Produced by The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
generously made available by The Internet Archive/American
Libraries.)
THE DIARY OF A RESURRECTIONIST
[Illustration: "THE DISSECTING ROOM." By ROWLANDSON.
The figure standing up above the rest is William Hunter; his brother John
is on his right-hand side, and Matthew Baillie is the next figure to
William Hunter on the left; Cruikshank is seated at the extreme left of
the picture, and Hewson is working on the eye of the subject on the middle
table.]
THE DIARY
OF
A RESURRECTIONIST
1811-1812
TO WHICH ARE ADDED AN ACCOUNT OF
_THE RESURRECTION MEN IN LONDON_
AND A SHORT HISTORY OF THE PASSING OF
THE ANATOMY ACT
BY
JAMES BLAKE BAILEY, B.A.
LIBRARIAN OF THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS OF ENGLAND
_LONDON_
SWAN SONNENSCHEIN & CO., LIM.
PATERNOSTER SQUARE
1896
INTRODUCTION
The "Diary of a Resurrectionist" here reprinted is only of a fragmentary
character. It is, however, unique in being an actual record of the doings
of one gang of the resurrection-men in London. Many persons have expressed
a wish that so interesting a document should be published; permission
having been obtained to print the Diary, an endeavour has been made to
gratify this wish. To make the reprint more interesting, and to explain
some of the allusions in the Diary, an account of the resurrection-men in
London, and a short history of the events which preceded the passing of
the Anatomy Act, have been prepared.
The great crimes of Burke and Hare drew especial attention to
body-snatching in Edinburgh, and consequently there have been published
ample accounts of the resurrection-men in Scotland.[1] For this reason,
Edinburgh has been omitted from the present work.
As to the genuineness of the Diary there can be no doubt. It was presented
to the Royal College of Surgeons of England by the late Sir Thomas
Longmore. In his early days, Sir Thomas was dresser to Bransby Cooper, and
assisted him in writing the _Life of Sir Astley Cooper_.
At the suggestion of Lord Abinger, it was decided to introduce an account
of the resurrection-men into the book. The information for this was partly
obtained by Mr. Longmore from personal communication with some of the
resurrection-men, who were then living in London. One of these handed over
portions of a Diary he had kept during his resurrectionist days. This was
preserved for some years at Netley, and was afterwards presented to the
College, as stated above. A few extracts from the Diary were printed in
the _Life of Sir Astley Cooper_.
The information respecting the resurrection-men is very scattered; the two
most useful works for getting up this subject are the _Life of Astley
Cooper_ before mentioned, and the _Report of the Committee on Anatomy_
published in 1828. Most of the detailed information has to be sought for
in the newspapers of the period. The accounts there given are, however,
generally of such an exaggerated character that it is often very difficult
to arrive at the truth. When any fresh scandal had given prominence to the
doings of the resurrection-men, the newspapers saw "Burking" in every
trivial case of assault. If a child were lost, the paragraph announcing
the fact was headed, "Another supposed case of Burking." Reports of the
most ridiculous character were duly chronicled as facts by the newspapers
of the day. Sometimes over a hundred bodies were supposed to have been
found in some building, and it was expected that several persons of
eminence would be named in the subsequent proceedings. Search in the
papers nearly always fails to find any further mention of the case.
In reading these accounts it must be remembered that "Burking" did not
always mean killing a person for the purpose of selling the body, but it
referred to the mode adopted by Burke and Hare in killing their victims,
viz., suffocation. Elizabeth Ross is called a "Burker," and may be found
so described in Haydn's _Dictionary of Dates_. She murdered an old woman
named Catherine Walsh, but in the report of her trial there is no evidence
of her having attempted to sell the body.
The broadside here printed is an excellent example of this exaggeration.
The facts are so circumstantial, that it appears as though there could be
no mistake. Enquiry at Edinburgh, however, shows that no such case
occurred. Mr. A. D. Veitch, of the Justiciary Office, has very kindly made
search, and can find no record of Wilson's supposed crimes. Had the
statements in the broadside been true, there is no doubt that this case
would have been referred to in books on Medical Jurisprudence. Poisoning
by inhalation of arsenic is rare, and Wilson's would have been a leading
case. There would also have been great opportunities for studying _post
mortem_ appearances, as it is stated that three bodies were found in
Wilson's possession. Search through the chief books on the subject has
failed in finding any reference whatever to this case.
