UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FOUNDED  1836
WASHINGTON,  D. C.
GPO  16—67244-1 
 
 
X
          A REPLY
TO DR. HA YGARTH'S « LETTER TO DR. PERCIVAL,
       ON INFECTIOUS FEVERS,"
            &C. &C &C,
 

 
-0T}
TO
      DR.  HAYGARTH'S

  " Letter  to Dr. Percival, on  Infectious
                   Fevers ;"
                    AND HIS
" ADDRESS ?0 VHE COLLEGE OF PHrSICIANS AT PHILADELPHIA,
  ON fHE PREVENTION OF THE AMERICAN PESTILENCE,"
  EXPOSING  THE  MEDICAL, PHILOSOPHICAL, AND
        LITERARY ERRORS OF THAT AUTHOR,
AND VINDICATING THE  RIGHT WHICH  THE FACULTY OF
  THE UNITED STATES  HAVE TO THINK AND DECIDE FOR
  THEMSELVES, RESPECTING THE DISEASES OF THEIR OWN
  COUNTRY,  UNINFLUENCED BY THE NOTIONS OF THE PHY-
  SICIANS OF EUROPE.
   BY CHARLES CALDWELL, M. D.
FELLOW OF THE COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS O
       PHILADELPHIA, &C. ifc. ijfc.
              PHILADELPHIA:
PRINTED BY THOMAS AND WILLIAM BRADFORD,
    BOOKSELLERS AND STATIONERS, NO. 8,
            SOUTH FRONT STREET.
1802. 
 
        DEDICATION

                     TO

    SAMUEL L. MITCHILL,  M.  D.

 PROFESSOR  OF CHEMISTRY IN COLUMBIA  COL-
                    LEGE,

                  &C  &C

 DEAR SIR,

           1 he  distinguished part you have
 taken in prostrating error and prejudice respect-
 ing pestilential diseases, the just indignation
 with which you meet the empty pretensions of
foreigners, who attempt to teach us what they
 do not themselves understand, and your patrio-
 tic regard for every thing truly American, have
 induced me  to inscribe to you  the following
 memoir.  However far its  literary merit may
 be from  commanding your approbation  as  a
 scholar and philosopher,  the friendly sentiments
 with which  it is  addressed to you, will not
fail to secure your notice as a  man.   Should
 my  remarks and reasonings,  in any part of
 this hasty little work, appear to you light  and
superficial, I must beg you to remember the
extreme frivolity and frothiness of the publica-
tion to which  I am replying.  Who can  bring 
DEDICATION.
himself to beat the air with his full force, when
he is only repelling the smoke  and dust which
offer violence to his eyes ?
     At the same time that I pray  your good-
ness to excuse me, for the liberty  I have taken
of thus publicly addressing you, without your
knowledge or permission, allow me to  tender
you the homage of my respect and friendship.


                            THE  AUTHOR.
  PHILADELPHIA,   ^
JANUARY 6tH, 1802.  5 

       A    REPLY,


             &c. &c.  &c.





      JJLOWEVER  painful it  may be  to
act the part of a perpetuator of regret and
sorrow  to  ourselves  and  others.—However
painful,  to  revive a  subject  which awakens
sensibility and tortures recollection, by recall-
ing scenes of misfortune  and misery, which
had nearly ceased to be remembered, a sense
of duty urges me to engage in the unwelcome
task.

     The late devastations by pestilence,  in
the seaports  and interior parts of the United
States,  (the keen  remembrance of  which the
influence of time has been gradually mellowing
into forgetfulness) have attracted the attention,
and employed the pens, of several  physicians
beyond the Atlantic.    Some of these  authors,
conscious of the difficulty of their subject, and
of the insufficiency of their information respect-
ing it to warrant decisive opinions,  have  writ-
ten with a  becoming degree  of modesty and
self-distrust.   But others have pursued  a far
                     B 
JLU
different and much less  decorous line of con-
duct.   Elevated on  a throne  of  their  own
conceit, dazzled by the mock splendor of their
own imaginary greatness, and strangely duped
into a belief in the infallibility of their know-
ledge, these latter have ludicrously endeavoured
to play  the part of medical pontiffs.   Instead
of addressing us as their equals and associates
in  science,  they  have,  in appearance,  only
condescended  to compassionate our supposed
humble  and benighted  situation, to offer us
instruction,  and to frame for us edicts, relative
to the origin, nature,  prevention, and cure, of
the  epidemics  which have swept  with such
havoc over our country.

     In the discharge of this preceptorial office^
these gentlemen  have  betrayed a  spirit so
haughty, a  manner  so authoritative,  and an
ignorance of their subject  so  profound,   and
have contributed to the  perpetuation of such
pernicious,  yet popular errors,  that a reply to
their writings  is rendered  indispensible.   For
American  physicians  to remain silent under
such circumstances, would appear to the world
like a willingness to be bound,  " in all cases,"
by the  idle notions of foreign  theorists,  and
would be, in reality, a tame and unmanly sub-
mission to insult.  But let these  medical despots
of our mother country know, that neither mind
nor spirit has  suffered such a  degeneracy in
the man of the west*   Resolved on indepen-
dence, in all its relations,   we  feel  ourselves 
11
disencumbered  of the weight  of provincial
shackles, no less in the science of medicine
than of  government.    For the latter we do
homage  to the memory  of a Washington,
for the former posterity will do justice  to the
genius of a Rush !

     The presumption  and folly betrayed by
homebred foreigners,  in pretending to instruct
us in the  knowledge of our endemic and epi-
demic  complaints,  are strikingly manifested
by the following consideration: European phy-
sicians, on their first emigration to the United
States, never fail to show themselves ignorant
of the nature, and incompetent to the treatment
of our common diseases, even when cases of
them are submitted  to their observation  and
care.  They find themselves under a necessity
of serving a second apprenticeship, in order to
assimilate  their ideas  and  habits to their  new
situation,  and to render them skilful American
practitioners.   The   most  enlightened  and
liberal of them, that have settled in this country,
have made repeated acknowledgement  of  this
truth.  How then can their brethren and  for-
mer  associates, immured  at  home,  become
possessed  of, and communicate to others,  that
knowledge which  they acquire only by  travel
and experience ?

     As  well  might an American physician,
who  had never visited foreign climates, under-
take  to teach the nature and cure of the  Lepra 
12
Grsecorum,  the Mai d'Aleppo, or the Cochin
leg,  as  a British physician,  accustomed only
to the complaints of his own country,  attempt
to impart instruction respecting the diseases of
the United States.   As well might the parlia-
ment of  Great Britain, in their present igno-
rance of our circumstances as a nation,  attempt
to legislate  for all our  emergencies,  as  her
faculty  to decide  for  us with regard to the
nature,  prevention,  or cure of our epidemics.
By the help of books alone,  a physician may,
even in  his closet, acquire a knowledge of the
general  principles of disease  ; but it  is  only
by travel,  observation,  and  experience, that
he can learn to apply  these principles  to the
diversified circumstances of different  climates
and countries.

