Clergymen and Doctors 7

Clergymen and Doctors 7

_Fee for a Political Consultation._--At the outbreak of the American

war, Grenville was desirous to ascertain what was the state of feeling

that prevailed among the Quaker colonists in America; and he could hit,

as he thought, on no more effectual means of doing this, than by a

conversation with Dr. Fothergill, who was a Quaker, and enjoyed the

hearty confidence of his brethren of that sect. Fothergill was

accordingly summoned to prescribe for the statesman--who, in reality,

wanted to feel, through him, the pulse of transatlantic Quakerism; and

the visit, of course, was made to take the turn of a vivacious

controversy on American politics. At the end, Grenville put five

guineas into the doctor's hand, and said to him, "Really, I feel so

much better, that I don't think it is necessary for you to prescribe."

With a shrewd smile, Fothergill, keeping a good hold of the money,

said, "Well, at this rate, friend, I can spare thee an hour now and

then."

 

_Generous Refusal of Fees._--There are many anecdotes of refusal of

physicians to take fees from persons whom the payment of them would

have distressed; but they are all so nobly alike, that we need not

quote any here. The benevolent and eccentric Dr. Smith, when

established in a practice equal to that of any physician in London, did

what perhaps few physicians in great practice would have done. He set

apart _two days for the poor in each week_. From those who were really

poor, he never took a fee; and from those who were of the middling

ranks in life, he never would take above half a guinea! Yet so great

was the resort to him, that he has in one day received fifty guineas,

at the rate of half a guinea only from each patient.

 

_Sticklers for Fees._--Sir Richard Jebb was once paid three guineas by

a nobleman from whom he had a right to expect five. Sir Richard dropped

the coins on the carpet, when a servant picked them up and restored

them. Sir Richard continued his search. "Are all the guineas found?"

asked his Lordship, looking round. "There must be two still on the

floor," was Jebb's answer; "for I have only three." The hint was taken,

and the right sum put down. An eminent Bristol doctor coming into his

patient's bedroom immediately after death, found the right hand of the

deceased tightly clenched. Opening the fingers, he discovered within

them a guinea. "Ah! that was for me, clearly," said the doctor, putting

the piece into his pocket. A physician, receiving two guineas when he

expected three, from an old lady who used to give him the latter fee,

had recourse to one part of Sir Richard Jebb's artifice, and, assuming

that the third guinea had been dropt through his carelessness on the

floor, looked about for it. "Nay, nay," said the lady, "you are not in

fault. It is I who dropt it."

 

_Fees collectively Irresistible._--Radcliffe attended a friend for a

twelvemonth gratuitously. On his last visit his friend said, "Doctor,

here is a purse in which I have put every day's fee; and your goodness

must not get the better of my gratitude. Take your money." Radcliffe

steeled himself to persevere in benevolence, just touched the purse to

reject it, heard the chink of the gold, and put it into his pocket,

saying "Singly, Sir, I could have refused them for a twelvemonth; but,

all together, they are _irresistible_."

 

 

PALEY'S ECONOMY OF CONSCIENCE.

 

The great controversy on the propriety of requiring a subscription to

articles of faith, as practised by the Church of England, excited in

1772 a very strong sensation amongst the members of the two

universities. Paley, when pressed to sign the clerical petition which

was presented to the House of Commons for relief, excused himself,

saying, "He could not _afford_ to keep a conscience."

 

 

DIFFIDENCE IN THE PULPIT.

 

Izaak Walton relates about Bishop Sanderson, that once "his dear and

most intimate friend, the learned Dr. Hammond, came to enjoy a quiet

rest and conversation with him for some days at Boothby Pannel, and did

so, and having formerly persuaded him to trust his excellent memory,

and not read, but try to speak a sermon as he had writ it; Dr.

Sanderson became so compliant as to promise that he would. And to that

end they two went early the Sunday following to a neighbour minister,

and requested to exchange a sermon; and they did so. And at Dr.

