Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T17:14:17.051Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influenza Research and the Medical Profession in Eighteenth-Century Britain*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2014

Margaret DeLacy
Get access

Extract

The depiction of influenza as a separate species of disease first became common during the eighteenth century. During that period, physicians developed competing theories about its etiology (causation) and transmission, including the theory that influenza was contagious. Theories of contagion were held by an increasing number of physicians during the course of the eighteenth century, although the issue remained a contested one, as symbolized by the publication of two separate reports on the epidemic of 1782 by the Royal College of Physicians and the Society for Promoting Medical Knowledge: reports that differed on the question of transmission.

It was because this issue was not settled by an overwhelming preponderance of the evidence that physician's views on this question had political implications that reflect the political and social fissures underlying medical practice in the eighteenth century. This article will examine the political, social, religious, and educational factors that influenced the initiative to investigate influenza as a separate disease, and will argue that these factors also influenced the readiness of some groups of physicians to entertain the hypothesis of contagion in the face of conflicting information. It will also suggest that the divergence of opinion on epidemic diseases reflected the social and educational differences between the graduates of English universities who were eligible for Fellowship in the College of Physicians, and the often equally distinguished “outsiders” who had obtained their medical degrees from other institutions, and who formed competing medical associations.

Type
Research Article
Information
Albion , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , Spring 1993 , pp. 37 - 66
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference on British Studies 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Research for this paper was carried out with the aid of a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities, an independent federal agency, for 1989–1992. I would like to thank my husband, John DeLacy, for technical assistance, Mr. Geoffrey Davenport of the Royal College of Physicians, Ms. Vivienne Orr of the Nithsdale District Council, Dumfries, Ms. Barbara Cantwell and the Multnomah County [Oregon] Library Interlibrary Loan Dept., Mr. Gary Sampson, Systems Librarian, Portland State University Library; the Oregon Health Sciences University Library; Reed College Library; Ms. Nancy Austin, Head of Cataloguing, Lane Medical Library, Stanford University Medical School; Mr. John Symons, Curator, Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine; the Welch Library of Johns Hopkins University; and the National Library of Medicine for providing material used in this article; and Sir Christopher Booth, Dr. Harold Cook, Dr. Anne Digby, Dr. Elizabeth Eisenstein, Dr. Norma Landau, Dr. Irvine Loudon, Dr. William McCarthy, Dr. Gail Pat Parsons, and Dr. K. David Patterson.

References

1 Sources for the history of influenza include Townsend, John F., “History of influenza epidemics,” Annals of Medical History, n.s. 5 (1933): 533–47Google Scholar; Crookshank, F. G., ed., Influenza, Essays by several authors (London, 1922)Google Scholar; Hirsch, August, Handbook of Geographical and Historical Pathology, trans. Creighton, Charles (London, 1885)Google Scholar; Charles Creighton, “Influenzas and Epidemic Agues,” in A History of Epidemics in Britain with additional material by D. E. C. Eversley, E. Ashworth Underwood, and Lynda Ovenall, 2 vols. (1894: 2nd ed.; London, 1965), 2: 306–433 (hereafter cited as Creighton, History); and Thompson, Theophilus, Annals of Influenza or Epidemic Catarrhal Fever in Great Britain from 1510 to 1837 (London, 1852)Google Scholar (hereafter cited as Thompson, Annals), which contains many eighteenth-century tracts on influenza. More recent treatments include Beare, A. S., ed., Basic and Applied Influenza Research (Boca Raton, Fl., 1982)Google Scholar; Beveridge, W. I. B., Influenza: The Last Great Plague: An unfinished story of discovery (London, 1977)Google Scholar, and Patterson, K. David, Pandemic Influenza 1700–1900: A Study in Historical Epidemiology (Totowa, N.J., 1986)Google Scholar. On the increasingly contagionist view of influenza see DeLacy, Margaret, “The Conceptualization of Influenza in Eighteenth-Century Britain: specificity and contagion,” forthcoming in the Bulletin of the History of Medicine 67 (1993): 74–118Google ScholarPubMed.

