LIEGE SUBJECTS, BY MEANS OF INOCULATION ***





  THE

  TRYAL

  OF

  Mr. DANIEL SUTTON,

  FOR THE

  HIGH CRIME

  OF

  PRESERVING THE LIVES

  OF

  His Majesty’s liege Subjects,

  BY MEANS OF

  INOCULATION.

  THE SECOND EDITION.

  LONDON:
  Printed for S. BLADON, at Nᵒ. 28. Pater-noster-Row.

  M.DCC.LXVII.




  THE

  TRYAL

  OF

  Mr. DANIEL SUTTON.

  Begun in the College on Monday, June 1, 1767.


This day Daniel Sutton was brought to the bar of the Court upon
a _Habeas Corpus_, in order to be arraigned on an indictment for
preserving the lives of the King’s subjects, found by the grand jury
for the county of Essex.

_Counsel for the Cr._ Mr. President, there is an indictment for high
crimes, and misdemeanors, found against Mr. Daniel Sutton, which hath
been removed into this Court by _certiorari_; the _certiorari_ and
return thereof hath been filed, and the Prisoner is now brought into
Court in order to be arraigned.

_President._ Read the indictment.

_Cl. of the Cr._ Daniel Sutton, hold up your hand. You stand indicted
by the name of Daniel Sutton, late of the town of Ingatestone, in
the county of Essex, for that you by inoculating, and causing to be
inoculated, and by means of certain secret medicines and modes of
practice, unknown to this College and to all other practitioners, not
having the fear of the College in your heart, do presume to preserve
the lives of his Majesty’s liege subjects; and that more especially
during the three years last past, you have inoculated, or caused to be
inoculated, twenty thousand persons, without the loss of one single
patient by inoculation, contrary to the statute in that case made and
provided.

Then the twelve jurors were sworn and counted.

_Cl. of the Cr._ Cryer, make proclamation.

_Cryer._ O yes! If any one can inform, &c.

_Cl. of the Cr._ Daniel Sutton, hold up your hand. Gentlemen of the
jury, look upon the prisoner and hearken to his cause.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Mr. President, and gentlemen of the jury, this
indictment is for the high crime of preserving the lives of his
Majesty’s subjects by means of inoculation, and particularly by modes
of practice and the exhibition of certain medicines unknown to this
College, and to all others who practise the art of healing.

Gentlemen, with regard to the first part of this charge, namely, that
of preserving the lives of the King’s liege subjects, we shall prove,
beyond all possibility of doubt, that in twenty thousand, whom the
Prisoner hath inoculated, not one single patient hath died, whose
death could be fairly attributed to inoculation. We shall then shew,
that he constantly enjoins a certain unusual regimen to be observed by
all his patients, previous to, and during the time of, inoculation;
and lastly, we shall convince you, by unquestionable evidence, that he
administers to his patients diverse medicines, the composition of which
is an intire secret to this College, and to the whole faculty.

Gentlemen, it were needless to expatiate on the heinousness of these
crimes. Your own sagacity, and regard to justice, will be your best
guides. We shall support our allegations by incontestible proof, and I
make no doubt that you will find the Prisoner guilty of the crimes and
misdemeanors specified in the indictment. If the Court pleases, we will
now proceed to examine witnesses. Call Mr. Robert Houlton.

Mr. Robert Houlton was sworn.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Do you know the Prisoner at the bar?

_Houlton._ I do.

_Couns. for the Cr._ I think, Sir, you are a clergyman?

_Houlton._ I am.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Pray, Sir, give me leave to ask you, whether you
have had any particular connection with the Prisoner?

_Houlton._ Yes, Sir, I was particularly connected with him. I was his
officiating clergyman.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Give me leave to ask you, whether you can give the
Court any information concerning the number of persons inoculated by
the Prisoner, during the last three or four years?

  _Houlton._ In the year 1764, he
  inoculated      1629
    In 1765       4347
    In 1766       7816
                  ----
    In all       13792
                 -----

To this number should be added 6000 that have been inoculated by Mr.
Sutton’s assistants, as he taught them his method, and as they use none
but his medicines. So that he may be said to have inoculated, within
these three years, 20000 persons.

_C. for the Cr._ How many of this number have died in consequence of
inoculation?

_Houlton._ Not one.

_C. for the Prisoner._ I think you said that you was officiating
clergyman to the Prisoner?

_Houlton._ I did say so.

_C. for the Prisoner._ And pray, Sir, what was your office?

_Houlton._ To pray with the sick, and return thanks for their recovery.

_C. for the Prisoner._ Very extraordinary, truly. Give me leave to ask
you, whence you took this very exact account of the number of persons
inoculated by the Prisoner?

_Houlton._ From Mr. Sutton’s books.

_Couns. for the Prisoner._ I beg, gentlemen of the jury, you will
observe that this account of the number of persons inoculated, and
consequently of the number of lives preserved, one of the crimes of
which the Prisoner stands accused, was taken only from his own books.
This is a material circumstance, and I make no doubt but you will give
it its due weight.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Have you any other question to ask this witness?

_Couns. for the Prisoner._ I have done.

_Couns. for the Cr._ We are perfectly satisfied, Mr. Houlton, with your
accurate account of the number of people inoculated by the Prisoner.
Now, Sir, let me ask you a few questions relative to the Prisoner’s
peculiar method of communicating the infection. How is this performed?

_Houlton._ By means of a puncture so slight, that it is scarce felt by
the patient, and which in a minute afterwards is scarce visible.

_Couns. for the Cr._ What do you know of his medicines?

_Houlton._ I know that they are most powerful. If he perceives a
symptom in patients of a great fever, or a probability of their having
more pustules than they would chuse, he quickly prevents both by virtue
of his medicines.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Do you recollect any particular instance of this
extraordinary virtue of his medicines?

_Houlton._ I do. A child belonging to Mr. Barnard, of Waltham in Essex,
was seized with the natural small pox. As soon as it was discovered,
by the pustules making a plentiful appearance, the child was conveyed
to one of Mr. Sutton’s houses. The next morning, the face and body
being extremely full, Mr. Sutton marked with a pen a great number
of pustules, and administered the medicine I allude to: some hours
afterwards, hundreds of the pustules disappeared; and among them
several of those marked leaving the little dot on the plain surface of
the skin. The child did extremely well.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Sir, you may retire.

 Dr. GEORGE BAKER sworn.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Pray, Dr. Baker, inform the Court what you know
concerning the Prisoner’s practice of inoculation.

_Dr. Baker._ I can give the Court but little information from my
own knowledge; but what I have to say, I received from a gentleman,
whose accuracy in observing, as well as veracity in relating what he
observed, may be relied on. All persons are obliged to go through a
strict preparatory regimen for a fortnight before the operation. During
this course, all fermented liquors and animal food, except milk, are
forbid. Fruit is generally allowed, except on the days of purging. A
powder is given three several times, and a dose of purging salt on the
following morning. The composition of this powder is a secret. But that
it contains mercury is evident, from its having salivated some patients.

_Couns. for the Cr._ I beg, gentlemen of the jury, you will please
to remember that the Doctor says, the composition of the powder is a
secret. Now, Sir, please to proceed to his manner of communicating the
disease.

