the universal administration of antimonial medicines, is well supported
by the evidence to which he has appealed, the bills of mortality having
greatly increased during the prevalence of that practice.
The numbers of those who died of fevers from the year one thousand seven
hundred and thirty-eight, to one thousand seven hundred and fifty,
including a series of thirteen years, is fifty-five thousand four hundred
and ninety, and those in a like series of years, immediately succeeding,
is thirty-six thousand three hundred and seventy-two; consequently
nineteen thousand one hundred and eighteen fewer have died in the latter
than in the former period, and this has, with some appearance of justice,
been urged as a proof of the efficacy of the fever-powder.
But if this decrease in the funerals were actually owing to that
medicine, it should have been still more observable in the last ten
years, when the powder has been more universally used. But, in that
period, thirty-five thousand four hundred and ninety-four have died,
and consequently, the number of deaths, by fevers, have increased
eight thousand seven hundred and eighty; and if inflammation, rash,
and sore-throat, which were included in the former calculations, are
added, the number will amount, nearly, to ten thousand, and therefore,
on an average, _one thousand, or near one-third_ more have died, of
fevers, _every year_, in the last ten years, while the medicine has
been universally used, than in the thirteen immediately preceding. The
proof, therefore, from the bills of mortality is fatal to the fame of the
fever-powder, and the decrease in the funerals during the thirteen years
to which the Inventor appeals for the success of his antimonial powder,
must be attributed to the desertion of the antimonial practice, and not
to its prevalence.
But an appeal to the sum-total of the funerals, to prove the efficacy
of the fever-powder, is unfair and inconclusive, since a great number
of deaths happen from disorders, accidents and casualties with which it
cannot possibly have any connection. That it might have a fair trial, our
calculation has been restricted to fevers; and if the other diseases, in
which it is recommended, had been included, the evidence would have been
still more unfavourable.
Another argument in favour of the powder is, _if it had not been attended
with general success, it could not, amidst the opposition of Physicians,
have grown into reputation_. But transitions, from the highest
approbation of antimony, to the absolute condemnation of it, have been
so frequent, and are so familiar to those acquainted with its history,
that no conclusion can be drawn from its casual reputation, or transitory
condemnation; and since, in the course of our enquiry, no advantage has
been taken of the penal laws enacted against its use, nor of the public
edicts by which it has been prohibited, neither can any concession be
made on account of the transient applause, _artfully_, obtained to some
of its preparations.
As to the opposition of physicians, the Inventor, indeed, that the
prophecy with which he set out might be fulfilled[83], complains, that
all laws human and divine, have been trampled upon in opposing him; that
he has been persecuted with _malice, rancour, virulence, detraction
and unprovoked revenge_, and that his enemies have not only sacrificed
_candour, honour, truth and reputation_, but even the _lives_ committed
to their care, in order to discredit his boasted arcanum[84].
Were we not witnesses of his triumph, we should naturally conclude that
he had suffered as a martyr in the cause of truth and humanity. Yet we
find, in his Dissertation, many cases in which the powder was given
under the sanction of eminent physicians, and these, too, produced by
the author, in proof of its efficacy; though by his own account of the
medicine, it is of all others the most improper to be used without an
accurate knowledge of its composition, and cannot therefore be prescribed
by physicians on any justifiable principles; although they may, from
facility or complaisance, yield to the importunity and prejudice of the
sick or their relations, and assent, even against their better judgement,
to its administration.
_When the fever-powder is given_, says the Inventor, _no other medicine
should be taken either with it, or during the course of it. For want of
this caution many have perished. For it may be depended upon, that in the
state of credit in which it has at present the honour of standing amongst
many of the medicinal worthies, nothing is meant by any addition, but
to counteract or discredit the powder at the expence of the patient’s
life. It is usual for them to say, that they are acquainted with the
preparation of the medicine, or that they cannot use a medicine that they
do not know, just as either favours the present intention and purpose.
