Here we have accounts of a disease, calledthat famous plague, driven away by two different methods; and, to complete our dilemma, Dr. Canestrinus tells us that theplague at Athensis said to have been staid “by sprinkling the streets with wine.” What an expensive remedy, when the odour ofprivieswas afterwards found to answeras well! “Whilst the plague was raging at Oczakow, anearthquake125happened on the very day that it began to decline. In this case did any vapour issue from the earth destructive of the pestilential contagion? or did former noxious exhalations cease in consequence of the convulsion of the earth?126Sorbait relates, that, in the time of the vintage in the neighbourhood of Moselle, the plague ceased like a miracle, while the must was in a fermenting state. At Vienna likewise it was observed that, during and at the close of the vintage, the disease manifestly declined; which may have been owing to the great quantity of fixed air in the atmosphere.”
To this our author adds, that “places adjoining to spice-shops have generally remained free from infection; and, in the plague of London, all those employed in shipbuilding escaped the disease. Smiths also and cooks remained uninfected.” M. Volney tells us that, in Egypt, water-carriers are exempted; and Baldwin, that oilmen are in the same happy predicament; while on the other hand Allen quotes Boerhaave saying, that “Forestus, Diemerbroeck, the French, English, and Germans, observed, that all dealers in soap, washers, and all who by their business used soap, nay,who only wore shirts washed with soap, presently died of the plague.”
From so many and so discordant opinions, the only conclusion we can draw is, that, when once a pestilence has invaded a country, there is not any possibility of operating upon the contagion in such a manner as to destroy it. If the plague ceases, it must do so naturally,and wecannotaccelerate this cessation. This is entirely conformable to the opinion of Dr. Patrick Russel. Speaking of the decline of the plague at Marseilles, and the vigorous exertions of the magistrates to put a stop to it, he says, “The causes now enumerated might no doubt have some effect, but a more powerful and general cause had begun long before to restrain the havock of the pestilence, which had declined visibly in the month of September, and in those of October, November and December declined with a rapidity not ascribable to the exertions of the most vigorous police. This cause is generally supposed to be some change in the constitution of the air; but which has hitherto been defined with no better success than that peculiar state of the atmosphere which, in conjunction with contagion, is absolutely necessary to render the plague epidemical.”
Dr. Russel takes notice of the methods of extinguishing contagion already mentioned, by kindling fires, &c. and disapproves of them. We shall not therefore spend more time in considering whether or not there is any probability of eradicating or mitigating the violence of a plague when once it is introduced. However this may be impracticable in so large a space, it seems that it certainly may be done in smaller spaces, ships for instance; or, if not with the true plague, at least with malignant and infectious fevers. Dr. Trotter, in his Medicina Nautica, has laid down methods for accomplishing this, and expresses the highest confidence in their success. He adopts the doctrine ofcontagion, of which he gives the same definition that in this treatise is given ofinfection, viz. “Something propagated from diseased bodies, or from substances that have been in contact with them, producing a similar disease in otherpersons127—the propagation of contagion, as well as its reception into the healthy body. A more aggravated degree of malignity will generate a greater quantity of infection, and, as it may be confined in a larger or smaller space, it will be less or more noxious. A fevermay be called malignant, when, with the symptoms of debility, there is a cadaverous smell arising from the body, an unusual fœtor of the breath, stools, and other excretions, the tongue black and parched, the eye dusky or yellow, the countenance bloated and dejected, and the skin sallow. In approaching a sick bed of this kind, a person not much accustomed to such visits will be very liable to receive the infection; and the unpleasant smell will be much sooner perceived than by the physician or other attendants. We conclude that a malignant typhus is more apt to generate contagion, because slight cases are found not to extend to others, even though no mode of precaution has been used. The disease itself is incapable of generating infection, till after a certain period; but this period is uncertain: it seems to depend on the nature of the symptoms, whether they are mild or malignant.We are assured of this fact, from a timely separation having prevented the farther progress; and by this meansALONE,I apprehend, we eradicate contagion inSHIPS,orANY WHERE ELSE. In the small-pox128the disease seems incapable of infecting another person before the second or third day of the eruption. With the measles it is otherwise. The disease may be propagated at the most early stage of the eruption; and, if I was to be allowed to conjecture on the subject, I would say, that the contagion is the offspring of the catarrh (the cough and hoarseness resembling a cold) which accompanies the measles.