"BURKING BY MEANS OF SNUFF.
"_The following Account is of so serious a Nature that no one can be too
cautious how they receive Snuff from Strangers._
"It appears that, on Monday se'nnight, a man, named John Wilson, was
apprehended at Edinburgh on a charge of Burking a number of persons by
introducing arsenic into snuff kept by him. He had long excited the
suspicion of the police of that place, but so deep-laid were his
diabolical schemes that he eluded their vigilance for a considerable time,
until Monday last. When, on the moors, on that day, between Lauder and
Dalkeith, practising his dreadful trade, it appears that the victim of
Wilson's villainy was a poor man travelling over the moor, whom he
accosted, and offered a pinch of snuff. He took it, and it had the desired
effect. The next individual whom he accosted was a labouring-man breaking
stones, who was asked the number of miles to Edinburgh; when answered, he
then offered his snuff-box to the labourer, which was refused, alleging
that he never used any. Wilson urged him again, which excited the man's
suspicions, but he took the snuff, and wrapped it up in paper, and carried
it to a chemist at Dalkeith, who analysed it, when it proved to be mixed
with arsenic. The police were then informed of Wilson's villainies, who
went in pursuit of him, and after a search of him for several days was at
length apprehended at a place three miles from Edinburgh, driving rapidly
in a vehicle like a hearse, which, on examination, contained three dead
bodies. They were recognised from their dresses to be an elderly man, and
his wife and son, who were seen travelling towards Lauder the day before.
"Wilson was immediately ironed and conveyed to Edinburgh, and a sheriff's
inquest was held on the bodies. After an investigation of nearly two hours
a verdict of Wilful Murder was returned against John Wilson, who was fully
committed to the Calton gaol to take his trial at the ensuing sessions.
"Wilson is described as a desperate character, and of ferocious
countenance. He is supposed to have been two or three years in this
abominable practice, and to have realised a considerable sum in the course
of that time. His career is now stopped, and that justice and doom which
overtook a Burke and a Hare are his last and only portion.
"LINES ON THE OCCASION.
Of Burke and of Hare we have heard much about,
Yet Burking's a trade that was lately found out--
Their plans of despatching were wicked indeed,
'T was thought of all others that theirs did exceed;
But the scheme first invented of Burking by snuff,
May yet be prevented by taking the huff,
For if strangers invite you to take of their dust,
Decline their kind offers--refuse them you must;
And would you be safe, and keep from all evil,
Shun them as pests as you'd shun the d----l;
By these means you'll live, avoiding all strife,
Shunning snuff takers all the days of your life.
"_Printed for the Publishers by T. KAY._"
The difficulty of getting reliable information is increased by the
incomplete nature of most of the newspaper records. In many cases there is
an account of a preliminary examination of some of the men who were
arrested for body-stealing. The report states that they were remanded, but
further search fails to find any subsequent notice of the case. It is
often impossible to fix who the men were who thus got into trouble, as
they nearly always gave false names: unless they were too well-known to
the police who arrested them, they invariably did this.
For the photographs, from which the illustrations of the house at Crail
are taken, the writer is indebted to the kindness of Prof. Chiene, of
Edinburgh.
THE DIARY OF A RESURRECTIONIST
CHAPTER I.
The complaint as to the scarcity of bodies for dissection is as old as the
history of anatomy itself. Great respect for the body of the dead has
characterised mankind in nearly all ages; _post mortem_ dissection was
looked upon as a great indignity by the relatives of the deceased, and
every precaution was taken to prevent its occurrence.
It would be beyond the scope of the present work to attempt a history of
anatomical teaching; as will be pointed out later on, the resurrection-men
did not come into existence until the early part of the eighteenth
century.
