We must be allowed, in one or two instances, to correct Mr. Sleight

in some of his remarks contained in the foregoing passage, which we

wholly acquit him of having wilfully misrepresented, as the lawyers

would call it, to bolster up his case. But in the bill alluded to by

Mr. Sleight, and which was known at the time by the name of Warburton's

Body Bill, no price whatever was stipulated at which the body of the

pauper was to be sold. On the contrary, it was to be left to find its

value in the market, according to the plenty or the scarcity of it,

like any other article of trade or commerce. Obnoxious, however, and

repellent to our amiable feelings as the clause of a bill may be,

which not only authorises the sale of the corpse of a pauper, but

actually makes it imperative on the parish authorities to dispose of

the bodies of paupers, for the purpose of dissection, yet when it is

taken into consideration that an antidote has been provided for the

most objectionable part of the bill, by enacting in it that no corpse

of a pauper shall be so disposed of without his previous consent being

obtained during life, or that such corpse be demanded by any relative

or friend, we candidly confess that the indignation manifested by Mr.

Sleight is, in a great degree, groundless, and that he has raised up a

shadow to fight with, which has neither substance nor tangibility.

In regard to the manner in which the bill was smuggled through

the House of Commons, it is impossible to speak of it in terms of

reprobation sufficiently strong. It was, however, one of those _common_

bills, which the faithful representatives of the people were well

convinced had no immediate reference to themselves, as not being likely

to have their bodies sold as paupers from a workhouse, and therefore

the merits or demerits of it were never canvassed, but it was suffered

to steal through the house, whilst the representatives were enjoying

themselves over a chop, and a bottle of Bellamy's _best_.

Mr. Sleight, however, proceeds to argue, 'That the committing of

murder by Burking is horrible, no one will dispute; but its having

occurred is no sound reason why any law should be made to sacrifice the

feelings and sympathies of the poor and unprotected; nor would such a

scheme ever be sanctioned by any christianized or liberal mind, which

considers every man in the light of a brother of immortality, and whose

hopes rest on the faith of the scriptures, that the resurrection of the

body to eternal life will ultimately take place, which any law to sell

dead bodies would be repugnant to, if not entirely subversive of the

belief in the grand doctrine of the Christian system, and which might

lead to every sort of riot and debauchery, to a worse degree than they

now exist, when it might be said in the words of the Apostle, "Let us

eat and drink, for tomorrow we die." Neither is the existence of the

crime of Burking a good ground, that another evil less palpable to the

mind should be legalized to prevent it. Any person, if he possessed the

feelings of a man, would make every exertion to suppress in the most

effectual way, namely, _by discontinuing to dissect the human body_,

if it could not be done but through the aid of so foul a deed, and by

endeavouring to bring to justice the villains who might commit murders

by Burking, as the assistant demonstrator at the King's College, to his

everlasting honour, did.

'As it is a misdemeanour to possess a dead human body, it shews

with what care Englishmen formerly reverenced the mortal remains of

humanity; surely they would have had sense enough to perceive, if, as

it is now asserted, dissections were necessary to qualify for the

profession of surgery or medicine, and the preservation of health in

their days; but as impediments were thrown in the way of the practice

of anatomy, it is clear it was then considered proper to prevent, if

possible, the violating the sanctuary of the dead, though they may now

be called ignorant, prejudiced, &c. Still it may be fairly presumed,

that they had as much common sense as the generation of this period

have, and _I believe they had more_; for it is only since continental

examples, and the pranks of Scotch philosophers have bothered the

brains of Englishmen, that any such thing as legalizing anatomy was

ever thought of, and it is only now intended, in my opinion, to gull

the people into a notion, that unless a surgeon has dissected he is

unable to practise his profession, which an instance or two I shall

relate will show not to be the case.

'The occurrences of Burking in London having produced schemes for

supplying the wants of anatomists by a compulsory appropriation of the

poor, I, as an individual, protest against any law that would inflict

so flagrant an injustice on those, who suffer enough already, without

any further addition.

