SURGERY. (continued 2)
Reading edition
Wherefore yor petitioners humbly begg that yor Grace will not for the future be pleased to give Lycences to any persons to practise Surgery within London or seven miles compass thereof untill such persons skill & ability for the exercise of that art appears by a Testimoniall under our Companys Seale to have been tried & approved of by the ten Examiners of our Company appointed for that purpose.
There is no note of any reply to this letter having been received from the Archbishop.
6th February, 1711. The Court petitioned the Queen that they might have the Examination and certifying of all Army Surgeons (who were then examined by the Surgeon-General) in the same way that they examined and passed the Navy Surgeons.
20th February, 1711. Letters similar in effect to the one addressed to the Archbishop on 1st June, 1710, though slightly differing to meet some altered circumstances not necessary to be here set forth in full, were ordered to be sent to the Bishops of London, Winchester and Rochester, and to the Dean of St. Paul’s.
6th March, 1711. It is ordered that William Cave one of the Beadles of this Company do make Inquiry who the persons were that carryed away the last body from Tyburne & that such persons be Indicted for the same.
16th August, 1711. Mr. Daniell Turner intending to become a “Collegiate Physician” applied for his discharge from the Freedom and Livery of the Company, which was granted to him for £50, and that sum he at once paid down.
9th October, 1711. Richard Russell one of the persons who stands Indicted for carrying away the last publick body applying himself to this Court & offering to be evidence against the rest of the persons concerned It it ordered that the Clerk do apply himself to Her Majesty’s Attorney Generall for a Noli pˀsequi as to the said Russell in order to make him an evidence upon the sd Indictment & particularly agst one Samuell Waters whom the Court did likewise order to be indicted for the said fact.
It was no uncommon circumstance for candidates under examination to be rejected, the reason being often rather tersely given, e.g.:
13th February, 1712. Wm Ogilby Rejected & said very Saucily it should be the last time.
Alexr Keith Rejected because an Apothecary’s boy.
Edward Brown Rejected because a Barber.
James Erwin ffor a Mate and rejected for Sauciness to Mr Blundell & the Court.
1st April, 1712. Two Barbers were ordered to be prosecuted for practising Surgery contrary to the By-Laws.
6th May, 1712. Ordered that Mr Watts be summoned to appear before the Governors att the next Court to answer a Complaint agt him for practiceing Surgery & Instructing Barbers for 2 Guineas a peice.
Ordered that Mr Small be likewise summoned to appeare before the Governors att the next Court to answer a Complaint agt him for amputateing a Breast without calling an examiner to be present.
27th May, 1712. John Wooding having been convicted at the Old Bailey for taking away the body of John Addison from the place of execution, the Court prayed the Lord Chief Justice to allow the sentence upon him to be inserted in the Gazette, and afterwards to consent in the Company’s name to the remission of his fine and imprisonment.
19th June, 1712. Mr. Bartlett, a truss maker, having been summoned for practising Surgery, he was ordered “to take from his sign board that he cures Ruptures.”
7th May, 1713. The Court having complained to the Bishop of London of the inconvenience arising from his licensing persons to practise Surgery, and the Bishop having informed the Company that he would not issue any more such licenses without a certificate of fitness from the Company, it was thereupon ordered that 5 guineas should be paid yearly to his Lordship’s Registrar as Caveat money.
28th May, 1713. Ordered that the Clark go to the Secretary at War for a Guard in order to gett the next Body [from Tyburn].
13th August, 1713. Upon hearing a complaint ag̃st Mr Godman & Mr Pinsent for prtending that one Vincents thigh was broke when it was not & then they had sett it contrary to truth & proficiency in Surgery & the Patient & other Witnesses being examined & proving ye fact ag̃st him, the Court fined Mr Godman five pounds for his unskillfull & wilfull practice & to be sued upon the by law or his bond as shall be thought most convenient.
19th November, 1714. Att this Court John Spurling a Barber at Highgate was ordered to be prosecuted upon the Company’s Charter for practising Surgery upon John Holmes Barber.
21st April, 1715. The Court being informed that the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty proposed to place the viewing of Sea Surgeons’ chests with Dr. Oliver and Mr. Rider, Physician and Surgeon of Greenwich Hospital, to the exclusion of the Company’s rights and contrary to the Charter of Charles I; it was ordered that a memorial should be presented to the first Lord against such a proposal.
4th June, 1715. The Lords of the Admiralty having requested the Court to undertake, with Dr. Oliver, the examination of such Warrant Officers in the Navy as should apply for superannuation pensions on the ground of age, wounds or infirmities, the Court directed the Clerk to reply stating that the Company would perform that office, and hold Courts for the purpose, on the first Friday in each month. Pursuant to the above, Courts were held and certificates granted from time to time.
