the least admixture of mucus or any other fluid or solid matter, which she informed me her daughter had just vomited up. On looking at it, I felt quite sure it could never have been discharged from the stomach or throat of a person under the influence of an emetic, because of the total absence of that matter, which must necessarily be in the stomach, throat, or mouth, of every living person. This quantity was, however, very small, compared to that which I had been informed always came up when an emetic was taken; I therefore waited patiently for more urine to make its appearance-she professed to be very sick, but none

came,

Her mother then told me it was not a vomiting day, and that some days she did not vomit up the urine so freely as she did on others; contrary to the story they first told me, when it was not supposed I should be sufficiently inquisitive, to insist upon seeing this urinous matter vomited.

At this time the mother likewise expressed a hope that I was satisfied what she had showed me was urine. I certainly was, but equally so, that it had been discharged from the body in the natural manner.

То put the matter to rest, I now spoke in a very decided manner, about the propriety of allowing a catheter to be used. I pledged myself that she would be cured by it, but no persuasion was of any avail. I afterwards called at the house, and expressed such displeasure at their continuing to refuse the assistance which I offered to procure, as made them endeavor to excuse themselves under the cloak of religion.

Upon offering to send for Dr. Yeats, or any other medical gentleman they might prefer, in order to make the examination with the catheter, they now told me it would be of no use, because they were both determined not to submit to it being quite sure it was wrong to try to take the work out of the hands of God, who had thought fit to afflict her in this very extraordinary manner: and both A. F. and her mother declared they thought it the duty of the former to wait God's time for bringing about a cure, if it was ever to take place. They appealed to me upon the harshness of my conduct, in appearing to disbelieve a person, who was so generally respected for the piety of her character; and said, that I ought to be ashamed of myself, (or words to that effect,) for withholding my assent to those reports which Dr. Yeats, and many other persons, implicitly believed, upon their simple assertion, This determined me to inform her charitable supporters, and the overseers of her parish, of my doubts respecting the veracity of her story;→→ and I hinted to them what was my determination, in case

1

their

their free consent was not soon given, to the proposal above stated. I was, however, prevented from doing so, by receiving information from the mother of A. F. of a great change in her daughter's complaints. She was said to be seized with symptoms of common fever, which was accompanied with apparent stupor, of two or three days duration, and at the close of this symptom, the urine found its way from the stomach to its proper organ, from which it has been regularly discharged to this time. I once saw her during this declared stupor, which I considered as deceptious, from the absence of those symptoms which are its usual concomitants; neither was any change or derangement of the urinary organs apparent.

Before the asserted return of the urine to its natural channel, I felt fully assured that a proper examination of the bladder would prove the total falsity of A. F.'s tale, and upon that account I thought it my duty to insist upon its being made. Probably the parties concerned well knew the same. Nay, I add, it is very unlikely that a case so painful as retention or suppression of urine has ever existed, in which the sufferer objected to the proper methods of at-tempting to give relief.

I must now touch upon some circumstances connected with this second Tutbury tale.

It has been objected to my opinion of the case being a clear attempt at imposture, that there was no adequate motive. I am not bound to prove any motive, but I can venture to assert, that it would astonish most persons at a distance from Bedford, to learn what was the greatest quantity of provision, clothing, and money, sent to A. F.'s house in one month, previously to my declaring this opinion publicly.

But for the circumstance of Dr. Yeats being much implicated in the foregoing statement, I should have sent you the result of my inquiries into this reputed state of Ischuria long ago. With the greatest reluctance to become personal, I feel obliged, in justification of my own character, and the opinions of other medical men, to make some observations on the papers which have appeared in your Journals since April last. As Dr. Yeats all along did, and I suppose to this moment does believe, that this marvellous vomiting actually took place, he, of course, felt an obligation to controvert the opinions which I and other medical men gave upon the subject, namely, that the declarations of Ann Foulkes and her mother were untrue, and utterly impossible. I, and many others, distinctly understood from Dr. Yeats, that he intended (or pledged himself) to prove both the truth

and

and possibility of A. F.'s story. The abstract question of vomiting urine for a length of time was never thought of, unconnected with the peculiarities of the case in question. Is it not then very extraordinary, that Dr. Yeats should try to reflect upon our opinions, by implication, in a manner which is unfair? But for the occurrence of this case, his paper upon Ischuria would never have been written. When I first saw A. F., and during the whole time I visited her, previously to the asserted return of the urine to the bladder, she was attended by Mr. Palgrave, a druggist, of this town. It is strange to tell, that Dr. Yeats gave up the care of this interesting case to him alone. Mr. P., under the controul of Dr. Yeats, gave the emetics and gave the diuretics. Without calling in any of the medical men of Bedford to assist him in investigating this wonderful story, Dr. Y. rested satisfied that all he heard was true.