2 Cunningham, Andrew, “Thomas Sydenham: epidemics, experiment and the ‘Good Old Cause,’” in French, Roger and Wear, Andrew, eds., The Medical Revolution of the Seventeenth Century (Cambridge, 1989), pp. 164–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Roy Porter, “The early Royal Society and the spread of medical knowledge” in ibid., p. 280; Tröhler, Ulrich, “Quantification in British Medicine and Surgery, 1750–1830” (Ph.D. diss., University of London, 1978), pp. 97–98Google Scholar.

3 Cook, Harold J., The Decline of the Old Medical Regime in Stuart London (Ithaca N.Y., 1986)Google Scholar, and “Physicians and the new philosophy: Henry Stubbe and the virtuosi-physicians,” in French, and Wear, , Medical Revolution, pp. 246–71Google Scholar, and “The new philosophy and medicine in seventeenth-century England,” in Lindberg, David C. and Westman, Robert S., Reappraisals of the Scientific Revolution (Cambridge, 1990), pp. 397–436Google Scholar.

4 The standard history of the College is SirClark, George, A History of the Royal College of Physicians of London, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1964 and 1966), 2: chs. 22, 23, 29Google Scholar. See also Fox, R. Hingston, John Fothergill and his Friends: Chapters in Eighteenth Century Life (London, 1919), pp. 137–56Google Scholar; Waddington, Ivan, “The struggle to reform the Royal College of Physicians, 1767–1771: a sociological analysis,” Medical History 17 (1973): 107–26CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Stevenson, L. G., “The siege of Warwick Lane together with a brief history of the Society of Collegiate Physicians, 1767–98,” Journal of Medical History 7 (1952): 105–21Google Scholar; and Maloney, William J., George and John Armstrong of Castleton: Two Eighteenth-century Medical Pioneers (Edinburgh, 1954), pp. 13–48Google Scholar.

5 Hamilton, David, The Healers: A History of Medicine in Scotland (Edinburgh, 1981, 1987), table 4:5, p. 119Google Scholar.

6 Ibid., and see Waddington, “Struggle.”

7 See note 4, and Lawrence, Susan Catherine, “Science and medicine at the London hospitals: the development of teaching and research, 1750–1815” (Ph.D. diss., Toronto, 1985) esp. pp. 516–20Google Scholar.

8 See the work of Cook in note 3, esp. “the new philosophy,” and Philip K. Wilson, “The Art of Surgery in early 18th-century London: Textual Analysis and Professional Concerns,” paper presented at the American Association for the History of Medicine, Cleveland, 1991. I thank Mr. Wilson for providing a copy of this paper.

9 Cunningham, “Sydenham.” On Sydenham's disease theory see also: Traill, R. R., “Sydenham's impact on English medicine,” Medical History 11 (1965): 356–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dewhurst, Kenneth, Dr. Thomas Sydenham (1624–1689): His Life and Original Writings (Berkeley, 1966)Google Scholar; Keele, K. D., “The Sydenham-Boyle theory of morbific particles,” Medical History 18 (1974): 240–48CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; and Winslow, Charles-Edward Amory, The Conquest of Epidemic Disease: A Chapter in the History of Ideas (Madison, 1943, 1980), pp. 161–75Google Scholar.

10 Porter, Roy, “Early Royal Society,” in French, and Wear, , Medical Revolution, pp. 280–81Google Scholar. Cassedy, James H., “Medicine and the rise of statistics,” in Debus, Allen G., ed., Medicine in Seventeenth Century England (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1974), pp. 304–05Google Scholar, and Riley, James C., The Eighteenth-Century Campaign to Avoid Disease (New York, 1987), pp. 12, 63CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 McConaghey, R. M. S., “John Huxham,” Medical History 13 (1969): 280-87, esp. 282CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 See Creighton, , History, pp. 337–52Google Scholar, and Thompson, , Annals, pp. 28–60Google Scholar. On the word “influenza” see Crookshank, F. G., “The name and names of influenza,” in Influenza, p. 67Google ScholarPubMed.

