LECTURE VIII. "The poet grieves to find his page grow scant, AMONG the literati of our country, in the different ages of her growth, may be numbered many eminent physicians, who were not only useful in their profession, but distinguished for a spirit of inquiry and a knowledge of letters. At the first settlement of the provinces, the clergy were the physicians, and often the surgeons of the community. They practised, in general, without fees, from a religious belief that they ought not to receive any compensation for their services, as what they could do for the body was intimately connected with the cure of souls. This union of the professions had long been in use in Europe. The confessors of the convents and monasteries had made, in many orders, the healing art a part of their vows; and after the suppression of the religious houses in England, by Henry VIII., the clergy still continued the art among the people; and, after the reformation was entirely effected, kept up the custom without any dread from the bulls against the practice of dissection. The first settlers of Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay, as well as those of Jamestown, had physicians and surgeons with them. Gager, an eminent surgeon, came to Charleston in 1630, but soon fell a victim to what has since been called the spotted fever. He practised physick as well as surgery. Firmin, a physician and surgeon, in 1639, was settled at Ipswich, but left the profession for that of divinity, which was the safest road to distinction in those days. The skill of the early physicians was speedily put to the test, for, besides the fevers incident to the hard living of new settlers, the small-pox and yellow fever were soon brought among them from the West-Indies; and, after several years, the "cynanche maligna" baffled all their skill for a time. The measles, often an obstinate disease, was constantly among the new settlements. The yellow fever, which we now trust has left for ever most of our cities, prevailed, in its most malignant form, in Charleston, South Carolina, in 1699, 1703, 1732, 1739, 1740, 1745, 1748; and Dr. Harris says it was there in 1761 and 1764. This fever prevailed in Philadelphia in 1741, 1747, 1762, and 1793; in New-York in 1792, 1798, and several times since. Hutchenson says, that, as early as 1693, it was preva lent in Boston. It came from the West-Indies in the fleet of Sir Francis Wheeler, which was sent from that station to join the NewEngland forces, destined against Quebeck. This fleet lost 1300 sailors out of 2100, and 1800 soldiers out of 2400. Previous to this period, a disease swept through the country in 1647; its precise character has never been known; the Indians fell victims to it, as well as the European colonists; and in 1655 it was nearly as extensive and fatal. The small-pox was a great scourge; it prevailed in Boston in 1689, 1702, 1721, 1730, 1752, 1764, 1776, and in 1792; and the probability is, that it was as frequent in other cities. We state these facts, to show that there were constantly subjects for the inquiries of the medical mind; and as early as 1647, Thomas Thatcher, of Weymouth, in Massachusetts, turned his attention to the subjects of diseases, and wrote a treatise on the small-pox and measles, called "a brief guide in the small-pox and measles." He was a great man, learned as a mathematician, and a practical mechanick, whose inventive genius was equal to his scientifick acquirements. He was also a profound oriental scholar, and had explored all the wisdom of the East in the healing art. This treatise of Thatcher's was probably the first book written in this country, upon any of the diseases incident to it. This eminent physician, scholar, and divine, died at the age of fifty-eight; a greater man than whom, this country has not since produced. At this time, some of the physicians educated abroad, attracted by the novelty of a new country, or dissatisfied with the old world, came among our ancestors to diffuse their information, and to find new sources of knowledge. Robert Child, educated at the university of Padua, came to Massachusetts as early as 1646. The name of this physician was connected with an attempt made to diffuse a spirit of religious toleration, which received the censures of the magistrates, but which may form his eulogium now, however severe they were thought to be at that time. The next physician and surgeon of note in our annals, is Gershom Bulkley, of Connecticut, son of the learned Mr. Bulkley, of Concord, in Massachusetts. He was a clergyman; in Philip's war of 1676, was appointed surgeon to the Connecticut troops, and such was the confidence of the legislature in his abilities, that he was made, by their order, one of the council of war. The next publication from a professor of medicine, that I can find, but probably my researches may not have been so thorough on this subject as on some other subjects, was one of Dr. Douglass' on the small-pox, whose character I have sketched in a former lecture. He was opposed to inoculation, and ridiculed Boyleston, who was there in 1721, introducing the practice of it. This provoked Boyleston to a defence. Cotton Mather had his share in the dispute; he was in favour of the practice. At this time, Nathaniel Williams, a clergyman, a schoolmaster, successor to old master Cheever, and a distinguished physician also, being a good-natured man, wrote a humourous dialogue upon this dispute, entitled "Mundungus, Sawney, Academicus, a debate;" these names glanced at the different characters who had been distinguished in the dispute; and it is said to contain the arguments on both sides of the question, as far as facts had then developed principles. The old physicians spoke of this work with great respect. Williams was a man of such benevolence and sincerity, that in that day of gratuitous epithets, he was called "the beloved physician." The next work was a treatise on pharmacy, by Thomas Harwood, a good medical writer of some eminence. This work was published in 1732. In 1740, Dr. Thomas Cadwallader published an essay on the " Iliack Passion," which gave him great celebrity in this country and in England. In 1745, he published some medical papers in the "Royal Transactions, London." This was the mode pursued by eminent physicians in this country; for the fact of appearing in such a publication, was sufficient to ensure the attention of the publick, or that part of it one would wish to attract. Dr. Cadwallader was one of the first professors in the medical art, who, in this country, taught his pupils from hospital practice; being one of the visiting physicians in the Philadelphia hospital, which was founded in 1752. Previously, the subject of plants had attracted the attention of men fond of pursuing nature in "the herb and flower." Mark Catesby