THE letter addressed to you, signed A. P.[sic] in your paper of the 29th ult. carries the clearest proofs how much the human mind is capable of being poisoned and perverted by principles of envy and a malignant temper. A thirst for novelty is far from being culpable in itself, it seems to have been imprest for very valuable purposes; as to this principle, most of the discoveries and improvements in natural knowledge owe their existence. That dangerous falsehoods are sometimes propagated by artifice to answer sinister purposes, is indeed much too true; but it is no less true, that envy and malice sometimes combine to rob the public of many blessings, through a most unpardonable ill will towards individuals; and, I take it, this letter of A. P.[sic] is an incontestable proof of the truth of this latter observation.
Certainly there is no plausibility in the tale of an ignorant man’s describing the unsound condition of a person he never saw by the bare inspection of his water; and nothing can be more absurd than to talk of deception procured by suitableness of application, when every thing is supposed to be founded on the most consummate ignorance. Here every thing said and done is unplausible, and apparently unsuitable. We are told, this writer was actuated by principles of humanity, and not to satiate any private pique, &c. I confess I do not believe him; for how artful soever the bolus of gilt over, the corrosive sublimate is discoverable in every part of it. I am persuaded, every reader of discernment will readily discover the whole tale to be the manufacture of the author’s brain, without the least foundation of truth or reality. Perhaps, the production of the same hand which held out to the Doctor two five hundred pound Bank notes to be admitted into partnership with him, which being refused, he wrote a ridiculous pamphlet to depreciate and abuse him.
But admitting this absurd tale to be true in every circumstance, it proves nothing to the writer’s purpose. It only serves to shew that the Doctor is not infalliable, and that once in a hundred times he was mistaken. Had his discernment been equal to what it was on a similar occasion, he probably would have told the bearer he was a rascal, and ordered him to be kicked down stairs, as he had before a blockhead in his neighbourhood.
Had our experimenter been actuated by the humane principles he professes, and indued with common understanding, he would have made an experiment more to his own reputation and the reader’s satisfaction. It would have been very easy to have picked out one from among the great number of miserable objects which daily present themselves for relief, on whom a satisfactory experiment might have been made both with respect to his skill and the virtue of his medicines; but, because he was not aware of a pitiful artifice unworthy of any but a simpleton, it is wisely inferred he has no skill in his profession.
That Dr. M. is become obnoxious to the whole physical tribe, is notorious enough, and every aspersion is cast upon him that falshood[sic] can invent, or dishonest cunning disseminate But what has raised this host of enemies against him, but superior success? He has cured many who had long been under the care of the most eminent of the faculty; others who had been turned out of hospitals and infirmaries as incurable. Many instances have occurred which prove the physicians of those unfortunate patients were totally ignorant of the source and cause of their ailments; and after having languished several years in miserable confinement, have, by this infamous quack, been restored to health, set upon their legs, and sent to labour in as few weeks. From superior success, common sense will ever infer superior skill and ability. Doctor L. and the whole College may write against him, they’ll only expand his fame, together with their own ignorance. Can they ever prove by argument, that he cannot judge of his patient’s disorder by inspecting his water, because it is a mode of practice they have not studied, and therefore are of course intirely ignorant of? When an unfortunate man, the far greater part of his time for years past has been confined to his bed, and treated by the best physicians money could procure as one debilitated and almost destroyed by the gout, and in the most favourable intervals could at best, with great pain, only raise himself on his crutches; could such a one, upon sending his water, and being told his physicians had mistaken his case, his disorder was not the gout, but some injury in the kidnies[sic], and upon taking a few simple medicines found himself mending daily, and in three or four weeks able to walk about and attend his business as ever? I say, is it possible such a one should not feel the highest value, friendship and esteem for one who had so wonderfully restored health and happiness, and the most sovereign contempt for those who for years had most illiberally fleeced him, and through their ignorance had perpetuated his pains, and rivetted his disorder upon him?
Will Doctor L. and his colleagues have the effrontery to attempt to disprove matters of fact by argument, and to insist the old gentleman who was thus surprizingly restored to health and seeming rejuvenescency, had, in fact, received no benefit at all, but was imposed upon by a “plausible tale, and an application they call suitable,” which is destitute of all sense and meaning?
Aug. 29. The LONDON SPY.
| Source: |
British Library Newspaper Collection Colindale - Burney Collection
6 September 1776 (14,834) Page 2 Column 2 |