_Dr. Baker._ The operator opens a pustule on the arm of some patient in
whom the matter is yet in a crude state; and then with his moist lancet
just raises the cuticle on the arm of the person to be inoculated,
applying neither plaister nor bandage. This was his method some time
ago; but he now generally dips his lancet only in the moisture issuing
from the place of incision, before the eruption, four days after the
operation.

_Couns. for the Cr._ And pray, Sir, what medicines does he give after
the operation?

_Dr. Baker._ On the night following, the patient takes a pill, which
is repeated every other night till the fever comes on.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Do you know the composition of this pill?

_Dr. Baker._ No: it is a secret.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Are the patients confined to their apartments at
this period?

_Dr. Baker._ No: moderate exercise in the open air is strongly
recommended.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Now, Sir, please to inform the Court what you
have learnt concerning the progress of the disease and the manner of
treating it.

_Dr. Baker._ Three days after the operation, if it succeed, there
appears on the incision a spot, like a flea bite, not as yet above the
skin, which gradually becomes first a red pimple, and then a bladder
full of clear lymph, advancing to maturation with the pustules. In
proportion as the discolouration round the place of incision is
greater, the less quantity of eruption is expected; therefore, when
this circle is small, stronger and more frequent cathartics are
exhibited. If, when the fever comes on, there appears no tendency
to perspiration, some acid drops, or more powerful sudorifics, are
administered. In general, during the burning heat of the fever, he
gives cold water; but after the perspiration begins, warm baum-tea, or
water-gruel. As soon as the sweat abates, the eruption having appeared,
he obliges every body to get up, to walk about the house, or into the
garden. From this time, to the turn of the disease, he gives milk-gruel
_ad libitum_. On the following day he gives a dose of Glauber’s salts,
and, if the eruption be considerable, he repeats it on the third day.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Pray, Sir, can you give the Court any information
relative to the number of persons that have been inoculated by the
Prisoner and his assistants?

_Dr. Baker._ According to the best information that I can procure,
about seventeen thousand have been thus inoculated, of which number no
more than five or six have died.

 Mr. B. CHANDLER sworn.

_Couns. for the Cr._ You, Sir, I think are a surgeon at Canterbury?

_Mr. Chandler._ I am.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Pray, Mr. Chandler, can you give us any
information concerning the Prisoner’s success in the practice of
inoculation?

_Mr. Chandler._ I know nothing of Mr. Sutton’s own particular practice,
except from report. What I have to say relates only to that of one of
his assistants, or partners.

_President._ This evidence cannot affect the Prisoner at the bar, as he
tells you he knows nothing of Mr. Sutton’s own particular practice.

_Couns. for the Cr._ I beg your pardon, Mr. President, the Prisoner
at the bar stands indicted for preserving the lives of the King’s
subjects, not only by inoculating, but also causing to be inoculated.

_President._ Proceed to his examination.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Pray, Mr. Chandler, who is this assistant or
partner, with whose practice you are acquainted?

_Mr. Chandler._ He is a surgeon of eminence at Maidstone; his name is
Peale.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Where was it that you saw his practice?

_Mr. Chandler._ In the city of Canterbury.

_Couns. for the Cr._ What number of persons might he inoculate in that
city?

_Mr. Chandler._ I cannot exactly tell; but it is considerable.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Did any of his patients die under inoculation?

_Mr. Chandler._ Not that I know of.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Did you hear Dr. Baker’s evidence?

_Mr. Chandler._ I did.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Does Mr. Peale’s practice differ in any respect
from that of the Prisoner, as related by the Doctor?

_Mr. Chandler._ It differs in some few particulars.

_Couns. for the Cr._ What are these particulars?

_Mr. Chandler._ I think, Dr. Baker informed the Court that the persons
to be inoculated are a fortnight under preparation. That time is now
reduced to eight days. The pill is not given every other night, as
mentioned by the Doctor; many of Mr. Peale’s patients not having taken
it till the fifth day after inoculation. It is generally repeated on
the seventh day, and sometimes continued to the eighth or ninth. When
the eruptive fever comes on, a sort of julap is given to be drank
_ad libitum_; composed of a small quantity of a medicine nearly the
colour of Madeira wine, poured into a quart or pint bottle of spring
water. It’s taste is very agreeable, cooling, and sub-acid. And here my
observations differ most from the accounts related to Dr. Baker; for
though this medicine, if taken upon going to bed, did sometimes seem
to occasion a slight perspiration, yet an increased perspiration was
never, that I saw, or could learn, insisted on in the day, much less
a profuse sweat at any time: for none of the patients are allowed to
lie in bed, or sit over the fire, or keep within doors, if the weather
is tolerable, even during the feverish symptoms, and the only drink
allowed is toast and water.

_Couns. for the Prisoner._ I thought, Sir, you said that the patients
were allowed a certain sub-acid julap _ad libitum_? and now you tell
us, that the only drink allowed is toast-water. I beg, gentlemen of the
jury, you will observe that he contradicts himself.

_Mr. Chandler._ When I said that toast-water was the only drink
allowed, I certainly mean to except the julap, which I considered as a
medicine, and the toast-water as common drink.

_Couns. for the Prisoner._ I submit it to the Court, whether he did not
contradict himself.

_President._ He has explained his meaning sufficiently.

_C. for the Prisoner._ I submit. Mr. Chandler, we desire you will not
leave the Court; we shall ask you a few more questions by and by.

_C. for the Pris._ Pray, Mr. Chandler, let me ask you, whether you know
the composition of the medicines given by Mr. Peale?

_Mr. Chandler._ I do not.

_Couns. for the Pris._ You do not. Then they are secret medicines?

_Mr. Chandler._ They are.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Sir, we have done with you. Mr. President, and
gentlemen of the jury, this is all the evidence we shall produce in
support of our indictment. Though it were easy to corroborate every
thing they have said by a hundred witnesses; yet as these are more than
the law requires, as their evidence is so clear and circumstantial,
and as they are gentlemen of undoubted character, we think it totally
unnecessary to trouble you with the repetition of facts, of the truth
of which you cannot possibly doubt.

That the Prisoner at the bar is guilty of preserving the lives of his
Majesty’s liege subjects, we have proved, first, on the evidence of
the Rev. Mr. Houlton, who asserts, that in the space of three years,
he, the Prisoner, hath inoculated, or caused to be inoculated, no less
than twenty thousand persons. Now, in the old way of inoculation, if we
allow that there died one in two hundred, which I believe is about the
mark, it will appear, that he hath actually preserved the lives of one
hundred people; for in the twenty thousand inoculated by the Prisoner
and his accomplices, not one hath died, whose death could be justly
attributed to inoculation. This witness hath likewise informed you,
that the Prisoner is actually possessed of a certain medicine, by the
administration of which, and by the help of a magick circle drawn with
a pen round the pustules, together with a prayer composed and repeated
by this witness on the occasion, he can make them retire at the word of
command, with the same dexterity, and in the same manner, as any other
_Hocus Pocus_ commands his little balls to pass through the table. That
this is performed by means unknown to the faculty, is very evident, as
not one of them all pretends to any thing like it.

Dr. Baker, a physician of considerable reputation, after giving you
a clear account of the Prisoner’s extraordinary method of preparing,
and manner of treating his patients thro’ the whole progress of the
disease, sufficiently confirms the evidence of Mr. Houlton, in regard
to the number of persons inoculated; with whom he also agrees in
confirming that material part of our allegation, which accuses the
Prisoner of performing these miracles by means of secret medicines, and
unusual modes of practice.