13 Medical Essays and Observations, Published by a Society in Edinburgh (3rd. ed.; vol. 2), in Thompson, , Annals, pp. 39–43Google ScholarPubMed.

14 Biographical information has been compiled from standard sources such as the Dictionary of National Biography, SirStephen, Leslie and SirLee, Sidney, eds. (Oxford, 1917-)Google Scholar, (hereafter cited as D.N.B.); Munk, William, The Roll of the Royal College of Physicians of London, Vol. II: 1701–1800 (London, 1861)Google Scholar; Smith, R. W. Innes, English-Speaking Students of Medicine at the University of Leyden (Edinburgh and London, 1932)Google Scholar; and Edinburgh University, List of the Graduates in Medicine in the University of Edinburgh from 1705 to 1866 (Edinburgh, 1867)Google Scholar. Invaluable is Wallis, P. J. and Wallis, R. V., Eighteenth Century Medics (Newcastle, 1988)Google Scholar. On Mead see Winslow, Conquest of Epidemic Disease. On Arbuthnot see Steensma, Robert C., Dr. John Arbuthnot (Boston, 1979)Google Scholar; Guerrini, Anita, “The Tory Newtonians: Gregory, Pitcairne, and their circle,” Journal of British Studies 25 (1986): 288–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Olson, Richard, “Tory High Church opposition to science and scientism in the Eighteenth Century: the Works of John Arbuthnot, Jonathan Swift, and Samuel Johnson,” in The Uses of Science in the Age of Newton, ed. Burke, John (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1983), pp. 171–204Google Scholar. On Hillary see Booth, C. C., “William Hillary, a pupil of Boerhaave,” Medical History 7 (1963): 295–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On Huxham see R. M. S. McConaghey, “John Huxham,” and Saul Jarcho, “Introduction” to Huxham, John, An Essay on Fevers (Canton, Mass., 1988), pp. vi–xxiGoogle Scholar. On Rutty see Sharpless, William T. S., “Dr. John Rutty of Dublin,” Annals of Medical History 10 (1928): 249–57Google Scholar, and Knapp, Lewis Mansfield, Tobias Smollett, Doctor of Men and Manners (New York, 1963)Google Scholar. “Dissenter” is used more as a social than a theological term: of those brought up as dissenters or presbyterians, several later conformed to the Church of England; others, such as Huxham, were widely suspected of being unbelievers.

15 Creighton, , History, 2: 340Google Scholar; Munk, , Roll, p. 24Google Scholar.

16 B.L., Add. Mss. 4433/90 [Royal Society Papers], Chandler, John, “Histories of the Epedemic Colds which happened in the Years 1729 & 1732/3…in London…,” Old Jury, Oct. 18, 1734Google Scholar. On Chandler, see the D.N.B.

17 Medical Essays and Observations, Published by a Society in Edinburgh, 1 (4th ed; 1752), preface, 15Google Scholar.

18 It became the Royal Medical Society of Edinburgh in 1778. See Anderson, R. G. W. and Simpson, A. D. C., The Early Years of the Edinburgh Medical School (Edinburgh, 1976)Google Scholar, and Fox, R. Hingston, Fothergill, pp. 15 and 140–41Google Scholar.

19 Gray, James, History of the Royal Medical Society 1737–1937, ed. Guthrie, Douglas (Edinburgh, 1952), pp. 3Google Scholar, “The Annual Presidents of the Royal Medical Society,” pp. 315–17; and Index Librorum Soceitatis Medicae Edensis 1766 (n.p., n.d.). I have not found a complete list of eighteenth-century R.M.S.E. members.