5th June, 1716. It is ordered That Nathaniel Charles be prosecuted He owning that he had lett blood severall times for one shilling and six pence, As allso his Master Joseph Roe. Twas observed that Mr Roe could not write his name haveing set his mark only to the Indenture.
3rd July, 1716. Ordered that the Clerk do permitt Mr. Beckett220 to Inspect the Company’s Registers of ffremen and apprentices and The Table of Governors Names to enable him to publish his book now in hand relateing to the lives and writings of eminent Surgeons.
6th July, 1716. Att this Court Mr Langley who lives in Shoreditch being suspected to be a Quack Doctor was exaĩed touching his skill in Surgery but not being able to answer a question was rejected.
1st July, 1720. Ordered That the Porter in Southwark and a Bone setter in Cheapside be prosecuted for Bone seting.
5th August, 1720. James King the Surgeon who deposited £7 13s. 0d. in order to be exaĩed againe as a fforreigne Brother was now Examined againe but not being fittly qualifyed he was rejected and ordered his money back And ordered to be prosecuted in case he shall ever practice Surgery for the future.
23rd June, 1721. The Master represented to the Court that “great trouble and inconveniency” had arisen in consequence of such Surgeons as had of late offered themselves for examination not having presented the Governors and Examiners “with Gloves of such sort and goodness as had been customarily and antiently given to the Governors and Examiners upon such examinac͠on and by buying the gloves of tradesemen who were not proper dealers in such sort of goods.” Whereupon it was ordered that in future every Candidate before Examination should deposit with the Clerk as much money as would be sufficient to pay each of the Governors and Examiners who should be present six shillings, for them to lay out in the purchase of such gloves as they should see fit. On the 10th December, 1725, the glove money was raised from 6s. to 10s. 6d.
The real secret of the above order, no doubt was, that there were such a great number of surgeons coming up for examination from time to time, that the Governors and Examiners got less money and more gloves than they wanted.
26th April, 1723. It is ordered that Mr John Douglass Surgeon and a fforeigne brother of this Company shall be admitted into the freedom and Livery of this Company and be discharged and acquitted from holding or paying any fine for his freedom or Livery, or for all or any offices to the Parlour door as a Compliment to him for introducing the new method of Cutting for the Stone and to express the sense this Court hath of the usefullness therof.
4th September, 1724. William Turner Barber who was sumoned at the last Court for letting blood appeared at this Court and owning his practiceing Surgery and insisting on his right and sufficiency so to do This Court doth order that the Clark do sue the said Turner for letting blood and practiceing Surgery contrary to the Statute of 32. Hen: 8: Cap. 42.
2nd October, 1724. At this Court Thomas Cooke was examined for a fforreigne Brother But being found insufficient he was rejected. Note he lives in Duck Lane Publishes Bills as a Quack pretending to the cure of the Venereall disease, but he being examined touching the cure of that distemper in particular and being found to know little or nothing of it, the Court directed him to take down his Surgeon’s sign and not to practice for the future on pain of being sued upon the Act of Parliament and Company’s Charter.
1725. The following seems somewhat inappropriately placed amongst the dinner accounts for this year.
The Charges to be Paid by the Masters and Stewards of Anatomy for Procuring a Body besides the Dinner at ye Viscera Lecture.
s.d.
Horsehire26
For a Coach60
For expenses in fetching the Body26
To the Sheriff’s officers134
To the Beadles assistant10
For Washing the Body10
For a Coffin50
To Parson Ground Clark and Sexton510
To the Bearers20
Funeral expenses26
For a certificate06
The Clark’s fees100
The 2 Beadle’s ffees100
For a Link03
To the Chairwoman50
£375
14th October, 1726. At this Court Peter North Boatswain of His Majesty’s ship Cornwall was viewed for superannuation and pretended to be afflicted with deafness & the Gout. But the Court being of opinion that his deafness (if any) was occasiond by wax in his ear only, which might be cured by syringing, and not being satisfyd that he had the gout, The Court did not think fit but that he was capable of further service at Sea.
At this Court one Chambers surgeon in Duck Lane was examined touching his Skill in Surgery in order to be made a fforeign brother, but appearing to be a stupid ffellow & a sort of a Quack who gave out Bills, and not being able to answer a question the Court rejected him.
17th February, 1727. The Navy Board having, on the 16th inst., written to the Master and Wardens enclosing a copy of an anonymous letter which had been received, charging the Examiners in Surgery with partiality, and with qualifying incompetent persons as Navy Surgeons, the Court seem to have taken the matter up in a high spirited manner, and returned a long letter setting forth their practice in conducting the Examinations, referring in detail to the particular case alleged against them, and indeed made a most excellent and satisfactory defence. The correspondence is very lengthy and full of detail, much reference being made to the work carried on by the Company for the public service without fee or reward.