'A publication has been made of an Anatomy Bill, which I suppose to be

a copy of that which has been brought into the House of Commons this

Session, under the auspices of the same member (Mr. Warburton) who

introduced the former one. In the preamble to this Bill it is asserted,

that the anatomy of the human body is necessary for the remedy of

diseases, and the performance of surgical operations. Now, that this

is unquestionable, some reasonable doubts may be entertained, as I

conceive, that dissections do not confer any extraordinary medical

skill to those who perform them, is proved by all antiquity, from the

days of Adam to the present time, the generations of which, I dare

say, enjoyed quite as good or perhaps better health than modern ones

have done; for if surgery was not practised anciently, how were the

conflicting campaigns of the Grecians, Romans, &c. conducted, when

there must have been surgical aid afforded to the wounded, or who among

them would have engaged in a warfare, when the fracture of a limb

might entail a tedious agony, and loss of life? It is not my object,

however, to go into the nature of diseases or remedies for them here;

but I may instance Hippocrates, the renowned physician of Greece, as to

what he is reported to have known of human anatomy, though his skill

in the treatment of diseases is undisputed; if, therefore, dissecting

dead bodies were necessary, would he have been so eminent for his

attainments, and the first methodical practitioner of medicine? No

such thing; he must have been a mere empiric, and not the ensample of

medical knowledge for every subsequent age. Not to mention professional

quacks, whose factotum medicines, I believe, are never compounded

through their dissecting dead bodies; but which are asserted to be

cures for any disease excepting restoring sight to a blind eye. It is

well known in this town [we believe Mr. Sleight alludes to the town of

Boston in Lincolnshire], that a bone-setter residing in it, who has had

no professional education that I am aware of, is, in cases of simple

or compound fractures and luxated bones, as efficient an operator

as any surgeon, and can as ably effect a cure. As to professional

skill, I recollect it was reported of a medical man having treated a

pregnant woman as dropsical[2]; so much did he know, it appears, about

diseases. Again, in the Encyclopædia Perthensis, it is related, that

a sow-gelder performed a Cesarean operation on his wife with success;

that is, cutting the fœtus from the uterus, which from some impediment

she was unable to give birth to, which operation saved her life. Now,

what sort of an anatomist this sow-gelder was, if the relation be true,

I need not say, as that will occur on the least reflection, but it

shows he had sense enough to perform this most difficult operation,

in a way that not one in a thousand surgeons in country practice, I

believe, would succeed in doing.

'In Cobbett's Register for April, 1829, or something about that period,

a letter appeared under the signature of W. Hornsey, M.D. North

Shields, on the subject of the infamous body-selling Bill, which, from

what I can now recollect of its contents, strongly disapproved of that

measure, and stated how little the pursuit of anatomy had improved

the treatment of diseases, especially that of consumption. This is

corroborated from the hubbub about the cholera morbus, as if it were a

complaint that had never appeared in the world till just now, though

it is well known to be a disease that has infested India for ages,

and if it were of the pestilential character attributed to it, would

have swept away the natives of that part of the universe from the face

of the earth ages ago, nor should we witness now shoals of Europeans

flocking thither to make their fortunes, if setting foot on Asiatic

soil was next to instant death; nor is its progress in England any

credit to the medical profession, some of whom are evidently grasping

at it as a god send to benefit the faculty, by frightening the public

out of their wits, and setting in action the machinery of Boards of

Health, some of the members of which may know as much about cholera

morbus, as the Chinese of Scotch philosophy. Pshaw! doctors of the

north, with all your dissecting--cannot you control Nature's volcano,

nor grapple with diarrhœa, puking and spasms, either of which you would

be ashamed to allow it to appear you could not treat efficiently, if

Nature had any strength. It seems, that part first of the cholera

morbus farce has concluded at Sunderland, and the Board of Health

dissolved. But why so, good ex-members of it? Is not _health_ still to

be dispensed, or has disease wholly vanished through your exertions?

Happy must the people of Sunderland be, with such a miraculous

invention as "A Board of Health," which throws the miracle-working

German prince into the shade, and I suppose gives a hope, that the

greatest of all the blessings of human life, an exemption from disease,

are thus to be obtained! What need have we of anatomy or physic, when

Boards of Health can be formed, and able to root out of the systems of

mankind the horror of horrors, "_Cholera Morbus!_"'

We admit that the foregoing remarks have no immediate relevancy to

the subject under our discussion; but on the other hand, we consider

that no opportunity ought to be allowed to escape, by which one of

the greatest and most prejudicial deceptions that has been practised

upon the country, can be exposed in all its noxious and alarming

consequences. If the cholera morbus question were confined, simply as

a bugbear, to frighten a score of silly nervous people, it might pass

over as wholly unworthy of any attention, and be suffered to live as

long as a few unprincipled empirics found it their interests to keep it

alive; but when it becomes a question, on which the actual welfare of

the country rests, on which the ruin of thousands is made to depend;

by which commerce is thrown into a state of stagnation, and the usual

channels of industry so choked up, that misery and want stare us in

the face, whithersoever we turn our eyes, and which are in themselves

sufficient actually to produce, and to aggravate the very disease,

which the sapient heads of the Board of Health have distinguished by

the name of the cholera morbus--then it becomes the duty of every man,

to use every exertion in his power to check the growing evil, to expose

the infamous and selfish views of the propagators of the bugbear, and

then leave them to the contempt and indignation of an offended and

injured country. We should be justly accused of digression, were we

here to enter into any further exposition of this subject; but we do

hope that some spirited individuals will seriously and patriotically

take up the matter, and so bring the unprincipled abettors of the

cholera morbus plague before the tribunals of their country, that

they themselves may no longer be allowed to be a plague, and that the

_heads_ of the heads of the Boards of Health may be consigned over to

the executioner of Newgate, to be dealt with by him as seemeth best in

his eyes.

