« PreviousContinue »
authority, to give it a trial; or were not ambitious of having their names appear in a work published by the renowned proprietor of a tincture of bark; or, what is more probable, the opinions they gave of it, did not suit the author's purposes . to publish!! In his second edition, (published at the moderate price of 2s. 6d.) the author, in compassion to the feelings of his readers, does not trouble them with many observations of his own, no more than, when collected, would occupy three pages 1! The extracts from the different authors he has found it convenient to quote, are extended to the 20th page, and the remainder of the pamphlet, except two letters from his consulting physicians, is filled up with the cases in which he has had an opportunity of giving his tincture and extract of the Humulus Lupulus a trial. Now, instead of making the public pay so dearly for those uninteresting cases and contradictory testimonials, it would have been far more consistent, to have disposed of them in the same liberal manner as he did the first edition of his work. It would have been more honourable in Mr. Freake, to have employed some distressed family to give them away in the streets, for which purpose he might have compressed them in the compass of a convenient hand-bill; which at any rate would have done some good. The cases being also anonymous, the work would not suffer by their omis
sion. Why the names, or residence of the patients should not have been inserted, we are totally at a loss to conjecture. Surely, no gentleman, however respectable his situation in life may be, could have an objection to his name appearing on such an occasion. He could not have been ashamed of the disease of which he was cured, or of having been a patient of- the ingenious and learned proprietor of a tincture of bark. We shall do Mr. Freake the honour of giving an analysis of this learned dissertation, and the still more learned testimonies accompanying it, in our next number.
Mr. Freake has, by some means, had the good fortune to obtain the insertion of a letter in the last number of the Physical Journal. The editor* of that work must be at a great loss for matter, to admit such a communication. In this learned production, Mr. Freake "offers his best acknowledgments to the editors of the different Reviews, for the handsome manner in which they have generally spoken of it, and requests they will accept such acknowledgment as a token of his ardent desire to promote public good."
Mr. Freake, like others of his cotemporary practitioners, has, (unintentionally, no doubt) omitted to mention the names of the Reviews in which his pamphlet has been so handsomely spoken of. Now, in that very respectable and ably conducted work, the Medical and Ckirurgical Review, Mr.
Freake will find a very different character given of his pamphlet; and in all the Reviews we have observed it noticed, we have not been able to discover any thing like an encomium, but many merited strictures. Mr. Freake has the vanity to suppose, that his preparations of the hop, will appear in the next Pharmacopoeia published by the College of Physicians!!!! Those acquainted with this pompous gentleman, will not be surprised at this piece of vanity, while others will pity his weakness.
Dr. Cramor, the proprietor of the Pectoral Balsam of Liverwort, noticed in our first number, makes a very similar remark : "As soon as I have cleared my expenses, observes that learned physician, I will communicate the mode of preparing it to the physicians of London, to be inserted in their Pharmacopoeia."
Mr. Freake concludes his letter in the Physical and Medical Journal, by the shrewd and politic observation, "that complaints have already been made of the tincture and extract, as prepared by some houses in London; and as so much depends on the preparation of the medicine, I have(observes he) taken care that the faculty and the public at large may be supplied with both the preparations at my residence, as it may probably be some time before the new Pharmacopoeia is published!!! This paragraph induced us to compare the preparations as made by two very respectable chemists in London with the tincture and extract made by Mr. Freake. Between the extracts, we could not discover any difference, but the tinctures procured from the chemists, were more strongly impregnated with the aromatic and bitter quality of the hop. One of these chemists observed, that he did not follow Mr. Freake's directions in making it, and has politely promised us, what he terms an improved method of making it, which we purpose giving in our further notice of Mr. Freake's publication.
Although Mr. Freake's tincture of bark is inserted in the schedule of the Quack Medicine act, Mr. Freake, we understand, does not think proper to decorate the phial with a stamp, because it is not Now necessary that printed directions should accompany it. And on our Secretary's requesting the usual directions, he was referred to a printed book of directions, sold by Mr. Callow. This is both a curious and politic method of evading the duty. If a person was to lay an information against Mr. Freake, for selling his tincture without being duly stamped according to act of parliament, the Solicitor of the Stamp Office would soon convince him, that although the directions were purchased separately, still the medicine is subject to duty, inasmuch as his learned disser~ tation is a mere advertisement of his tincture.
This subject we purpose resuming in our next number, when we shall also give an analysis of Mr. Freake's Dissertation on the Tincture of Bark.
A Letter on the Practice of Midwifery, addressed to Sir Jam ts Earle, Knight, Surgeon, occasioned by, and including att Account of a late unfortunate Case. With some Observations and Reflections on the Subject. By John Boys, Physician, Man Midwife, and Teacher of Midwifery in London.
r r .J
The lamentable case that occurred in the practice of Midwifery, on which the humane Dr. Boys has thought proper to intrude on the public his observations and reflections has, unfortunately been but too generally made known through the medium of the daily newspapers, and has recently undergone investigation in a court of justice, the result of which was, the acquittal of the defendant. Surely then, there could be no necessity of a further publication of the circumstances. The medical profession were well acquainted with them, or at least, sufficiently so, to put them on their guard against similar occurrences. After the transaction had undergone legal investigation, nothing, in our opinion, can justify a further publication of particulars of so delicate a subject.
Doctor Boys, from some unaccountable motive, has eagerly embraced the opportunity of alarming