Our last witness, Mr. Chandler, a very skilful surgeon, hath, in
the course of his examination, corroborated Dr. Baker’s account of
the Prisoner’s unprecedented mode of practice, at least in the most
essential points; so that you cannot possibly entertain the least doubt
as to facts. Gentlemen, it were very easy for me to expatiate on the
fatal consequences of permitting such proceedings to go unpunished; but
your own understanding and impartiality will, I make no doubt, prompt
you to determine with propriety: I therefore forbear to say any thing
more that might influence your judgement. The counsel for the Prisoner
may now call their evidence whenever they think proper.

_Couns. for the Prisoner._ Mr. President, and gentlemen of the jury,
the Prisoner at the bar stands indicted for preserving the lives of his
Majesty’s liege subjects, by secret medicines and modes of practice,
and by inoculating, or causing to be inoculated, divers persons, &c.
With regard to his preserving the lives of the King’s subjects, it has
been so insufficiently proved, that we shall not take up your time
in disproving it; but as to his secret medicines, we shall shew you
that the ingredients of which they are made are certainly known, and
consequently that they are not secret medicines. We shall prove to
you, by undeniable evidence, that the same medicines have been long
recommended and administered for the same purposes, and with equal
success. And we shall, last of all, produce a witness of unquestionable
authority, who will convince you that the successful practice of
inoculation does not depend on any peculiar medicine whatsoever, and
consequently that the Prisoner is perfectly guiltless of the crimes of
which he stands accused. Call Dr. Thomas Ruston.

 Dr. THOMAS RUSTON sworn.

Pray, Dr. Ruston, have you any knowledge of the composition of
certain medicines used by the Prisoner at the bar, in his practice of
inoculation?

_Dr. Ruston._ I believe I have.

_Couns. for the Pris._ What is the form of these medicines?

_Dr. Ruston._ Powders, pills, and drops.

_Couns. for the Prisoner._ What are the ingredients which compose the
powder?

_Dr. Ruston._ I verily believe the powder to consist entirely of
calomel and æthiops mineral.

_Couns. for the Pris._ What are your reasons for thinking so?

_Dr. Ruston._ My reasons are founded on chemical experiment and
analogy.

_Couns. for the Prisoner._ What experiment and what analogy?

_Dr. Ruston._ 1st. To a small quantity of Mr. Sutton’s powder, which
was of a greyish colour, I added a few drops of volatile alkali, which
immediately changed it to a deep black. 2dly. To a small quantity of
the same, a few drops of a solution of salt of tartar were added,
which produced the same colour. 3dly. A few drops of lime-water were
added, which also changed the powder black, but not quite so black as
in experiment 1 and 2. The colour and weight of Mr. Sutton’s powder
were exactly imitated by the addition of six grains of æthiops to ten
grains of calomel, and by repeating the above experiments with this
composition, it was found to exhibit exactly the same phenomena.

_Couns. for the Prisoner._ Now, Sir, as to the pills?

_Dr. Ruston._ The pills, from their smell, taste, colour, and effects,
are evidently no other than the well-known _pilulæ cochiæ_, with a
small addition of calomel.

_Couns. for the Prisoner._ Did you make no experiment with the pills?

_Dr. Ruston._ Yes. I poured on one of them a few drops of volatile
alkali, and it immediately struck a deep black. The same appearance
was produced by salt of tartar, and by lime-water. I then added a few
grains of calomel to the _pilulæ cochiæ_, and repeated the experiments
with the same effect.

_Couns. for the Prisoner._ And what discoveries have you made
concerning the drops?

_Dr. Ruston._ The acid drops with which he prepares his punch, is so
obviously of the same nature with the dulcified volatile vitriolic
acid that arises during the distillation of æther, and which is the
same with what exists in large quantities in the _liquor anodinus_
of Hoffman, that it was unnecessary to submit it to any chemical
experiment. There was nothing foreign in its composition.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Not to interrupt the course of your examination,
I beg leave, before you proceed, to ask the Doctor one question. If I
remember right, you said, the powder contained ten grains of calomel.
Pray, Doctor, is not this an unusual large dose?

_Dr. Ruston._ As an alterative it certainly is so; and therefore Mr.
Sutton’s powders have often been known to salivate the patient. But its
activity is somewhat weakened by the sulphur contained in the æthiops.

_Couns. for the Cr._ But has it not been generally supposed that there
was some other powerful ingredient in Mr. Sutton’s medicines?

_Dr. Ruston._ Yes, antimony. But from my experiments, I am convinced of
the contrary.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Now, Doctor, give me leave to ask you, whether
the exhibition of mercury, as preparative to inoculation, be the
invention of the Prisoner at the bar?

_Dr. Ruston._ Certainly not.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Who were the inventors of this practice?

_Dr. Ruston._ I cannot answer positively to that question. The great
Boerhaave, in his Aphorisms, recommended the experiment of uniting
mercury with antimony as an antidote to the variolous virus; but I
believe some American physicians were the first who used mercury in
preparing for inoculation.

_Couns. for the Pris._ And with what success?

_Dr. Ruston._ With very great. Out of the first three thousand
inoculated, only five died; and these were all children, who could not
be prevailed on to take the medicine.

_Couns. for the Pris._ I beg, gentlemen of the jury, you will remember
this circumstance--All that took the mercurial medicines recovered.
Pray, Dr. Ruston, was this new method of preparation long confined to
any particular physician, or part of America?

_Dr. Ruston._ No: the fame of its extraordinary success soon produced
a number of inoculators on the new plan; so that in a short time it
spread from one end of the continent to the other.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Did these several inoculators all give precisely
the same medicines?

_Dr. Ruston._ Not precisely.

_Couns. for the Pris._ In what respect do they differ?

_Dr. Ruston._ Principally in the proportions of calomel and antimony.

_Couns. for the Pris._ But they all agreed in giving calomel?

_Dr. Ruston._ All.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Did they agree in any other respect?

_Dr. Ruston._ Yes: they all gave cathartics, and during the eruptive
fever treated their patients in the anti-phlogistic method.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Were their patients under any restrictions in
regard to diet?

_Dr. Ruston._ In general they were ordered to abstain from salt food,
spirituous liquors, butter, oil, and such like.

_Couns. for the Pris._ You have given a very satisfactory account of
these matters. Now give me leave to ask, whether you yourself practise
inoculation?

_Dr. Ruston._ I do.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Do you prepare your patients?

_Dr. Ruston._ Certainly.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Do you confine your patients to any particular
diet?

_Dr. Ruston._ I order them to abstain from animal food, spirituous
liquors, and spices.

_Couns. for the Pris._ And what medicines do you prescribe?

_Dr. Ruston._ They consist principally of mercurials and antimonials.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Do you believe there is any specific virtue in
these medicines? Do you give them as antidotes?

_Dr. Ruston._ By no means. I give them merely as evacuants, and
accordingly proportion them to the constitution and age of the patient.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Can you say any thing, from experience, of the
success of your method, compared with that of the Prisoner at the bar?

_Dr. Ruston._ I can say, from experience, that my method, in point of
success, is fully equal to his.

_Couns. for the Pris._ What is your opinion of his cold regimen?

_Dr. Ruston._ I approve of it in general, and practise it; but not in
the extreme.

_Couns. for the Pris._ What is your opinion as to the manner of
communicating the infection?