20 On Hunter see Simmons, Samuel Foart and Hunter, John, William Hunter, 1718–1783: A Memoir, ed. Brock, C. H., (Glasgow, 1983), p. 6Google Scholar. See also Bynum, William and Porter, Roy, eds., William Hunter and the Eighteenth-Century Medical World (Cambridge, 1982)Google Scholar, chs. 1 and 2 contain additional citations; Peachey, George C., “William Hunter's obstetrical career,” Annals of Medical History, n.s. 2 (1930): 476–79Google Scholar; idem, A Memoir of John and William Hunter (Plymouth, U.K., 1924); and Kobler, John, The Reluctant Surgeon: The Life of John Hunter (London, 1960)Google Scholar. On Pringle see Singer, Dorothea W., “Sir John Pringle and his circle,” Parts I and II, Annals of Science 6 (1949–1950): 127-80, 229–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Selwyn, Sydney, “Sir John Pringle, hospital reformer, moral philosopher: and pioneer of antiseptics,” Medical History 10 (1966): 266–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Gordon, Charles, “Sir John Pringle and the apothecaries,” Pharmaceutical Historian 19 (1989): 5–12 (I thank David L. Cowen for this article)Google Scholar.

21 Maloney, , George and John Armstrong, p. 98 n13Google Scholar.

22 Clark, , History, 2: 738Google ScholarPubMed.

23 Fox, , Fothergill, p. 150Google Scholar.

24 [?Cox, Daniel], A Letter from a Physician in Town to his Friend in the Country, Concerning the Disputes at Present Subsisting between the Fellows and Licentiates of the College of Physicians in London (London, 1753)Google Scholar.

25 Waddington, , Struggle, p. 109Google ScholarPubMed.

26 Clark, , History, 2: 564–67Google Scholar.

27 McConaghey, , “John Huxham,” p. 281Google ScholarPubMed.

28 Clark, , History, 2: 547Google Scholar. See also Harley, David, “Honour and property: the structure of professional disputes in eighteenth-century English medicine,” in Cunningham, Andrew and French, Roger, eds., The Medical Enlightenment of the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge, 1990), pp. 138–64Google Scholar.

29 Maloney, , George and John Armstrong, pp. 24–30Google Scholar.

30 On Heberden, see Heberden, Ernest, William Heberden, Physician of the Age of Reason (London, 1989)Google Scholar. See also Davidson, Percy B., “William Heberden, M.D., F.R.S.,” Annals of Medical History 4 (1922): 336–46Google Scholar, and Crummer, LeRoy, “Prefatory Essay to an Introduction to the Study of Physic,” Annals of Medical History 10 (1928): 226–41Google Scholar. On Heberden's efforts to reform pharmacy and introduce a journal to the College of Physicians, see Clark, , History, 2: 548, 560-61, 565, 578-81, 589–90Google ScholarPubMed.

31 On Baker see McConaghey, R. M. S., “Sir George Baker and the Devonshire colic,” Medical History 11 (1967): 345–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Childs, St. Julien R., “Sir George Baker and the Dry Belly-Ache,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 44 (1970): 213–40Google Scholar.

32 Simmons, and Hunter, John, William Hunter, p. 6Google Scholar.

33 Fox, Fothergill. On his ill-paid practice see “Biographical Anecdotes of the late John Fothergill,” London Medical Journal 4 (1784): 176–203Google Scholar.

34 Tröhler, , “Quantification,” pp. 56, 275Google Scholar.

35 For the history of contagionism, see Winslow, Conquest of Epidemic Disease, and Shryock, Richard Harrison, “Germ theories in medicine prior to 1870,” Clio Medica 7 (1972): 81–109Google ScholarPubMed.

36 Miller, Genevive, The Adoption of Inoculation for Smallpox in England and France (Philadelphia, 1957)Google Scholar. See also Wilkinson, Lise, “The development of the virus concept as reflected in corpora of studies on individual pathogens, 5: Smallpox and the evolution of ideas on acute (viral) infections,” Medical History 23 (1979): 1–28CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; DeLacy, “Influenza in eighteenth-centuiy Britain,” and idem., review of Huxham's, JohnEssay on Fevers, Bulletin of the History of Medicine 64 (1990): 110–11Google Scholar.