“Substances imbued with the exhalations from infected bodies, if not exposed to the air, have their powers of communicating the disease increased; or, in other words, the infection fromfomites(infected cotton, clothes, &c.) is said to become more virulent than it was when first separated from the body.
“I am of opinion, with others, that the exhalations or excretions of the sick are the vehicles of contagion. It is these which impregnate the atmosphere with noxious matter: they affect in like manner bed-clothes, or apparel, and every thing that can imbibe them, when in contact with the diseased body. When bed-clothes, or body-linen, but particularly silk or woolen cloth, have been exposed to these exhalations, and then heaped together for a length of time, the noxious effluvia are, as it were, multiplied, and will more certainly infect others than they did at first. The bales of goods which brought the plague to Marseilles, and affected the people that opened them so suddenly, had their virulence increased by not being duly ventilated. When the jail-fever was brought into court by the prisoners at Oxford assizes, and more lately at the Old Bailey, the fever was propagated from the clothing of the prisoners; no doubt, from being confined in impure, ill-aired cells, this infection became more virulent. The highly concentrated state of contagion, in the bales of goods, could only have been brought to that degree of virulence from the closeness of the package: it cannot be supposed that human beings could have put them together otherwise. The nurses of hospitals know well, as Dr. Lind tells us, that there is most danger of catching a fever when they pile heaps of bed-clothes or body-linen together for a few days, before it is carried to the wash-house. The washer-women at Haslar have also told me the same thing. They know when a dangerous fever is in the hospital by the bad smell of the clothes: this makes them air them abroad, till the smell is gone, and then they can wash them with safety. But, if it happened, from the hurry, that this could not be done, or if it was neglected by design, many of them were seized with the sickness. The porters and people employed in cleaning and fumigating the blankets and beds at Haslar are well acquainted with this fact, and they measure the danger by the badness of the smell. This ought to instruct every body to stand to windward ofthese infected substances when they are opened; as the current of air would then carry it the other way. In one of the courts of justice, the people who stood between the prisoners and a window, into which the wind blew, escaped the infection, while those on the other side were sufferers.
“In the summer of 1793, while the Orestes brig, commanded by Lord Augustus Fitzroy, lay at Plymouth, she was anchored very near and to leeward of an army transport, which had on board a very malignant fever among the soldiers. While the soldiers were moved on deck, to go on shore to the hospital, the crew of the Orestes, from curiosity, walked on deck to look at them. Such was the concentrated state of the contagion among the clothing and bedding of these troops, on bringing them from below, that eighteen people belonging to the brig were quickly seized with the same fever, the infection of which had been conveyed by the current of wind. It did not, however, extend much farther in the Orestes, from the attention of her commander. But this ought to be a caution for ships to keep clear of those that have fevers on board, as avirulentCONTAGIONmay be conveyed to a considerable distance.
“Dr. Lind is inclined to think that washing the bed-linen in hot water, even when first shifted, is attended with much risk; and that the noxious matter may be volatilized by the heat of the water, and affect the woman. For this purpose he has recourse to his favourite process, offumigation, to insure the washer-woman. The heat of his fumigating furnace would no doubt dry the linen, and exhale any moisture; but our practice in the Charon (the hospital ship) was, to plunge everything as it came from the bed into a tub of hot water kept ready on purpose. The linen was washed and dried immediately after. We had in that hospital many malignant cases of typhus, and some deaths, yet no infection was ever spread there.”
