[134] This doctrine of fancy, or imagination, ought undoubtedly, as Dr. Russel says of the imagination itself, to be under some management. The indiscriminate use of the word has been carried to such a length as in a manner to supersede all evidence, testimony, argumentation or reason. With some it is sufficient to discredit the most positive testimony (even upon oath) if they take it into their heads that such a thing cannot be: which by the bye is as strong an evidence of ignorance as any man can give. If imagination is given as a cause, the extent and nature of its powers ought to be ascertained; but who has done this? On the contrary I may say that not one in five hundred who makes use of the word would be able to define it. But the most curious mode of reasoning used by these imaginary gentlemen is, if they are asked, “How do you prove that such a thing is the effect of imagination?” they are ready to answer, “I can indeed bring no proof that it is so, but how do you prove that it is not?” Here the imaginaries have not reason sufficient to show them that they ought to bring a proof, and not those who say they saw or felt any thing. But, waving this, sense is the highest faculty in our nature; imagination as well as reason are inferior to it; because neither the one nor the other can be conversant except about the objects of sense. If any person therefore says that he sees or that he feels any thing, nobody can, with any shadow of reason, say that he neither saw nor felt any thing. If one man sees what another cannot see, while the supposed object is easily within reach of the eyes of either, then the one who cannot see it has a right to suspect that the object is imaginary; but, if the person himself feels any slight pain or uneasiness, and that should go off in a short time, after drinking a glass of wine, there is as little reason to suppose that the pain was imaginary, as that the drinking of the wine was imaginary. In Dr. Russel’s case, though his strength was in general sufficient to resist the contagion in which he was immersed, yet, when that strength began to decay, it was no wonder that he found the contagion beginning to invade: a few glasses of wine gave vigour to the system, and enabled it to repel the attack. Had he been much fatigued with bodily labour, and found himself greatly relieved by a few glasses of wine, surely he would not suppose that his former fatigue was merely imaginary. Just so must it be in the former case; the one has no more to do with imagination than the other.
[135] Duncan’s Med. Comment. vol. viii, p. 352.
[136] Dr. Dover, who wrote, in 1732, the Ancient Physician’s Legacy, had lodged his soldiers in a church in which those who died of a plague had been buried. An hundred and eighty of the soldiers were seized either with petechiæ or buboes. He ordered them all to be bled in such quick succession, that the arm of the first was not bound up till the blood flowed from the last. Thus every one lost about an hundred ounces (upwards of three quarts.) He then ordered them water acidulated with spirit of vitriol for their drink; and by this treatment all recovered excepting eight, who would not refrain from spiritous liquors. This was transacted in Peru: but in Europe the plague will scarce bear bleeding to a few ounces. (Sauvages.)
[137] Duncan’s Med. Comment. vol. viii, p. 359.
[138] As it might by some be deemed an affront offered to the wisdom of antiquity, should we pass over in silence the opinions of the more ancient physicians, I shall in this note give a short account of some of their most remarkable modes of practice, as they are recorded in Burnet’s Thesaurus.
1. Forestus, in many respects a respectable author, recommends an antidote composed of equal parts of rue, figs and almonds, beat into a pulp in a stone mortar with a wooden pestle till united (which is not very easily done) into an uniform mass, adding as much syrup of citrons with vinegar as would render it soft, with a little powdered salt put in last. The efficacy of this he tells us he experienced in himself as well as all his family as a preventive; himself taking in the morning the bigness of a small nutmeg of this, made up into a confection with the ancient theriac, mithridate, Armenian bole, terrasigillata, &c.
In his regular practice (for the above must be accounted quackery) he advises bleeding within the first twelve, or at most twenty-four, hours; such as were bled afterwards he says died. If performed in seven or eight hours after the commencement of the disease the cure went on the better. Where bleeding was inadvisable he used cupping with scarifications, finishing the cure with sweating and cordials. He remarks that where black tumours or eschars, lentil shaped, appeared, the disease always proved mortal, without a single exception. These were small, like a grain of black pepper, and therefore called by the vulgar peppercorn; undoubtedly the tokens of Dr. Hodges.
2. Hildanus, also a respectable writer, has an high opinion of issues as a preventive. He says he never knew but one or two (and those of a very bad habit of body) who had issues in their legs and arms that perished in the plague, and says that he has known its efficacy as a preventive not only in himself but many others. He says he kept two issues in his own body, one in the left arm, the other in the right leg. (See above p. 339) To the same purpose Mercurialis relates that he never knew but one, and he was a priest, who died of the plague having an issue. He says also that he had inquired of many other physicians, who all gave a similar testimony. According to him, in the plague at Lausanne, all who were attacked by vomiting or looseness, and almost all who were bled, fell victims to the disease.
As preventives he advises amulets made up of arsenic, powder of toads, and other things. These are to be hanged round the neck in times of plague, and are undoubtedly of great virtue (maximam ad præservationem vim habere, non est quod dubites!) This remedy he says he had from his preceptor Cosmas Slotanus, a very celebrated surgeon.
Brine of pork is another preventive, which he never tried himself, but asks Sennerius about it. It was recommended to Hildanus by a lawyer of his acquaintance. The brine is first to be boiled in a kettle, and well skimmed, till it becomes clear, poured into earthen vessels. and kept shut up from the air for a twelvemonth; after which it was fit for use. A draught of this was given to people infected with plague, and operated by sweat, stool or vomit, or perhaps both by vomit and stool. The patient was to abstain from drink for some hours after. The brine of anchovies is recommended by Sam. Formius, as useful in the plague at Montpelier in 1630.