'There is no occasion in my opinion,' Mr. Sleight proceeds, 'to argue

for human bodies being hacked, and cut up piecemeal for students'

improvement; as the carcasses and extremities of old horses, cows,

bulls, &c., would do quite as well, for familiarizing them to the use

of the knife in operations, which I believe to be the principal object;

as well as those of sheep, dogs, cats, rabbits, monkeys, &c., are

sufficient for demonstrating the action and economy of Nature, as its

principles are the same in the human and the brute creation,--as to the

pulsation of the heart, the circulation of the blood, nervous system,

&c., which for illustrating physiology would be quite sufficient; but,

if anatomists are determined to have none other than human subjects,

they and their pupils should be sent to the Sierra Leone settlement,

where they might perhaps obtain them in abundance, and very cheap. Of

all the world, this is the most proper place to locate the anatomical

departments of the Scotch London University, King's College, and

dissecting-schools; for at this pestilential place medical students

would have to endeavour to preserve their own health, and I believe

have to search more into the principles of sound medical treatment of

diseases than they do in England; and thus be really useful in the

cause of humanity to those of their fellow men, who are resident in

that abode of death, as well as be prepared to cure diseases in a more

skilful way than by the regimen of 'Buchan's Domestic Medicine,' which

I once saw on a newly-commenced practitioner's table in a country

village, a copy of which I bought for three shillings. As to replacing

dislocated joints, there is not a tinker more bungling at mending a

kettle, than some professional men are at setting them; nor is there a

student who has passed his examinations, and is authorized to practise,

who could use a knife, in the difficult case I have before mentioned,

equal to the sow-gelder, but who if he attempted it, his hair would I

dare say stand as erect as the quills of the fretful porcupine.

'The more dissections which students perform, can never make them

expert operators, in cases of extracting a stone from the bladder,

reducing a hernia with a knife, or cutting off a limb of a living

subject; as their operations require, to become skilful at them, a more

frequent practice than occurs in the course of a country surgeon's

business, and when any do arise, the anxiety of the operator and array

of professional attendance show what little confidence there is of

success.

'The provisions of the "Anatomy Bill," as to an appropriation of

subjects for dissection being _voluntary_ is very proper, as any

attempt to make a compulsory one would be sure to fail; for those of

the community who see a necessity for anatomical study being prosecuted

by the use of the knife on human dead bodies, might by bequeathing

their mortal remains when dead, as it is to be expected the members of

the medical profession, would be the first to volunteer, afford such

a supply of subjects as would be sufficient for the London anatomical

schools; this being extended to country towns is quite out of the

question, as I believe they would not be endured. So incensed would

the public be against them, if subjects were forcibly furnished,

that they would be upset very quickly, unless guarded by a park of

artillery, but a dissecting practitioner of medicine would soon find

his loss in the account of business, as many poor persons, I conceive,

would rather suffer all that the pains of disease could inflict,

than that their earthly remains should be compulsorily consigned

to the dissecting-knife, for a little medicine. Vulgar prejudice

cannot be pleaded as an impediment to those persons who think anatomy

is necessary in promoting surgical skill, as no soul possessed of

human feelings in any degree, would ever think of grasping, for

anatomization, an individual who was averse from dissection, and

selfishly reserve his body from the dissecting-knife, and allow the

science of anatomy, so far as his good will to promote it extended,

to go to the d--l; though this is precisely, I believe, the character

of Scotch philosophy, to make anything subservient to its purpose,

but is not disposed to make any sacrifice. I apprehend it is none but

Scotch writers who, however intellectual or educated they may be, have

had the insolence to invent the phrase, and call the aversion of the

poor from dissection "a vulgar prejudice," and only select them as

subjects for anatomists, as they have done to find out that the vitals

of English labourers should be wasted by law and Gospel in providing

means for sinecurists and titled pensioners to subsist on. Peasantry,

indeed! They are not shot at like game, certainly; but if they can be

induced to submit to be made brutes of, there seems to be no want of

inclination in Scotch philosophy that they should; for so transfused

does this villainous idea appear to be into the minds of some reading

Englishmen, of "higher orders, lower orders, vulgar prejudice," &c.,

that a stupid fellow that I heard talking on the subject of Burking,

who appeared to be what is called a gentleman farmer, said it was only

from vulgar prejudice that the poor objected to be dissected; but

when he was asked if he should like for his wife and daughter to be

anatomized, he became silent, and stared as if he had been a Burked

subject revived.