Our author next proceeds to inquire into the cause of this excessive concentration of the infectious matter infomites, or clothes, bed-clothes, bale-goods, &c. The most plausible reason, he says, that could for some time be assigned for this, “was, the generation of animalcula; the cotton or woollen clothing was said to serve as a nest for the corpuscles to multiply; and thus the contagion was thought to increase seven fold.” This theory had an effect on the practice of physicians, both as to the prevention and cure of fevers supposed to proceed from thence. Our author looks upon the hypothesis to be chimerical, because none of these animalcules have ever been made visible by the best microscopes. But there is no necessity for supposing the animalcules to be invisible to the naked eye. They may creep on the ground, or fly in the air, without being observed by us. Mr. Baker’s discovery of the insect which not only poisonedeleven hundred thousandtimes its bulk of water, but infected a much greater bulk of air, with its effluvia,129shows that such a thing may bepossible; and in dubious matters bare possibility ought always to produce inquiry. If the perspiration of human bodies when confined becomes noxious, why may not that of a multitude of insects be so too? There is no necessity for supposing that an insect must be swallowed, or inhaled by the breath, before it can do hurt. What Dr. Trotter says of the variolous contagion emitted from the human body will apply equally to insects. “What has been called the insensible perspiration (says he) which arises from the surface and the lungs, we have a right to believe carries with it in solution a portion of the variolous matter which charges the atmosphere with the contagion of small-pox, even in such quantities as to impregnate the clothing of attendants and visitors; by which means it has been frequently carried to families and villages many miles distant from its source.” The smallness of size of insects can be little objection here. A skunk is but a small animal, yet it spreads its odour farther than an hundred diseased human bodies could propagate the plague.130
On this subject, however, we may remark, that though the nurses and attendants on hospitals measure the degree of infection by the smell, yet people are by no means safe in approaching patients about whom no smell can be perceived. We have already seen, from Dr. Fordyce, that what may be called thepureinfection of fevers is not perceptible by any of our senses; and there are examples of very offensive smells issuing from diseased bodies without any contagion ensuing. Dr. Trotter tells us, that “a patient in typhus was sent from the Venerable to the hospital ship, with a fœtor about him, that exceeded any thing of the kind that ever came within the Doctor’s knowledge. After being washed and shifted, it still continued, and was perceived at a considerable distance. He died in a few days, yet nobody was infected from him, either in his own ship, or in our hospital. There was probably some peculiarity of constitution here.” In M. Deidier’s experiments, above related, the dog which eat the dressings of the plague sores, after being infected with the disease, emitted a very disagreeable odour, but we do not find that the odour was in any way infectious. In the Encycloped. Britan, art. Med.Hydrophobia, we find an account of an hydrophobic patient (and a patient who recovered) in whom the blood drawn from a vein was as black as ink, and stunk abominably, yet this stench was attended with no bad consequence. There is therefore no essential connexion between offensive smells and contagion; yet, as they are sometimes united, the absence of the smell ought not to encourage us rashly to go into suspicious places, neither ought the presence of it to deter us from venturing where we have otherwise good reason to do so.
Having given up the doctrine of animalcula, the Doctor goes on to explain the doctrine of concentrated contagion in a manner very similar to that given in this treatise, viz. from the decomposition of some kind of gas. “The fœtor of the breath (says he) perspirable matter, &c. evidently demonstrate that they differ from the healthy state. The smell, to our senses, comes very near what is calledsulphurated-hydrogenous gas. Some of the fluids within the body would seem to be in some degree in a state of actual decomposition; unless we can suppose the mucous glands of the lungs secreting a fluid that taints the expired air in this manner. The decomposition of the fat, which sometimes disappears very suddenly in fevers, may give some ground for the supposition that a large portion of these exhalations are composed of hydrogenous gas. But, whether we can go thus far or not, what is separated from the body, it is plain, is more disposed to decomposition than when the body is in health. Now this process will still go on, whether exposed to the atmosphere or not, with this difference, that, by exposing substances which have imbibed the exhalations of the diseased to a free air, the noxious gases will be dissipated as quickly as they are evolved; while, on the other hand, by laying the clothes in a heap, packing them firm in a chest, or making up cloth into small bales, the gases are concentrated into a small space; and woe to the man who first inspires them. . . . Now this does not hold out an idea that the powers of contagion are multiplied, as by generation; for that would be to say, that these gases arethemselveswhat we call the matter of infection. I would only go so far as to assert that they are the vehicles of it, till more certain experience shall determine farther.”