     The two European physicians,  who have
rendered  themselves,  of  late,  most  conspi-
cous by their writings  on the  epidemics of the
west, and to whose works the following reply
will  particularly relate, are  Dr. Chisholm and
Dr.  Haygarth.

     Though I have connected the  names of
these gentlemen together,  let it not be suppo-
sed  that I consider-them on the same level,
either in their general respectability as  authors,
or in their qualifications to instruct their cotem-
poraries on  the  subject of pestilential diseases.
In these respects, their merits differ as widely
as reality differs  from empty pretension,  and 
13
dignified  discussion  from  misrepresentation
and abuse.  The latter writes only from hear-
say and conjecture,  while the  former details
to us the result of his experience.

     Although  obliged,  by  numerous  and
weighty considerations, to dissent from many
of the opinions of Dr. Chisholm, yet I" cannot
look into his late publication on malignant fever,*
without considering him respectable  even in
his errors.   As long as an acquaintance with
climate and situation shall be deemed essential
to the knowledge and  treatment of  endemics ;
as long as the West Indies and other tropical
countries   shall continue to  be the resort of
adventurers  from high latitudes,  and as  long
as tropical diseases shall retain their present
character, this work will be sought after and
read, as  a repository  of choice  information,
by practitioners of  medicine  in  warm  climates.

     Dr.  Chisholm possessed the most ample
and favourable opportunities of seeing our late
pestilential epidemic  in all  its grades, and of
faithfully  considering it in all its relations. He
was among the first physicians  who were  call-
ed on to  contend with this  disease in 1793,
when it invaded in such fury the island of
Grenada.   Here, amidst  an extensive  practice,
he did not rest satisfied  with  the  knowledge
* I allude to the second edition of this work. 
14
derived from a close and painful attendance on
his patients while living.  Like a true philoso-
pher in medicine, he aided  the observation of
the  physician  by the  knife  of the  anatomist,
thus rendering even death itself subservient to
the advancement of the science he  professed.
Nor was this all:   Led partly by official duty,
and partly by a laudable ambition of acquiring
a more perfect knowledge  of,  and a greater
ascendency over, this scourge of humanity, he
afterwards travelled from island to island of the
West Indies,  carefully observing and treasur-
ing up every thing  that might tend to shed
light on the subject.   While engaged in  this
arduous and perilous task,  we behold  in  him
the noble enthusiasm of Hippocrates,  travers-
ing  the  islands of the  Mediterranean  and
Adriatic Seas,  surrounded by  the dangers of
shipwreck and pestilence, to swell the treasures,
of medical  science,  and to  qualify himself to
heal the diseases of man. Such opportunities
as these, accompanied by such unwearied atten-
tion and perseverance in research, give  the
result of his enquiries  a well founded claim to
credit and respect.    It is the collective force
of such  circumstances,  that give  weight to
his  general pretensions as an author, and that
command a peculiar deference to his opinions
with regard to the pestilence of the west.

     But what shall we say to the {magisterial
pretensions of Dr. Haygarth in this respect?
Whence do they originate,  and on  what  are 
they founded ? Where is the fund of experience
to sanction them, or the sources of observation
to render them even plausible ? Has the doctor
a single qualification,  either natural or acquir-
ed,  which designates him as a man prepared
to shed light on the subject of our late epi-
demics ?  Has he ever expatriated himself for
the purpose of enriching the science of  medi-
cine, by an examination  of nature  in  foreign
countries ? Has he  ever  left the temperate
atmosphere of Great Britain, to gain a know-
ledge of the disease of regions  that lie nearer
to the sun ?  Such  a journey might have both
expanded  his  capacity  and  augmented  his
information.   For the sun of the  tropics has
oftentimes ripened into active  intellect  the
hebetude imported from higher latitudes.   Has
he ever crossed the  Atlantic  to  study  the
climates, the topography, and the diseases  of
the  United  States ?  Or,  does his mind pos-
sess such an  exalted station in the region  of
intellect, as to enable it to overlook the globe,
and to descry and comprehend, at a glance,
the  scenes that are passing  in distant hemis-
pheres ?  Those  who know  this gentleman best,
will be the last to answer  these questions  in
the affirmative.

     But his conduct may be  influenced by
different considerations.   Perhaps he  may
found the  boldness of  his  pretentions as an
author on the maturity  of his  years.   Many
writers less youthful are more modest, and it 
16
 is to be lamented that grey hairs give no infal-
 lible earnest  of cither wisdom  or liberality.
 Does he  derive  his  self-sufficiency from an
 education finished in the schools and hospitals
 of London  and  Edinburgh ?   The  public
 teachers of these  places,  being themselves
 inexperienced in true  pestilential  diseases,  are
 unable to impart a knowledge of them to their
 pupils.   Is the extent of his reading the cause
 of his imaginary superiority over his brethren
 in the United States ?  We will  not positively
 assert that he is not  a man of profound eru-
 dition ;  but we have no evidence whatever to
 convince us that he is.  But,  be  the case as
 it may, books are at best but  a  secondary
 source of information, and a mere acquaintance
 with them should never be set in competition
 with observation and experience.   But,  per-
 haps he may pride  himself on being a native
 of the same country which produced  a  Har-
 vey, a Sydenham,  a  Cullen,  and  a Hunter.
 We  entreat him to remember that weeds may
 infest the ground which has been overshadowed
 by the lordly  Addansonia,  and that  the same
 clime gives birth to the lion and the jackal.

     Were Dr. Haygarth much younger than
 he is, we might ascribe his presumption to the
 inexperience and temerity of youth ;  and, if
 much older,  we might commiserate him  as
 being under  the influence of dotage.   But,
flourishing  as  he is in the meridian of intel-
lectual manhood, we are sorry to say, that we 
17
can trace his unbecoming pretensions and man-
ner to no other source,  but the extent of his
self-conceit.

     What less can we  say of a  man,  who,
insulated in his observations to the diseases of
a  few country-towns in  Great Britain,  and
removed a  thousand leagues from the scene of
action he is examining, presumes to vilify the
reasonings  of the  Academy  of Medicine of
Philadelphia, a society deliberating on the spot,
and consisting  of members  individually as
respectable as  himself—What  less,  I repeat,
can we  say of  such a man, when he has the
assurance to  annex to the reasonings  of such
a society,  the rude epithets, " frivolous, inade-
quate,  and  groundless."   For the  sake of
whatever reputation he may now possess, we
hope he will, in future,  have more prudence
than to expose himself by attempting to teach
what he does not understand; and more delicacy
than to  insult others for exercising what they
conceive to be a well founded  right to  differ
from his crude and visionary notions.

