CHAPTER VIII.
“Who will, for him, may boast of sense,His better guard is impudence.”
“Who will, for him, may boast of sense,His better guard is impudence.”
Inthe early part of the present year I addressed letters to several gentlemen who figure in the list of patrons to the advertising Spectacle quacks, and enclosed a copy of the advertisements in which their names had appeared as giving unqualified approval to the trickster’sinvention.
From the specimens I have given of such advertisements it is unnecessary to give a verbatim copy again here; and as the truths which this correspondence elicits apply to one and all of the puffing tribe, I have omitted the names of the individuals particularly alluded to, my object being to expose asystemof villainy, and not to denounceoneortworapacious creatures, while the rest of the clique escape detection.
Therefore, although many of the remarks in these pages may seem to have only a local or particular reference, they are applicable to the whole tribe oflocusts, and describe the species too definitely to admit of mistake. The characters sketched are not caricatures, but, unfortunately for the eyes of her majesty’s lieges, really existin propriâ personâ.
Feeling assured that the Duke of Wellington would rejoice to see an exposure of such tricksters, I forwardedto him a copy of Spectacle Secrets, and the following acknowledgment was promptly returned:—
Walmer Castle,Nov. 11, 1838.The Duke of Wellington presents his compliments to Mr. Cox, and has received his letter and the work referred to: he is much obliged to Mr. Cox for the communication.
Walmer Castle,Nov. 11, 1838.
The Duke of Wellington presents his compliments to Mr. Cox, and has received his letter and the work referred to: he is much obliged to Mr. Cox for the communication.
Copy of a Letter toFrederick Tyrell, Esq.
Sir,—The advertisement enclosed frequently appears in the daily and weekly newspapers, to which, as your name is attached, I beg to direct your attention, and solicit an answer to the following questions at your earliest convenience.1st.—Have you proved the superior efficacy of the Spectacles, (as stated in the advertisement), and consider they merit your unqualified approbation?2nd.—Will you oblige me by stating what peculiar advantages you consider them to possess over the usual Spectacles, manufactured by the London opticians?3rd.—Does your approval extend to all the Spectacles sold by the advertiser, or to those which he designates Amber Spectacles only?I remain, Sir, yours obediently,George Cox.To Frederick Tyrell, Esq.
Sir,—The advertisement enclosed frequently appears in the daily and weekly newspapers, to which, as your name is attached, I beg to direct your attention, and solicit an answer to the following questions at your earliest convenience.
1st.—Have you proved the superior efficacy of the Spectacles, (as stated in the advertisement), and consider they merit your unqualified approbation?
2nd.—Will you oblige me by stating what peculiar advantages you consider them to possess over the usual Spectacles, manufactured by the London opticians?
3rd.—Does your approval extend to all the Spectacles sold by the advertiser, or to those which he designates Amber Spectacles only?
I remain, Sir, yours obediently,George Cox.
To Frederick Tyrell, Esq.
Mr.Tyrell’sReply.
17, New Bridge Street, Blackfriars.January 29th, 1838.Sir,—In reply to your letter respecting Mr. —— I have to state, First, That I am not acquainted with any institution which is designated “The Royal Eye Infirmary,” to which he states that he is optician. The Royal Ophthalmic Hospital, in Moorfields, is sometimes so called, but Mr. —— is not optician to that institution.Secondly, That Mr. —— has not any permission from me to make use of my name in advertisements, as approving of any glass, spectacles, or other articles he may either manufacture or sell.And thirdly, That I donotconsider his glasses to be in any respect superior to those manufactured by other persons in the trade.You are at liberty to make use of this communication in any way you deem proper to counteract Mr. ——’s advertisements.I remain yours respectfully,Frederick Tyrell.To Mr. George Cox.
17, New Bridge Street, Blackfriars.January 29th, 1838.
Sir,—In reply to your letter respecting Mr. —— I have to state, First, That I am not acquainted with any institution which is designated “The Royal Eye Infirmary,” to which he states that he is optician. The Royal Ophthalmic Hospital, in Moorfields, is sometimes so called, but Mr. —— is not optician to that institution.
Secondly, That Mr. —— has not any permission from me to make use of my name in advertisements, as approving of any glass, spectacles, or other articles he may either manufacture or sell.And thirdly, That I donotconsider his glasses to be in any respect superior to those manufactured by other persons in the trade.