In Great Britain the study of medicine and surgery was much hampered at
this date by the scarcity of opportunities by which the student might get
a practical acquaintance with the anatomy of the human body. A knowledge
of anatomy was insisted upon by the Corporation of Surgeons, as each
student had to produce a certificate of having attended at least two
courses of dissection. It is unnecessary to point out the wisdom of this
condition in the case of men who were to go out into the world as
surgeons, and, consequently, to have the lives of their fellow-men in
their hands. The attendance on the two courses of dissection could be
evaded, and this was frequently done. The Apothecaries' Hall had no such
restriction, and, consequently, many men went thither and received a
qualification to practise, although they were quite unacquainted with
human anatomy. The work of such 'prentice hands one trembles to think of;
whatever experience these men did gain was obtained after they began to
practise, and so must have been at the expense of their patients, who were
generally those of the poorer class in life.
It was pointed out by Mr. Guthrie, that in the then state of the law a
surgeon might be punished in one Court for want of skill, and in another
Court the same individual might also be punished for trying to obtain that
skill. Before the Anatomy Committee, in 1828, Sir Astley Cooper narrated
the case of a young man who was rejected at the College of Surgeons on
account of his ignorance of the parts of the body; it was found, on
enquiry, that he was a most diligent student, and that his ignorance arose
entirely from his being unable to procure that which was necessary for
carrying on this part of his education.
When bodies were obtained for dissection it was generally by surreptitious
means; the newly-made grave was too often the source from whence the
supply was obtained. At first there was no direct trade or traffic in
subjects by men who devoted all their efforts to this mode of obtaining a
livelihood. The students supplied their own wants as they arose. Mr. G. S.
Patterson told the Committee that at St. George's Hospital the students
had to exhume bodies for their own use.
In the _Diary of a Late Physician_ Samuel Warren has given us a chapter on
this subject, which he calls "Grave Doings," and which is probably
founded on fact. The object in the expedition here recorded was, however,
rather to obtain a valuable pathological specimen, than to get a body for
dissection. Writers of fiction have made use of body-snatching, and have
given a gruesome turn to their stories by making the body, when uncovered,
turn out to be that of a relation or friend of some one of the party
engaged in the exhumation. Such a tale is recorded in the _Monthly
Magazine_ for April, 1827; there a sailor is pressed into the service of
some students who were anxious to obtain a body. The subject was safely
brought home, and, on being taken from the sack, turned out to be the
sweetheart of the sailor, who had just returned from sea, and, not having
heard of his girl's decease, was on his way to greet her after a long
absence from home. Truth and fiction often agree. There is a case on
record of a child who had died of scrofula, and whose body was brought to
St. Thomas' Hospital by Holliss, a well-known resurrectionist. The body
was at once recognised by one of the students as that of his sister's
child; on this being made known to the authorities at the hospital, the
corpse was immediately buried before any dissection had taken place.
In vols. 1 and 2 of the _Medical Times_ there is a series of articles,
entitled "The Confessions of Jasper Muddle, Dissecting-room Porter." These
papers are signed "Rocket," but were written by Albert Smith.[2] One of
the articles contains an account of a handsome young lady who came to the
dissecting-room late at night, and begged for the body of a murderer
executed the previous day, which was then being injected, ready for
lecture purposes. In the _Tale of Two Cities_, Dickens has given us a good
study of a resurrection-man in the person of Mr. Cruncher. Moir in _Mansie
Wauch_, Lytton in _Lucretia_, Mrs. Crowe in _Light and Darkness_, and Miss
Sergeant in _Dr. Endicott's Experiment_, have also used the body-snatcher
in fiction.
As long as the Barber Surgeons kept to their right of the exclusive
teaching of anatomy, there was small need of bodies for dissection. This
right the Company jealously guarded. On 21st May, 1573, the following
entry occurs in the records, "Here was John Deane and appoynted to brynge
in his fyne x{li} for havinge an Anathomye in his howse contrary to an
order in that behalf between this and mydsomer next."[3] As late as 1714
this rule was put in force against no less a man than William Cheselden.
The entry in the books of the Company runs as follows, "At a Court of
Assistants of the Company of Barbers and Surgeons, held on the 25th March,
1714. Our Master acquainting the Court that Mr. William Cheselden, a
member of this Company, did frequently procure the Dead bodies of
Malefactors from the place of execution and dissect the same at his own
house, as well during the Company's Publick Lectures as at other times
without the leave of the Governors and contrary to the Company's By law in
that behalf. By which means it became more difficult for the Beadles to
bring away the Companies Bodies and likewise drew away the members of this
Company and others from the Public Dissections and Lectures at the Hall.