With respect to fumigations with nitrous acid, our author repeatedly declares that he has no confidence in them; nay, he brings instances where they seemed to have bad effects. But as the dispute about fumigation has no connexion with the true plague, nitrous acid having never been used as a preventive for it, we shall defer anyfarther consideration of it to the second part of this treatise, to which it naturally belongs.
We come now to the fourth and last mode of prevention, viz. a consideration of those means by which an individual, without separating himself from society, and who is daily obliged to have communication with the sick, may yet secure himself against infection. Here the means recommended are extremely various, and some of them so opposite, that we can scarce avoid suspecting them all. The misfortune is, that though a person should go, without fear, among the sick, though he should constantly take a medicine, and should never have the distemper, yet we cannot say whether the medicine did preserve him or not. Were it possible to know the particular constitution of the body which disposed some to resist the attack of the disease, attempts might be made to bring the constitutions of others to the same standard, but unfortunately our ignorance here is so great, that any attempt to alter the constitution of the body has generally proved unfortunate even in other diseases. Dr. Lind informs us, that the first Portuguese adventurers in Africa, having observed, that “such as had the good fortune to escape a fit of sickness or death, soon after their arrival, enjoyed afterwards a pretty good state of health, thence concluded, that the blood of such persons had been entirely changed by the diet of the country. Upon this erroneous principle they adopted a most fatal method of seasoning people to these unhealthy climates. They, by small quantities, frequently repeated, took away as much blood as they supposed to be contained in the body, and thus they reduced the patient to a state of extreme weakness.” From its being observed that people of delicate constitutions are less liable to the plague than others, such a mistake probably has also been made with regard to this distemper, but with equally bad success. Allen tells us from Diemerbroeck, “Phlebotomy, though mightily cried up by many of the ancient and modern physicians, yet we reject it altogether,as very dangerous and detrimental; for it appeared by experience thatthose who made use of it for prevention’s sake were seized with the plague soon after bleeding, wherefore we forbad it to all.” This may seem surprising, as we find bleeding so much recommended by Sydenham as a remedy; but by others it is equally reprobated; nay, Dr. Hodges tells us that he never knew but one who recovered from the disease after the use of it. Issues seem more likely, if not to prevent, at least to render the disease more mild if it should attack. They are recommended by Diemerbroeck, and Russel speaks of them as, “by some authors, represented as almost infallible.” He cannot, however, recommend them from his own experience, having never seen them opened for the purpose of preventing the plague; and he justly observes, that when habitual on any other account, they may perhaps lose their effect in this. “Multitudes (says he) of both sexes at Aleppo had issues in their arms, it being there a very common remedy in a variety of chronic disorders: but, notwithstanding those outlets, numbers perished; and I did not remark that those who had them were in any degree less liable than others to be infected.”