_Dr. Ruston._ I think it a matter of little importance. That of just
raising the skin with the point of a lancet, which has been dipped into
a pustule, and then rubbing the matter which adheres to it on the wound
with the finger, seems to be as good a one as any.

_Couns. for the Pris._ One question more. Do you think, upon the whole,
that the Prisoner at the bar possesses any secret, to which his success
is to be attributed?

_Dr. Ruston._ I think it must have appeared, from the evidence I have
given, that he possesses no secret at all.

_Couns. for the Pris._ We shall now recall one of their own witnesses;
a gentleman of undoubted veracity; whose evidence, if it have proved
any thing against the Prisoner, will, upon farther examination, be
found to prove much more in his favour.

 Dr. BAKER.

Pray, Dr. Baker, is the practice of preparing persons for the small pox
with calomel peculiar to the Prisoner at the bar?

_Dr. Baker._ By no means: it is a very general practice. There are
several physicians of credit who insist strenuously on its good effects.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Is it common to give purgative medicines on this
occasion?

_Dr. Baker._ That in general two or three doses of some purging
medicine ought to be given, almost all inoculators have agreed.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Now, Dr. Baker, give me leave to ask you, as a
physician, whether it be your opinion that the marvellous success, of
which the Prisoner stands accused, be owing to the peculiar virtue of
any medicine or medicines, known only to himself and his accomplices?

_Dr. Baker._ I am of opinion it is not.

_Couns. for the Pris._ To what cause then do you ascribe that success?

_Dr. Baker._ Principally to the free use of cold air.

_Couns for the Pris._ Is he the only inoculator who allows his patients
the free use of cold air?

_Dr. Baker._ Not now: the practice is at present very general in many
parts of this kingdom.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Was he the inventor of this cold regimen?

_Dr. Baker._ I cannot accuse him of being the inventor, because it is
strenuously recommended, in the natural small pox, by writers of the
first rank, particularly Sydenham, whose works are in the hands of
every physician.

_Couns. for the Pris._ We shall now call a physician sufficiently known
in the medical world, particularly by his _Analysis of Inoculation_.

 Dr. KIRKPATRICK sworn.

_Couns. for the Pris._ I think, Sir, you have had much experience in
the practice of inoculation?

_Dr. Kirkpatrick._ I have.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Have you been long accustomed to give calomel in
preparing your patients?

_Dr. Kirkpatrick._ It hath long been my practice, as appears from my
book.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Has it been your practice to confine your
patients to any particular regimen?

_Dr. Kirkpatrick._ It appears from my _Analysis_, that I regulate my
practice, in this respect, according to age and constitution; but in
general I advise that they should abstain from flesh meat, spirituous
liquors, and, in short, every thing inflammatory, or difficult of
digestion.

_Couns. for the Pris._ I beg, gentlemen of the jury, you will take
notice that the Doctor prescribes a vegetable diet; so that this is no
new thing. Pray, Doctor, when was your _Analysis_ printed?

_Dr. Kirkpatrick._ The first edition, in the last King’s reign, and the
second in the year 1761.

 Dr. BENJAMIN GALE sworn.

_Couns. for the Pris._ You are a physician, I think?

_Dr. Gale._ I am.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Where do you live?

_Dr. Gale._ At Connecticut in New England.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Have you practised inoculation?

_Dr. Gale._ I have inoculated many hundreds.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Do you prepare your patients with calomel?

_Dr. Gale._ I do.

_Couns. for the Pris._ With what success?

_Dr. Gale._ With very great success. In eight hundred patients, I have
lost but one.

 Mr. GATTI sworn.

_Couns. for the Pris._ If I am properly instructed, you, Sir, have
practised inoculation in France?

_Mr. Gatti._ Some time ago I was much employed in that business at
Paris.

_Couns. for the Pris._ In what manner did you prepare your patients?

_Mr. Gatti._ I was always an enemy to any general plan: I paid the less
regard to preparation, because I knew, that in all the Levant, where
the natural small-pox is as fatal as elsewhere; and where you may find
old women who have inoculated ten thousand people without an accident:
the only enquiry is, whether the patient is prepared by nature. All
that is considered, is, whether the breath be sweet, the skin soft, and
whether a little wound in it heals easily. Whenever these conditions
are found, they inoculate without the least apprehension of danger.

_C. for the Pris._ We shall now call a witness, who has already been
examined by the counsel on the other side.

 Mr. CHANDLER.

_Couns. for the Pris._ You, Sir, seem to have observed the Suttonian
practice with a good deal of attention: please to inform the Court,
whether you attribute the success of this new method to the virtue of
his medicines.

_Mr. Chandler._ I attribute his extraordinary success neither to his
medicines, nor his cool regimen, but principally to his method of
communicating the infection by means of the crude lymph before it has
been ultimately variolated by the succeeding fever; and I found my
opinion on that being the only circumstance in which he differs from
other inoculators.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Which, gentlemen of the jury, you will please
to observe, is no secret: it is, indeed, a circumstance which could
not possibly be concealed; for the method of performing the operation
must not only be obvious to every patient, but to every by-stander.

 Dr. GLASS sworn.

_Couns. for the Pris._ If I am not misinformed, you practice physic in
the city of Exeter?

_Dr. Glass._ I do.

_Couns. for the Pris._ I presume, Doctor, you have heard of these
mighty miracles said to be performed by the Prisoner at the bar?

_Dr. Glass._ I have; and have moreover been at some pains to discover
the cause of these miracles.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Do you know of any other miraculous inoculator?

_Dr. Glass._ There is, in Somersetshire, an operator who hath
inoculated, at least, seventeen hundred patients, with the loss of two
only.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Are you acquainted with his method?

_Dr. Glass._ I am.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Is it different from that of the Prisoner?

_Dr. Glass._ It is apparently, though perhaps not essentially,
different.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Pray, Doctor, favour the Court with an account
of this practice.

_Dr. Glass._ This Somersetshire operator inoculates all that apply to
him for that purpose, without examining in what state of health they
are, or have been, or asking them a single question. He always begins
his process with communicating the infection. After this he bleeds
some, purges all twice, confines them to a low diet, forbids exercise,
and whatever quickens the motion of the blood. Every one, as soon as
the eruptive fever begins, is put to bed in a room that is shut up
close, to keep out the cool air, is well covered with bed-cloaths, and
has plenty of baum tea given him to make him sweat. But if this doth
not answer, a sweating powder, which, being tasteless, is supposed
to be some antimonial preparation, is administered. By these means,
a plentiful sweat is procured, and continued till the eruption is
compleated. The patient is then permitted to get up, walk about the
house, and to go out, if he pleaseth, into the open air, when the
weather is not unfavourable.

_Couns. for the Pris._ I think, Sir, you said that you had been at some
pains to discover the cause of the miraculous success ascribed to this
new method of inoculation, as it is called: is it your opinion that it
is owing to any peculiarity in his preparatory course?

_Dr. Glass._ No; because the result of inoculation after various
methods of preparation, and without any preparation at all, as appears
from the practice of the Somersetshire man, are much the same.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Do you ascribe it to the use of mercury?

_Dr. Glass._ No; because I certainly know, that some gentlemen of my
acquaintance, who make it a constant rule to prepare with mercurials,
have not been more successful than some others, who seldom or never use
any mercurial preparation before or after the operation.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Are you of opinion that it is to be attributed
to his extreme cool regimen?

