Thomas Beddoes to the Printers of The Bristol Gazette and Public Advertiser, and of Felix Farley’s Bristol Journal, 24 March 1803
TO THE PRINTER.
Sir,
The history of the influenza of 1782 applies with sufficient exactness to the present epidemic. There were sceptics then, but, according to a vast majority of suffrages, it was infectious. At present, it seems to spread from place to place, from person to person, just as it would if propagated by contagion. No observable exposure to cold, no circumstance but personal communication, in many cases now, precedes its attack.
Should these mild days stop the influenza, no conclusion will follow respecting the question. A change of weather puts an end to many epidemics, whether infectious or not.
Of several practitioners, in and about Bristol, who have seen much of the influenza, I know that they consider it as infectious; and were the whole body convened, I doubt not but one half would confirm this opinion. Could this be without probable grounds? What then is the safe side for every unprofessional person? Clearly as far as possible to keep out of harm’s way. This precaution he should apply to the consumptive and otherwise weakly members of his family. We shall have testimonies enough, when the disease is over; and then I will venture to predict that the preponderance of opinion will be in favour of the infectious nature of this disease.
It is difficult not to be either credulous or rashly sceptical, on the subject of infection. A physician, with whom I conversed as he was setting out to explore the nature of the plague in the Levant, told me he was satisfied that the plague was not infectious. He inoculated himself with it, and died. A knot of students at Edinburgh, as I am credibly informed, decided that low fever was not catching. They lay on the beds with patients, and braved the contagion in every possible way. Out of thirteen of these anti-contagionists, eight, I understand, died of fever last winter. I hope that none here will meet with the same punishment for equal incredulity respecting influenza. I am, sir, your humble servant,
Clifton, 24th March, 1803 THOMAS BEDDOES.
P.S. A newspaper can scarce afford space for fully discussing the infectious nature of a disorder; nor are the readers of newspapers judges of the arguments. Indeed there are a few readers of newspapers but may have learned that lunatics are generally exempt from infection; and therefore no wonder lunatics should escape the present epidemic. I did not speak from a few days’ experience. And I am convinced by renewed observation, that the influenza is contagious. The question is important; I have put it to our different practitioners. If they do me the honour to return an answer, and permit the publication, we shall soon know which opinion is most probable.
Respecting acid fumigations, nothing but utter inexperience or the grossest mismanagement can induce a person to doubt whether they can be safely employed in the way recommended in my first letter. In repeated trials they have been found not merely innocent but pleasant; and no one has been seized with the disorder after they have been disseminated through a house. Your readers may try for less than two pence. – Pour one or two table-spoonfuls of oil of vitriol into a saucer. Add one or two teaspoonfuls of salt petre; and then let everyone judge for himself whether the diffused fumes are irritating. I have not advised them in sick chambers, without a cautious trial. In the rest of the house they can be used without difficulty. Burning of brimstone is not a case in point nor can the effect be judged of from what happens in some manufactories. I hope your readers will not suffer themselves to be frightened out of a probably useful practise, by a representation, which, in a few minutes, they will discover to be totally erroneous.
Published: 1. The Bristol Gazette and Public Advertiser, Vol. 37, no. 1851, Thursday 31 March 1803, Bristol Central Library Archives; cf. another printed copy in the Richard Smith Papers, Biographical Memoirs, Volume 5, 1784–1789, Bristol Archives 35893/36/e_i, 448. 2. Felix Farley’s Bristol Journal, vol. 54, no. 2821, Saturday 26 March 1803 (main text) with the postscript printed in the next issue, vol. 54, no. 2822, Saturday 2 April 1803.