37 Fothergill, John, An Acount of the sore Throat Attended with Ulcers (1748)Google Scholar, republished as An Account of Putrid Sore Throat in vol. 1 of The Works of John Fothergill, M.D., ed. Lettsom, John Coakley (London, 1783)Google Scholar. I thank the National Library of Medicine (N.L.M.) for supplying a microfilm copy of this work.

38 See Selwyn, , “Pringle,” p. 268Google ScholarPubMed, and Margaret DeLacy “A Linnaean Thesis on Contagium Vivum: the ‘Exanthemata Viva’ of John Nyander,” paper given at the American Association for the History of Medicine, May 2, 1992.

39 See DeLacy, “Influenza in eighteenth-century Britain,” and idem., “Puerperal Fever in Eighteenth-Century Britain,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 63 (1989): 521-56. For an eighteenth-century discussion see Thomson, John, ed., The Works of William Cullen, M.D., 2 vols. (Edinburgh and London, 1827), 1: 225-362, 479–560Google Scholar. See also Bynum, W.F. and Nutton, V., eds., Theories of Fever from Antiquity to the Enlightenment, Medical History, supp. 1 (London, 1981)Google Scholar, esp. Smith, Dale C., “Medical science, medical practice, and the emerging concept of typhus in mid-eighteenth-century Britain,” pp. 121–34Google ScholarPubMed. See also King, Lester, “Boissier de Sauvages and 18th. century nosology,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 40 (1960): 43–51Google ScholarPubMed; and idem, The Medical World of the Eighteenth Century (Chicago, 1958), pp. 193-99.

40 Campbell, letter to Fothergill in Thompson, , Annals, p. 113Google ScholarPubMed. Campbell (?1749–1832), M.D. Leyden (1770) and Edinburgh (1777), wrote an important book on typhus. Campbell is described as “English” at Leyden but there is some evidence that he lived for a time in America. Lancaster City Library, Biographies File; R. W. Innes Smith, English-Speaking Students.

41 See DeLacy, “Influenza in eighteenth-century Britain.” The best accounts of Haygarth are Elliott, John, “A medical pioneer: John Haygarth of Chester,” British Medical Journal 4 (Feb. 1, 1913): 235–42Google Scholar, and Weaver, George H., “John Haygarth, clinician, investigator, apostle of sanitation, 1740–1827,” Bulletin of the Society of Medical History of Chicago 4 (1930): 156–200Google Scholar. See also Lobo, Francis M., “John Haygarth, smallpox and religious Dissent in eighteenth-centuiy England,” in Cunningham, and French, , Medical Enlightenment, pp. 217–53Google Scholar, and Haygarth, John, “An inquiry how to prevent the small-pox” (1784)Google Scholar in Haygarth, John, Medical Transactions, vol. 1 (London, 1801)Google Scholar. I thank the N.L.M. for providing a microfilm copy of this work.

42 Fothergill, John, “A sketch of the epidemic disease which appeared in London towards the end of the year 1775,” Medical Observations and Inquiries (1784)Google Scholar in Thompson, , Annals, pp. 86–89Google Scholar.

43 Clark, , History, 2: 578–7Google ScholarPubMed9, Sir Christopher Booth, “The Development of Medical Journals in Britain,” in idem. Doctors in Science and Society: Essays of a Clinical Scientist (1987), p. 204.

44 Clark, , History, 2: 560-61, 572Google ScholarPubMed.

45 “An Account of the Epidemic Disease, called the Influenza, of the year 1782,…by a Committee of the Fellows of the Royal College of Physicians…” (Medical Transactions 3 [1785])Google Scholar, in Thompson, , Annals, pp. 155–64Google ScholarPubMed. Royal College of Physicians, mss. 670, 1045/18 and 3012/1–23, omitting 3012/10. I have omitted 3012/19 from Spain, dated 1790. I thank the College for supplying copies of these letters.