Now let us suppose they do not know it, which is very true; by what
conjuration, magic, or inspiration are they taught a method of improving,
by adding something to a medicine, of which they are so totally ignorant,
that they choose to suffer their friends to perish rather than employ
it_[85].
It may be left to the Author to explain how those physicians, who do not
use the powder, _kill_ their friends, by adding something to counteract
or discredit it, while from his own declaration, we may fairly conclude
that those who _do use it_, must, in _his_ opinion, be destitute either
of judgment or integrity. _For supposing them_, says he, _perfectly well
skilled in the preparation and uses of it, their behaviour is, for this
very reason, abundantly more infamous. For the same knowledge would
inform them, that no addition can be made to it that will not diminish
its virtues_[86].
But so far is this heinous charge of committing _murder_ to discredit
the powder from being supported by any shadow of proof, that physicians,
on the contrary, have been complaisant to excess, or culpably indolent,
in suffering the many _misrepresentations_ concerning this medicine to
pass uncensured and unexposed; and those who, from the most laudable
principles, have refused to adopt it, are wanting to themselves, to
their profession, and to the public, in neglecting to explain the
honourable principles on which they have acted; while others from
different motives, _which they can best justify to themselves_, have
acquired fame and fortune by a _studied_ compliance with the popular
prejudices in favour of this fashionable remedy.
In the course of more than twenty years practice, though I have never
prescribed this medicine, yet, I have not, after fairly declaring my
opinion, opposed its being given, when desired by the sick or their
relations; and as the cure, where I have been concerned, has been wholly
committed to it, without the addition of any medicine, or even regimen,
excepting what is prescribed in the printed directions, or what the
Inventor himself has ordered, some fair opportunities have occurred of
observing its effects, to which, and to every other information that
could be obtained, with a mind open to conviction, I have carefully
attended. But in this, as in all our former researches, the evidence has
been unfavourable to the fame of the powder.
In some instances it has occasioned fainting, convulsions, and other
violent symptoms, which terrified those who gave it. In all which I
have seen, it has proved unsuccessful, though, in some cases the cure
has afterwards been accomplished by safer methods; and in those where
it was too late to use other remedies, the sick have died, although it
was probable they might have recovered by a different management, which
has succeeded in similar instances, but from an abused and misplaced
confidence, has too often been set aside to make way for this favourite
medicine.
An argument still remains in favour of the powder drawn from the credit
due to its Inventor. If that is impeached by what has already been
advanced, it is only by the force of the evidence, since all personal
application has been avoided. But as the reputation of the medicine
is chiefly supported by an implicit confidence in the Inventor, it is
necessary, however unpleasing, that this should also be considered.
When our assent is demanded, on the credibility of the relator, to any
fact which we are not permitted to examine, we can only judge of its
probability from his known accuracy and ability. Several specimens of
these have occurred in the course of our enquiry. Quotations have been
misrepresented[87]. Authorities misapplied[88]. Evidence produced which
establishes facts, directly opposite to those in support of which it is
perverted[89]. Palpable contradictions have been pointed out[90]; and an
air of mystery and devotion detected, the tendency of which, when joined
to a train of suspicious circumstances, cannot be mistaken[91].
But the inaccuracy betrayed in the directions given with the powder,
is sufficient to put us on our guard. _The best general and plain
direction_, we are told, _is to repeat half a paper, or ten grains and
a half of the powder once in six hours[92], but in South America they
seldom give less than twenty_, which the Inventor _thinks right_[93],
yet when it fell under the direction of the navy-surgeons, the general
rule which was avowedly intended, and is still continued, for the common
people, was found to be fraught with danger, and the Inventor admits
that it has been necessary to reduce the dose so low as two or three
grains[94], thereby acknowledging _the best plain general direction, to
be a very improper one for the common people_, since no good reason can
be assigned, why ten or twenty-one grains should be given by those who
have no medical skill, though it is judged necessary to warn others, who
may be supposed capable of conducting its operation, and detecting and
counteracting its pernicious effects, of the necessity of reducing it, in
some cases, to two or three grains. The only solution of this parodox,
is, _there is one faith for the learned, and another for the unlearned_.