The said Mr. Cheselden was, therefore, called in. But having submitted
himself to the pleasure of the Court with a promise never to dissect at
the same as the Company had their Lecture at the Hall, nor without leave
of the Governors for the time being, the said Mr. Cheselden was excused
for what had passed with a reproof for the same pronounced by the Master
at the desire of the Court."[4]
By the Act Henry VIII., xxii., cap. 12, provision was made for the Company
of Barbers and Surgeons to have the bodies of malefactors for the purpose
of dissection. This part of the Act was as follows: "And further be it
enacted by thauctoritie aforesayd, that the sayd maysters or governours of
the mistery and comminaltie of barbours and surgeons of Londo & their
successours yerely for ever after their sad discrecions at their free
liberte and pleasure shal and maie have and take without cotradiction
foure persons condempned adjudged and put to deathe for feloni by the due
order of the Kynges lawe of thys realme for anatomies with out any further
sute or labour to be made to the kynges highnes his heyres or successors
for the same. And to make incision of the same deade bodies or otherwyse
to order the same after their said discrecions at their pleasure for their
further and better knowlage instruction in sight learnyng & experience in
the sayd scyence or facultie of Surgery."
The "foure bodies" could not always be obtained without difficulty;
despite the precautions of the Company private anatomy was, to a certain
extent, carried on, and the bodies of malefactors had a market value. The
following entries from the _Annals of the Barber Surgeons_ are
illustrative of this:
"6th March, 1711.[5] It is ordered that William Cave, one of the Beadles
of this Company, do make Inquiry who the persons were that carryed away
the last body from Tyburne, and that such persons be Indicted for the
same.
"9th October, 1711. Richard Russell, one of the persons who stands
Indicted for carrying away the last publick body applying himself to this
Court and offering to be evidence against the rest of the persons
concerned It is ordered that the Clerk do apply himself to Her Majesty's
Attorney Generall for a Noli p'sequi as to the said Russell in order to
make him an evidence upon the s{d} Indictment and particularly ag{st} one
Samuell Waters whom the Court did likewise order to be indicted for the
said fact."
Often there were riots caused by the Beadles of the Company going to
Tyburn for the bodies of murderers. This rioting was carried to such an
extent that it was found necessary to apply for soldiers to protect the
Beadles.
"28th May, 1713. Ordered that the Clerk go to the Secretary at War for a
guard in order to gett the next Body [from Tyburn.]"
The dissection of these bodies was made known by public advertisement. The
following is from the _Daily Advertiser_ of January 15th, 1742: "Notice is
hereby given that there being a publick Body at Barbers and Surgeons Hall,
the Demonstrations of Anatomy and the Operations of Surgery will be at the
Hall this evening and to-morrow at six o'clock precisely in the
Amphitheatre."
In 1752 it was ordered that bodies of murderers executed in London and
Middlesex should be conveyed to the Hall of the Surgeons Company to be
dissected and anatomized, and any attempt to rescue such bodies was made
felony.
In 1745 the Barbers and Surgeons, who from 1540, until that date, had
formed one Company, separated, and the latter were incorporated under the
title of "The Masters, Governors, and Commonalty of the Art and Science of
Surgery." To the Surgeons naturally fell the duty of dissecting the bodies
of the malefactors handed over for that purpose. The building of the
Surgeons' Company was in the Old Bailey; there was, therefore, no
difficulty in removing the bodies from Newgate. In 1796 the Company came
to a premature end through an improperly constituted Court having been
held. It was attempted to put matters right by a Bill in Parliament, but
there was so much opposition from those persons who were practising
without the diploma of the Corporation, that the Bill, after passing
safely through the Commons, was thrown out by the Lords. In the following
year attempts were made to come to terms with the opponents of the Bill,
and finally it was agreed to petition for a Charter from the Crown to
establish a Royal College of Surgeons in London. These negotiations were
successfully carried out in 1800, and the old Corporation having disposed
of their Old Bailey property to the City Authorities, the College took
possession of a house in Lincoln's Inn Fields, the site of part of the
present building.