Tobacco has been recommended as an excellent preservative, particularly by Diemerbroeck, who writes with a kind of enthusiasm in its favour. “Being called (said he) to visit a patient afflicted with the plague, as soon as I entered his chamber I felt a most offensive smell of excrements (for he had a diarrhœa) with which I was greatly affected. Leaving the house after a very short visit, I instantly found myself seized with giddiness, nausea, and uneasiness at the heart; so that I had no doubt of my having caught the pestilential contagion. Laying aside all business, therefore, I immediately returned home, and smoked five or six pipes of the best tobacco; by the use of which all the above-mentioned symptoms so totally vanished, that I felt not the least uneasiness any more. Then, being again desirous to go abroad and visit other sick people, I took a drachm of theriaca, and from thence-forward was in perfect health. The same thing happenedto me three or four times during the time of this pestilence; and without loss of time, according to the quantity of infection I supposed that I had taken in, I had recourse to the more plentiful use of tobacco, by which my health was restored. I always looked upon tobacco to be an excellent preventive remedy, and its smoke I have sometimes found useful to myself even in an incipient attack of the disease.131” He then proceeds to inform us of a report that in a violent plague at London all the dealers in tobacco were exempted. At Nimeguen, however, they were not so fortunate; yet of the family of the principal tobacco merchant (Thomas Peters, an Englishman) which was very large, none were infected, excepting only one servant maid, and she quickly recovered.
On this remedy Dr. Russel makes the same remark as on the issues. “The custom of smoking (says he), is universal among both men and women at Aleppo. This too, from its being habitually practised, might perhaps lose part of its prophylactic virtue: at the same time those who use it as a preservative must always be supposed in some degree accustomed to it, otherwise the violence of its operation on most persons, on their first beginning to smoke, might prove hurtful. It should further be observed, that the tobacco commonly used in Syria is much milder than the American, and that the oriental smokers seldom or never spit.”
It hath been observed that the plague is stopped either by great heat or great cold, but more readily by the former than the latter. “It has generally been supposed (says Dr. Canestrinus) that the cold of winter was destructive of contagious matter; but various instances of the contrary may be collected. The plague in Transylvania continued through the very severe frost in 1709. On the contrary it has been found, that excessive heat has extinguished, or at least diminished, pestilential diseases. During the plague at Aleppo the weather was unusually hot in the beginning ofJuly, and it was remarked that the disease declined considerably; and in general Dr. Russel observed, that the plague ceased at the hottest season of the year. The plague at Ockzacow, which raged in the years 1738 and 1739, began in the month of April, and continued with violence till July, when it declined considerably, and entirely ceased in the month of September; in February of the year following it re-appeared, and totally ceased in July.”
From these facts we might be led to suppose that a warm regimen, or occasionally exposing the body to great heat, might be advantageously used by way of prevention; but Dr. Russel justly observes, that the human frame, “could it support such an application of fire and smoke as is necessary to expel or destroy contagion from infected substances, would probably receive little benefit from it, if infected; nor could those in health sustain, without prejudice, the heat and dense smoke which is probably required for the perfect extinction of the infectious effluvia floating in the confined atmosphere of a morbid body.” He is of opinion, however, that some kinds of fumigations may be of use, and he mentions some of these, but says that the perfumes ordered by the college are perhaps as proper as any, though their forms might be rendered more simple. Heat alone can scarce be thought very proper for prevention, and, when the disease is once begun, is said to be detrimental. Dr. Guthrie quotes Baron Ash saying, that “in heated rooms the disease is ungovernable: it is only in free air that it is to be treated.” But of late a discovery has been made of a surprising power in heated oil of removing this disease, insomuch that, if we can believe what has been published of it, we must suppose it to be little less than a specific. So great indeed has been the confidence put in this method, that, by order of the Academy of Sciences at Lisbon, it has been translated into Arabic, French and Portuguese.132“The method was first proposed by George Baldwin esq. agent for his Britannic Majesty, and consul-general atAlexandria. He communicated his method to Lewis de Pavia, chaplain and agent to St. Anthony’s Hospital at Smyrna; who, after five years experience, pronounces it to be the most