USA > Connecticut > New London County > A modern history of New London County, Connecticut, Volume I > Part 50
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57
The diary of Joshua Hempstead,' which begins in 1711 and continues to 1758, has a number of references to small pox. Under date of April 18, 1719, he notes cases brought in by vessel, and May 9th "Ephraim Avery was buried on Powder Island. he died with the Small Pox on bord of Capt King."
Powder Island, a small islet a little below Fort Trumbull on the west side of the Harbor, was one of the earliest quarantine stations. Miss Caulkins' (p. 474) says: "The beautiful beach along the mouth of the river, north of the lighthouse, was for many years used as a kind of quarantine ground. At various periods, the small-pox has been a scourge to the town. Between 1750 and 1760, vessels were continually arriving with this disease on board. The selectmen were the only health officers, and it fell to them to dispose of the sick, and to the town to defray most of the charges. At the White Beach and Powder Island, such vessels were usually stayed, and there many a victim to the perilous infection was cast into the earth as a thing utterly abhorred."
Hempstead records its presence again in 1721 and 1730. In the first year the Governor and Council sat at New London and made regulations with regard to small pox. In the latter and following years Hempstead made entries which give an idea of his official duties in connection with such cases. June 22nd and 27th, 1730, he was at court with Justice Plumb "about moving G. Buttolphs Brig down to Powder Island." In 1732, November 8th: "Sent a post to the Govr at Hartford Concerning the Small pox." In 1733 the dis- ease was introduced from the Barbadoes. He writes: "I ordered them to Ly at Powder Island until further orders." Other minor invasions took place in 1746-48. Late in 1752 there were five deaths out of eight cases. November 4th he says: "I was with the Selectmen att the Harbours mouth taking Care of Capt Thomas Eames & Crew in a Brigg from New york. Divers of his men & himself Sick with the Small pox." On the 12th he records deaths "att the white-beach in Peter Lattimers House." -- "buryed yesterday by one of the Sand Banks." On December 8th: "I was most of the day with Mrss Chapman Adam and Hurlbut Selectmen Removing Hannah Preston in Jas Harris's House. She is taken with the Small pox. Widow Hobbs is prest to Nurse her & we Carted Harris's Household Stuff to Doctor Coits house." Two days later: "Sund 10 fair. Mr. William adams pr all day. in the Ioren I Stayed at home to assist in the small pox affair. they have fenced the Highway up from Trumans Corner to Holts & across the hill from Holts Corner to Hills Lot." In 1756 and '57 it appeared again, and in the latter year some of Hempstead's own relatives were affected and moved "to the lighthouse so called below the harbours mouth."
368
NEW LONDON COUNTY
As is well known, the practice of inoculation of small pox was introduced in Boston in 1721 by Dr. Zadiel Boylston. The fact that there is no mention of the practice in Hempstead's diary would go to show that it was very late in getting a foot-hold in this part of New England. It was at first everywhere bitterly fought, recognition of its value both in and out of the profession being very slow. The first law bearing upon the subject passed by the Connecticut General Assembly was in 1760, prohibiting the practice in any town except by written consent of the major part of the civil authority and selectmen. The next year it was forbidden altogether. This prohibition was renewed and confirmed no less than twelve times in the ten years to 1769, when it was declared in force for the future. In 1777, however, inoculation was legalized, subject to such restriction as boards of health might impose. (Lindsley.")