During the debate in the House of Lords on the Bill just mentioned, the
Bishop of Bangor, who had charge of the measure, sent for the Clerk of the
Company, and informed him that a strong opposition was expected to the
Bill, on account of the inconvenience that would arise from the bodies of
murderers being conveyed through the streets from Newgate to Lincoln's Inn
Fields. To remedy this a clause was proposed, giving the College
permission to have a place near to Newgate, where the part of the sentence
which related to the dissection of the bodies might be carried out.
That this difficulty of moving the bodies was not a fancied one, the
following extract from "Alderman Macaulay's Diary" will show: "Dec. 6,
1796. Francis Dunn and Will. Arnold were yesterday executed for murder and
the first malefactors conveyed to the new Surgeons' Hall in the Lincoln's
Inn Fields. They were conveyed in a cart, their heads supported by tea
chests for the public to see: I think contrary to all decency and the laws
of humanity in a country like this. I hope it will not be repeated."[6]
Just at this date the Corporation were removing from their old premises to
Lincoln's Inn Fields; the last Court in the Old Bailey was held on October
6th, 1796, and the first at Lincoln's Inn Fields on January 5th, 1797.
In July, 1797, it was reported to the Court that Mr. Chandler, one of
their members, "had in the most polite and ready manner offered his stable
for the reception of the bodies of the two murderers who were executed
last month." The thanks of the Court were voted to Mr. Chandler "for his
polite attention to the Company upon that occasion."
After the Bill had been lost in the Lords, the following resolution was
passed by the Court in November, 1797: "Resolved that in order to evince
the sincerity of the Court to remove all reasonable objections to the
present situation in Lincoln's Inn Fields the Clerk be directed, with
proper assistance, to look for a temporary dissecting-room at a place in
or near the Old Bailey until a permanent one near the place of execution
can be established."
In June, 1800, a warehouse was taken in Castle Street, Cow Cross, West
Smithfield, for eighteen months, as, owing to the labours of taking over
the Hunterian Collection, there had been no time for obtaining a permanent
place. A house in Duke Street, West Smithfield, was afterwards leased for
the purpose, and arrangements were made for Pass, the Beadle, to reside
there. This landed the College in a small expense, as in 1832 the Beadle
was elected Constable of the Ward of Farringdon, and the Council had to
pay a fine of L10 in place of his serving the office. At the expiration of
the lease of the Duke Street house, so great an increase of rent was
demanded that the College gave up the premises, and took a newly-built
house in Hosier Lane, on a lease for twenty-one years. Here the
dissections were carried on until the passing of the Anatomy Act, when the
College had no longer to share with the hangman the duty of carrying out
the sentence on murderers who were condemned to be hanged and anatomized.
The bodies were not really dissected by the College Authorities; a
sufficient incision was made to satisfy the requirements of the Act, and
the body was then handed over to one of the Teachers of Anatomy. The
following is a copy of an order authorizing the Secretary of the College
to give up a body:
"Ordered.
"That the body of Mary Whittenbach executed this day at the Old
Bailey for murder be delivered (after the necessary dissection by the
College) to Mr. Joseph Henry Green.
"WILLIAM BLIZARD
"WM. NORRIS
"ANTH{Y} CARLISLE.
"Royal College of Surgeons
"_17th day of Sept. 1827_
"To Mr. BELFOUR, Secy. to the College."
There is in the Library of the Royal College of Surgeons of England a
series of drawings of the heads of murderers, made by the two Clifts,
father and son, when the bodies were brought to the College for
dissection. These drawings include Bishop and Williams (see p. 107),[7]
and Bellingham, who was executed in 1812 for the murder of Mr. Perceval
in the lobby of the House of Commons.
Earl Ferrers, who suffered the extreme penalty of the law in 1760 for the
murder of his steward, was taken to Surgeons' Hall, where an incision was
made in the body; instead of being further dissected it was given over to
the relatives for burial.