had the honour of being among the first engaged in this pursuit in this country. He was sagacious and indefatigable, but his works are far inferior to Clayton's Flora Virginiana. The history of the labours of this great botanical work is very singular. The art of printing and engraving in this country, would not admit of printing a flora here; he therefore sent his production to Leyden, to professor Gronovius, who published it in several editions; the first of them in 1739, the second in 1743, the third in 1762. Clayton began this work in 1705, when the forests were extensive, and when the lily of the valley and the mountain daisy breathed their fragrance on the same gale. Dudley and Douglass, whom we have named before, were at the same time engaged in the same pursuit. Clayton's descriptions of the plants he collected are remarkable for neatness and accuracy, and often beautiful and elegant. It is a fact worthy of notice, that some of the finest descriptions to be found any where, are in the works of naturalists and botanists. Some descriptions of plants by Linnæus, Darwin, and their fellowlabourers in the garden of nature, are models of beauty; and what can surpass in splendour Buffon's description of the horse, the peacock, and the eagle? Every part of our country puts in just claims for distinction in the medical profession; Doctor William Ball, of South Carolina, who was a graduate of Harvard college, defended a medical thesis, with ability, at Leyden, in 1734. He was for many years eminent in his native state. Doctors Thomas Bond, and Middleton, made the first publick dissection, in 1750. This was done by leave of a court of law. Josiah Bartlett, of Exeter, New-Hampshire, wrote on the "cynanche maligna," which had been prevalent in New-England; and John Jones wrote at the commencement of the revolutionary war, a treatise "on wounds and fractures," for the use of the army. I have collected these facts, with many others that I shall not trouble you with, respecting the medical faculty, simply to show that this profession has had its share in the literature of our country. Within the half century, it is well known that in Europe and this country, they have raised the standard of the profession, by banishing, as far as possible, all empyricism from their borders. This is a profession in which ignorance has heretofore so often hid herself, and gulled the world by pretensions, that the satirists have in every age, poured out upon it their surcharged vials of wrath; but the historian now sharpens his pen to write their praise. Hippocrates describes a quack, as a being "no laws could reach, and no ignominy disgrace." The medical profession has often wisely resorted to letters for immortality. It is not the cure, but the record of it only, that we can To prove the altitude of the medical character in our country, we need only look to the earliest medical school in America. When, in 1768, a medical college was established at Philadelphia, what a cluster of distinguished men were collected to give it popularity. Shippen, Cadwallader, and a host of others, were ready and active ministers of science to diffuse its advantages. "A good physician" (says the scriptures) is from the Lord; and to continue the oriental phraseology—a Hospital well regulated, and bountifully endowed to heal the maladies of the mind and body, may be said to be a perpetual lamp of life in the temple of nature; and those whose duty it is to watch, should never slumber or sleep on their posts. see. At the time of the revolution, there were a goodly number of active men in the profession of medicine, who took a part in the conflict. Warren, Church, Bull, Finch, and others, had taken the place of Perkins, Cutter, Clarke, and others, in Massachusetts; and in other States, there were also many of the physicians who were an effective and active class of men. They had defects, no doubt, in their education, for they had many difficulties to contend with, but none that could not be overcome. Many of them had distinguished themselves by their writings in favour of civil liberty, and it was necessary for them to push forward and take an active part. Some of them entered the army professionally, and others gave up the lancet for the sword. Among the officers of the army of the revolution, whose profession had been that of physick, were, Warren, Mercer, St. Clair, Gadsden, Cobb, Brooks, Bricket; and who were braver than they? In political life, the profession has been conspicuous; before the adoption of the federal constitution, the profession could number some of the first men in Congress from their body. And since the constitution has been in operation, there have been also many of distinction in publick life. As orators, there has been no small share of eloquence among them. This has been proved in the halls of legislation often, but more often, and more happily, in the lecture room; there the subjects are neither artificial nor conventional, but natural, and nature makes her votaries eloquent. As poets as well as warriors, the medical faculty has been distinguished. We have, in our account of American poets, mentioned Hopkins, Church, Warren, Ladd, Bryant, Shaw, Boyd, Percival, and other bards, who, while they plucked the misletoe as Druids, analysed, as chemists and philosophers, the nut gall of the same oak on which the parasite had grown. It is impossible to mention all in a short course of lectures; but I cannot pass over some names without paying a tribute to their virtues, if it be only in a hasty breath. In every great enterprise, more depends upon the character of the few who zealously engage in it, than upon the many, who may take cursory and imperfect views of it, and with only faint motives for its prosperity. It was fortunate, that such a man as Rush should have been found at the close of the revolution, to assist in building up an American school of medicine. He was fitted for the task. His temperament was ardent, and his feelings enthusiastick; he had the rare faculty of communicating this enthusiasm to others; and his pupils pursued their inquiries with an impetus, derived from him, which carried them rapidly and pleasantly through the labyrinths of science. His eloquence, his arguments, and his love of labour, did much to break the spell which hung over the profession, "that no man could be qualified for a professor, in any of the branches of medicine, who had not been in a foreign school." He taught that nature was the same in every country, and that when she was properly interrogated, her responses would be the same at all times. The medical school at New-York has had a share of the intelligence of the country in every stage of its growth; James, Middleton, and others, distinguished in their day, have been succeeded by men of science and letters. |