7th March, 1727. It is ordered That for ye future when any apprentices are to be bound to Surgeons they shall be called in & be examined by themselves touching their skil in ye Latin tongue.
7th April, 1727. James Ripoult a Frenchman was called in but not speaking English nor being naturalized the Court did not think it proper to examine him.
5th October, 1727. John Jacob Sax being a Prussian by birth & not naturalized nor understanding English The Court did not think it proper to examine him.
William Miles recomended by Lord Torrington & examined but seeming to know nothing of Surgery was rejected.
16th January, 1729. A Petition was drawn up by the Court for presentation to the King, setting forth the Company’s right to four dead bodies of felons yearly to be obtained at Tyburn, and that of late divers riotous persons had wrested the bodies from the Company’s Beadles at the place of execution. The Court declared that these proceedings were greatly to the detriment of the study of Surgery, and also set forth the services which the Company rendered to the State, by examining Surgeons and their Mates for the Royal Navy, viewing their medicine chests and instruments, viewing all such officers as are wounded in fight at Sea and for superannuation, and they conclude—
Your petitioners do therefore humbly pray that your Majesty will be graciously pleased to permitt and direct That a ffyle or Two of yr Majesty’s ffoot Guards shall upon applicac͠on to the Commanding Officer attend the publick executions from time to time to guard and assist your Petic͠oners Beadles in the taking away so many dead bodys yearly as are granted unto your Petic͠oners by the said Act of Parliament or otherwise to releive your Petic͠oners in such manner as your Majesty in your Majesty’s most gracious wisdom and condescension shall think fitt.
The Company seem also to have applied to the Court of Aldermen again for assistance in this matter, for, on the 7th March following, it was ordered that 2,000 copies of two orders of the Lord Mayor and Court of Aldermen, dated respectively 4th February and 4th March, should be printed, and copies fixed up at Newgate and other public places on the road to Tyburn, some time before any execution, and also that the said orders should be inserted in the London Gazette and other papers.
4th April, 1729. Peregrine Compton Rejected being fuddled & not answering a question.
1st February, 1732. It was ordered that any extraordinary cases of Surgery appearing in the journals of the Sea Surgeons should be copied out into a book, as well as any others which might be reported to the Governors, and the same be laid before the Court of Examiners, from time to time, for their direction as to whether the same should be published. This book, if it ever existed, is not now in the Company’s possession.
15th August, 1734. It is ordered that from henceforward a Silver Medal not exceeding the value of a Guinea with a proper device upon each side of it to be made and presented at the end of the year to each of the Demonstrators now chosen and to the Demonstrators for the time being as an acknowledgment for their trouble in performing such Demonstrations.
These medals by a subsequent order, were to have a representation of Holbein’s picture on one side and of Inigo Jones’ Theatre on the other, but they do not appear to have ever been struck.
It was customary at the Demonstrations of Anatomy to provide specimens of parts of animals, presumably for comparison, as appears by some of the expenses incurred, e.g., in 1732:—
To a sheeps hart & kidney006
A sheeps hart and lights004
2 Bullocks eyes004
and the following is the Beadle’s Bill at the dissection of a female malefactor in 1735:—
For a board to lay her head upon004
For a board to shew her liver upon010
For two bullocks eyes004
For four sheeps eyes004
For a quarter of soap0011/2
For hogs brissels001
For a new spunge003
For Borrowing a Hone to set the Instruments003
For Sticking up the Bills026
For nine days attendance at 2s 6d pr Day126
£1781/2
4th February, 1735. Under this date is an entry of a long letter from the Commissioners of the Navy, complaining of the want of skill in a Surgeon, whereby great mortality had ensued on the ship Newcastle; the Court examined the Surgeon and his Journal and considered that there was nothing to find fault with as regarded his proficiency in Surgery, and that the sickness among the ship’s crew required skill in Physic rather than in Surgery, moreover they declared that the Physician at Greenwich examined the Navy Surgeons as to their skill in Physic and not the Barber-Surgeons’ Company. The Clerk was directed to write to the Commissioners to this effect, and to state that the Company did not consider themselves answerable for any man’s want of skill in Physic.
A long letter dated 5th February was accordingly written and is set out in the Minute Book. The Surgeon complained of was Thomas Middleton, son of Mr. Henry Middleton (the oldest Member of the Court) and it appears that he had been fully examined and qualified.