At the execution of Bishop and Williams the Sheriffs of London felt that
some means should be taken to show gratitude to Mr. Partridge, and the
other officials of King's College, for the way they had brought the
murderers to justice. The following letter was therefore addressed to the
College of Surgeons:
"JUSTICE HALL,
"_Dec. 5, 1831._
"_To the Governors and Directors of the College of Surgeons._
"It is our particular desire and we do ask that it may be thought but
a reasonable request that the bodies of the malefactors executed in
the front of Newgate this morning should be sent to King's
College--by the vigilance of whose surgical establishment these
offenders were detected and ultimately brought to justice, we shall
therefore feel obliged by your handing over these bodies to the
King's College.
"We are, with great respect,
"Your mo. ob. Servts.,
"J. COWAN }
} _Sheriffs_."
"JOHN PIRIE}
The body of Bishop was given to Mr. Partridge, and that of Williams went
to Mr. Guthrie at the Little Windmill Street School of Anatomy.
The following account of the reception of one of the bodies is by Mr. T.
Madden Stone, for many years an official at the College. It was printed in
a series of articles, entitled "Echoes from the College of Surgeons."[8]
"The executions generally took place at eight o'clock on Mondays, and the
'cut down,' as it is called, at nine, although there was no cutting at
all, as the rope, with a large knot at the end, was simply passed through
a thick and strong ring, with a screw, which firmly held the rope in its
place, and when all was over, Calcraft, _alias_ 'Jack Ketch,' would make
his appearance on the scaffold, and by simply turning the screw, the body
would fall down. At once it would be placed in one of those large carts
with collapsible sides, only to be seen in the neighbourhood of the Docks,
and then preceded by the City Marshal in his cocked hat, and, in fact, all
his war paint, with Calcraft and his assistant in the cart, the procession
would make its way to 33 Hosier Lane, West Smithfield, in the front
drawing room of which were assembled Sir William Blizard, President of the
Royal College of Surgeons, and members of the Court desirous of being
present, with Messrs. Clift (senior and junior), Belfour, and myself. On
extraordinary occasions visitors were admitted by special favour. The
bodies would then be stripped, and the clothes removed by Calcraft as his
valuable perquisites, which, with the fatal rope, were afterwards
exhibited to the morbidly curious, at so much per head, at some favoured
public-house. It was the duty of the City Marshal to be present to see the
body 'anatomised,' as the Act of Parliament had it. A crucial incision in
the chest was enough to satisfy the important City functionary above
referred to, and he would soon beat a hasty retreat, on his gaily-decked
charger, to report the due execution of his duty. These experiments
concluded, the body would be stitched up, and Pearson, an old museum
attendant, would remove it in a light cart to the hospital, to which it
was intended to present it for dissection."
* * * * *
These bodies of murderers were the only ones which could be legally used
for dissection; it is therefore obvious that the number was quite
insufficient for the wants of the Metropolitan Schools, and the teachers
were thus forced to obtain a supply from other sources.
It was strongly urged, but urged in vain, that the whole difficulty would
disappear if a short Act were passed, doing away with the dissection of
murderers, and enacting that the bodies of all unknown persons who died in
workhouses or hospitals, without friends, should be handed over, under
proper control, to the different teachers of anatomy. That these would be
sufficient was afterwards made clear by the Committee on Anatomy.[9] In
their Report it is stated that the returns obtained from 127 of the
parishes situate in London, Westminster, and Southwark, or their immediate
vicinity, showed that out of 3744 persons who died in the workhouses of
these parishes in the year 1827, 3103 were buried at the parish expense,
and that of these about 1108 were not attended to their graves by any
relations. The number of bodies obtained from this source would have
exceeded those supplied by the resurrection-men, and would have been
adequate for the wants of the London Schools.
The newspapers of the day contain many proposed solutions of the
difficulty. One correspondent gravely suggested that as prostitutes had,
by their bodies during life, been engaged in corrupting mankind, it was
only right that after death those bodies should be handed over to be
dissected for the public good. Another correspondent proposed that all
bodies of suicides should be used for dissection, and that all those
persons who came to their death by duelling, prize-fighting, or
drunkenness, should be handed over to the surgeons for a similar purpose.