In the latter part of the century, inoculation hospitals came into vogue. These also met with strenuous opposition at first. The conflict was particu- larly bitter in Norwich (Caulkins,1º pp. 427-8), beginning in 1760, when the town voted down the following proposition : "Will the town approve of Dr. Elisha Lord's proceeding to inoculate for the Small pox, under any regulations whatever?" The question was brought up again from time to time by those believing in the practice, but always with the same result. "The popular feeling was excited almost to violence whenever the faculty brought up the question." In 1773 a hospital for inoculation was opened by Drs. Philip Turner and Jonathan Loomis on an island off the Stonington shore. They were soon obliged to give it up, however, on account of the violent opposition of the dwellers on the mainland. Miss Caulkins10 states that: "In April, 1774, Dr. Loomis was arrested and committed to prison on the charge of having communicated the infection of small pox by inoculation to two persons in Stonington. He escaped from his cell after a few days' confinement, and the Norwich jailkeeper, Sims Edgerton, advertised him and offered a reward for his apprehension, as would have been done in the case of a notorious crim- inal." Dr. Elisha Tracy, also, although recognized as a distinguished and skillful physician, was, according to Dr. Woodward11 (p. 176), presented by two grand jurors of the county "for communicating the Small-pox by inocula- tion to Elijah Lathrop and Benjamin Ward, both of Norwich aforesaid, and sundry other persons against the peace, and contrary to the laws of this State." He plead guilty, and "was held in a recognizance of sixty pounds, to appear and answer before the county court." Further efforts were made by Drs. Elihu Marvin and Philemon Tracy in 1787 to get permission to open a hospital for inoculation, subject to the control of the selectmen, but in vain. As the next best thing, however, they found two suitable sites near the river in the town of Montville, and there, together with Drs. Jeremiah Rogers and David H. Jewett of Montville, as their associates, they at last were able to carry on the practice unhindered. Not until 1795 did the town of Norwich vote authority to Drs. Tracy and James W. Whiting to open in the following spring an inoculation hospital within the town limits under the regulation of the civil authority.
So far as New London is concerned, there appears no evidence of any strenuous controversy. Miss Caulkins® gives the town record of June 23.
369
EARLY MEDICINE AND MEDICAL MEN
1777, as follows : "voted almost unanimously to admit of inoculation of small pox agreeably to a resolve of the General Assembly in May last." In the 'gos there were two such hospitals in the town, one kept by Dr. Thomas Coit, Jr., the other by Dr. Samuel H. P. Lee.
A few years later, following Jenner's immortal discovery in 1799 of the efficacy of vaccination as a preventive of small pox, inoculation became a thing of the past. Vaccination was taken up in this country with remarkable promptness. One of the first physicians in Connecticut to adopt and push the practice was Dr. Elisha North, then living in Goshen, but later a resident of New London. Other physicians of the county who were early advocates and users of the method were Drs. John R. Watrous of Colchester, and Dr. Vine Utley of East Lyme. It appears from Dr. Watrous' ledger that he frequently employed Dr. Utley to come up to Colchester and do his vaccin- ating. The ordinary charge was six shillings. Thus in 1805-06 items like the following are not infrequent: "To 2 inoculations for Kine Pock by Doct Utley -0-12-0." (Dr. John R. Watrous, mss. Ledger C.) With the general adoption of the practice epidemics of small pox became more and more rare.
Passing to other infectious diseases, the first mention of the occurrence of measles in this county, so far as I know, occurs in the diary of Thomas Minor® of Stonington. He writes under date of February 8th, 1657-58, "Joseph had the measles." In the winter of 1713-14 New London was severely visited with the disease, according to Hempstead," and there were seven deaths in two months. This outbreak, which continued until 1716, was probably the latter part of the general epidemic of measles in America which Webster1ª says prevailed in 1713. Hempstead notes also several deaths from the disease in 1740, coincident with a state-wide epidemic of severe character. Undoubt- edly other outbreaks have taken place at more or less irregular intervals, but, as applying to our county, precise information is lacking.
Of other infectious diseases special mention should be made of diphtheria. In 1689 there was in New London a severe epidemic of what was probably this disease. Miss Caulkins® quotes the town clerk's record as follows: "An Accompt of severall persons Deceased by the present Distemper of sore throats and ffeaver which Distemper hath passed through most familys & proved very mortall with many Especially to those that now have it in this more than ordinary Extremity of hot weather, the Like haveing not been knowne in ye Memory of man." There were twenty-five deaths in the town that summer, most of them from the epidemic disease.
The first record in Hempstead of diphtheria occurs July 23rd, 1726, when a child of four "died with a distemper of the throat." He notes it again in 1731 and '36. In the latter year there were fourteen deaths in New London from the disease during seven months. He calls it variously, "throat dis- temper," "sore throat distemper," and what he speaks of as "canker" was doubtless the same disease. Cases were frequent also in 1743-44 and 1751-56.
Dysentery, "bloody flux," is another disease which terribly ravaged the settlements in early times. The first notice of it in our region known to me occurs in Hempstead's diary, where cases are cited in September and October, 1722. It is not, of course, to be supposed that this was its first appearance. N.L .- 1-24
370
NEW LONDON COUNTY
Frequently after that, it afflicted the inhabitants, as in September and October, 1729, when he records five or six deaths from "bloody flux which distemper prevails much in this town." It appeared again in 1734 and 1753.