29th September, 1735. The following order touching the vexed question of dead bodies was issued by the Sheriffs:—
London to Witt
In Pursuance of an Act of Parliament made in the Thirty second year of King Henry the Eighth and of an order of Sessions bearing date the eighth day of July in the Fifteenth year of our late Sovereign Lord King Charles the First Sir Maurice Abbott Mayor. Wee do order and command our Officers who are entrusted with or attend the execution of such Malefactors as shall be to dye at any time hereafter during our Sheriffalty to deliver to Henry Gretton and William Littlebury Beadles of the Company of Barbers and Surgeons of London or such other Officer or Officers as the Company shall appoint, One of the Bodys of the said Malefactors from time to time for a publick Dissection and to assist them with the said body to their Hall according to an Order of the Court of Aldermen of the Thirteenth of February 1675221 Sir William Hooker Mayor and to two other subsequent Orders of the Court of Aldermen one bearing date the fourth day of February the other the fourth day of March 1728222 Sir Robert Baylis Knight Lord Mayor.
Given under our hands this 29th day of September 1735.
Jno Barnard Rot Godschall.
1st June, 1736. It is ordered that the Constables of the Holborn Division shall be allowed Three Guineas and a halfe above the Guinea already paid them in regard to their expences at the last execution, when the Body was taken from the Beadles and retaken by the Constables and the Clerk is ordered to repay the same But the Clerk is not to pay the officers of the Compter the Two guineas usually received by them at every execution.
24th September, 1741. John Thrift the Executioner this day attended on a complaint made against him by the Beadles for obstructing the Bodys being brought from Tyburne to the Hall for dissection and threatning to prevent the Company’s measures for obtaining the same, when after he had been reproved, was Dismissed, But the Court then agreed (in order to prevent his intended proceedings) to attend the Lord Mayor and Court of Aldermen that they may on complaint made be releived therein.
18th December, 1741. Ordered that the High Constable of Holburne be allowed Ten shillings and sixpence as his ffee for every Body that shall be brought from Tyburne and delivered at this Company’s Hall and for his aiding and assisting the Company’s Beadles therein and not otherwise.
10th February, 1742. The Court either forgetting or ignoring their order of 7th May, 1713, now ordered that Mr. William Skelton, a proctor in Doctors’ Commons, who had for many years past received five guineas annually as Caveat money (being Registrar of the Bishop of London) and “pretended to be allowed him by this Company on account of his Lordship’s Grant for the Prohibiting of Surgeons to practice within his Diocese be no longer entitled to such fee untill such time as this Court shall be better informed of the nature of his right of demanding the same.”
23rd November, 1740. Great consternation prevailed at the Hall in consequence of a malefactor who had been hung at Tyburn having revived when brought here for dissection. The account of this remarkable occurrence is recorded by the Clerk, Mr. Joseph Wheeler, on the last page of the rough Minute Book 1738–1742, and is very interesting. From the record of his trial at the Old Bailey (see Sessions Papers) Duell appears to have been an outrageous young scoundrel. A popular impression prevails, and frequent currency has been given to it, that Duell subsequently made a fortune abroad and out of gratitude to the Barber-Surgeons for saving his life, presented them with the handsome leather folding screen now in the Court Room, the best answer to which is, that the screen in question is referred to in the Company’s Inventory some thirty years previously to Mr. Duell’s visit to Tyburn.
Mr. Wheeler’s account is as follows—
November the 23d. 1740.
This day Wm. Duell (who had been indicted at the Old Bayley for a Rape and had received sentence of Death for the same) was carryed to Tyburne in order to be executed where having hung some time was cutt down and brought to this Company’s Hall in order to be dissected where he had not been five minutes before Life appeared in him & being let blood and other means used for his recovery in less than two hours he sat upright drank some warm wine and lookˀd often round him and before he was carryed back to Newgate which was about Twelve o’the Clock at Night he severall times pronounced distinctly the word Dont when anybody touched him though was thought to be mostly insensible of anything but paine which in a great measure he endured by his most violent screamings & was often in strong convulsions in his bowells which he then exprest by applying his hands to those parts.
The Sheriffs having ordered him back to Newgate he was carryed out in a blankett putt into a Coach & was seemingly much composed & quiet not making any manner of noise wherein 3 or 4 days time he recovered sufficient to converse & eat & drink very freely but never could give any reasonable account of what had passed. He afterwards obtained a reprieve in order to be transported for life which he was accordingly in the 16th year of his age. (Vide his Tryall in the Sessions paper of that time.)
The Wardens’ accounts give the following particulars relative to this case:—
£s.d.
Paid the Beadles their expences in bringing the last Body from Tyburne2190
Paid the Officers of the Two Compters220
Paid Joseph Wheeler the Company’s Clerk his Coach hire and expences in attending the Sheriffs when the Body came to life0100
Paid the Chairwoman for her trouble and expences about the Body050
A somewhat similar account of the foregoing circumstance will be found in Maitland’s London (ed. 1756), Vol. I, p. 613, and also in the Gentleman’s Magazine, Vol. X, p. 570.