     From these general reflections, to which
nothing but  conduct  such as Dr. Haygarth's
could have given rise,  I will pass  to a more
particular  analysis of,   and reply  to,  this
gentleman's late publication.   In doing  this I
shall be led to offer a  few remarks  on the
                     C 
18
character of the author : 1st, as a scholar; Qdly,
as a philosopher, and, 3dly, as a man of candour
and veracity.  The boldness of his pretensions,
and the commanding attitude he has attempted
to take,  render it necessary that he should be
more than commonly  accomplished in these
respects.  How humiliating to him then,  should
he, on being weighed in the balance, be found
shamefully wanting in each of the three !

     In putting the  doctor through this ordeal
of examination, I  feel it incumbent  on  me  to
treat him with every mark of fairness and justice.
Resolved,  therefore, to reject all testimony  of
a dubious nature,  I  shall admit nothing  in
evidence against him,  except what has  fallen
from his own pen.   This will be my apology
to the reader for troubling him, in the follow-
ing  pages,  with more copious extracts from
his late  work, than the merit of the perform-
ance would otherwise justify.  This copious-
ness will also vindicate my own candour against
any suspicion of a design to misrepresent our
author's  meaning;  a  practice of which,  as
will  hereafter appear,  he has himself been
strangely guilty,  in  his  strictures  on Mr.
Webster's " History of Epidemic and Pestilen-
tial Diseases," and on my Oration delivered to
the Academy of Medicine in 1798.

     I shall  also,  in my proposed  analysis,
hold sacred  Dr. Haygarth's right to enquire,
deliberate,  and advise, respecting the  origin, 
19
nature, and prevention of such diseases of Great
Britain, as fall  immediately under his  notice.,
Nor shall I be  so rude as to call his opinions
relative to these local matters either " frivolous"
or " unfounded," whatever reason I  may have
to think them so.   For 1 cannot with-hold my
belief, that, relying on observation and experi-
ence, and deliberating on  the  spot,  he has  a
better chance,  even with his limitted capacity,
to arrive at  truth respecting  the  diseases of
Chester and Bath, where he appears to have
spent the best part of his life, than a physician
of the first talents, three thousand miles remote
from these places.  Had  the  doctor made  a
concession equally rational  and liberal to the
physicians of the United States, it is  more than
probable,  that  the  errors  and absurdities of
his late  publication would have been suffered
to pass  silently and  securely  into  the same
oblivion, which has already become  the grave
of his former works.  But,  as  he has attempt-
ed to usurp the office of dictator to the medi-
cal characters of the west,  and,  with  regard
to some of them, has even endeavoured to  add
injury to insult, it is  their  duty to  meet his
pretensions with a becoming spirit, to embalm
his  follies,  his errors,  and his faults,   and
expose them as  brazen  monuments  of his
disgrace.*
  * I am both a stranger in practice, and, under common cir-
cumstances, an enemy in principle to the language of invective. 
20
     The production of this gentleman which
I am about to examine, is entitled, "A Letter to
Dr. Percival,  on the prevention  of Infectious
Fevers, and an Address to the College of Physi-
cians at Philadelphia,  on the prevention of the
American  Pestilence."
:<©:
                 SECTION  I.

  STRICTURES ON  DR. HAYGARTH'S CHARACTER  AS A
                   SCHOLAR.

     Under  this head  I beg the  liberty of
quoting a  few passages  from the  foregoing
work,  and of annexing to each a  few remarks.

     In his  description  of typhus fever,  our
author tells  us, that  among other symptoms,
the subjects of that complaint experience " pain
on the exertion  of muscular  motion," page 10.

     We have  oftentimes heard  of muscular
exertion, vascular exertion, and mental exertion;,
Should, therefore, any expressions of severity and apparent harsh-
ness escape me in this memoir, I will as candidly acknowledge
their unfitness to fall from me,  as I will stedfastly maintain
their propriety when applied to Dr. Haygarth. 
21
but till we  were favoured with a vocabulary
of phrases by Dr. Haygarth,  the '- exertion of
motion" was an  expression  unknown to us.
What tribute  of  gratitude  and applause  will
not future  authors  pay to him,  for  having
taught them thus-to diversify  modes of speech;
and who  but the most  profound philologist,
could have enriched his  native language with
such a combination!

     Again, conceitedly puffing his own pigmy
atchievements, in  having (as he  supposes)
taught the world how  to escape the influence
of typhous  poison, the  doctor  gives vent to
the following extraordinary paragraph :

     " As  the cause of these calamities is so
fully explained, and as the means of prevent-
ing them  is  so obvious  and  so easy, I hope
that, in future, no physician,  surgeon, or
medical  student,  will  ever,  in  future,  be
infected with a typhus  fever,  in an hospital!!"
page 94.

    The numerous and gross enormities of this
 sentence, silence criticism, and forbid comment.
For tautology,  grammatical  inaccuracy,  and,
indeed, general outrage on the rules of compo-
sition, it offers defiance  to  any paragraph  of
the same length in the English language. 
22
    In page 104, our author says, " No medi-
cal or other visitors were ever  suspected to
have caught infection in these wards," &c.

     The use of the disjunctive instead of the
negative  conjunctive  particle,  is  a mode of
expression which abounds in  all  parts of the
doctor's writings.  To the intelligent reader I
need not remark,  that a vulgarism so palpable,
and  so frequently repeated, bespeaks an illite-
rate state of mind in the man who practises it.

     Again,  in page 138,  we have the follow-
ing clause, which, not even the devoutness of
the sentiment it breathes,  can  render  accept^
able  to a literary  ear.

   " On looking at the world around me," says
our  author,  " I have  reason,  much reason
to be gratefully thankful to the Disposer of all
things,"  occ.

    " Gratefully  thankful!" In plain English,
thankfully thankful!    How   brilliant  is the
commencement of the  nineteenth century! A
new and more  perfect degree  of comparison
ushered  into existence, to supply the want of
energy of the former three.  Compared to our
own, how beggarly are the languages of other
nations and times! The French have only their
reconnaissant, plus reconnoisant,  bien  recon-
naissant; the Romans had only  their  gratus, 
23
gratior, gratissimus;   and  the  Greeks  their
eucharis,  eucharion, eucharistos ;  but, thanks
to the inventive  powers of a Haygarth, we
have our thankful, more thankful, most thank-
ful,   and  thankfully  thankfully!   In future
we may expect to find in  the  writings of this
gentleman,  and of such other happy geniuses
as may be able to  keep pace with him in his
career of improvement, the following  elegant
and  nervous epithets : Foolishly foolish, igno-
rantly ignorant, illiterately illiterate,  and un-
candidly uncandid.    We are willing to hope,
however,  that  these  literati will  not  always
furnish ground  for  the  application of  such
expressive epithets to themselves.