You are at liberty to make use of this communication in any way you deem proper to counteract Mr. ——’s advertisements.
I remain yours respectfully,Frederick Tyrell.
To Mr. George Cox.
J. Hodson, Esq., consulting Oculist to the Eye Infirmary, Birmingham, resolved upon coming to London to give me his disclaimer, rather than incur any chance of misrepresentation from an unjustifiable use being made of his signature, he being an entire stranger to me before I addressed him upon this subject.
He authorizes me to state that Mr. —— has no authority or right whatever to make use of his name. About four years since a man came to his surgery, and introducing himself as the inventor of roseate tint preservers and amber spectacles, showed him a pair in silver frames, and, expatiating upon their wonderful properties, mentioned the names of several leading surgeons and oculists who had inserted their signatures in a book which he handed to Mr. Hodson, who, without suspecting the design of the knave, added his to the list, for the same reason, he said, that folks do so at a watering place, a library, or as having visited or seen some particular exhibition—in fact, because it was customary to do so. Four or five days afterwards the same individual called again, apparently in great haste, and requested Mr. H. to lend him two sovereigns, as he had immediate occasion for that sum. He produced a pair of amber spectacles, and said, “I will leave these as security until I return the money.” Mr. H. began now to suspect the fellow, and guessed it to be very unlikelythat he would trouble himself to redeem the Spectacles (worth about twelve shillings) if he succeeded in raising two pounds upon them; he therefore referred him to a pawnbroker in the neighbourhood, whose business it was to enter into such arrangements, which were, clearly quite foreign to his, Mr. H.’s practice.
Mr. Hodson has ever since regretted having (though inadvertently) given his signature, which, as the reader will perceive, is solicited as a mere matter of form, and is then made the most unwarrantable use of, involving the parties in many dilemmas, and exposing them to the ridicule and reprehension of every intelligent observer.
The fact is, if one signature of an eminent person can be procured by dint of false representation or plausible pretence, the rest follow as a matter of course; thus Mr. Hodson signed his name, seeing that some of the “heads of colleges” were there inscribed. Mr. Soden, of Bath, gave his signature because Mr. Ledsam had given his; and Mr. Ledsam signed because Mr. Hodson had done so.
Mr. Alexander, Oculist to the Royal Family, was waited upon by one of the crafty crew, whose object was to get his signature at all hazards. The fellow fawned and entreated, but was sternly resisted by Mr. A. who showed him the door, and declared, if he presumed to make use of his name, in his quack advertisements, he would set a solicitor to work immediately.
Copy of a Letter fromRobert Keate, Esq., Surgeon in Ordinary to Her Majesty.
Albemarle Street,July 17, 1838.Sir,—Although I do not consider myself bound to reply to the questions put to me by you, being in utter ignorance of the usewhich you propose to make of my answer; yet I can have no hesitation in saying that I think Mr. —— has been guilty of an unpardonable liberty in publishing my name, without my sanction, and more especially in appending it to the document (a copy of which you sent to me), and to which I have never affixed my signature. I was requested to look at M ——’s amber spectacles, and I saw no others; and looking through them on a day when the sun shone brightly, they appeared to me to soften the light more than crystal or pebbles; and seeing the names of many eminent surgeons and oculists attached to various certificates, I wrote and signed what I have stated above, and I believe no more; namely, that the amber spectacles seemed tosoften the lightmore than the pebbles.[16]I am not aware of having seen any other sort; and certainly I have not ventured to sign myapprovalof these, or of any others.I am, Sir, your obedient servant,Robert Keate.To Mr. George Cox.
Albemarle Street,July 17, 1838.
Sir,—Although I do not consider myself bound to reply to the questions put to me by you, being in utter ignorance of the usewhich you propose to make of my answer; yet I can have no hesitation in saying that I think Mr. —— has been guilty of an unpardonable liberty in publishing my name, without my sanction, and more especially in appending it to the document (a copy of which you sent to me), and to which I have never affixed my signature. I was requested to look at M ——’s amber spectacles, and I saw no others; and looking through them on a day when the sun shone brightly, they appeared to me to soften the light more than crystal or pebbles; and seeing the names of many eminent surgeons and oculists attached to various certificates, I wrote and signed what I have stated above, and I believe no more; namely, that the amber spectacles seemed tosoften the lightmore than the pebbles.[16]I am not aware of having seen any other sort; and certainly I have not ventured to sign myapprovalof these, or of any others.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant,Robert Keate.