When my mind was decidedly made up on this subject, and whilst I considered A. F. as being more immediately under the care of the druggist, I told Dr. Yeats, in a truly friendly manner, that I was in possession of such facts as compelled me to consider her in the light of an impostor. He then seemed to think that my opinions were not founded upon facts. He assured me, that he paid so much deference to the assertions of the parties interested in this (as I supposed deceptious) affair, that he could not think of changing his opinions respecting her case. In addition to the facts which he thought would satisfactorily prove the truth of all this marvellous story, he is now in possession of the oaths of two persons who were in the habit of waiting upon or nursing A. F., which oaths I may hereafter show are to be regarded in a very suspicious point of view.

Not only did I inform Dr. Y. of my opinion, but I sent him a written statement, containing the substance of the foregoing history. He, in return, was kind enough to favor me with the perusal of a very long account of her case, which I understood was intended for publication; and, if I am not misinformed, has been already presented to a medical society for publication. If I had wanted any information to strengthen ny previous opinion, or clear up any remaining doubts, the inspection of Dr. Y.'s case-book would have been amply sufficient; it corroborated, in a remarkable manner, what A. F. had previously told me about the absence of symptoms, which a better informed impostor would have spoken of when mentioning what took place at the time she said the urine first stopped.

The case now appeared so clear to me, and all those medical men with whom I had any intercourse or correspond

ence,

ence, that I could not think it probable Dr. Y. would venture to commit himself by writing upon the subject, except it was to acknowledge that he might have been imposed upon still less, after what had passed, could I suppose it possible he would write upon Ischuria, or vomiting of urine, without giving the particulars of this case.

It must be evident to every one, that if I say A. F. is an impostor, because of the utter impossibility of her having vomited urine in the manner reported above, I have a right to expect that the man who controverts my opinion will do it in a fair and candid manner.

It was unpleasant enough for me, that in the simple discharge of my duty, I was obliged to incur the ill opinion of many well-meaning persons, whose good opinion I have been always solicitous to deserve; but that Dr. Y. could go such a round-about way to work to try to make a fact of what I suppose a fable, astonishes me much indeed. I have to assure you, that it was principally out of tenderness for his professional character, that I abstained from publishing my opinions of this case before; and I now feel justified in calling upon him, through the medium of your Journal, to give his history of the whole case, or acknowledge that he was imposed upon.

Dr. Y. might have chosen the time and season for publishing upon Ischuria; but I must repeat, that if I did not call upon him to publish this case, according to his promise, I cannot willingly submit to his assertions in your Journal for the present month. The point in dispute between him and me, and I believe between him and other medical gentlemen, is, simply, whether it was possible for Ann Foulkes to have vomited urine in the manner, and for the length of time, she declares she did. I do not act more unfairly towards Dr. Y. in relating the following story, than he has done towards others and myself, in writing his paper upon Ischuria, without giving the case of A. F. in connection with it.

A woman, who lived in Essex a few years ago, declared, as did her friends, that she was in the habit of sweating a vast quantity of living tadpoles, or animalculæ, of a visible size, which were seen very merry in the buckets full of fluid that was said to have exuded from her skin. This excited the wonder and curiosity of the neighbourhood. When it was understood that a medical gentleman believed it, many persons went to see this phenomenon from a distance, and made liberal contributions towards defraying the expence of washing and drying the great number of cloths that were used to absorb this unusual discharge from the skin, and to furnish

NO. 177.

3 A

furnish her with wine to keep up her strength. At last, a physician of great respectability insisted upon seeing these animals make their way through the skin. That could not be acceded to. I scarce need add, that, upon further inquiry, it was proved, the persons in connection with this woman supplied her with tadpoles from a neighbouring ditch. I am, Gentlemen,

Bedford, Sept. 9, 1813.

Your obedient Servant,

J. GIBBON.

To the Editor of the Medical and Physical Journal.

IT

SIR,

T may appear somewhat to border on presumption, to undertake to maintain opinions contrary to the tencur of one of the most respectable publications on a medical subject that I am acquainted with, whether we view it in regard to style, or the candor with which it is published, or the well-deserved reputation of the author, supported also as it is by some present authorities of deserved influence in the medical world: I refer to Dr. Haygarth's second edition on the subject of Acute Rheumatism. Such a weight of authority that has now engaged in this cause, and adopted the practice which is the particular subject of the volume, must tend much to fix those who may have been wavering in their opinions respecting the cure of that disease, and also those who can have little else to guide them, beyond a fair application of the practice which they are taught through lectures, or which they learn from books. For myself, I should have been very happy if I could have received information through so respectable a channel as the present author, which had perfectly convinced me. But as that is not the case, I feel more inclined to hazard my feeble opinion in a somewhat contrary direction to this respectable publication.

We have very plainly seen, in the instance of Sydenham, in what strong chains he has held the medical world, in respect to his opinions on the Gout, which was one of the last of his performances, when his reputation had arrived at the highest pitch of credit. And in the same way we may be likely again to be bound down for many years to a practice coming in the shape of most overwhelming authority.

The reputation of Dr. Haygarth has deservedly arrived at the highest degree of eminence; and if with such repu tation he promulgates opinions, they are likely to make the deepest impression. My experience has, however, led me to conclusions different from the publication alluded to;

and