Notes suggested by the Franklin-Heberden pamphlet of 1759 / by Henry K. Cushing.

  • Cushing, Henry K. (Henry Kirke), 1827-1910.
Date:
[1904]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Notes suggested by the Franklin-Heberden pamphlet of 1759 / by Henry K. Cushing. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by the Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library at Yale University, through the Medical Heritage Library. The original may be consulted at the Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library at Yale University.

    26/42 (page 18)
    [381] would at least stand a better chance by being inoculated than in taking the infection as they would probably do, in the common way. The Surgeons and Physicians were also suddenly oppressed with the great hurry of business, which so hasty and general an Inoculation and spreading of the distemper in the common way must occasion, and probably could not so particularly attend to the circumstances of the patients offered for Inoculation. [283] Inoculation was first practiced by Dr. Boylstone in 1720.28 It was not used before in any part of America, and not in Phila- delphia till 1730. Some years since, an enquiry was made in Philadelphia of the several Surgeons and Physicians who had practis'd Inoculation, what numbers had been by each inoculated, and what was the success. The result of this enquiry was that upwards of 800 (I forget the exact number) had been inoculated at different times, and that only four of them had died. If this account was true, as I believe it was, the reason of greater suc- cess then than had been found in Boston, where the general loss by Inoculation used to be estimated at about one in 100, may probably be from this circumstance; that in Boston they always keep the distemper out as long as they can, so that when it comes, it finds a greater number of adult subjects than in Philadelphia, where since 1730 it has gone through the town once in four or five years, so that the greatest number of subjects for Inoculation must be under that age. Notwithstanding the now uncontroverted success of Inocula- tion it does not seem to make that progress among the common people in America, which at first was expected. Scruples of con- science weigh with many concerning the lawfulness of the prac- tice: And if one parent or near relation is against it, the other does not chuse to inoculate a child without free consent of all parties, lest in case of a disastrous event, perpetual blame should follow. These scruples a sensible Clergy may in time remove. The ex- pense of having the operation performed by a Surgeon weighs with others, for that has been pretty high in some parts of America; and when a common tradesman or artificer has a num- ber in his family to have the distemper, it amounts to more money than he can well spare. Many of these, rather than own the true motive for declining Inoculation, join with the scrupulous in the cry against it, and influence others. A small pamphlet wrote in plain language by some skilful Physician, and publish'd, directing what preparations of the body should be used before the Inoculation of children, what precautions to avoid giving the infection at the same time in the common way, and how the 'The year was 1721. (IS)