But not to insist on the contradictions abounding in this dissertation,
one more only shall be mentioned. No addition, it has been said, can be
made to this medicine, by which its virtues will not be diminished, and
that assertion has again been retracted; but as one affirmation is as
good as another, that there may be no doubt which is to be credited, the
Inventor _being extremely cautious of leading any one into error in an
affair of so much importance as is that of life, thinks it imprudent to
neglect repeated bleeding, purges, clysters, and all other assistances
which the art of medicine can afford_[95], and is _obliged to own,
that, as he esteemed life too sacred to be hazarded for the sake of an
experiment, he had never neglected to call in all other medical aids
to his assistance when he thought the case required them, and believed
they would of service_[96]. But though he is _extremely cautious_, and
though _life_ is too sacred to be hazarded, yet the experiment of using
the powder without any addition or aid, is still to be tried _throughout
the whole British dominions, and in other parts of the world, where our
commerce has conveyed it_[97], excepting by the Inventor and the Navy
Surgeons, _who being persons versed in practice will readily distinguish
when the rules laid down are punctually to be followed and when not_[98].
The real motives assigned for these contradictions and this mysterious
conduct, _waving whatever artifices might be employed by way of
palliation or disguise, are represented without reserve, and with that
sincerity which will stand the strictest scrutiny_. The Inventor _was
very cautious of divulging a medicine of such vast importance, because if
it failed of success, it would subject him to infinite reproach. He was
so ignorant as to expect assistance and applause from every one concerned
in any branch of physic, not considering that a miliary or nervous fever
of twenty days continuance, was attended with greater emoluments than
one that terminated in two or three. But he had soon an opportunity of
discovering his error, for some became his avowed enemies, without the
least pretence to any provocation; whilst others, with the countenance
of friendship, pointed a dagger to his breast_[99], and therefore, after
a contest between simplicity and caution, ignorance and shrewdness,
the unsuspecting Inventor _thought it time prudently to consult his
own interest, and the advancement of his private fortune, by securing
to himself the exclusive privilege, and putting it out of the power of
others to disguise, misrepresent, deny, or forge facts_[100].
Thus, from the parade, ostentation, and mysterious secrecy, with which
this medicine has been published, from its resemblance to the Berlin
specific febrifuge, from its being prepared from an arsenical mineral,
and easily converted into a noxious substance; from the difficulty
of ascertaining the dose, and conducting its operation, and from the
necessity of calling in other medical aids to its assistance; from the
incompetency of the generality of the witnesses in its favour; from
the unfair conclusions drawn from their testimony; from the dangerous
symptoms and fatal consequences, which have followed its administration;
from the inaccuracy and inconsistency of its Inventor; and from the
increase of the bills of mortality during its general use, it appears,
not only, that no proof of its salutary efficacy has been produced, but
that many circumstances and facts, which have been perverted to that
purpose, concur to demonstrate its general and indiscriminate application
to be highly dangerous to mankind, to whom, to borrow the language of
the Inventor, _it is not material, whether they lose their lives by
ignorance, mistake, or design_.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Prelati enim, et fratres, me jejuniis macerantes tuto custodiebant,
nec aliquem ad me venire voluerant, veriti ne scripta mea, aliis quam
summo pontifici et sibi ipsis pervenirent. Epistola Rogeri Bacon ad
Clement. IV.
[2] Triumphal Chariot of Antimony.
[3] Id. p. 3, and p. 118.
[4] Paracelsus.
[5] Triumphal Chariot of Antimony, p. 93.
[6] Poppius’s Basilica Antimonii, Newman’s Chemistry, &c. &c.
[7] New Dispensatory, p. 21.
[8] Dr. James describes cobalt, from which the most virulent kind of
arsenic is extracted, a ponderous, hard, fossil substance, almost black,
not unlike antimony. Universal English Dispensatory, p. 288.
[9] Triumphal Chariot of Antimony, p. 37.