_Dr. Glass._ No; though I approve it in general: nevertheless, I will
venture to say, that I have met with some cases, in which cordial
medicines were necessary. Yet I apprehend, that a close room and hot
air are always extremely prejudicial in every stage of the small-pox,
and in all kinds of fevers.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Do you lay any stress on the manner of
communicating the infection?

_Dr. Glass._ No; it can make but little difference whether the
infectious matter is applied to a slight wound of the skin on the
point of a lancet, or a bit of thread.

_Couns. for the Pris._ To what cause then do you ascribe the great
success of the Suttonians?

_Dr. Glass._ It seems highly probable, that their singular success is
chiefly owing to their singular method of disposing their patients
to sweat, and then sweating them, by the medicines they give after
inoculation, and during the eruptive fever.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Mr. President, and gentlemen of the jury,
we shall now produce a witness, whose successful practice in the
particular branch of inoculation is universally known to have been
equal to that of the Prisoner at the bar; and whose evidence (if of the
Prisoner’s innocence there yet remain _a loop to hang a doubt on_) will
certainly put the matter beyond all dispute.

 Dr. DIMSDALE sworn.

_C. for the Pris._ Hertford, I think, Doctor, is the place of your
residence?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ It is.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Pray, Dr. Dimsdale, have you been long in the
practice of inoculation?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ Upwards of twenty years.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Has your practice in that branch of your
profession been extensive?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ Very extensive.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Have you lost many patients under inoculation?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ About fourteen years ago I had one patient, who, after
the eruption of a few distinct pustules, died of a fever, which I
esteemed wholly independent of the small-pox.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Did you then, in upwards of twenty years, never
lose a patient, whose death could be justly ascribed to inoculation?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ Not one.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Perhaps, Doctor, you have been particularly
careful in the choice of your subjects?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ Not in the least: I have inoculated persons of all
ages, all constitutions, and at all seasons of the year.

_Couns. for the Pris._ In what manner do you prepare your patients? Do
you confine them to any particular regimen?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ In directing the preparatory regimen, I principally
aim at these four points: to reduce the patient, if in high health, to
a low and more secure state; to strengthen the constitution, if too
low; to correct what appears vitiated; and to clear the stomach and
bowels, as much as may be, from all crudities and their effects. With
these intentions, therefore, I order them to abstain from animal food,
spirituous liquors, and spices, for ten days before the operation;
during which time, I give three doses of a powder composed of eight
grains of calomel, the same quantity of the compound powder of crabs
claws, and one-eighth of a grain of emetic tartar: this powder is
taken over-night, and a dose of Glauber’s salts in the morning. On the
days of purging I allow broths.

_Couns. for the Pris._ In what manner do you usually communicate the
infection?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ With a lancet, dipped in the variolous matter, I
make an incision as short as possible, and so slight as to pass only
just through the scarf-skin. I then stretch the little wound with my
finger and thumb, and moisten it with the matter on the point of my
lancet. This operation I generally perform on both arms, to prevent
disappointment.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Do you take the matter from the natural
small-pox, or do you prefer that taken from a person inoculated?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ It seems to be of no consequence, whether infecting
matter be taken from the natural, or inoculated small-pox. I have used
both, and never have been able to discover the least difference,
either in point of certainty of infection, the progress, or the event;
and, therefore, I take the infection from either, as opportunity
offers, or at the option of my patients or their friends.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Did you ever inoculate with the lymph taken
before the crisis of the distemper?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ I have taken a little clear fluid from the elevated
pellicle on the incised part, even so early as the fourth day after the
operation; and have at other times used matter fully digested after
the crisis, with equal success. I chuse, however, in general, to take
matter for infection during the fever of eruption, as I suppose it at
that time to have it’s utmost activity.

_Couns. for the Pris._ What medicines do you prescribe after
communicating the infection?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ On the second day, in the evening, I usually give a
pill, composed of calomel and compound powder of crabs claws, each
three grains, with one-tenth of a grain of emetic tartar. This I also
repeat on the first appearance of the eruptive symptoms, in case they
seem to indicate any uncommon degree of vehemence; and the next morning
I order a dose of purging physic.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Do you confine your patients to their beds
during the eruptive fever?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ By no means: on the contrary, as soon as the symptoms
of the eruptive fever come on, they are directed, when the purging
medicines have operated, to keep abroad in the open air, be it ever so
cold, as much as they can bear, and to drink cold water, if thirsty;
always taking care not to stand still, but to walk about moderately
while abroad.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Is this your constant practice?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ It’s effects are so salutary, and so constantly
confirmed by experience, and an easy progress through every stage of
the disease depends so much upon it, that I admit of no exception.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Now, Doctor Dimsdale, give me leave to ask you,
whether you are possessed of any medicine by which you can repel a
number of pustules, when they appear too numerous, leaving only such a
quantity as the patient shall desire?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ I am, indeed, possessed of no such medicine. Sometimes
the whole surface of the skin is covered with a rash, intimately mixed
with the variolous eruption. This rash has been often mistaken for the
confluence it so much resembles, and has afforded occasion for some
practitioners, either ignorantly or disingenuously, to pretend, that
after a very copious eruption of the confluent pox, they can, by a
specific medicine, discharge the major part of the pustules, leaving
only as many distinct ones as may satisfy the patient that he has the
disease.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Thank you, Sir; the Prisoner is much indebted to
you for this explanation of the matter. You have sufficiently cleared
him from the imputation of sorcery. Pray, Doctor, let me ask, whether
you ever inoculated without preparation?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ I have often inoculated without any preparation at all,
and have always had the same success.

_Couns. for the Pris._ To what then do you chiefly ascribe the success
of this new method?

_Dr. Dimsdale._ I can only answer, that although the whole process may
have some share in it, in my opinion it consists chiefly in the method
of inoculating with recent fluid matter, and in the management of the
patients at the time of eruption.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Mr. President, and gentlemen of the jury,
the evidence which we have examined, on behalf of the Prisoner at
the bar, have spoken so positively, and have in general delivered
themselves with so much precision, that there can be no doubt but you
are perfectly satisfied that he is innocent of the crimes laid to
his charge in the indictment: nevertheless, in order to collect the
whole into one point of view, I shall briefly recapitulate what hath
been proved, and endeavour to point out those circumstances which
principally merit your attention.

The Prisoner stands indicted for preserving the lives of his Majesty’s
liege subjects, by means of secret medicines, and modes of practice,
unknown to the faculty. The first part of this charge was supported
almost entirely on the evidence of a person who calls himself
officiating clergyman to the prisoner. This gentleman told you, that
his office was, to pray with the sick, and to return thanks for their
recovery. But he had told you before, that the Prisoner never lost a
single patient by inoculation; consequently there was no danger, and
consequently no more reason to pray at this time than at any other.
An officiating clergyman, therefore, in this case, seems so perfectly
unnecessary, as to render his account of his office ridiculous and
incredible; a circumstance which greatly invalidates his evidence: and
lest you should be improperly influenced by your special regard to the
sacred function of this officiating gentleman; lest you should allow
the supposed gravity of his character to add weight to his testimony;
we shall now call a witness of some consequence, who, in few words,
will give you a just idea of the reverend Mr. Houlton.

 MONTHLY REVIEW sworn.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Pray, Sir, do you know any thing of a person who
calls himself officiating clergyman to the Prisoner at the bar?