To Mr. George Cox.
I could give the disclaimers of other gentlemen who have been trepanned into giving their signatures, which are afterwards so pompously paraded by the testimonialed and certificated adventurers; but these will suffice to illustrate the working of the system.
“A wise physician, skill’d our wounds to heal,Is more than armies to the public weal.”—Pope.
“A wise physician, skill’d our wounds to heal,Is more than armies to the public weal.”—Pope.
“A wise physician, skill’d our wounds to heal,Is more than armies to the public weal.”—Pope.
“A wise physician, skill’d our wounds to heal,
Is more than armies to the public weal.”—Pope.
I cannot but feel gratified, that this correspondence, while it has substantiated my arguments, affords an opportunity for those gentlemen to explain the real truthof the matter, and to exonerate themselves from the contaminating connexion, which appeared to place their reputation for that “quality called honesty” in jeopardy.
I have received several impromptu effusions from humorous correspondents in different parts of the kingdom, where I have been and unmasked the impositions of spectacle cheats. One says—
“Theymakenot spectacles, you say;With that I can’t agree,Both wife and I have worn their trash,Now spectacles are we.”—Quiz.
“Theymakenot spectacles, you say;With that I can’t agree,Both wife and I have worn their trash,Now spectacles are we.”—Quiz.
“Theymakenot spectacles, you say;With that I can’t agree,Both wife and I have worn their trash,Now spectacles are we.”—Quiz.
“Theymakenot spectacles, you say;
With that I can’t agree,
Both wife and I have worn their trash,
Now spectacles are we.”—Quiz.
Another—
“A celebrated chemist has ascertained, by very accurate analysis, that there is enough brass in the countenances of the spectacle men of Duke’s Place and Petticoat Lane to make spectacle-frames for all the spinsters in the neighbourhood.”—Satirist.
“A celebrated chemist has ascertained, by very accurate analysis, that there is enough brass in the countenances of the spectacle men of Duke’s Place and Petticoat Lane to make spectacle-frames for all the spinsters in the neighbourhood.”—Satirist.
I have, of course, laid myself open to the furious and vindictive hostility of those quacks, whose nefarious practices are exposed, and whose career will be checked in proportion as this treatise is circulated and dispassionately perused. But, secure of the approbation of all my readers who will avail themselves of the information contained in these pages, I may conclude with satisfaction, since
Friends I have made whom envy must commend,And not one foe whom I would wish a friend.
Friends I have made whom envy must commend,And not one foe whom I would wish a friend.
Friends I have made whom envy must commend,And not one foe whom I would wish a friend.
Friends I have made whom envy must commend,
And not one foe whom I would wish a friend.
THE END.
R. COTTLE, PRINTER, BASINGSTOKE.
FOOTNOTES:[16]When the eyes are distressed and overwhelmed with light,anyshade or screen is viewed with satisfaction. Coloured glasses “soften the light” more naturally, and present to the eye equal and parallel surfaces: parasols, veils, and even opaque substances, may thus be said to shield the eye, and “modify bright and strong light,” but it would be as ridiculous to consider these as fit mediums for the ordinary purposes of vision, as it is to select amber for the purpose.
[16]When the eyes are distressed and overwhelmed with light,anyshade or screen is viewed with satisfaction. Coloured glasses “soften the light” more naturally, and present to the eye equal and parallel surfaces: parasols, veils, and even opaque substances, may thus be said to shield the eye, and “modify bright and strong light,” but it would be as ridiculous to consider these as fit mediums for the ordinary purposes of vision, as it is to select amber for the purpose.
[16]When the eyes are distressed and overwhelmed with light,anyshade or screen is viewed with satisfaction. Coloured glasses “soften the light” more naturally, and present to the eye equal and parallel surfaces: parasols, veils, and even opaque substances, may thus be said to shield the eye, and “modify bright and strong light,” but it would be as ridiculous to consider these as fit mediums for the ordinary purposes of vision, as it is to select amber for the purpose.