     There are many weak and  narrow mind-
ed  Christians,  who,   judging of  the  divine
taste by their  own,  suppose that  the  Deity
delights in rags and wretchedness, in the ap-
pearance of those who approach  him in wor-
ship. Perhaps  our author, possessed of similar
ideas with regard to  language, may conceive
a sentiment of gratitude to be acceptable to the
" Disposer of all things,"  only in proportion  to
the coarseness  of the manner in  which  it  is
expressed.  If this opinion be just, I beg him
to accept my congratulation on the uncommon
acceptability of the sentiment conveyed in the
above quotation.

     Such are a few of the evidences, derived
from his own writings,  which throw a  shade 
24
on the reputation of Dr. Haygarth  as  a scho-
lar.  More, many more, equally striking might
be drawn from  the same  source.  Indeed  I
will venture to say,  that scarcely three succes-
sive  pages can be found throughout his whole
works, that do not betray some flagrant viola-
tion of the rules of composition.  Shades of
Waller,  Addison,  and  Johnston,  descend,
and  bear  in  your hands  a chaplet for your
countryman,  who is so rapidly carrying to
perfection  the   improvements   in  philology
which you only began !

     I shall proceed to
               SECTION  II.

STRICTURES ON THE CHARACTER OF DR. HAYGARTH AS A
                PHILOSOPHER.

     Under this head the same course will be
pursued as under the former.  To each quo-
tation from our author's late work a few critical
remarks will be subjoined.

     The first part  of this publication, where
I shall call  in question the doctor's philosophy,
is that in  which he undertakes  to  teach  us
" what dose of typhous  poison is  infectious."
On this  subject he expresses himself in the
following terms : 
25
     " By the assistance of these preliminary
principles, we are  well  prepared to enquire,
what dose of  the typhous poison is required
to  produce  infection.   The  quantity  will
undoubtedly vary according to different circum-
stances,  but we shall be enabled to judge with
some accuracy,  what are the limits  of this
variation.

     " In this whole  investigation,  you will,
I am certain,  keep in mind one medical truth,
it cannot be called a theory,  a term often ap-
plied to  doubtful  disquisitions.   The larger
the dose of a poison  or drug, the greater in
general is the effect which it produces.  Many
of  the most powerful  and  salutary medicines,
when taken in too large a quantity, are poisons,
as opium, antimony, mercury, hemlock, aconite,
fox-glove, &c.   Even arsenic itself, the most
virulent and unmanageable of all poisons, by
the skill and attention of physycians, has been
reclaimed from the class of mischievous sub-
stances, and  by a diminution of the dose, is
held, on good authority,  to be a safe and use-
ful remedy.

      "On this subject a farther analogy ought
to be taken into  consideration.    In different
constitutions,  and  in  different  indispositions,
there is  a certain degree of variety in the opera-
tion of any drugs;  in some more than in others. 
% 6
Few drugs are so uncertain in  their effects as
antimony ; four or six times the dose of it may
be required for one patient more than for ano-
ther, or for the same  person in different disea-
ses.   In most other  medicines and  poisons,
the difference between the least and greatest
operating dose is much less than what is here
stated. The mischievous quantity of infectious
miasms,  as might be expected,  from the  ana-
logy here explained,  admits of  some degree of
variation.    They  propagate  the small-pox,
liowever, with much  uniformity,  as has been
proved in the Inquiry  and  the Sketch.   It is
not improbable that debility, or indisposition,
or fear,  or exposure  to  cold or fatigue,  or, as
some suppose, a difference of diet, may occa-
sion greater variety in the quantity of poisonous
miasms  requisite to produce an infectious fever
than the small-pox.  In these peculiar circum-
stances,  a  sufficient,  which  can  only be  a
small, allowance may be made for the differ-
ence, without much difficulty." (Pages 35, 36,
37, and 38.)

     It  is universally admitted, that an author
can always write with ease and perspicuity on
whatever subject he clearly understands. Under
such circumstances there  is  neither labour in
his  manner,  confusion  in his arrangement,
obscurity in his style, nor a want of connection
between his propositions.   His reasoning is
lucid and  intelligible,  his  remarks have  a 
27
specific and obvious reference, and tend directly
to the  establishment  of the point he  has in
view.  What, then,  shall we say of Dr. Hay-
garth's knowledge respecting  the  subjecjt of
the preceding paragraphs?  Were ever the com-
ponent parts of any thing,  that bore the name
of reasoning, so perfectly deficient in point of
relationship to  each other, and of specific affi-
nity to some common end ? He tells us, in the
beginning  of them, that he  intends to  teach
us what  ' dose" (by which I suppose he means
quantity)  of typhous poison  is requisite  to
produce infection.  It is peculiarly fortunate that
he  has informed us  of  his  intention,  as  his
subsequent remarks furnish no clue to conduct
us to a knowledge of it. The country-painter's
inscription, " This is the man,  and this is t/ie
horse," was not  more necessary to  prevent
mistakes  respecting the  works  of his  pencil,
than such information is, in the present instance,
to prevent similiar consequences relative  to
the production of Dr. Haygarth's pen.

     Let us briefly analyse this strange quo-
tation,  and see to what  the  matter  contained
in it amounts.

     The doctor  first tells us,  that  " truth"
and "  theory" are not necessarily synonomous
terms.   In proof of this he need only refer us
to his own speculations. He goes on to  inform
us, that a large dose  of medicine will  operate 
28
more powerfully  than a  small  one,  that a
sufficient quantity of tartar emetic (tartarized
antimony)  will  puke a  person to death, that
opium is a medicine or a poison  according  to
the  dose  in which it is  administered,  and,
(mirabile dictu!) that even arsenic may, under
skilful management, be converted to medical
purposes.   But these  pieces of information,
new and important as our author may  think
them,  we  could  have obtained from his apo-
thecary's boy, as readily as from  himself.

     He proceeds in his  illustration.  In differ-
ent constitutions, says he, and even in the same
constitution under  different indispositions, the
same drug will be  productive  of  different
effects; but few drugs  are so  uncertain in
their operation as antimony.  From these loose
propositions, which he appears to consider as
preliminary principles, he next,  with his cus-
tomary perspicuity of reasoning, infers, that
" the mischievous quantity of infectious miasms
admits of some degree of variation,"  and then
refers us to his  "Inquiry" and  his "Sketch"
for proofs respecting the  propagation of small-
pox, which every  intelligent reader  of them
will agree with me  these  obsolete productions
do  not contain.   He closes with  a strange
medly of words,  which,  with more than his
usual modesty, he  admits to be  the  signs  of
something only conjectural.   What this some-
thing is, common attention in reading  has not 
29
enabled me to ascertain ; and I feel no  dispo-
sition to sacrifice further either my time  or my
ease for the sake of the discovery.

     Such are the particulars of Dr. Haygarth's
re very  (I will not call it reasoning) relative  to
the infectious dose  of typhous poison.  But I
intreat  the   reader  to  turn back,   examine
again  the foregoing  quotation,  reconsider it
attentively, and then judge of it  for  himself.
As for  me, I can give him no aid in tracing its
connection, or in deciphering its drift.    I feel
myself either bewildered by  the  darkness,  or
dazzled into blindness by the brilliancy of the
author's  mind.  In relation  to the  extract I
might,  with a few verbal alterations,  adopt the
exclamation of the poet on a different occasion,
      "  It  has no worth, or I no worth can  spy,
      "  It  is all nonsense, or all blindness I!"