_M. Review._ I remember one Robert Houlton, who gave himself that title.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Is he an author?

_M. Review._ Yes; he lately published a sermon, with an appendix
concerning inoculation.

_Couns. for the Pris._ And what is his character?

_M. Review._ I am sorry to say, this reverend son of the church
descends to the level of a mere _nostrum-puffer_.

_Couns. for the Pris._ I beg, gentlemen of the jury, you will take
notice; _a mere nostrum-puffer_. And pray, Mr. Review, is this
_nostrum-puffer_ forgetful of the usual, the proper gravity of his
profession?

_M. Review._ From the low wit, and familiarity with which he presumes
to treat the most respectable characters, he might easily be mistaken
for the Merry-Andrew of some wonder-working professor of the
stage-itinerant.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Merry-Andrew of some wonder-working professor of
the stage-itinerant! I beg, gentlemen of the jury, you will remember,
that this nostrum-puffer, this Merry-Andrew, is their principal
evidence, their corner stone upon which the first and most material
part of the indictment depends; namely, that part which accuses the
Prisoner of preserving, in an especial manner, the lives of his
Majesty’s liege subjects. I say, in an especial manner; for tho’ it be
not thus expressed in the indictment, it is certainly implied.

_Couns. for the Crown._ This is too much. I beg, Mr. President, the
counsel for the Prisoner may not be suffered to mislead the jury by
implications in the indictment. The fate of the Prisoner at the bar
must depend solely on the _letter_ of the indictment. We admit of no
implications. My Lord Cook----

_President._ You must abide by the letter of the indictment. Counsel
for the Prisoner, proceed.

_Couns. for the Pris._ Gentlemen of the jury, I was going to observe,
when I was interrupted by the counsel on the other side, that unless we
suppose the Prisoner peculiarly, or especially, or uncommonly guilty
of preserving the lives of the King’s subjects, this will appear, at
least, to be a malicious prosecution; and that it really is so, can
admit of no doubt, when you recollect, from the general tenour of our
evidence, how many other inoculators might, with equal justice, have
been indicted for the same offence. Doctor Dimsdale, in particular, in
the course of twenty years extensive practice hath lost no patients;
and I will venture to affirm, that there are now in this metropolis,
and in the neighbourhood, a very considerable number of inoculators,
who have been equally successful with the Prisoner at the bar.
Certainly, therefore, this is a malicious prosecution, and ought to be
considered as such.

As to that article of the indictment, which relates to the means of
perpetrating the crime of which the Prisoner is accused, namely, by
secret medicines and modes of practice unknown to this College, and to
all other practitioners, we have proved very clearly, by Dr. Ruston’s
experiments, that the composition of the medicines is certainly
known. But that they consist chiefly of a mercurial preparation, is
sufficiently evident from their effects. Now that mercury hath been
very commonly used as a preparative to inoculation, we have proved to
you by the testimony of several witnesses of indisputable character.
And with regard to the vegetable diet, enjoined by the Prisoner at
the bar, it is so far from being peculiar to him, that it hath very
long been the common practice. As to his manner of communicating the
infection by means of the lymph taken before the eruptive fever,
whether it be the invention of the Prisoner, or not, is a matter of no
importance, as it is now a very common, and therefore not a secret mode
of practice.

I come now to that part of his practice, in which he hath been thought
most singular, and which hath generally been imagined to be his own
invention: I mean his cool regimen; that is, the practice of exposing
his patients to the open air, and giving them cold water to drink. But,
though this practice may not have been carried to the present extreme
by regular physicians, it is nevertheless most certain, that they could
not be ignorant how strenuously it was recommended, in the natural
small-pox, by many writers of the first distinction.

Rhases, an Arabian physician, who wrote some hundred years ago, in
his chapter _De præservatione, et de modo impediendi_, &c. expresses
himself, concerning the use of cold water, in order to extinguish
the variolous fever, in these words: _Bibendam præbe aquam in nive
refrigeratam in summo frigiditatis gradu, effusim et affatim datam, et
brevibus intervallis; ita ut ea prematur, et frigiditatem ejus sentiat
in intestinis suis ægrotus. Quod si posthac febricitet, et in illum
redierit ardor; potui illam dato secunda vice, videlicet a libris
duabus ad tres, et amplius, in semihoræ spatio. Quod si adhuc calor
redierit, et venter aqua repletus fuerit; fac ut illam evomat: tum
denuo aquam bibendam præbe._ Thus, gentlemen of the jury, you hear,
that this early, this celebrated writer on the small-pox, carried the
use of cold water far beyond the practice of our most adventurous
inoculators. He not only ordered his patients to drink cold water
till they were full, but made them spew it up, and drink again. Now,
though our learned and regular physicians, who had some tenderness
for their patients, and some reputation to lose, did not dare to try
what appeared to them a dangerous experiment, it is, nevertheless, a
practice of which they could not be ignorant; and of which the Prisoner
is undoubtedly guiltless of being the inventor.

Our immortal Sydenham is so universally known to have been a strenuous
advocate for the cool method of treating patients in the small-pox,
that to quote him upon this occasion, were unnecessary and impertinent.

The learned Boerhaave, in aphorism 1399, advises the cool regimen
in these words: _In primo initio apparentis inflammationis externe,
videtur requiri cautela, ne vergat in suppurationem, aut curandum ut
minima fiat, procul a capite, & tarda; quod fit, victu tenuissimo
putredini resistente; potu diluente, blando, subacidulo &c. regimine
frigidiusculo, maxime admissu puri & frigidi aëris._ So that in this
aphorism we discover not only the liberal admission of pure and cold
air, but also, the sub-acid liquor, and antiseptic regimen, of which
the Prisoner at the bar hath so unjustly been supposed the inventor.

The celebrated Dr. Mead, though he does not advise the extreme cold
regimen, nevertheless, in regard to cool air, says, _In primis autem
curandum est, ut purum aërem, eumque frigidulum, ubertim trahere
possit_.

Dr. Kirkpatrick, in his Analysis of inoculation, though he thought it
not advisable to attempt an entire extinction of the ordinary process
of the disease in question, says, “Notwithstanding we have little to
oppose to it’s most virulent operation but powerful acids, styptics,
and not only free ventilating air, but, perhaps, the strongest
potential cold we can generate and apply.”

Thus, gentlemen of the jury, it appears, beyond all dispute, that the
Prisoner at the bar is so far from having preserved the lives of his
Majesty’s liege subjects, by secret medicines and modes of practice
unknown to the faculty in general, that all his medicines have
been generally prescribed, and every article of his process either
practised or recommended by a great variety of authors, whose works are
universally studied.

Gentlemen of the jury, I make no doubt but you are perfectly convinced
that the Prisoner is guiltless of the crimes specified in the
indictment. But his accusers, not satisfied with their general charge,
have, in the course of their evidence, endeavoured to convict him of
dealing with the Devil; they have endeavoured to prove him guilty of
witchcraft; they have endeavoured to make you believe, that, by means
of a certain medicine, and a magic circle drawn with a pen round
the pustules, with the addition of a prayer repeated (backwards I
suppose) by his officiating clergyman; I say, they have endeavoured to
persuade you, that, by the help of the black art, he is able to make
the pustules retire at the word of command. But, gentlemen of the
jury, I beg you will remember, that Dr. Dimsdale has clearly explained
this matter; he told you, That these supposed pustules were nothing
more than a rash, which frequently accompanies the small-pox, and
which naturally retires of it’s own accord, without the assistance of
the black art, and, consequently, that the Prisoner at the bar is no
conjurer.