During the last forty years of the 18th century many parts of Connecticut were sorely ravaged by this and other infections. It is not unlikely that New London county may have suffered in like manner, but thus far no records of such have come to my notice.
Another discase that took a heavy toll was what was called then pleurisy, "malignant" or "putrid," but which was probably in most cases what is now called pneumonia. The first record of it that I have seen, though it had doubt- less occurred earlier, is in Hempstead's diary in 1731, where the entry is: "Died of a Pleurisy Taken Tuesday & buried on Saturd." From then on that disease is mentioned as a frequent cause of death. Later in the century, in 1761, 1781, 1789-90 and 1793, there were epidemics of this disease, probably often with influenza, in other parts of the State. Whether New London county shared in those outbreaks I have no present means of knowing. We have, however, Dr. Vine Utley's14 account of an epidemic of influenza with pneumonia in Waterford and Lyme in 1813. Of the other infectious diseases, except for Hempstead's mention of whooping cough, there seems to be little or nothing on record.
Of malaria, however, there is somewhat more to be said. It was prob- ably present from the early years of the settlement, as it was known in the New Haven colony practically from the beginning. Thomas Minor® under date of August 20, 1670, writes : "hanah had her ffirst ffit," and the next year, May 25th, he notes: "My wife had a fit of ague." In 1668 Mr. Bradstreet" mentions "Feaver and ague" as "very prevalent toward the westward, espe- cially at Guilford." Throughout almost the whole of Hempstead's diary, at least until 1751, there are frequent allusions to cases of this disease, occurring both in New London and Stonington. The same is true with what was prob- ably typhoid fever, called by Hempstead "nervous" or "long" fever. Both diseases were probably more or less endemic in our area at that time. I have no knowledge of the prevalence of malaria in New London after Hempstead's time until well toward the middle of the next century. There seems to have been an intermission of greater or less duration, for, as stated by C. W. Cham- berlain14: "It reappeared in New London county in 1837 lasting till 1843. There were a few cases each year."
There were epidemics also of doubtful nature. Quoting from another article by the author15 (p. 73) : "In 1724-25 New London was visited by a very malignant epidemic in the course of which there were thirty-five deaths in February and March. Hempstead in his diary says 'fryd 5th (March) fair warm & pleasant wether overhead. but the Most sorrowfull time yt Ever was seen in N. London for Mortality their Lyes now this morning. 6 persons dead & I negro woman of Groton.' Unfortunately, not the slightest clue as to the nature of this disease is given us."
In the same paper15 (p. 75) another epidemic of uncertain character is thus described: "In 1746 a peculiar disease appeared among the Mohegan
371
EARLY MEDICINE AND MEDICAL MEN
Indians. By Webster it is conjectured to have been of the same nature as an epidemic which occurred in Albany, New York, at the same time, and which Dr. Cadwallader Colden called a nervous fever, and Dr. Douglass yellow fever. It began in August and ended with frost. The sick Indians were Attended by Dr. Elisha Tracy of Norwich, whose son, Dr. Philemon Tracy, gave Webster his information. The disease, quoting Webster, 'began with severe pain in the head and back followed by fever; and in three or four days the skin turned 'as yellow as gold,' a vomiting of black matter took place and generally a bleeding at the nose and mouth till the patient died. These are the words of the old Indian as penned by my informant.' Dr. Tracy was affected with the disease but recovered. About one hundred died. This out- break seems to have been confined to the Indians. Its nature must remain in doubt, but the possibility of its having been yellow fever cannot be ex- cluded. That disease had raged in the South in 1741-42, and, as stated, in 1743 a 'bilious plague' which was probably the same disease prevailed in New York."