     It would be   improper  to pass, without
due notice, our author's assertion, that arsenic
is " the most virulent and unmanageable of all
poisons." There are vegetable poisons which,
on being  applied to the human system, require
fewer   minutes than  arsenic  does hours,  to
complete  the work of destruction.   For further
information on this subject,  I  beg leave to refer
the  philosopher  of Bath,  to  the unlettered
savage  on the banks of the Ooronoquo. *
   * In this reference, though I do not, in plain and un
courtly language, call the doctor an Ignoramus, he will please 
30
   In pages 55 and 56 of Dr. Flaygarth's work,
we find the following clause : " Every chemist
must be convinced,  that the insensible perspi-
ration is disolved in  the air, because it is insen-
sible.  And  the vapour which arises from res-
piration  is also disolved,  except when made
visible by cold air."

     A blunder in science  similar to this, Dr.
Mitchill has very  happily  exposed,  in  his
admirable review of our author's  publication.
(Vid. Med. Repos. vol. v. p. 179, et seq:) such
a blunder  would  not only exclude  an  appli-
cant from a doctor's  degree, in the University
of Pennsylvania,  but would  effectually  pro-
cure  the rejection  of a candidate from the
junior medical society of this city.

     " Every chemist must be convinced, that
the insensible perspiration," or matter of per-
spiration is  not  " dissolved  in  air."   It  is
dissolved in caloric,  or the matter  of heat.
Place  the  human  body in  vacuo,  and the
perspirable  gas will  rise  with more facility,
and be  (if the expression be  admissible) even
more insensible than  in the open air, because its
ascent will be  no  longer impeded  by  the
pressure of the atmosphere.   These remarks
are equally applicable  to the " vapour which
to excuse me for adopting an effectual expedient to prove him
so. 
SI
 arises from respiration." Cold  air renders  this
 halitus visible only by robbing it of the matter
 of heat which held it in solution.

     Again, in pages 56 and 57, in attempting
 to prove the solution of his  " infectious  mi-
 asms" in air, the doctor says, " It is maintained
 that no two  substances  do,  in any  instance
 whatsoever exist together in a perfectly pellucid
 state,  unless they  are chemically united with
 each other."

     Pray, doctor, by whom is  this assertion,
 so repugnant to the principles  of pneumatics,
 " maintained ?" Is it by yourself, or by some of
 your  friends, whose  stock  of information is
 more  scanty than your  own ?  No one, who
 has ever heard  of the  modern improvements
 in chemistry can  believe it,  till he reject  the
 evidence of the best of his senses.  Have you
 never   seen  an  admixture of  oxygenous  and
 inflammable airs,  of oxygenous and nitrogen-
 ous  airs, and of carbonic acid gas  with the
 common airs of the atmosphere.    Are  not
 these mixtures " perfectly pellucid,"  and will
 you or your  friends  undertake to  " maintain"
 that the elements which constitute them  are
 "  chemically united with each  other?"  Does
 not our atmosphere itself, the most transparent
 of all bodies,  consist of two gases  in  a  state
of mixture and not of chemical union ? But, I
feel that I  am uselessly  wasting  words ;  for 
32
you have shown yourself so profoundly  igno-
rant of these subjects, that I really doubt your
capacity even to comprehend truth  respecting
them,  when laid before you.

     In page 117, our author remarks, " Con-
tagious fevers appear to be the chief cause why
there is a much greater proportional mortality
in large than in small towns, and houses dis-
persed in country situations."

     This is certainly not true  in America,
and it is highly improbable even when applied
to  other  countries.  London  and  Paris  are
not more infested by contagious  fevers (small-
pox perhaps excepted) than many of the small
inland towns of Great  Britain   and  France.
The principal cause of the greater proportional
mortality in large cities  appears to be,  artificial
debility  in  the  systems  of their inhabitants,
induced by an  impure atmosphere *, intense
summer  heat,   sedentary occupations, high
living,  early incontinence, and  other  modes
of dissipation  and  irregularity.    When  the
human frame is debilitated by such means as
   * Not only does the general impregnation of the atmos-
pheres of large cities with heterogeneous substances, produce
chronic debility in their inhabitants ;  but their contamination
with the gas resulting from the process of putrefaction peculi-
arly predisposes to bilious diseases, which contribute in a high
degree to swell the bills of mortality in such places. 
33
these, it is not only less able to contend with
disease, but is  also predisposed to invite and
suffer it in  a  more exalted degree.   For de-
bility and an increase of irritability are, for the
most  part, concomitants in the  human system.

     Dr. Haygarth's long habits of attention to
the typhus fever of Chester and its neighbour-
hood,  and the melancholy and extensive rava-
ges which he has no doubt seen produced by
that disease,  appear to have  given a settled
cast to his thoughts,  and to  have induced him
too hastily  to attribute the mortality of towns
and cities in general to a similar cause.

     In page 148, our author, modestly contra-
dicting the  physicians  of the United States,
who derive yellow fever from the putrefaction of
animal and vegetable substances, furnishes us
with  another extraordinary specimen of his
philosophical attainments.

     " It is too obvious," says he,  " to escape
notice, that the  stench  arising from the hold
of a ship, proceeds from the putrefaction  of
substances  which belong to all the three king-
doms of nature, vegetable, animal, and mineral.^

    "  The putrefaction of mineral substances !"
Strange and  unheard of phenomenon! Here (to
Use an epithet of his own) Dr. Haygarth " mar-
                     E 
 vellously"  improves  on his own absurdities.
 He " out-Herod's Herod."   This is a blunder
 more gross and palpable to sense,  than that
 which  he committed,  when he asserted  his
 belief in the "putrefaction of typhous poison."
 (Vid. Med. Repos. vol.  v.  p.   189.) As well
 might the doctor declare his  belief in  the putre-
 faction of iron,  magnesia, or silex, as in that of
 any other substance truly mineral.   This pro-
 cess is exclusively confined  to  the animal and
 vegetable kingdoms.

      But the  most striking  specimen of our
 author's  ignorance both of books end things is
 yet to come.  In page 150 he says, "previous
 to the accusation of putrid coffee as the  cause
 of pestilence  in 1793, no  medical author,  as
 far as I recollect, has  ever ascribed  to vegeta-
 bles In such a  situation, a  power to generate
 an infectious fever, or any fever,  or indeed any
 other disorder whatsoever."