_Couns. for the Cr._ Mr. President, and you gentlemen of the jury,
it is now late, and you must necessarily be fatigued by your close
attention to a long tryal. I shall not, therefore, trespass on your
patience, by a circumstantial reply to the elaborate speech which you
have just heard; I shall only intreat you to recollect the tenor of our
indictment, and the positive evidence by which it hath been proved. You
have too much understanding to be improperly biassed by fine speeches,
and too much integrity not to determine a cause of such importance
according to the laws of justice and equity.

_President._ Gentlemen of the jury, Daniel Sutton, the Prisoner at the
bar, is indicted for the high crime of preserving the lives of his
Majesty’s liege subjects, by inoculating, or causing to be inoculated,
twenty thousand persons, in the space of three years, and by secret
medicines and modes of practice unknown to this College, and to all
other practitioners.

The first witness produced, in support of this heavy charge, was Mr.
Robert Houlton, who swears positively as to the number of persons
inoculated, and tells you he had his information from the Prisoner’s
own books. He is no less positive on the article of secret medicines,
by means of which the Prisoner has a power, unknown to the faculty, of
causing the pustules to disappear at pleasure.

Dr. Baker, the second witness, gave you a clear account of the
Prisoner’s general practice, but as he related nothing of his own
proper knowledge, his evidence, in law, proves nothing against the
Prisoner at the bar.

Mr. Chandler, the third witness against the Prisoner, relates the
practice of one of his accomplices, by whose means many have been
preserved; and he likewise told you, that the composition of the
medicines is not known.

These are all the evidence produced in support of the indictment. We
come now to those that have been examined in behalf of the Prisoner:
the first of which was Dr. Ruston, who, by the result of a course of
chemical experiments, has discovered the composition of these secret
medicines; consequently, at the time when this indictment was laid,
they were not secret medicines. This witness likewise informs you, that
mercury, which appears to have been the chief ingredient, hath been
long in use, especially in America, as a preparative to inoculation. He
told you also, that the regimen prescribed by the American physicians
was very similar to that of the Prisoner at the bar, and that he
himself, pursuing the same general plan, has been no less successful
than the Prisoner at the bar; and he concludes with declaring, that he
does not believe him possessed of any secret to which his success can
be attributed.

The Counsel for the Prisoner then recalled Dr. Baker; who declared,
that preparing persons for inoculation with calomel, and other
purgative medicines, is a common practice; that the success, ascribed
to the Prisoner, is not owing to any peculiar virtue in his medicines,
but chiefly to the free use of cold air; and that this part of his
practice is now very general, and not his own invention.

The next witness was Dr. Kirkpatrick; who testifies, that for many
years past he hath been accustomed to prepare his patients in a manner
very similar to that of the Prisoner at the bar.

Dr. Gale informed you, that he always prepared his patients with
calomel.

Dr. Gatti told you, that he paid little regard to preparation, because
the people in the Levant are successful without it.

Mr. Chandler, who had already been examined by the Counsel against
the Prisoner, being recalled, gives it as his opinion that the
success of this Suttonian practice is owing entirely to the manner of
communicating the infection, which, as it is performed openly, can be
no secret.

The next witness was Dr. Glass, who informed the Court that there is
a certain operator in Somersetshire, who without any preparation at
all hath inoculated seventeen hundred with the loss of two patients
only. Being asked his opinion as to the cause of the success of this
new method, as it is called, he told you, that he believed it to be
principally owing to the exhibition of sudorific medicines during the
eruptive fever.

Dr. Dimsdale deposed, that he hath practised inoculation in a very
extensive manner for twenty years past without the loss of a patient;
that his practice is very similar to that of the Prisoner at the bar;
but that he has often inoculated without any preparation, and with
equal success; and that he ascribes his success chiefly to the cool
regimen, and to his method of communicating the infection with recent
fluid matter.

The last witness called was Mr. Monthly Review, who spoke to the
character of the Rev. Mr. Houlton, on the credit of whose testimony the
fate of the Prisoner at the bar almost entirely depends.

Gentlemen of the jury, having thus briefly summed up the evidence on
both sides, intentionally neglecting to animadvert as I went along, I
shall now endeavour, as far as I am able, to state this complicated
affair in such a manner, as to reduce it to a few simple questions;
and if, after all, it should appear, that what hath been deposed be
insufficient to explain the great mystery, I shall think it my duty,
for the sake of truth, and in justice to the Prisoner at the bar, to
give you as much of my own opinion as may be necessary to lead you to
an equitable determination.

First, then, I must observe to you, that the part of the indictment,
which accuses the Prisoner, in general, of preserving the lives of
the King’s subjects, depends entirely on the deposition of Mr. Robert
Houlton; for though the evidence of Dr. Baker, and Mr. Chandler, may,
in some degree, corroborate his testimony, yet they are, of themselves,
insufficient. Some regard is certainly due to Mr. Houlton’s sacred
function; but if you believe the gentleman who spoke to his character;
if you view him in the light of a mere _nostrum-puffer, a Merry-Andrew
to the stage-itinerant_; in that case, you are not only to disregard
his function, but the whole of his evidence. But, in justice to the
Prisoner, I must farther observe, that though you were to admit the
evidence of Mr. Houlton in full force and virtue; yet, as it hath been
very sufficiently proved, that there are a considerable number of
operators, who are equally guilty of preserving the lives of the King’s
subjects, you will doubtless consider this as a malicious prosecution,
and on that account alone you will be justified in acquitting the
Prisoner: for though, in general, to sin with a multitude be no excuse,
yet the nature of this offence is such, that unless he be found
singularly guilty, he is hardly guilty at all.

But he is likewise accused of administering medicines, the composition
of which is unknown to the faculty in general. In answer to this
charge, Dr. Ruston hath demonstrated, that calomel is the principal
ingredient, and several other witnesses have deposed, that calomel hath
long been an universal medicine on these occasions. Of this part of
the indictment therefore the Prisoner stands fairly acquitted.

As to what relates to the other part of his practice, after the
evidence you have heard, you can have no doubt, that he cannot with
the least appearance of justice be accused of singularity, as his cold
regimen, his mode of preparation, and method of communicating the
disease, are at this time exactly similar to the practice of almost
every other inoculator in this kingdom.

But admitting that you are satisfied of the reality of his great
success in the practice of inoculation, a natural question will
arise, namely, to what particular circumstance is that success to be
attributed? Before we attempt to solve this problem, let us first
recollect the several opinions of those who have been examined relative
to this matter.

Mr. Houlton’s opinion was, that it is owing to certain secrets in the
art; but it hath plainly appeared in the course of our proceedings that
no such secrets exist.

Dr. Baker was of opinion, that the success is principally to be
ascribed to the free use of cold air; but in answer to this, I must
observe, that there have been cases, particularly one related by Dr.
Glass, in his late pamphlet, in which this was found insufficient.

Mr. Chandler attributes it to the practice of communicating the
disorder with crude lymph; but Dr. Dimsdale informed you, from long
experience, that the mode of communication is a matter of indifference.