effectual remedy hitherto made use of in the hospital of which he has had the management for twenty-seven years. Immediately after a person is perceived to be infected with the plague, he must be taken into a close room; and, over a brazier of hot coals, with a clean sponge, dipped in warm olive oil, his body must be very briskly rubbed all over; for the purpose of producing a profuse sweat. During the friction, sugar and juniper berries must be burned in the fire, which raise a dense and hot smoke, that contributes to the effect. The friction ought not to be continued more than four minutes, and a pint of oil is enough to be used at each time. In general the first rubbing is attended by a very copious perspiration; but, should it fail of this effect, the operation may be repeated, first wiping the body with a warm, dry cloth; and, in order to promote perspiration still farther, the patient may take any warm sudorific drink, such as elder-flower water, tea, &c. It is not necessary to touch the eyes; and other tender parts of the body must be touched gently. Every possible precaution must be made use of to prevent the patient from taking cold, nor must the linen be changed till the perspiration has entirely subsided. The operation should be repeated once a day, until evident symptoms of recovery begin to appear. If there are already tumours on the body, they should be gently and more frequently rubbed, till they appear to be in a state of suppuration, when they may be dressed with the usual plasters. The operation ought to be begun on the first appearance of the symptoms of disease; if neglected till the nerves and the mass of blood are affected, or a diarrhœa has commenced, little hopes can be entertained of a cure; but still the patient should not be despaired of, as, by an assiduous application of the means proposed, some few have recovered, even after diarrhœa had commenced.During the first four or five days the patient must observe a very abstemious diet; the author allows only a small quantity of vermicelli, simply boiled in water. Nor must any thing be taken for thirty or forty days, except very light food, as, he says, an indigestion in any state of the disorder might be dangerous. He does not allow the use of wine till forty days. There is no instance of the person rubbing a patient having taken the infection. He should previously anoint himself all over with oil, and must avoid receiving the infected person’s breath into his mouth or nostrils. The precaution to be used in all circumstances is that of carefully anointing the body, and living upon light and easily digestible food. Mr. Baldwin observes, that among upwards of a million of people carried off by the plague in Upper and Lower Egypt, in the space of four years, he could not discover a single oilman, or dealer in oil.”Lisbon, July, 1797. By Royal Permission.
With regard to diet, and the use of spiritous liquors, opinions, as may well be imagined, have been very discordant. Allen quotes Diemerbroeck advisingpoor peopleto take two or three spoonfuls of the best white wine vinegar every morning, which he looked upon to be one of the best preservatives: he recommends also the frequent application to the nostrils of a spunge dipped intreacle vinegar. With regard to himself he says that his principal care was to avoid uneasy passions of the mind; and that when he found himself any way disturbed by these, he cheered his heart by three or four glasses of wine: his common drink was beer, and also white wine, small, or moderately strong, which sometimes he drank to cheerfulness, but never to drunkenness. Dr. Patrick Russel also says, that “a glass of generous wine, or any other cordial more agreeable to the choice, may be taken before dinner, in case of languor, or oppression at the stomach, from fatigue, fœtor, or apprehension.I found a rummer of old hock very agreeable on such occasions.” Allen goes on to inform us from Diemerbroeck, that, “as to diet, it is advisable in a pestilential dispositionto use temperance, which very much contributes to the preservation of health; but all sudden changes are dangerous; wherefore it is most dangerous suddenly to alter the usual rule of diet. It is very ill in the plague to go abroad with an empty stomach: hog’s flesh is looked upon to be very pernicious: all sweet things are to be avoided: wine moderately made use of is good, but the abuse of it very dangerous.—Mercurialis testifies, that among the Patavians and Venetians, most of the tipplers died, who thought to drive out the plague with strong wines.” Mr. Howard informs us, that a person in high station at Constantinople, attributed his recovery entirely to the use ofgreen tea, others tobrandy. He also mentions a Mr. Hare, master of a merchant vessel at Senegal, who, during the prevalence of a malignant fever there, was very much exposed to the infection, and who out of humanity waited upon a negro, whom nobody would go near. He took no medicines, neither did he taste either spiritous or fermented liquors, and was theonlyEuropean that entirely escaped the contagion.133