[10] See Schroder’s Pharmacopœia, Poppius’s Basilica Antimonii.
[11] Philosophical Furnaces, book i. and ii. and Mineral Work, part first.
[12] Ninth chapter of the first book of Surgery.
[13] Triumphal Chariot of Antimony, p. 187.
[14] Triumphal Chariot of Antimony, p. 188 and 189.
[15] Triumphal Chariot of Antimony, p. 64.
[16] Ibid. p. 49.
[17] Lemery Cours de Chymie, p. 283. Geoffrey’s Treatise of the Materia
Medica, tom. i. p. 41. Poppius Basil. cap. 8. p. 216, Newman’s Chymistry,
New Dispensatory, &c.
[18] Geoffroy Memoires de l’Academie des Sciences 1735.
[19] Dr. James’s Dispensatory, page 282.
[20] New Dispensatory, page 236.
[21] Cronstedt’s Essay toward a System of Mineralogy, translated by Da
Costa, Sect. 135. p. 223. London 1772.
[22] See p. 14. Cronstedt’s Essay, sect. 236, and the New Dispensatory.
[23] Newman’s Chymistry, New Dispensatory, &c.
[24] Cronstedt’s Essay toward a System of Mineralogy, p. 223, 224.
Stahl on the Arsenical Substance of Antimony. Hoffman of the wonderful,
virulent and medical powers of Antimony, and the easy transition from one
to the other.
[25] Id. Ibid.
[26] Stahl’s Chymico-Physico-Medical Works, page 488-591. On the
arsenenical substance of antimony.
[27] New Dispensatory, page 343.
[28] New Dispensatory, p. 85 and 86.
[29] Basilica Antimonii, in the Appendix to Hartman’s Chymistry, p. 896.
[30] See the fifth part of the Philosophical Furnaces.
[31] Vol. I. Of the Theory of Chymistry, p. 31, of sulphureous
semi-metals.
[32] Chymical Dictionary on the Ores of Antimony.
[33] Cronstedt’s Essay toward a System of Mineralogy, translated by Da
Costa. London, 1772.
[34] Compare Glauber’s account of the effect of orpiment cups, in page
31, with that of essence of antimony in the fourth section.
[35] Mais quelquefois il se (antimoine) rencontre avec des sels acides
qui l’ouvrent, (dans l’estomach, et dans les intestines) luy donnent
une nouvelle fermentation, et lui sont produire des super-purgations
incommodes. Traîte de l’antimoine, par M. Nicholas Lemery, p. 7.
[36] Dr. James’s, in his Dispensatory, page 285.
[37] Observationes Physico-Chymicæ, p. 233.
[38] We are told by Newman, that the utmost caution is necessary to avoid
the fumes of arsenic, and that it is on account of the danger arising
from them that this mineral has been so little examined by the chymists;
but according to Dr. Percival’s late observations, they seem to have been
mistaken. I have, says he, some doubt, whether the vapours of arsenic
be so poisonous as is commonly supposed, and if the candid reader will
excuse the digression, I will lay before him my reasons for it. To solder
works of silver filligree, and other delicate manufactures of that kind,
a composition is used of which arsenic is the principal ingredient. The
solder is melted by the flame of a lamp, directed by a blow-pipe; and
this operation cannot be performed with due accuracy, but in a close
room. The greatest part of the arsenic is evaporated by the blast and
flames, and some part also of the rest of the solder. The workmen must
constantly breath these vapors, because there is little or no current of
air to carry them into the chimney. Yet the men appear to enjoy as good
health, and to live as long as other artists who pursue their business
in close rooms, and use lamps. Amongst other examples of the truth of
this observation, I saw one lately at the manufactory at Soho, near
Birmingham: a man, aged upwards of fifty years, who has soldered silver
filigree more than five and thirty years, and has regularly passed from
eight to twelve hours daily in his occupation, and is at present fat,
strong, active, chearful, and of a complexion by no means sickly. Neither
he, nor his brother artists, use any means to counteract the effects of
their trade. Dr. Percival’s Observations and Experiments on the Poison of
Lead, p. 75, 76, and 77, London, 1774.
