MONTHLY CATALOGUE,

For FEBRUARY, 1807.

MEDICAL, &c.

Art. 12. An Answer to Dr. Moseley, containing a Defence of VaccinaBy John Ring, Member of the Roy College of Surgeons, and of the Medical Societies of London and Paris. 8vo. pp. 290. 6s. Boards. Murray.

MR. Ring, who has proved himself one of the most zealous advo

cates of vaccination, here undertakes to repel the violent attack of Dr. Moseley, by turning the weapons of his antagonist against himself, and assailing him with that species of declamatory wit which occupies so large a part of the doctor's own pages. He has certainly been in some degree successful, and has occasionally made some fair hits: but, on the whole, we cannot commend this method of conduct. ing a controversy, even when it may be justified by the previous outrages of the enemy.

This volume is not, however, deficient in valuable matter of a different kind. We have been amused with the account which it gives of the opposition manifested by some individuals, against the small, pox inoculation, at its first introduction into this country: on which occasion, the noted Sir Richard Blackmore was particularly prominent, aided by Mr. Tanner, one of the surgeons of St. Thomas's hospital. They asserted that the preventative power of inoculation was contrary both to reason and experience, and that more deaths occurred after the operation, than from the disease in its natural form; and they boldly accused those persons of falsehood who maintained the contrary opinion. Some extracts are also given from a sermon preached by a Mr. Massey, in 1722, in which he proceeded, in the most abusive strain, to declaim against the crime of inoculation. He endeavoured to prove that the small pox was the discase with which Job was afflicted, and that the Devil was the inoculator; and he afterward seriously laid it down as a principle, that it is impious to attempt to alleviate or remove any of the disorders which are sent from God to afflict mankind. Even so late as the middle of the last cen. tury, a cry was raised against inoculation, by two physicians of considerable eminence; who adduced many instances of its failure, and of the evils which ensued from it.-From these documents, the friends of vaccination will perceive that their pred-cessors had to encounter at least an equal share of prejudice and illiberality with themselves.

Mr Ring then proceeds to examine the value of the evidence which has been cited by Dr. Mosely against the vaccination; and he particularly adverts to the case rehted by Dr. John Sims, in which a person received the small-pox who was said to have previ ously been twice affected with the casual cow pox. The well-known pamphlet of Mr. Goldson is also noticed; and the case of a child of a Mr. Bowen, who, after several unsuccessful attempts at variolous inoculation subsequently to vaccination, became at length infected. On these and other similar occurrences, Mr. Ring offers a number

of

of judicious observations, and displays considerable address in obtaining an authentic statement of the transactions. In some instances, he has it in his power to shew that Dr. Moseley's account is completely erroneous, and in others that it is essentially defective. Altogether, we think that Mr. Ring's performance possesses considerable merit: but we should have bestowed on it more unqualified commendation, had it less resembled the work of Dr. Moseley.

Art. 13.

Observations on Vaccine Inoculation; tending to confute the Opinion of Dr. Rowley and others. By Henry Fraser, M.D. &c. 8vo. 2s. Highley.

We heartily commend the zeal which Dr. Fraser displays, but we are sorry that we cannot bestow equal praise on the execution of his design. We are indeed obliged to acknowlege that this tract appears to us remarkable solely for a pompous style, which is altoge ther inconsistent with its subject. The only part of the pamphlet which can be considered as interesting is the attempt to prove that the cow-pox does not originate from the grease of the horse: he animadverts with some severity on the conduct of Dr. Jenner in adopting this idea; and he considers it to have been one of the principal obstacles to the general diffusion of the practice of vaccination.

Art. 14. Vaccine Vindicia; or, Vindication of the Cow-pox: containing a Refutation of the Cases and Reasonings on the same, in Dr. Rowley's late extraordinary Pamphlet against Vaccination, in Letters to Dr. Moseley, by Robert John Thornton, M.D. &c. Nos. 1. and 2. 8vo. 15. 6d. each. Symonds.

These two numbers form the commencement of a monthly publication, written by Dr. Thornton, the object of which is to counteract the unfavorable impression produced on the public mind by Drs. Rowley and Moseley respecting the cow-pox. After having pointed out some of the extravagant and indecorous sentiments ad. vanced by these writers, particularly the former of them, Dr. T. proves, in opposition to their positive assertion, that the Jennerian society has taken every possible pains to investigate the supposed cases of failure. A committee of 25 practitioners was formed for this express purpose; and from a very judicious report which they published, and which is inserted in the work before us, it appears that they executed their office with diligence and fidelity.