Mr. Dermott, the proprietor of the Gerrard Street, or Little Windmill
Street, School of Medicine, proposed a scheme by which a fund was to be
raised by grants from Government, and from the College of Surgeons, and by
voluntary contributions from the nobility and gentry. This fund was to be
invested in the names of "opulent and respectable men," not more than
one-third of whom were to be members of the medical profession. It was
proposed to expend the interest on this fund in paying a sum not exceeding
seven pounds to those persons who were willing to contract for the sale of
their bodies for dissection. Registers were to be kept of all such
persons, and the Committee were to have the power of claiming the body six
hours after death. Mr. Dermott also suggested that all medical men should
leave their own bodies to be used for anatomical teaching. It is hardly
necessary to point out the absurdity of the first part of this scheme; the
Committee, after paying their seven pounds, would have had no control over
the subsequent movements of the persons whose bodies they had thus
purchased, and it was hardly to be expected that friends of the deceased
would send notice to the Committee that the body was ready for them. Both
parts of the scheme would have required an Act of Parliament, as executors
were not bound to give up a corpse, even though instructions had been left
that it was a person's wish that his body should be used for anatomical
purposes. Many such bequests have been made, and in some instances the
desire of the testator has been carried into effect. To try to do away
with some of the prejudices against dissection, Jeremy Bentham left his
body for this purpose; the dissection was duly carried out at the Webb
Street School, and at the request of Dr. Southwood Smith, Mr. Grainger
delivered the following oration over the body on June 9th, 1832:
"Gentlemen,--In presenting myself before you this day, at the request of
my friend and colleague, Dr. Southwood Smith, I can assure you I do so
strongly impressed with the high importance of the duty I have undertaken,
and the responsibility I have thus assumed. Gentlemen, it is no ordinary
occasion on which we are assembled. We are here collected to carry into
execution the last wishes of one whose mortal career, prolonged far beyond
the usual limits of man's existence, has been devoted with almost
unexampled energy and perseverance to the establishment of those great
moral and political truths, on which the happiness and the enlightenment
of the human race are founded. Ill would it become me, however, to dwell
on the genius, the philanthropy, or the integrity of the illustrious
deceased. His eulogium has already been eloquently pronounced by one more
fitted to do justice to such an undertaking than the humble individual who
now addresses you. It would be more suitable to the object of the present
meeting that I should consider in what manner the intentions of the late
Mr. Bentham, regarding the disposition of his remains, can best be carried
into effect. But before I do this, it may be proper to inform some of my
auditors what those intentions were. This great man was an ardent admirer
of the science of medicine, and his penetrating mind was not slow in
perceiving that the safe and successful practice of the healing art
entirely rests on a thorough knowledge of the natural structure and
functions of the human body. He also perceived that there was but one
method of obtaining such knowledge, viz., dissection. In proceeding to
inquire how it came to happen that in a country like England, justly proud
of those numerous institutions in which science is so successfully
cultivated, so little encouragement, or more correctly speaking, so much
opposition, was offered to the advancement of so indispensable a branch of
knowledge, Mr. Bentham discovered that this repugnance to dissection
sprang from a feeling strongly implanted in the human breast--a feeling of
reverence towards the dead. Far be it from me to condemn such a sentiment,
for it has its source in some of the purest principles of our nature. But
if it can be shown that an undue indulgence in this feeling produces
incalculable mischief in society, it becomes the duty of all who are
interested in the happiness of mankind to oppose the progress of such
injurious opinions. Mr. Bentham, impressed with this idea, and thinking it
unjust that the humbler classes of the community should alone be called
upon to sacrifice those feelings which are cherished alike by the rich and
poor, determined to devote his own body to the public good. He knew that
this determination would inflict pain on many of his dearest friends. An
example of this character, emanating from a person so talented, so
influential, and so esteemed, is calculated to operate a most beneficial
effect on the public mind, and I cannot refrain from considering the
dissection of the body now before us as an important era in the progress
of anatomy, as it is one of the first that in this country has been
employed for the purposes of science, under the direct sanction of the
individual expressed during his lifetime; he also knew that obstacles
would probably be offered to its fulfilment, but with an indifference to
personal feeling rarely witnessed, he took effectual means to carry his
resolution into effect. And thus, gentlemen, did the last act of this
illustrious man's existence accord with that leading principle of his
well-spent life--the desire to promote the universal happiness and welfare
of mankind."