[39] The word reguline signifies royal, and has been applied by chymists
to the harder or more fixed parts of minerals or metals. Hoffman uses
reguline and arsenical indifferently when applied to antimony; and
Carthusier asserts that the intimate union of the reguline part with
the arsenical principle of antimony, is the cause of its being caustic,
drastic, emetic, and virulent.
La parte reguline est etroitement unie au principe arsenical, qu’elle
est par elle-meme caustique drastique, emetique, et virulente. Matiere
Medicalle, tom. ii. sect. xv. chap. v. De l’antimoine crud. A Paris, 1765.
[40] Observationes Physico-Chymicæ, p. 251 & 252.
[41] Newman, p. 146.
[42] Opuscula Chymico-Physico-Medica, p. 434-441.
[43] In a treatise on the medical virtues of poisons, published in 1702.
[44] In an inaugural speech printed in 1700. This and the last quoted
author I have not seen.
[45] Observations, on fevers, p. 42, and 204, published at Hanover in
1745.
[46] Cours de Chemie, p. 374.
[47] This matter is explained in a letter from Doctor De Haen, of Vienna,
to a physician in England. I have, _says this celebrated physician_,
made many experiments with hemlock, in consequence of an order from
high authority: the result was, that not one of one hundred and twenty
patients was cured or relieved by it; many grew worse, and seven unhappy
women, with cancers in their breasts, perished in my hands, some of whom
might have been saved by the knife. How did I intreat those to whom
it belonged to use more precaution, or at least to suspend publishing
in praise of poisons, till repeated trials had been made by several
hands, lest the public faith should be abused, and the author rendered
ridiculous in the face of the universe. But my remonstrances were
fruitless, and, to my great concern, my best friend abruptly fell out
with me, and I have incurred the disgrace of the best of sovereigns.
Since I have spoke my sentiments freely, I am looked upon as the chief of
heretics, as an enemy of the public and of the author’s reputation; and
for this reason I have been unhappily disgraced, and defamatory libels,
of the most virulent kind, have been printed against me. I expect yet
more terrible storms; however, I adore that Providence which directs
all for his glory and my good, from whom I should deserve a disgrace
infinitely more fearful than that which I now suffer, if for the sake of
transitory glory, perishable treasures, or tranquillity of life, that may
be taken from me in this world, I _should become a confederate with those
who have thus infamously abused the publick confidence, to the disgrace
of physick_. See Medical Museum, vol. III. London, 1764.
[48] Cronstedt, Hoffman, Stahl, &c. &c.
[49] See Hoffman’s Physico-Chymical Observations. Of the wonderful,
virulent and medical powers of antimony, and by what means the one may
easily be changed into the other.
[50] Newman, p. 133. New Dispensatory, p. 343. Geoffroy Tractatus de
Materia Medica, tom. I. p. 234-239.
[51] See a narrative of the proceedings of the committee appointed by the
College of Physicians to review their Pharmacopœia. p. 64.
[52] New Dispensatory, page 347.
[53] See Morton’s Treatise of Acute Diseases, printed at Geneva, 1727.
[54] See Baron Van Swieten’s Commentaries on Boerhaave’s Aphorisms, Vol.
II. p. 797.
[55] See the narrative of the proceedings of the committee appointed by
the College of Physicians to review their Pharmacopœia.
[56] Medical Museum, Vol. III. p. 530. London, 1764.
[57] Sydenhami Opera, p. 67. Lipsiæ, 1695.
[58] Observations made at Plymouth, on the weather and prevailing
diseases from the year one thousand seven hundred and twenty-eight, to
one thousand seven hundred and thirty-seven, p. 140, &c.
[59] Newman, page 137.
[60] Newman’s Chymistry, p. 137.
[61] Geoffroy’s Treatise on the Materia Medica, tom. i. p. 225, and
Glauber’s Apology against the lying calumnies of Christopher Farnner.