Dr. I hornton enters on the important task of examining the adverse cases of Dr. Rowley and the other opposers of vaccination. He selects some of those to which the greatest credit has been attached, and which have produced the most effect on the public mind; and, by referring to the practitioners who performed the inoculation, and who saw the cases during their progress, he has shewn, in the most satisfactory manner, that the statements published by Drs. Rowley and Moseley are defective in the most essential particulars, and that some of them are altogether without foundation-As friends of truth and humanity, we feel greatly obliged to Dr. Thornton for the zeal and perseverance which he has exercised on this subject. In the title, Dr. T. writes Vindicia, instead of Vindicia.

Art.

Art. 15. Cow-Pock Inoculation vindicated and recommended from Matters of Fact. By Rowland Hill, A.M. 12mo. Is. Darton and Harvey.

The reverend author of this pamphlet is well known to have been one of the most zealous advocates for vaccination, and, unlike some gentlemen of his profession, he has added knowlege to his zeal. Before he ventured to enter on the practice, he adopted every pos sible means of acquiring all the necessary information on the subject, and the pages before us afford a suficient proof that his endeavours were successful. The tract is principally designed for the perusal of the unprofessional, for which purpost it is well adapted by its plain style and familiar modes of illustration. It furnishes, however, one piece of information which must be interesting to every description of readers; viz. the following account of Mr. Hill's own success in the practice; I solemnly assert that, having inoculated in different places not less (fewer that 4840 subjects, independent of 3720 and upwards who have been inoculated at Surrey Chapel School-Room, I have not, as yet, met with one single failure; though, on the repetition of my visits, I have at all times made it a point to inquire with the utmost diligence in my power; nor yet, in any one point of view, have I seen any of those distressful consequences that have been brought forward with so much art and downright falsehood, to alarm the fears and terrify the imaginations of the public.'

We sincerely hope that this little work will have an extensive circulation; since by this means the benevolent views of its author cannot fail to be materially promoted.

Art. 16. Vaccination vindicated from Misrepresentation and Calummy, in a Letter to his Patients, by Edward Jones, Member of the Royal College of Surgeons, &c. 8vo. 18. Murray. 1806. Mr. Jones's principal object is to refute the opinions of Dr. Squirrel; whose positions are so extraordinary, and indeed so repugnant to every feeling of common sense, that we were inclined to question the propriety of making them the subject of a formal reply. Perhaps, however, it may be better not to let any publication, although ever so contempuble, pass entirely without notice; especially where the opinions are advanced with so much confidence as in the work of Dr. Squirrel. The present pamphlet forms a satisfactory answer to that of the author's opponent.

28. Mur

Art. 17. A Reply to the Anti-Vaccinists, by James Moore, Member of the Royal College of Surgeons in London. 8vo. ray. 1806. We think that this is decidedly the best treatise which has appear ed in the course of the controversy; it is candid, judicious, and spirited. Without giving too much consequence to the antagonists of vaccination, the author fairly states the nature of their arguments; and without descending to any harshness or abuse, he fully refutes them. He justly observes that those who now oppose themselves with the greatest confidence to the cow-pox are the least able to form an accurate judgment on the question, because they made up their minds against it from the time of its being first proposed to the pub

lic, and before they had themselves tried its effects or seen it tried by others. He points out, and happily combats, the hypothetical objections employed by Dr. Moseley and his coadjutors, derived from what they call the bestial origin of the disease; and he counteracts, with equal effect, the unfavorable reports that have been so industriously circulated, respecting the complaints said to be left in the system after vaccine inoculation.

Mr. M.'s remarks on medical evidence in general are highly judicious, and cannot be too forcibly impressed on the mind:

The evidence that is requisite to prove or disprove any proposi tion in the science of medicine, is of a peculiar kind. It differs entirely Both from that species of proof which satisfies a Court of Law. direct and circumstantial evidence, which would leave no doubt in the breasts of judges and juries, have often not the slightest tendency to render a medical fact even probable. The declarations, and ever the oaths of the most conscientious, disinterested, and able men are all insufficient.