      That a physician  who  has had access to
 public  schools, public libraries, and the con-
 versation and correspondence of learned  men;
 and who has even  acquired some reputation
 in a country distinguished for medical literature;
 should make  such a  confession as this, sur-
' passes expectation and almost  belief.    Were
 Dr. Haygarth subject to  intoxication, or did he
 possess genius enough  to  predispose him to
 madness, I should really be inclined to suspect, 
35
that he  had written the  above extract  in a
paroxysm of the  one or the  other,  and had
neglected to erase it 0:1 his return to his  sober
senses.  Madness or intoxication would be the
most  reputable  apology  for such unparalelled
ignorance.   What.  I beg leave to ask the Dr.
is marsh miasma, but a gas  resulting princi-
pally, perhaps,  wholly,  from  vegetable putre-
faction ?  But why do 1 attempt to remonstrate
or to reason  with such a  man ? Scarcely an
author of respectability has written on bilious
diseases  for a century past, who has not attri-
buted them to the putrefaction of vegetable or
animal  substances,  or to  a combination of
both.

     I shall pass to
                section ih.

STRICTURES ON DR. HAYGARTH'S CHARACTER, AS A MAN
           OF CANDOUR AND VERACITY.

     The reader will,  no doubt think, on  a
first view of things, that I am pushing matters
to a serious issue, in arraigning our author on
points of such magnitude and concern.  But
while facts support me I am regardless of the
extent to which I proceed.   If the doctor's own
writings  give evidence  against him—if  they
prove him to  have repeatedly outraged these 
36
cardinal attributes of man,  it is an act of public
justice to  collect and embody this evidence,  in
such a manner,  as to convict him of the deed.
Nor have I  the smallest doubt of gaining the
assent of  the candid reader to this truth,  that,
on the present,  as on former occasions, his
own works are the organ of his  condemnation.

     Resolved to  say something (though  in
fact  he knew nothing) respecting the origin of
the first epidemic of Philadelphia, he observes,
" But a physician of eminent abilities (alluding
to Dr. Rush) in  an evil hour,  most unfortun-
ately, ascribed the generation of the pestilence
with which America was  afflicted in 1793,  to
putrid coffee, without any proof, or the slight*
est degree cf probability."   P. 146—147.

     How uncandid,  illiberal,  and  presuming
are such  insinuations and  assertions !  " The
pestilence with which  America was  afflicted  in
1793 !" As if the disease which  Dr.  Rush
declared to have had  so  simple an  origin,  as
a quantity of putrid coffee,  had overspread the
continent  of  America ;  whereas, it was, as is
well  known, exclusively  confined to the city
of Philadelphia.   But, be this as it may, which
of the two was  most  competent to judge  of
"proof"  and  "probability" on this subject,
Dr. Rush in Philadelphia,  or Dr. Haygarth at
Chester in England ? The great medical teacher
of the West, enquiring  and reflecting on the
spot, or the author of a neglected  " Inquiry" 
37
and' Sketch" indulging his idle conjectures  at
the clist nice of more thin three thousand miles ?
But I have no words to express my sentiments
of such  assuming and  spurious  pretensions.
They must be left to the keener lash of silence
and contempt.

     Determined  boldly to  assert the  worst
(no matter whether  true or  false) which his
imagination could  suggest, respecting the advo-
cates of the American origin of our late epide-
mics, Dr. Haygarth, in another place,  says :

     " It is not  a little curious, and indeed
highly instructive to observe, that Dr. Cald-
well signed this opinion, that the  yellow fever
of America was generated from putrid vegeta-
bles, as an individual, in answer  to Governor
Mifflin's letter,  dated 6th  November  1797,
and assented to  it as an Academician on the
20th day of March  1798.    Yet in an oration
spoken on the  17th of December  1798,  with
great declamatory parade, bold assertions, and
flowery diction,  he takes no notice whatsoever
of this doctrine, but ascribes the whole mischief
to a peculiar constitution of  the  atmosphere,
as proved by the  multitude  of grass-hoppers,
flies, and muskitos.   The dirt of Philadelphia
he also blames,  but  does  not allege that it
existed in  any  unusual degree.   No clearer
proof need be required of self contradiction and
condemnation."   P.  151. 
38
     I am not a little gratified  at being told,
 that any part of my writings has furnished our
 author either with  a curiosity  for his amuse-
 ment,  or with matter " instructive" to him. He
 appears to possess a mind of that flimsy cast,
 which is most devoted to amusement, and, cer-
 tain I am,  that no man stands more deeply  in
 need of instruction.   He is  at liberty, there-
 fore, to read the few works I have written  as
 often  as  he  pleases, to rifle  them  of their
 instructive matter, to play with their curiosities,
 and even  to laugh at the follies  which they no
 doubt  contain.  But I- owe it as a duty both  to
 him and to myself, to warn him not again  to
 disgrace himself, and attempt  to injure  me, by
 a palpable misrepresentation of  my opinions.

     In the foregoing quotation the doctor,  as
the reader has observed,  very delicately alleges,
that I have been guilty of " self-contradiction,"
in  having ascribed  the  origin  of  the  late
epidemics of Philadelphia,  at different times  to
different sources.   He  asserts  that,  on two
occasions,  I subscribed to the  opinion, that
these diseases were  "generated from putrid
vegetables,"  and afterwards in  my Oration  of
December 1798, attributed "the whole mis-
chief, to a peculiar constitution  of the  atmos-
phere," without taking any " notice whatsoever
of the former doctrine," 
     Those who have ever  looked  into  my
Oration here referred to, need not be informed,
that the latter part of this assertion is unequivo-
cally  false.  In no  part of that work did  I
ascribe  our late epidemics exclusively  to  a
general malignity of  the atmosphere,  in no
part of  it did I lose  sight of the influence  of
putrid vegetable effluvia in  the production  of
these evils.  At all times, both in my Oration
and elsewhere, have I attributed the diseases
in question to  the  co-operation of these two
causes.  At all times have I declared it as my
belief, that, without such co-operation, pesti-
lence can but rarely  become epidemic.


     The  flagrant injustice which Dr. Hay-
garth has  done me, in asserting that,  in  my
oration  to the Academy of Medicine,  I take no
notice of the doctrine which derives  yellow
fever from the influence of putrid  vegetables,
will be most effectually exposed by the  following
quotation from that  work :


     After  having, in  general terms,  assigned
the " filth" of Philadelphia as one of the causes
of the repeated calamities she  had  suffered,  I
proceed thus :  " To enumerate all the sources
of our domestic filth is not my present object.
This  has already been ably done  in several 
memorials *  by  the  Academy  of Medicine.
There exist,  however,  two  sources of putre-
faction,  to  which,  I  will  be  pardoned  for
thinking, that the public attention has not been
directed  in  a  manner  sufficiently  forcible.
These  are,  the  vast   quantity of putrid and
putrefying timber, which enters into the forma-
tion of our docks and wharves, and the immen-
sity of animal and vegetable substances, strewn
in a putrifactive  state, along the commons,  in
a  south-western  direction  from the city." See
Semi-annual Oration, p» 25.