These accounts seem to evince that little or nothing is to be expected from a change of diet. This is an attempt to change the constitution of the body, and cannot be expected to succeed any more than bleeding. There is a certain quantity, and a certain species, both of food and drink, different in different persons, necessary to preserve health, and those who require both in larger quantity or better quality than others, are no more to be charged with intemperance than those who are supported by the smallest quantity of the coarsest fare. In times of danger, therefore, those who have been accustomed to spiritous liquors ought not to give them over; neither ought those to begin the use of them who have not used them before. From the account formerly given of the structure of the human body, it appears to be furnished with an apparatus forexhalingor throwing out a perspirable matter as well as forinhalingor takingin one equally subtile. How far the skin may be able toinhaleor ratherimbibesurrounding effluvia, may be doubted; but with the lungs there cannot be any doubt; and the effluvia taken into them must unquestionably affect the blood, and of consequence the vital principle, almost without any medium. To deprive the body of its due portion of nourishment therefore is tothrow a temptation in its way(if I may use the expression) to absorbany thing; and the same effect must ensue from any other mode of debilitating it, either by intemperance, terror, or the like; and hence to visit infected places while under any such debility must be very imprudent. Dr. Russel agrees that it is a general and rational precept, never to go abroad fasting. For those who cannot easily bear fatigue without eating between breakfast and dinner, some light food may be proper, at an intermediate hour, in order to avoid going into the chambers of the sick with an empty stomach in the forenoon. “In such circumstances (says he) after a long and fatiguing morning, I have often found myself disagreeably affected in my latter visits, and have been sensible of slight giddiness, and of the appetite flagging at dinner, as if something lay on the stomach. I have known others much more strongly affected in this manner, and consequently much more alarmed. In such cases much no doubt may depend on the fancy; but in those times the power of the imagination requires management. So intimately is it connected with the accidental state of the body, that the same risk, from which a man shrinks in a state of languor and fatigue, he will encounter undauntedly after a temperate meal: the strange, unusual sensations, which amount almost to a persuasion of having caught the infection, will often, like the phantoms of a vision, vanish after a few glasses of wine.134Whether anyslight degree of real infection can be thus dissipated, I shall not take upon me to determine; it is sufficient for the present purpose to indicate the means of restraining those alarming sensations which, when aggravated by imagination, are apt to depress the spirits, and, according to the general opinion, to reduce the human body to thatrelaxed,inhalingstate peculiarly susceptible of contagion.”
As to other modes of precaution, the Doctor advises that such as are about the sick “should guard the mouth and nostrils with vinegar, avoid drawing in the breath while close to the bed side, or swallowing their spittle while in the infected chamber. Before they approach the bed in order to examine the eruptions, the bed-clothes ought to be removed, to give time for the dispersion of a confined steam which immediately discovers itself to the senses; and it will be advisable to dip the hands in vinegar before examining the parts. On coming out of the chamber it will also be proper to rinse the mouth, and wash the hands, with vinegar, plain or camphorated.” He advises alsoto fumigate the clothes with nitre, sulphur, and juniper berries, burnt on a red-hot iron.
“Upon returning home it may be advisable to shift clothes immediately, hanging those taken off upon lines in a small chamber, to be again smoked, and afterwards aired. The mouth and hands ought once more to be well washed, and the hair might be fumigated with a little nitre and sulphur, by means of a pipe, so as not to incommode the lungs.”
One other mode of prevention, not of the disease, but of incurring danger from it, is inoculation. This is greatly recommended by Baron Ash above mentioned, and not only for the plague among the human species, but for that among cattle, which frequently destroys great numbers of those necessary animals. The case of Mathias Degio related p.272, shows the practicability and the safety of it. The only solid objection that can be made to it is, that those who have once had the plague are not secure from having it a second time, or oftener. Yet, if we consider the extreme fatality of the disease when it attacks in the natural way, and that the number of those who have the plague only once is much greater than of those who relapse, this practice will certainly be found to merit consideration, and, unless some objection to it be discovered greater than any that has yet appeared, seems likely to be advantageous to the human race in general.