46 Gray, Edward, “An Account of the Epidemic Catarrh of the Year 1782; compiled at the request of a Society for promoting Medical Knowledge,” (Medical Communications 1 [1784])Google Scholar, in Thompson, , Annals, pp. 117–48Google Scholar.

47 Hamilton, Robert, “Some remarks on the influenza that appeared in Sp[r]ing 1782, in a letter to Dr. Lettsom” (1787)Google Scholar, in Thompson, , Annals, p. 173Google Scholar.

48 In addition to the standard biographical sources, see Janssens, Uta, Matthieu Maty and the Journal Brittanique (Amsterdam, 1975)Google Scholar, and Tyson, Gerald P., Joseph Johnson: A Liberal Publisher (Iowa City, 1979)Google Scholar. I thank Dr. Elizabeth Eisenstein for these references.

49 Clark, , History, 2: 582Google ScholarPubMed. On Monro, see Maloney, , George and John Armstrong, pp. 57–61, 105 n13Google Scholar.

50 Gibbs, F. W., Joseph Priestley: Revolutions of the Eighteenth Century (Garden City, N.J., 1967), pp. 96Google Scholar, and Selwyn, , “Pringle,” p. 269Google Scholar. See also Fox, , Fothergill, p. 141Google Scholar; Chaplin, , Medicine in England during the Reign of George III (London, 1919), pp. 88–89Google ScholarPubMed; Wiltshire, John, Samuel Johnson in the Medical World: The Doctor and the patient (Cambridge, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Maloney, , George and John Armstrong, p. 48Google Scholar. Brocklesby, a member of Fothergill's Society of Physicians and the Edinburgh Medical Society, participated in conflicts with Priestley and Armstrong.

51 College of Physicians, “Account,” in Thompson, , Annals, p. 161Google ScholarPubMed, and Munk, , Roll, pp. 253–57Google Scholar.

52 See note 14 for sources of biographical information. I have assumed that anyone described as “doctor” held a degree (M.B. or M.D.). Rutty, who wrote before and after 1750, is included. Of 145 “doctors,” I counted two “Dr. Scotts” and Dr. John Nelson Scott of the Isle of Man as three different men. Eleven of the “doctors” are identified but not the place of their degrees. Two men, “Chisholm” and “Lindsay,” are named by Hirsch as influenza authors, but I have not been able to verify this. I have not included Edinburgh theses in the tabulations. I have also been unable to consult separate works by Robert Hooper, John Nott, and John Herdman on the epidemic of 1803. Robert Hooper worked as an apothecary before entering Pembroke College and obtaining a B.A. at age 30. Members of the College of Physicians prevented him from obtaining an Oxford M.D., according to the D.N.B.

53 Wallis, and Wallis, , Eighteenth Century Medics, p. xivGoogle Scholar. The Wallises' sample consisted of 142 “doctors,” including 40 whose place of graduation was unknown. The Wallises apparently counted only M.D. degrees, not M.B. degrees, and they counted physicians with more than one degree as half at each university. Recalculation to reconcile this discrepancy would not significantly alter the results.

54 In addition to the biographical sources above, see DeLacy, Margaret, “Puerperal fever in Eighteenth-Century Britain,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 63 (1989): 550Google ScholarPubMed ns 14, 20, and 41, which contain many additional citations.

55 Rolleston, Humphry, “Medical friendships, clubs and societies,” Annals of Medical History n.s. 2 (1930): 249–66Google Scholar.