The reason of this is, that few men, even those of considerable capacity, distinguish accurately between opinion and fact.

When a man asserts he has been cured of a particular disease by a certain drug, he is apt to think he is declaring a fact, which he knows to be true; whereas this assertion includes two opini ns, in both of which he may be completely mistaken. The first is an opinion of his having had the disease specified; the second, that the medicine employed removed the disease.’

These observations apply to the case in question in a very particular manner; since it appears, by the confession of Dr. Rowley himself, that this great champion of anti-vaccination was, in all instances of apparent failure, satisfied with the mere assertion of the party concerned; and, without any farther investigation, immediately set down such occurrences in his list of unfavorable cases.-We shall not extend our remarks on this pamphlet, but earnestly recommend it not only to every medical man, but to every person who feels interested in the welfare of his fellow creatures.

Art. 18. The Evidence at large, as laid before the Committee of the House of Commons, respecting Dr. Jenner's Discovery of Vaccine Inoculation; together with the Debate which followed; and some Observations on the contravening Evidence, &c. By the Rev. G. C. Jenner. 8vo. pp. 240. 6s. Boards. Murray. Although the principal contents of this volume have already been made known to the world in different ways, we are glad to see them collected and published under their present form. The evidence delivered to parliament on the subject of the cow pox is so clear and decisive, and embraces a question of so much moment, that it cannot be too widely circulated, nor too frequently impressed on the minds of the inhabitants of these kingdoms. This is rendered still more necessary in consequence of the objections that have lately been started against vaccination; objections which, however futile, have not failed to make an unfavourable impression, and appear to have had the effect of impeding the progress of this most valuable discoREV. FEB. 1807.

P

very.

very. The Committee of the House of Commons manifested their wisdom, not less than their candor, in bringing forwards all the evi dence that was to be obtained against the claims of the petitioner and the imperfect and confused statements, which were delivered by the opposers of vaccination, afford one of the most powerful proofs of the strength of the cause. Perhaps on no subject, either scientific or medical, was so large a weight of authority ever adduced, and so little thrown into the opposite scale.

Art. 19. A Dissertation on Ischiar; or the Disease of the Hip-joint, commonly called a Hip Case; and on the Use of the Bath Waters as a Remedy in this Complaint. By William Falconer, M.D. TR.S. &c. 8vo. 2s. 6d. Cadell and Davies.

This treatise is a re-publication of Dr Falconer's paper inserted in the 6th volume of the Memoirs of the Medical Society; and we have therefore only to refer to p. 145. of this Number of the M. R. for an account of its merits.

EDUCATION.

Art. 20. A Complete Analysis of the German Language: or, a Philological and Grammatical View of its Construction, Ana. logies, and various Properties. By Dr. Render. 8vo. Boards, Symonds.

Dr. Render begins his preface by remarking: It will not, perhaps, be thought too harsh, if 1 assert, that the greater part of German grammars hitherto published have been the offspring of necessity; a circumstance which, while it accounts for their defects, certainly offers no extenuation for them; nor can the warmest philanthropy even wish that mankind should be misled, merely to give subsistence to the propagator of error.' Without inquiring into the justice of this observation, we feel ourselves obliged to add the present Analysis to the number of those children of necessity, or to assign its existence to an equally unkind mother of literary productions; since it is merely a hasty and inaccurate compilation, without philosophical arrangement or new remarks, too minute for the first beginner, and too trifling and unsatisfactory for the more advanced student. Dr. R. has also been guilty of the grossest plagiarism, without mentioning the source from which he has drawn his best materials. Almost whole pages have been copied, some word for word, others in a mutilated state, from Noehden's grammar; and on several occasions the reader is misled by rules being given as general which ought to be only partially applied. The work is swelled by several extracts from Schiller and other German authors, to which a free translation is subjoined.

Art. 21. An Epitome of Scripture History: chiefly abstracted from Dr. Watts's short View, &c. 18mo. PP. 323. 4. Boards. Darton and Harvey.

The juvenile reader is here furnished with an account of the prin cipal events recorded in the Old and New Testament, judiciously abridged, and forming a good compendium of sacred history. The otyle is perspicuous and attractive, and likely to fix in the memories

of