Some special interest attaches to the epidemic of yellow fever of 1798. It had been imported before, but it had never got a foothold, due without doubt to the fact that the patients had not been accompanied by the mosquito carrier. As regards this outbreak in New London, I will quote again (Graves,15 pp. 82-85) : "We have what is probably a fairly accurate contemporary account of this outbreak issued in pamphlet form by Charles Holt, publisher of 'The Bee,' a New London paper of that period. Furthermore, the 'Medical Repos- itory' of New York for the year 1799 contains three letters to Dr. Mitchell, the editor, on the subject, two from the Rev. Henry Channing, and one from Dr. Thomas Coit, both residents of New London. The first victim was Capt. Elisha Bingham, who kept the Union Coffee House on Bank street, in the most populous part of the city. He was suddenly taken August 22 and died after four days. A few days afterward his wife, son and daughter were taken down, and all died. Others in the neighborhood were soon stricken and the disease spread rapidly. Following the first few cases 'the next week witnessed no less than 25 deaths.' It is stated by Holt that within a small space there were fifteen houses inhabited by ninety-two persons of which number ninety were infected by the disease. Thirty-three of this number died and two only escaped the fever. The disease remained practically confined to an area extending about thirty rods north and the same distance south of Capt. Bingham's house, and twenty rods in width. According to Holt, the 'mortality within the aforesaid limits was equal to that among the same number of inhabitants in any part of Philadelphia in the same length of time.' 'It is not surprising that this visitation created a genuine panic in the town. A large proportion of the inhabitants, who at that time in the compact part of the town numbered about 2,800, removed to a greater or less distance.' According to Holt, even the physicians, except for two who were ill, left the city, 'except- ing Dr. Samuel H. P. Lee, to whose lot it fell alone and unassisted to combat the fury of the dreadful pestilence. And his conduct on the occasion was such as will call the warmest sentiment of gratitude and esteem from the citizens of New London, as long as the memory of the Yellow Fever shall exist in
372
NEW LONDON COUNTY
their minds. He cheerfully sustained the arduous task of visiting and supply- ing with medicine thirty to fifty patients daily, notwithstanding the great fatigue and danger of infection to which he peculiarly exposed himself." Holt's account is followed by Miss Caulkins': "For a large part of the eight or nine weeks that the epidemic lasted he carried the whole load. He received much assistance, however, from a Mr. Gurdon J. Miller, who, though not a physician, was skilled in caring for the sick, which he did without compensa- tion. Moreover, during the latter part of the time, a relative, Dr. James Lee from East Lyme, and Dr. Amos Collins of Westerly, Rhode Island, came to his aid. Dr. Lee himself had an attack of the disease near the end of the epidemic." Holt writes: "In the discharge of the important duty to which he so nobly devoted himself, he was seized with the prevailing disorder, but after a struggle of a few days was happily preserved from falling a sacrifice to his humanity." He received the public thanks of the Committee of Health of the Town, which had been especially appointed for this emergency and which was untiring and most efficient.
"There were," according to Holt, "more than 350 cases and ninety deaths." Rev. Mr. Channing, however, gives the figures as follows: "We ascertained with a precision to be relied on that the whole number of persons whose complaints clearly indicated the pestilential, or, as it is called, the yellow fever, did not exceed 246; and I give it you as a very important fact, on which you may rely, that, of the above number, 231 cases were clearly traced to the spot where the sickness commenced; that is, the patients were conversant, or had been in that part of the city a few days before they were seized."
Holt says: "Two or three solitary instances, indeed, occurred, where the disease was taken from an infected person, without any previous communi- cation with the contagious spot. General Marvin, an eminent physician of Norwich, was attacked while attending Mr. Stewart, at Mr. Haughton's, seven miles from the city, and went home and died. But no other person, it is believed, was taken off by the disorder without having been nursing or other- wise in the infected spot; and in general those who lived at only a few rods distance, and avoided any nearer approach, were as secure from the effects of the fever as though they had removed an hundred miles in the country." In 1803 Yellow fever reached New London again, but according to Miss Caulkins8 "The disease came from abroad and did not spread among the citizens. There were only very few cases."
Of the dreaded spotted fever, or cerebro-spinal meningitis, which was such a scourge in other parts of Connecticut in 1807 and 1823-25, New Lon- don county seems to have had no distinct outbreak of any importance. There were apparently a few cases in Waterford in the early '30s, which were seen or attended by the veteran Dr. North.
In 1832, at the time of the great epidemic of cholera in New York, when there were, according to Wendt, 2,030 cases, with 852 deaths, a few cases appeared in New London, as in New Haven and Hartford. The "New Lon- don Gazette," August, 1832, contains the following note about it:
"Cholera .- The notice published in the papers of Boston & N. Y. of the
!