Bentham's skeleton, clothed in his usual attire, is now in University
College, London.
Messenger Monsey, the eccentric physician to the Chelsea Hospital, was
exceedingly anxious that his body should be examined after death. He
obtained a promise from Mr. Forster, of Union Court, that he would
perform this service for him. So anxious was Monsey for the _post mortem_
to be carried out, that in May, 1787, he wrote to Cruikshank, the
anatomist, as follows:
"Mr. Foster (_sic_) a Surgeon in Union Court, Broad Street, has been
so good as to promise to open my Carcass and see what is the matter
with my Heart, Arteries, Kidnies, &c. He is gone to Norwich and may
not return before I am [dead]. Will you be so good as to let me send
it to you, or if he comes will you like to be present at the
dissection. I am now very ill and hardly see to scrawl this & feel as
if I should live two days, the sooner the better. I am, tho' unknown
to you
"Your respectfull humble Servant
"MESSR. MONSEY."
Monsey lived until December 20th, 1788; his wishes were duly carried out
by Mr. Forster, at Guy's Hospital, in the presence of the students.
Ninety-nine gentlemen of Dublin signed a document, in which the wish was
expressed that their bodies, instead of being interred, should be devoted
by their surviving friends "to the more rational, benevolent, and
honourable purpose of explaining the structure, functions and diseases of
the human being."
A Mr. Boys, who died in 1835, wished to be made into "essential salts" for
the use of his female friends. In a letter to Dr. Campbell, written four
years before his death, he asks: "Are you now disposed (without Burking)
to accomplish my wish, when my breath or spirit shall have ceased to
animate my carcase, to perform the operation of vitrifying my bones, and
sublimating the rest, thereby cheating the Devil of his due, according to
the ideas of some devotees among Christians? And, that I may not offend
the delicate olfactory nerves of my female friends with a mass of
putridity, if it be possible, let me rather fill a few little bottles of
essential salts therefrom, and revive their drooping spirits. It may be
irksome to you to superintend the business, but, perhaps, you have
knowledge of some rising genius or geniuses who may be glad of a subject
without paying for it. Let them slash and cut, and divide, as best please
'em."
The following account, taken from a newspaper of 1810, shows that
untoward events sometimes followed a request of this kind. A journeyman
tailor died at the _Black Prince_, in Chandos Street, and directed, in his
will, that his body should be opened in the presence of Mr. Wood, the
landlord. This instruction was carried out. The paragraph goes on to say
that the dissection was scarcely concluded "when the landlord, a stranger
to such exhibitions, was seized with sickness and vomiting; and, on
reaching the bar, was prevailed upon by his wife to take a glass of brandy
and water; in a few minutes he was obliged to be carried to bed, never to
rise again; on Friday last, the third day from the attack, he died in a
state of delirium, not from contagion, or a predisposition to disease, but
solely from the impression made upon his mind by the anatomical
performance, which, he observed, exceeded in horror any thing he had ever
beheld."
It was not an uncommon thing for persons to try to put into effect part of
Dermott's plan, by offering to leave their bodies for anatomical purposes,
on the condition that they were paid a certain sum down. This was
generally only a swindling dodge, and one by which the teachers were not
to be caught, as they could have no hold on the persons whose bodies they
purchased, nor could they compel the friends to give them up after death.
The following letter, preserved amongst Sir Astley Cooper's papers, and
now forming part of the Stone Collection at the Royal College of Surgeons
of England, is a specimen:
"SIR,--I have been informed you are in the habit of purchasing bodys
and allowing the person a sum weekly; knowing a poor woman that is
desirous of doing so, I have taken the liberty of calling to know the
truth.
"I remain, your humble servant."
[10]
On the back Sir Astley has written, "The _truth_ is that you deserve to be
hanged for such an unfeeling offer. A. C."
The idea at the present day has not died out; quite recently a man called
at the College of Surgeons, and offered to sell his body for a cash
payment. It is a fairly common experience of Curators of Pathological
Museums to have similar offers from persons suffering from a rare disease,
or a curious deformity.
[Illustration: MORTSAFE IN GREYFRIARS CHURCHYARD, EDINBURGH.]