Sanderson's going into the pulpit, he gave his sermon (which was a very

short one) into the hands of Dr. Hammond, intending to preach it as it

was writ; but before he had preached a third part, Dr. Hammond (looking

on his sermon as written) observed him to be out, and so lost as to the

matter, especially the method, that he also became afraid for him; for

it was discernible to many of that plain auditory. But when he had

ended this short sermon, as they two walked homeward, Dr. Sanderson

said with much earnestness, 'Good Doctor, give me my sermon, and know

that neither you, nor any man living, shall ever persuade me to preach

again without my books.' To which the reply was, 'Good Doctor, be not

angry; for if ever I persuade you to preach again without book, I will

give you leave to burn all the books that I am master of.'" Elsewhere

Walton says:--"Though they were much esteemed by them that procured and

were fit to judge them, yet (Dr. Sanderson's sermons) were the less

valued because he read them, which he was forced to do; for though he

had an extraordinary memory (even the art of it), yet he was punished

with such an innate, invincible fear and bashfulness, that his memory

was wholly useless as to the repetition of his sermons, so as he had

writ them; which gave occasion to say, when some of them were first

printed and exposed to censure (which was in the year 1632), that the

best sermons that ever were read were never preached." Aubrey says,

that when he was a freshman at college, and heard Dr. Sanderson read

his first lecture, he was out in the Lord's Prayer.

 

 

CHRISTIAN NAMES AMONG THE PURITANS.

 

In his _Church History_, Collins says:--"Under the article of Baptism,

the Book of Discipline runs thus: 'Let persuasions be used that such

names that do savour either of Paganism or Popery be not given to

children at their baptism, but principally those whereof there are

examples in the scriptures.' The Puritans were strict in keeping close

to this rule, as may be collected from the odd names they gave their

children; such as, 'The Lord is Near,' 'More Trial,' 'Reformation,'

'Discipline,' 'Joy Again,' 'Sufficient from Above,' 'Free-Gifts,' 'More

Fruit,' 'Dust,' etc. And here Snape was remarkably scrupulous; for this

minister refused to baptize one Christopher Hodgkinson's child, because

he would have it christened Richard. Snape acquainted Hodgkinson with

his opinion beforehand. He told him he must change the name, and look

out for one in the scripture; but the father, not thinking this fancy

would be so strongly insisted on, brought his son to church. Snape

proceeded in the solemnity till he came to naming the child; but not

being able to prevail for any other name than Richard, refused to

administer the sacrament, and thus the child was carried away, and

afterwards baptized by a conforming clergyman."

 

 

"WHAT IS AN ARCHDEACON?"

 

Lord Althorp, when Chancellor of the Exchequer, having to propose to

the House of Commons a vote of £400 a year for the salary of the

Archdeacon of Bengal, was puzzled by a question from Mr. Hume, "What

are the duties of an archdeacon?" So he sent one of the subordinate

occupants of the Treasury Bench to the other House to obtain an answer

to the question from one of the bishops. To Dr. Blomfield accordingly

the messenger went, and repeated the question, "What is an archdeacon?"

"An archdeacon," replied the bishop, in his quick way, "an archdeacon

is an ecclesiastical officer, who performs archidiaconal functions;"

and with this reply Lord Althorp and the House were perfectly satisfied.

 

 

"TAPPING" A TOPER.

 

A man who had never drunk water enough to warrant the disease, was

reduced to such a state by dropsy, that the physicians decided that

tapping was necessary; and the poor patient was invited to submit to

the operation, which he seemed inclined to do, in spite of the

entreaties of his son. "Oh! father, father, do not let them _tap_ you,"

screamed the boy, in an agony of tears; "do anything, but do not let

them tap you!" "Why, my dear?" inquired the afflicted parent. "It will

do me good, and I shall live long in health to make you happy." "No,

father, no, you will not: there never was anything _tapped_ in our

house that lasted longer than a week!"

 

 

THE CAPACITY OF AN ABBE.

 

When the diminutive Abbé de Voisenon was ordered by his physician to

drink a quart of ptisan per hour, he was horrified. On his next visit

the doctor asked, "What effect has the ptisan produced?" "Not any,"

answered the little Abbé. "Have you taken it all?" "I could not take

more than half of it." The physician was angry that his directions had

not been carried out, and frankly said so. "Ah! my friend," pleaded the

Abbé, "how could you desire me to swallow a quart an hour? I hold but a

pint!"

 

 

BENEFIT OF CLERGY.