1
1 1 1
1
1
!
373
EARLY MEDICINE AND MEDICAL MEN
Cholera in this city, has a tendency to alarm our friends and connections abroad, & to interrupt the business between us & the country. The cases which occurred were-Mrs. Dart, who died on Winthrop's Neck and was found by the attending physician in collapsed state; two boys who had eaten a quantity of green peaches, and died before medical aid could reach them, Mrs. Briggs, their mother, who in the absence of her nurse and in a high state of perspiration, left her bed and went to an open window; and Mrs. Pollus, recently from N. Y., who had taken salts the day before her death without consulting a physician. All the women were afflicted with a diarrhoea several days previous to applying for medical aid. These are all the deaths that have occurred for 14 days past, with the exception of one person who died of old age. No case of the cholera now exists in this city that we know of. The confidence of the public in the practice of our physicians remains undiminished; and we have no doubt that when medical aid is applied for in the early stages of the cholera, it will be successfully combatted."
Medical Organization .- New London county, and especially the town of Norwich, is distinguished by the fact that here was made the first move in this State having for its purpose the organization of the profession and its recognition by the State. In September, 1763, eleven physicians of Norwich petitioned the General Assembly for an act to incorporate the physicians of the State and to provide for examination and licensing of candidates for practice. This memorial was signed by the following: Theophilus Rogers, Joshua Downer, Cyril Carpenter, Php Turner, Obadiah Kingsbury, Joseph Perkins, Physician, Elisha Tracy, Moses Morris, John Barker, Elisha Lord, Ebenezer Robinson.
The petition was negatived, but the attempt was no less significant. Dr. Woodward11 well says: "The presentation of that unpretending Norwich memorial was the initiative step in a series of efforts which have since resulted in the permanent establishment of many flourishing State Associa- tions, and within a few years of the National Association, which has con- tributed in a high degree to purify the ranks, elevate the aims, and make a real unit and fraternity of the profession in America. In the attempts alluded to, it was not the object of the petitioners to secure any immunities or exclu- sive privileges for themselves, but to protect the health of the community by additional securities. At that time there was no authority in the State legally qualified to confer degrees in a way to discriminate the man of solid acquire- ments from the ignorant pretender." They wished "to establish a standard of education by making a respectable amount of attainments an indis- pensable requisite, to the acquirement of the title," and they "asked for the appointment of a committee legally authorized to examine and approve can- didates if found qualified."
The rebuff which their petition received at the hands of the General Assembly did not entirely discourage the New London county physicians. Even if they could not gain recognition by legislative action, they could at least form themselves into an association which would secure to them at least some of the benefits of organization. In fact, in September, 1775, a voluntary society was formed calling itself the New London County Medical Society. Dr. John Barker was elected as first president, and was annually
374
NEW LONDON COUNTY
re-elected up to the time of his death in 1791. "It is said that at the earlier meetings, which were held monthly, Dr. Philip Turner gave lectures on military surgery." (Woodward.16) Further than that, little or nothing is known of the doings of this society. It is beyond doubt, however, that it must have been a powerful factor both in elevating the professional standards of its members and in developing an esprit de corps among them.
The direct offspring and close successor of the voluntary organization just mentioned was the still flourishing New London County Medical Asso- ciation, which came into being with the incorporation of the Connecticut Medical Society in May, 1792, the year following Dr. Barker's death. Nat- urally, much interest attaches to the first meeting. The original record reads as follows:
"At a meeting of the Physicians and Surgeons of New London County on the 4th Tuesday of Sept. 1792, agreeable to the act of the General Assembly passed in May last incorporating a Medical Society in the State of Con- necticut-
"Voted : By a majority present, that the following gentlemen be members of said society for this County, viz."
Then follows a list of names and residences beginning with "Doctr Theophilus Rogers, Norwich," forty-four in all. There is a question whether there may not be a duplication in the names of John Watrous and John R. Watrous. I have been unable to learn whether or not there were two men named John Watrous. Dr. Theophilus Rogers was chosen chairman, and Dr. Simon Wolcott clerk. Unfortunately the members present were not listed, nor was the place of meeting stated, though it was probably Norwich. Some of those thus voted in apparently did not accept their election. Three of the names do not appear again in the records, and in the case of eight others there is only one further mention, always in connection with the abatement of taxes.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.