'The feelings which Britons have hitherto entertained, I hope will

never be suppressed by a beastly indifference towards the disposing

of the remains of the dead, to be cut up by beardless students, for

the benefit of an anatomist's pocket, or to see, as I once heard one

say, what _guts_, as he expressed it, are made of. The Anatomy Bill,

however, will not, if it should become law, be what anatomists want,

which is, subjects fresh, cheap, and by wholesale; though voluntarily

this will never be the case, and is rather to prevent bodies being

dissected which are murdered, by causing a certificate from a medical

man--but I think any relative would be better--that the person deceased

had died a natural death; for any one, unless he be an idiot, can know

this as well as a doctor; and which, I propose, should also distinctly

state the consent of the person it might refer to, that his or her

body, when dead, should be dissected; though, except repealing so much

of former enactments as to the illegality of possessing a dead human

body, this bill, in my view, will not facilitate anatomical study by

dissection, but otherwise, as it appears that bodies of murderers are

to be interred at a cross highway, instead of being dissected, which

has been considered a proper part of the punishment for that crime.

'The Creator of the universe and Father of mankind, under whose

peculiar care the Israelites were, gave no direction to Moses relative

to any dissection of them; whose infinite wisdom gave the almighty

fiat, 'Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return,' and which has

been responded in all ages, in the respect paid to the remains of

departed life, and will continue to be so, as long as the feelings of

human nature remain what they have been. Notwithstanding the discovery

of Scotchmen, that it is only a vulgar prejudice, there have none

come forward to authorise their brawny bodies to be dissected, nor

ever will, so long as a parliament would create a law appropriating

the poor. However, it would only be proper that any legislation

compulsorily providing human subjects for dissection should be reserved

for a reformed parliament, and let the country see how it will deal

with the matter. But, come what may, it would be better that practical

human anatomy should altogether cease; and rather would I see it to be

the case, than that the feelings of the poor and friendless should be

outraged, and they so degraded as to be reduced to a level with brutes;

as ages after ages show that mankind can exist, and have existed

equally as well as they do now, where anatomy was not practised at all,

or even thought of, and that, too, in a period when the baiting a bull

is considered as repugnant to humanity, and the thrashing of a horse or

ass punished by fine or imprisonment.

'In concluding these brief reflections, I have just to observe, as to a

publication purporting to be a memorial from the Council of the Royal

College of Surgeons, (a pompous title truly!) to the Home Secretary

of State, that it is sickening to read such a whining inuendo to his

Majesty's government to make a dead body law; though I would say to

those who appear to have signed it, never mind continental examples, of

which we see enough of the evil of copying in the beggarly condition of

the working people, and an enormous national debt, &c., &c., to wish

to imitate their brutal apathy to anatomy, or having our bodies sold

for six or eight shillings a piece, as at Paris, but to make shorter

work of it by proffering yourselves for dissection when departed this

life, which, as a proof of your sincerity, will be worth a thousand

stupid arguments; and this will be the way that I and hundreds more can

only judge how far a necessity for the anatomy of the dead human body

exists in your opinion, for while _you_ keep aloof, how do you ever

think that England will submit to be made subservient to the promoting

of anatomical science, when those of the surgical profession, who are

to be _sovereignly_ benefited by it, wriggle and twist, argue and

assert, rather than come to the practical point of showing example is

better than precept. If students want subjects, get the carcasses of

cattle for them, especially _calves_ and _asses_, to cut up, and I'll

warrant they will make just as good surgeons as if they had cut up

human bodies; for, however they may smatter over descriptive anatomy at

their examinations, they know as little about it a year after as the

man in the moon; but if Englishmen will shut their eyes and open their

mouths to swallow anything, and put an enemy in their skull to steal

away their brains, why so be it, though I hope never to see this to be

the case so long as I live; still nothing shall be wanting in my power

to prevent it,'

The history of the London Burkers Containing a faithful and authentic account of the horrid acts of the noted Resurrectionists, Bishop, Williams, May, etc., etc., and their trial and condemnation at the Old Bailey for the wilful murder of Carlo Ferrari, with the criminals' confessions after trial. Including also the life, character, and behaviour of the atrocious Eliza Ross, the murderer of Mrs. Walsh, etc., etc. · 第 23 / 27 段