     Can any thing be more explicit and deci-
sive than this paragraph :  and  can  any  thing
be more unexpected than that a man,  with M.
D. and F. R.  S. annexed to his  name, should
declare, that the publication containing it, takes
no notice of the doctrine which derives the late
epidemics of Philadelphia  from putrid vegeta-
bles ? The least I can say on this occasion is,
that Dr.  Haygarth  is  either  so  immoral  as
voluntarily to violate truth,  or  so ignorant  a9
not  to  know,  that  " timber" is  a vegetable
substance.   The only  piivilege left to him  is,
    * Thk memorials, here alluded to, are those in which
putrid vegetables are expressly mentioned as one of the sources
of yellow fever, and to which, as Dr. Haygarth acknowledges,
1 had given my assent.  This single circumstance is sufficient
to invalidate his assertion, that in my address to the Academy
1 take no notice  of the doctrine which derives this diseasa
from vegetable putrefaction. 
41
a liberty to shelter himself under that branch
of the dilemma which he thinks least disgrace-
ful to him.

      But I have not yet  done with the doctor
on this subject.  In the very same paragraph,
where he  has the assurance falsely to charge
me with " self-contradiction," he most unequi-
vocally Contradicts himself.   Fie  first asserts
that,  in my Oration already quoted, I take no
notice of the doctrine  which derives  yellow
fever from putrid vegetables,  and afterwards
acknowledges,  that I   " blame  the  dirt  of
Philadelphia" as taking  part in the production
of this disease.   Now I  can scarcely conceive
a man, even of Dr. HaygartiVs  shallow capa-
city, to be so ignorant as  not to know, that the
dirt,  or " filth" (as  my  Oration expresses it)
of a large city, consists  in a great measure  of
putrid vegetable substances.  Such is the  self-
consistency of this  strange man, who so boldly
arraigns  the consistency of others.

     But,  the injustice  done by Dr. Haygarth
to Mr. Webster of  Connecticut,  is no  Jess
glaring, than that of which  I have convicted
him with regard to myself.    Speaking  of  Mr.
Webster's " History of Epidemic and Pestilen-
tial Diseases," he asserts, that this  learned and
truly  philosophical  writer ascribes  the genera-
tion of these evils " to earthquakes, volcanos,
                     F 
42
 tornados, hailstones,  flights  of wild  pigeons,
 large flies,  dead  haddocks  on the coast  of
 Norway, abundance of shads on the American
 coast, black wormsr"-£sfc. &c. Vid. p. 155 ; and
 again, in p.  156, declares,  that " for the cause
 of the pestilence which so sorely afflicted Ame-
 rica in 1793, he (Mr.  Webster) goes back as
 far  as 1788, to collect an account of  all the
 earthquakes,  (in  Iceland  and in  Tuscany)
 comets, tornados,  high tides,  hailstones, me-
 teors, sickly fish on the Banks of Newfound-
 land ;  a halo ;  a famine in India and China ;
 dead haddocks on the coast of Norway,  &c. &c j
 and that " to these causes,  which happened in
 distant parts of the world,  during a period  of
 five years,  he (Mr.  Webster)  ascribes the
 American pestilence "

     A misrepresentation more gross and slan-
 derous than this, never fell from the pen  of
 an  author.   Mr. Webster does not  attribute
 pestilential diseases to earthquakes, volcanos,
 tornados,  meteors,  famine, nor to any  of the
 causes enumerated, as above, by Dr. Haygarth.
He  holds these physical enormities and pesti-
lence to be only  concurrent  effects resulting
from the  operation of the same cause.  He
 represents  pestilential periods  as times  of
 elementary derangement, and considers earth-
 quakes, volcanos, tornados, and pestilence among
 mankind,  fish,  and other animals, as the visi-
 ble  effects of such derangement on the material 
43
world.  But let us hear Mr. Webster's opinion
on this  subject delivered in his own words:

    " I  cannot however admit," says he, " that
the  explosion of subterraneous fires, are the
direct exciting cause  of pestilential  diseases.
It is indeed  ascertained,  beyond all question,
that periods of extensive pestilence and mortar
lity, are remarkable for earthquakes and erup-
tions of volcanos.  But the  explosions of fire
do not so generally precede epidemic diseases,
as to authorize the supposition that they produce
those  diseases.  Earthquakes  occur, during
the prevalence of pestilential or other mortal
epidemics, but in the midst  of  the  period, or
sometimes at the conclusion."

   " Hence," continues he, " I deduce an opi-
nion, that earthquakes  and pestilence depend
on one common cause ; which excites into action
the internal fires*."

      So much for  Mr. Webster's  sentiments
respecting the connection between earthquakes,
volcanos, and pestilence.  But he* is equally
express in denying the agency of all the  other
phenomena enumerated by  Dr. Haygarth,  in
the  production of  pestilential diseases, except
   * See Webster's " History of Epidemic and Pestilential
diseases." Vol. II. p. 88. 
44
 comets.   It  must  be  acknowledged  that  he
 seems inclined  to a belief, (perhaps a rational
 one) that these erratic bodies are influential in
 giving  rise  to  that  elementary  derangement,
 which produces pestilence  and other  irregula-
 rities in the dominions of nature.  With  these
 remarks I leave the  reader  to determine for
 himself, to which of the two we should attribute
 Dr. Haygarth's misrepresentation of Mr.  Web-
 ster's opinions, want of discernment, or want of
 veracity.  I cannot, however, conceal my own
 belief, that the latter is the true source of such
 unparalelled  perversion.   For, in  the  words
 of the poet:

     " Eyes without feeling', feeling without  sight>
     "  Ears without hands or eyes, smelling sans al|,
     " Or but a sickly part of one true sense,
     $'  Could not so mope 1"

     Though not so enamoured of quoting my
publications  as Dr.  Haygarth  is of quoting
his*, yet, for the purpose  of further exposing
 the cavilling spirit with which this  author has
written,  I must beg the  reader's  attention  to
 another short extract from my Oration to the
 Academy of  Medicine.
   * In a work containing only 188 pages, the doctor modest-
ly quotes,  as authorities, his own writings and opinions, be-
tween fifty and sixty times ! !                       ■':?? 
45
     In speaking of the existence of a pestilen-
tial constitution of our atmosphere,  I remark,
that,  " though  ridiculed of  late,  by   some
physicians, under the denomination of an  oc-
cult quality, reason and observation still declare
it (a  pestilential constitution) to be  a quality
resting, for the  certainty of its existence, on
evidence as substantial, as that which supports
the great  Newtonian principle, the gravitation
of terrestrial bodies."

     To this paragraph  our author, affecting
at once the witling and  the philosopher,  has
been  pleased to  make the following pert and
sagacious reply:

     "  The gravitation  of terrestrial bodies is
no discovery of Newton's ;  (admirably gram-
matical!) but a fact well known to every inha-
bitant of the  earth  ever since  the  creation."
P. 173.