 

In Burnet's _History of the Reformation_, we find it stated that "a law

of Henry VII. for burning in the hand clerks convicted of felony, did

not prove a sufficient restraint. And when, in the fourth year of the

following reign, it was enacted that all murderers and robbers should

be denied the benefit of their clergy, two provisos were added to make

the bill pass through the House of Lords, the one for excepting all

such as were within the holy orders of bishop, priest, or deacon, and

the other, that the Act should only be in force till the next

Parliament. Pursuant to this Act many murderers and felons were denied

their clergy, and the law passed on them to the great satisfaction of

the nation; but this gave great offence to the clergy, and the Abbot of

Winchelcont said, in a sermon at Paul's Cross, that the Act was

contrary to the law of God, and to the liberties of the holy Church,

and that all who assented to it had by so doing incurred the censures

of the Church."

 

 

DEAN SWIFT'S CONTRIBUTORY DINNER.

 

Dean Swift once invited to dinner several of the first noblemen and

gentlemen in Dublin. A servant announced the dinner, and the Dean led

the way to the dining-room. To each chair was a servant, a bottle of

wine, a roll, and an inverted plate. On taking his seat, the Dean

desired the guests to arrange themselves according to their own ideas

of precedence, and fall to. The company were astonished to find the

table without a dish, or any provisions. The Lord Chancellor, who was

present, said, "Mr. Dean, we do not see the joke." "Then I will show it

you," answered the Dean, turning up his plate, under which was

half-a-crown, and a bill of fare from a neighbouring tavern. "Here,

sir," said he, to his servant, "bring me a plate of goose." The company

caught the idea, and each man sent his plate and half-a-crown. Covers,

with everything that the appetites of the moment dictated, soon

appeared. The novelty, the peculiarity of the manner, and the

unexpected circumstances, altogether excited the plaudits of the noble

guests, who declared themselves particularly gratified by the Dean's

entertainment. "Well," said the Dean, "gentlemen, if you have dined, I

will order the _dessert_." A large roll of paper, presenting the

particulars of a splendid dinner, was produced, with an estimate of the

expense. The Dean requested the accountant-general to deduct the

half-crowns from the amount, observing, "that as his noble guests were

pleased to express their satisfaction with the dinner, he begged their

advice and assistance in disposing of the _fragments_ and _crumbs_," as

he termed the balance mentioned by the accountant-general--which was

two hundred and fifty pounds. The company said, that no person was

capable of instructing the Dean in things of that nature. After the

circulation of the finest wines, the most judicious remarks on charity

and its abuse were introduced, and it was agreed that the proper

objects of liberal relief were well-educated families, who from

affluence, or the expectation of it, were reduced through misfortune to

silent despair. The Dean then divided the sum by the number of his

guests, and addressed them according to their respective private

characters, with which no one was perhaps better acquainted. "You, my

Lords," said the Dean to several young noblemen, "I wish to introduce

to some new acquaintance, who will at least make their acknowledgment

for your favours with sincerity." "You, my reverend Lords," addressing

the bishops present, "adhere so closely to the spirit of the

scriptures, that your left hands are literally ignorant of the

beneficence of your right. You, my Lord of Kildare, and the two noble

lords near you, I will not entrust with any part of this money, as you

have been long in the _usurious_ habits of lending your own on such

occasions; but your assistance, my Lord of Kerry, I must entreat, as

charity covereth a multitude of sins."

 

 

"BREAKING UP" BEFORE THE HOLIDAYS.

 

It is related that Dr. Harrington of Bath, the Editor of _Nugæ

Antiquæ_, for many years attended the Dowager Lady Trevor, relict of

Lord Trevor, and last surviving daughter of Sir Richard Steele. "He

spoke of this lady as possessing all the wit, humour, and gaiety of her

father, together with most of his faults. She was extravagant, and

always in debt; but she was generous, charitable, and humane. She was

particularly partial to young people, whom she frequently entertained

most liberally, and delighted them with the pleasantry and volubility

of her discourse. Her person was like that which her pleasant father

described himself in the _Spectator_, with his short face, etc. A

little before her death (which was in the month of December) she sent

for her doctor, and, on his entering her chamber, he said, 'How fares

your Ladyship?' She replied, 'Oh, my dear Doctor, ill fare! I am going

to break up before the holidays!'"