56 Crane, Verner W., “The Club of Honest Whigs: friends of science and liberty,” William and Mary Quarterly 3rd. ser., 23 (1966): 210–33Google Scholar. See also Aldridge, Alfred Owen, Benjamin Franklin and Nature's God (Durham, N.C., 1967), pp. 208–09Google Scholar, and Robbins, Caroline, The Eighteenth-Century Commonwealthman (New York, 1968)Google Scholar. Conflicting accounts have created confusion about the membership of these clubs. Crane argues that physicians named in other accounts, such as Watson, Templeman, Maty, and Parsons were not members of the Honest Whigs but merely accompanied Franklin as visitors.

57 Falconer, William, “Influenzae Descriptio,” Memoirs of the Medical Society of London 3 (1792): 25–29Google Scholar; Fothergill, Anthony, “Account of the epidemic catarrh (termed influenza) as it appeared at Northampton,…in 1775; together with a comparative view of a similar disease,…in 1782,” Memoirs of the Medical Society of London 3 (1792): 30–43Google Scholar. Robert Hamilton, “Some remarks on the influenza that appeared in Sp[r]ing 1782,” reprinted in Thompson, , Annals, pp. 164–90Google ScholarPubMed. On Lettsom see Abraham, J. Johnston, Lettsom: His Life, Times, Friends, and Descendants (London, 1933)Google Scholar, and Kilpatrick, Robert, “‘Living in the light’ dispensaries, philanthropy and medical reform in late-eighteenth-century London,” in Cunningham, and French, , Medical Enlightenment, pp. 254–80Google Scholar.

58 D.N.B., “Edward Whitaker Gray.”

59 Tyson, , Joseph Johnson, pp. 78–79Google Scholar.

60 Tyson, Joseph Johnson, passim. See also Grant, William, Observations on the Late Influenza….As it appeared at London in 1775 & 1782 (London, 1782)Google Scholar. I thank the N.L.M. for supplying a copy of this work.

61 Simmons, Samuel Foart, “Of the epidemic catarrh of the year 1788,” London Medical Journal 9 (1788): 335-54, 336Google Scholar.

62 Clark, , History, pp. 631–32Google Scholar.

63 See the D.N.B. and Jones, Graham, “Phillips, Sir Richard,” in Biographical Dictionary of Modern British Radicals, Vol. I: 1770–1830, eds. Baylen, Joseph O. and Gossman, Norbert J. (Sussex, 1979)Google Scholar.

64 On Aikin see Aikin, Lucy, Memoir of John Aikin, M.D., with a selection of his Miscellaneous Pieces (Philadelphia, 1824)Google Scholar. I thank Dickinson College for supplying a copy of this work.

65 See the biographical sources listed above and in note 93 of DeLacy, , “Puerperal Fever,” p. 550Google ScholarPubMed. See also Sir Christopher Booth, “Three Doctors and the American Revolution,” in idem, Doctors in Science and Society, pp. 95–117.

66 See the D.N.B. and Bower, Alexander, The History of the University of Edinburgh, 2 vols. (London and Edinburgh, 1817), 2: 351Google Scholar.

67 D.N.B., “Simson, John.”

68 Bower, , History, p. 351Google ScholarPubMed. See also Simson, Thomas, “A further account of the epidemic fever in Scotland, in a letter to Dr. Pringle,” Medical Observations and Inquiries 2 (1762): 203–06Google Scholar. For the religious and medical implications of Stahlian views, see Geyer-Kordesch, Johanna, “Georg Ernst Stahl's radical Pietist medicine and its influence on the German Enlightenment,” in Cunningham, and French, , Medical Enlightenment, pp. 67–87Google Scholar.

69 D.N.B., “Opie, Amelia.” Godwin was a suitor of Alderson's. See Marshall, Peter H., William Godwin (New Haven, 1984), pp. 145, 174, 182, 187Google Scholar.

70 Alderson, John, An Essay on the Nature and Origin of the Contagion of Fevers (Hull, 1788)Google Scholar.

71 Cunningham, “Thomas Sydenham,” in French and Wear, Medical Revolution.

72 Waddington, “Struggle.”

73 Hamilton, “Remarks,” in Thompson, , Annals, p. 165Google Scholar.