[62] Histoire de l’Academie Royalle des Sciences, pour l’anne 1720, and
Lemery, Traîte de l’Antimoine.
[63] See the apology of John Rudolph Glauber, against the lying calumnies
of Cristopher Farnner.
[64] Geoffroy’s Treatise of the Materia Medica, tom. i p. 225.
[65] Observationes de Aere et Morbis Epidemicis ab anno 1728, ad finem
anni 1737, Plymuthi factæ, p. 140, 141, & 142. London. 1752.
[66] Medical and Chymical Observations on Antimony, p. 6 and 75. London.
1756.
[67] New Dispensatory, p. 351.
[68] Observations on the prevailing Diseases of Great Britain, part i.
chap. iv. case 2d, p. 34.
[69] Ibid. part 2d, chap. x. p. 305.
[70] Observations on the Diseases of Great Britain, part i. chap. iii.
case x, p. 106.
[71] See p. 49-66.
[72] Dissertation on Fevers, p. 6. London, 1770.
[73] See p. 57 and 58.
[74] See p. 24, 45 and 46.
[75] Introduction to the Dissertation on Fevers, p. 10.
[76] Introduction to the Dissertation on fevers, p. 11.
[77] Dissertation, p. 85.
[78] Dissertation on Fevers, p. 91. Ibid. p. 7.
[79] See p. 62 and 63.
[80] Addenda to the Dissertation.
[81] Introduction to the Dissertation, page 4.
[82] Introduction to the Dissertation, page 4.
[83] See page 72.
[84] Introduction to the Dissertation on Fevers, pages 1st, 2d, and 10th.
[85] Introduction to the Dissertation on Fevers, pages 9, 10.
[86] Introduction to the Dissertation on Fevers, page 10.
[87] See page 18-22.
[88] Ibid.
[89] Ibid. and page 79, 80, 86, and 87.
[90] Page 75-78.
[91] See page 72, and 73.
[92] Dissertation on Fevers, p. 84.
[93] Ibid. p. 81.
[94] Ibid. p. 91.
[95] Dissertation on Fevers, p. 76.
[96] Dissertation on Fevers, p. 70.
[97] Introduction to the Dissertation on Fevers, p. 1.
[98] Dissertation on Fevers, p. 90.
[99] Dissertation on Fevers, p. 72.
[100] Dissertation, p. 72.
ADVERTISEMENT.
The Medical Society of London, have resolved to give an honorary Gold
Medal to the Author of the best Dissertation on fevers.
Gentlemen who become candidates are desired to attend to the following
regulations.
Dissertations on this subject are to be delivered to the Secretary in
Crane Court, on or before the third Tuesday of April, 1775, written in
a fair hand, and in the English or Latin language, and along with each
a packet (sealed up) containing the name of the Author, and his place
of residence, some motto or device being written on the outside of the
packet, and at the beginning or end of the Dissertation.
It is resolved that the medal shall be publickly adjudged on the fifth
day of June, 1775, after which all the papers, excepting that which
obtains the honorary reward, shall be returned with the packets unopened,
so that all the names excepting that of the successful candidate shall be
concealed.
_N. B._ No Member of the Society will be admitted a Candidate for the
Medal.
* * * * *
The Medical Society, being instituted for the improvement of medicine in
all its branches, will be obliged to all who shall contribute toward the
execution of their extensive design.
Papers intended for them may be directed to their Secretary in Crane
Court, Fleet Street, or to any of the Members.
* * * * *
BOOKS printed for J. JOHNSON, No. 72, St. Paul’s Church-yard; and D.
WILSON, and G. NICOL, opposite to York Buildings, in the Strand.
I. Observations on the prevailing Diseases in Great Britain. Together
with a Review of the History of those of former Periods, and in other
Countries. By John Millar, M. D. Price 12s. in Boards.
II. A Discourse on the best Means of promoting Medical Enquiries,
delivered before the Medical Society at their annual Meeting, on Tuesday
the 18th Jan. 1774. and published at their Request. By James Sims, M. D.