 

 

BOTTLE BLIND.

 

Dean Cowper, of Durham, was very economical of his wine. One day at

table he was descanting on the extraordinary performance of a man who

was blind, and remarked that the poor fellow could see no more than

"that bottle." "I do not wonder at that at all, Sir," replied a minor

canon; "for we have seen no more than _that bottle_ all the afternoon."

 

 

FEARLESSNESS OF JOHN KNOX.

 

When Lord Darnley, in 1565, had married Mary Queen of Scots, he was

prevailed on by his friends to go and hear Knox preach, in the hope

that thereby he might conciliate the stem moralist and outspoken

minister. But Knox seized the occasion to declaim even more vehemently

against the government of wicked princes, who, for the sins of the

people, are sent as tyrants and scourges to torment them. Darnley

complained to the Council of the insult; and the bold preacher was

forbidden the use of his pulpit for several days. Robertson thus

remarks on his character:--"Rigid and uncomplying himself, he showed no

regard to the infirmities of others. Regardless of the distinctions of

rank and character, he uttered his admonitions with acrimony and

vehemence, more apt to irritate than to reclaim. Those very qualities,

however, which now render his character less amiable, fitted him to be

the instrument of Providence for advancing the Reformation among a

fierce people, and enabled him to face dangers, and to surmount

opposition, from which a person of a more gentle spirit would have been

apt to shrink back." The shortest and perhaps the best funeral oration

extant, is that pronounced by the Earl of Morton over the grave of

Knox: "Here lies he who never feared the face of man."

 

 

WESLEY AND BEAU NASH.

 

Wesley once preaching at Bath, Beau Nash entered the room, came close

up to the preacher, and demanded by what authority he was acting?

Wesley answered, "By the authority of Jesus Christ, conveyed to me by

the present Archbishop of Canterbury, when he laid his hands upon me

and said, 'Take thou authority to preach the gospel.'" Nash then

affirmed that he was acting contrary to the law. "Besides," said he,

"your preaching frightens people out of their wits." "Sir," replied

Wesley, "did you ever hear me preach?" "No," said the master of the

ceremonies. "How, then, can you judge of what you have never heard?"

"By common report," said Nash. "Sir," retorted Wesley, "is not your

name Nash? I dare not judge of you by common report; I think it not

enough to judge by." Nash, right or wrong as to the extravagances of

the Methodists, was certainly proclaiming his opinions in the wrong

place; and when he desired to know what the people came there for, one

of the company cried out: "Let an old woman answer him. You, Mr. Nash,

take care of your body, we take care of our souls, and for the food of

our souls we come here." Nash found himself so different a man in the

meeting-house, to what he was in the pump-room or the assembly, that he

thought it best to withdraw.

 

 

THE FRENCH REVOLUTION AND THE BIBLE.

 

In Silliman's _Travels_ it is related that during the Peace of Amiens,

in 1801-2, a committee of English gentlemen went over to Paris for the

purpose of taking measures to supply the French with the Bible in their

own language. One of these gentlemen, Mr. Hardcastle, subsequently gave

the assurance that the fact which was published was literally

true--that they searched Paris for several days before a single Bible

could be found.

 

 

EDWARD JENNER, THE DISCOVERER OF VACCINATION.

 