     A quibble more paltry and  contemptible
than this, never disgraced the  page of a critic.
The reader will bear me witness, that the above
extract does not attribute  to Newton the disco-
very of the gravitation of matter.  The evident
and only meaning of it is, that that great man
was the first who made the  proper use of this
principle,   in  explaining  the  motions of  the
heavenly bodies.   I have not a doubt but that,
" ever since the creation," men  even possessing 
46
grains less saturnine than those of a Haygarth,
have known and often experienced, that if their
heels were tript up, their heads would come to
the ground.    But I excuse  this medical St,
George of Bath.   After having, in his  own
estimation, vanquished  the  deadly  dragon of
contagion, he  still appears  unwilling to rest
from his toils.   Having, as he supposes, given
peace and safety on this score to Britain,  his
meddling spirit now urges him headlong into
the affairs of other countries.   On  condition,
therefore,  that he no more  pervert  the opi?
nions of the medical characters of the United
States,  he has  my  full  and uncontrolled perT
mission, to give vent, in future, to his pruriency
for writing, in scribbling personal squibs and
invective§ against myself.

     With this  I  take my  leave of Dr. Flay*
garth's publication.   It  exhibits  many other
passages no less exceptionable  than  those  I
have noticed.   Indeed the work throughout is
as frothy as it is ostentatious ; as weak in argur
rnent as it is bold in assertion.  Did it contain
a single fact or  remark of the  least  respectabi?
Jity, relative to  the contagious nature of yellow
fever,  or its  introduction into this  country, I
^vould proceed to  answer it*.   Put, on these
   * The second memoir in my volume of " Medical and
physical Memoirs," which is_already before the public, contains 
47
points,  it is, I will not say, below mediocrity $
but, completely barren.   Here its author has
prudently adopted the  knave's expedient, of
boldly assuming as self-evident what he is un-
able to prove.  Even the advocates of this doc-
trine will blush  at the recollection of  such a
beggarly performance.

     Among the  physicians  of  the  United
States, there will be but one sentiment respect-
ing this work.  They will  all  feel it as a thing,
which insults their understanding and indepen-
dence,  without adding a single idea  to  their
information.  Even the College of Physicians
of Philadelphia will constitute no exception to
this general sentiment of indignation and con-
tempt.   Eor the gentlemen who compose that
institution  have  too   much discernment  and
sensibility, not to perceive  and feel,  the  weak
and arrogant attempt which Dr. Haygarth has
made to direct their proceedings.  They have
too high a sense of their own dignity, and too
just an abhorrence of cavilling and misrepre-
sentation, not to repel, in a becoming manner,
an epitome of my objections to the contagious nature and foreign
origin of our late epidemics. To that work, therefore, I beg leave
to refer the reader for some knowledge of my opinions  and
reasonings on these matters.  In my  reply to  Dr. Chisholm^
late  publication, (a  work which merits argument, because it
contains it) I  shall endeavour to make them subjects of further
discussion. 
48
such an intrusive overture from this conceited
foreigner, to rule them in a matter respecting
which he is equally ignorant and  uninterested.
For, though I have not the honor to think with
this learned body on all subjects, I am  confi-
dent, that, on  the present  occasion, they will
not  fail to  feel with  me as  an  independent
American.

     A few words directed  personally to Dr.
Haygarth shall close this memoir.   Here, then,
in reference to  my own wrongs, I may  address
him in the manly expostulation of  Hamlet to
the passionate and rude Laertes.

    " Hear me,  Sir ;
    " What is the reason that you Use me thus?
    " I harm'd you never : But it is no matter ;
    " Let Hercules himself do what he may,
    " The cat will  mew, the dog will have his day."

     You have drawn me, sir,  into  a field
I was unwilling to  enter, and have  provoked
me to a contest I would gladly have shunned.
The spirit of recrimination  is not congenial to
me, and I am weary of controversy respecting
pestilential diseases.  But  your matter  and
your manner  demanded  a reply.  For,  by
weak minds, silence is oftentimes construed
into conviction.  You have  slandered the pro-
ductions and endeavoured to be-little the talents
of the first medical  characters of the  United
States.   You have  gone  further,   and even 
49
 attempted to usurp the authority of a dictator
 to the whole Faculty of the west.  With regard
 to myself,  you have basely misrepresented my
 opinions,  charged me with self-contradictions
 which do  not  exist, and  attacked  with  harsh
 invective,  what I  wrote with moderation, and
 without the smallest expectation of submitting
 it to the public.
      Had  you  conducted  your late work with
 the dignity of a gentleman, or the  modesty
 becoming  a man necessarily unacquainted with
 his subject, some of my generous  and enlight-
 ened countrymen would,  no doubt, have un-
 dertaken  to inform  your  understanding and
 correct your  judgment, in a manner  so  mild,
 as not to have offered offense to your feelings.
 But you have forfeited all claim to gentleness
 and delicacy.  Your unmannerly  interference
 in matters that do not concern you, and your
 unprincipled  outrage on  candour and  truth,
 have forced me to tell you, in plain language,
 what Americans think of you and  your publi-
 cations.
     Go, then,  sagacious measurer of the dose
 of typhous poison !  enlightened   dissolver of
 gaseous fluids  in air !  fortunate discoverer of
the putrefaction of contagion and  of  mineral
 substances!  Go!  revolve only  in a  sphere
 commensurate with the extent of your  intellect
and  scientific  attainments.   Feel  with empty
affectation,  and count with mimic wisdom, the
enfeebled pulses of the fashionable at Bath. 
^
50
Superintend,  as the only  monument of youtf
labours which is likely to outlive you, your
first begotten Infirmary at  Chester.  Dote in
solitude (for in this no one will bear you com-
pany)  on the imaginary  perfections of your
" Inquiry" and your " Sketch." And,  for the
want of a better herald, trumpet in the  ears of
your correspondents at Manchester the fame
of  your wonderous works.   Such alone are
the objects and pursuits which appear  to befit
you.    Of the  honours derived from these
quarters, I would not pluck  a leaf from the
wreath,  which you behold in imagination encir-
cling your brow.   But listen  for once  to the
advice of a young man : Confine your remarks,
in future, to the narrow circle of your obser-
vation and knowledge.   Suffer your  distant
brethren in medicine to investigate  and decide
 on the nature and causes of the diseases which
 surround them, without  becoming subject  to
 your  obloquy and  abuse.  Keep your weak
 counsel for the benefit of those whose emergen-
 cies  may compel them to consult you.  Re-
 strain the loose speculations and childish vaga-
 ries of your mind, to the circumscribed limits
 of the island which produced you.   But never
 again so far forget yourself, as to engage in a
 controversy,  where  genius and science  have
 entered the lists ; never again dare to approach,
 with  hostile  intentions, the temple erected  to
 truth on this  side of the Atlantic, by the pens
 of a  Webster, a Mitchill, and a Rush !
FINIS. 
 
 
Med.,. Hist.

  wo
 CJf7r
  \U3u