Dr. Glass ascribes it to the effect of sudorifics, administered at
the period of eruption; but Mr. Chandler told you, that the Suttonian
practice requires no such effect from the medicines; and Dr. Dimsdale
pursues a contrary method.

As to preparation, it evidently appears from the Levant practice,
from that of the Somersetshire operator, and from Dr. Dimsdale’s
confession, that it is a matter of much less importance than hath
generally been supposed; or rather, it appears to be of no importance
at all. Nevertheless, we are obliged to acknowledge, that fewer
patients have died under inoculation within those few years, than
formerly, when the practice was in its infancy. It should therefore
seem natural to conclude, that some considerable improvement has
been made; but the nature of this improvement appears, from the
proceedings of this day, to be yet _in nubibus_. That this new
method of inoculation hath been amazingly successful, is beyond all
contradiction; but that this success is not confined to the Prisoner
at the bar, is equally indisputable. None of our patients die. The
success is universal. Whether we prepare our patients or not; whether
we give them mercury, or no mercury; whether we inoculate with crude
lymph, or with matter ultimately variolated; whether we sweat them in
the eruptive fever, or send them into the cold air; in short, let us
proceed as we will, to kill a patient by inoculation, seems to be out
of our power.

From these _data_, I think, you may rationally conclude, that the
Prisoner himself is totally ignorant of the real cause of his
successful practice; and if you are of that opinion, this being a Court
of equity, you must necessarily acquit him of the crimes laid to his
charge. But as judge of this Court, for the sake of truth, and the more
effectually to exculpate the Prisoner at the bar, I shall now endeavour
to explain this mysterious affair.

The small-pox hath been generally ranked among inflammatory diseases,
and certainly with propriety, if we consider it only in it’s first
stage; but that, in it’s natural progress, it becomes a putrid
disorder, is indisputably true. Let us now suppose a number of patients
ill of a malignant putrid disease, the jail fever for instance. Let us
suppose these unhappy beings pent up in the close ward of an hospital,
swallowing hot medicines, and denied the use of fresh air. In such a
state the disease would certainly exert it’s utmost virulence, and very
few of the patients would recover. Let us farther suppose a number
of patients, in a contiguous ward, receiving the infection from the
others; but let us imagine their medicines less inflammatory, and the
air less confined: is there a physician here present, who has the least
doubt that the disorder, in this case, would be less malignant and
less fatal? Let us yet farther suppose a third ward, contiguous to the
second, and the patients, infected from the second ward, treated more
on the anti-phlogistic and antiseptic plan, and particularly indulged
with fresh air: such patients, I say, having caught a milder disease,
and being more rationally treated, would more generally escape. But
if we carry our supposition still farther, as we gradually recede
from the first ward, we shall find, by a parity of reasoning, that the
disease will at last retain no more of it’s original malignity, than is
barely sufficient to communicate the infection. The disorder will now
assume so mild an aspect as hardly to appear of the same _genus_ with
that from which it originally sprung.

What hath been said of the jail fever, will evidently apply to the
small-pox. We Europeans received it a malignant, a fatal disease; the
fatality and malignancy of which, by the general practice of nurses,
and, indeed, of most physicians, hath, perhaps, been rather increased
than diminished: for, if an infectious disease may be rendered more
mild by judicious treatment, it is no less certain, that a mild
disorder may, by a series of improprieties, be gradually raised to
such a height of virulence, as to assume a new aspect, and exhibit
phenomena so different from those of it’s parent disease, that, in
the end, it will constitute a new genus. If this be admitted as a
possibility, perhaps it might be no difficult matter to trace many
of our disorders to their origin, and to prove, that a considerable
number are of our own creation; they are the offspring of medicine, the
children of dulness or chimera, begotten upon old women.

The small-pox, by a treatment diametrically opposite to that which
reason, and a perfect knowledge of the nature of the disease, would
have dictated, hath, through a series of many ages, preserved all the
virulence with which it first burst into Europe. But experience hath
taught us, that, when produced by inoculation, it is much less fatal.
Why? Is it because those that are inoculated are previously prepared?
No: that is a very insufficient reason; for you have heard, that, in
the Levant, preparation is disregarded; and also, that some of the
most successful operators in this nation think it of little importance.
We must therefore search for another cause; to the discovery of which
let us consider, in what respect the communication by inoculation
differs from that in the natural way. In the latter case the variolous
_miasmata_ are conveyed into the body either with the air into the
lungs, or with the saliva into the stomach: in the former, it is
received into the system by means of the lymphatic vessels which
are distributed over the surface of the body. There is yet another
difference, perhaps a very essential one, namely, that in the natural
infection, it is communicated by volatile particles, which probably may
be in their nature more virulent than those which are fixed. For my own
part, I am of opinion that the small-pox is a disease of the lymphatic
system only, and my opinion seems to be confirmed by the impossibility
of communicating the infection by inoculating with the blood. Be this
as it may, it is indisputably true, that the crude lymph is sufficient
to give the infection, and that there is no necessity to draw blood at
the time of incision. Add to this, the frequent tumour of the lymphatic
glands in the axilla soon after the operation.

From these premises, it seems rational to conclude, that the general
success of inoculation is chiefly to be attributed to our mixing the
fixed variolous ferment with the lymph on the surface of the body, by
which means the viscera, most essential to our existence, are less
affected, and the poison rendered less virulent by dilution. But the
wonderful success of the present practice of inoculation remains yet to
be accounted for.

I have told you, that the most malignant diseases may be rendered
less malignant by proper treatment. The malignancy of the small-pox
hath been considerably abated by inoculation, and that malignancy
hath been still farther diminished by the gradual introduction of
the anti-phlogistic and antiseptic plan. So that in all places where
inoculation hath been long practised, and the patients thus treated,
the small-pox will naturally become a mild disorder, and the ignorant
operators themselves will be surprised at their unexpected success.

This, gentlemen of the jury, I conceive to be a true picture of the
present state of inoculation in these kingdoms. You will now lay your
heads together, and weigh well the evidence you have heard. If you are
of opinion that the articles of the indictment have been sufficiently
proved; that the Prisoner hath in an especial manner preserved the
lives of his Majesty’s liege subjects, by secret medicines and modes
of practice unknown to all other practitioners, you will then find him
guilty. If on the contrary, you think that these things are not true,
and that this is a malicious prosecution, you will in that case acquit
him.

_The jury having laid their heads together, without going out of Court,
were called over, and answered to their names._

_Cl. of the Cr._ Gentlemen of the jury, are you agreed in your verdict?

_Jury._ Yes.

_Cl. of the Cr._ Who shall say for you?

_Jury._ Our foreman.

_Cl. of the Cr._ Daniel Sutton, hold up your hand. You of the jury,
look upon the Prisoner. How say you? Is Daniel Sutton guilty of the
high crimes and misdemeanors of which he stands indicted, or not guilty?

_Jury._ NOT GUILTY.

The Prisoner was acquitted, and discharged accordingly.


FINIS.




Transcriber’s Notes

A few minor errors in punctuation were fixed.

A few minor inconsistencies in the treatment of speaker names were
fixed.

Page 8: “extreamly full” changed to “extremely full”

Page 16: The missing catchword “the” from the previous page was added
before “colour of Madeira wine”.

Page 22: “he ingredients” changed to “the ingredients”

Page 26: “gentletlemen” changed to “gentlemen”

Page 39 & 69: “administred” changed to “administered”