It is to a "country doctor" that England and the world owe one of the

greatest benefits that modern medical science has conferred on the

race, in the practice of vaccination. The youngest son of a

Gloucestershire clergyman, Edward Jenner was placed, about 1763, as

apprentice to a surgeon at Sodbury; and it was there, it is stated,

that first the possibility of arresting the then dreaded and dreadful

ravages of small-pox entered his mind. He accidentally learned, from

the conversation of a young serving woman--who boasted that she was

safe from that disease because she had had "cow-pox"--that among

servants in the country there prevailed a belief that the small-pox

could not attack any one into whose system had been absorbed the virus

from a diseased cow. From that time Jenner never lost sight of the

idea. He spent some time in London finishing his studies, under the

prelections of John Hunter; and then he settled, for life as it proved,

at Berkeley, in Gloucestershire. Pursuing inquiries and experiments on

the subject of vaccination, he established the efficacy of the rural

system of inducing "cow-pox" as a preventive against small-pox; which

had originated by inoculation, accidental or designed, with some of the

matter afforded by a peculiar disease of the udder of a cow, and which

could be communicated by inoculation from one human being to another

with the same preventive efficacy. In 1796, a friend of Jenner's, to

whom he had communicated the results of his inquiry--Mr. Cline, surgeon

to St. Thomas's Hospital--first employed vaccination in London; and the

practice was speedily adopted in the army and navy, the Government

bestowing on Jenner honours and rewards, and the University of Oxford

conferring on him the diploma of Doctor of Medicine. Just, however, as

Blackmore and Tanner had vehemently opposed inoculation, so did many

members of the Faculty, foremost among them Moseley, Birch, and

Woodville, oppose the new system of vaccination. The London mob were

asked and induced to believe that if they submitted to vaccination they

were in jeopardy of being converted into members of the canine species,

and that the operation would infallibly be followed by the development

of horns, and tail, and "thick natural fell" of hair. A child was said

to have never ceased, since he received the matter into his system, to

run about on all fours and imitate the lowing of a bull! In a

caricature Jenner was mounted on a cow. Moseley indited verses, of

which this is a sample:--

 

"O Jenner! thy book, nightly phantasies rousing,

Full oft makes me quake for my heart's dearest treasure;

For fancy, in dreams, oft presents them all browsing

On commons, just like little Nebuchadnezzar.

_There_, nibbling at thistle, stand Jem, Joe, and Mary,

On their foreheads, oh, horrible! crumpled horns bud;

There Tom with his tail, and poor William all hairy,

Reclined in a corner, are chewing the cud."

 

Even in Berkeley, Jenner was pursued with ridicule and suspicion; but

he went quietly on his rounds, waiting confidently till the storm was

laid, plashing through the Gloucestershire lanes in the garb that an

acquaintance has thus described:--"He was dressed in a blue coat and

yellow buttons, buckskins, well-polished jockey-boots, with handsome

silver spurs, and he carried a smart whip with a silver handle. His

hair, after the fashion, was done up in a club, and he wore a

broad-brimmed hat." But Jenner, says Mr. Jeaffreson, found also

compensation for all the ridicule and opposition "in the enthusiastic

support of Rowland Hill, who not only advocated vaccination in his

ordinary conversation, but from the pulpit used to say, after his

sermon to his congregation, wherever he preached, 'I am ready to

vaccinate to-morrow morning as many children as you choose; and if you

wish them to escape that horrid disease, the small-pox, you will bring

them.' A Vaccine Board was also established at the Surrey

Chapel--_i.e._ the Octagon Chapel, in Blackfriars Road. 'My Lord,' said

Rowland Hill once to a nobleman, 'allow me to present to your Lordship

my friend, Dr. Jenner, who has been the means of saving more lives than

any other man.' 'Ah!' observed Jenner, 'would that I, like you, could

say--souls.' There was no cant in this. Jenner was a simple,

unaffected, and devout man. His last words were, 'I do not marvel that

men are grateful to me; but I am surprised that they do not feel

gratitude to God for making me a medium of good.'"

 

 

ANGEL-WORSHIP.

 

A now obsolete ecclesiastical custom in Scotland was, Dean Ramsay says,

that the minister should bow in succession to the heritors or

proprietors in the parish, who occupied the front gallery seats; a

custom, when the position of the heritors was tolerably well matched,

that led to an unpleasant contest at times as to who was entitled to

the precedence of getting the first bow. A clever and complimentary

reply was made by Dr. Wightman of Kirkmahoe, when rallied on one

occasion for neglecting this usual act of courtesy one Sunday. The

heritor who was entitled to, and always received, this token of

respect, was Miller of Dalswinton. One Sunday, the Dalswinton pew was

filled by a bevy of ladies, but no gentleman was present; and the

Doctor--perhaps because he was a bachelor, and felt a delicacy in the

circumstances--omitted the usual salaam in that direction. A few days

after, meeting Miss Miller (who was widely famed for her beauty, and

afterwards became Countess of Mar), she rallied him, in presence of her

companions, for not bowing to her on the Sunday. The Doctor immediately

replied, "I beg your pardon, Miss Miller; but you know, surely, that

angel-worship is not allowed by the Church of Scotland;" and, lifting his hat, he bowed low and passed on.