Part 25

ST. JOHN LONG’S LINIMENT.

John St. John Long after he became famous was always reticent about his origin; but it was believed that he was the son of a basket maker, some said of the name of Driscoll, that he was born in or near Doneraile, and in his youth assisted his father: that later, being possessed of some artistic talent, he practised as a portrait painter in Dublin and afterwards in Limerick. An advertisement appeared in a Limerick paper of Feb. 10, 1821, which was as follows:--

“Mr. John St. John Long, Historical and Portrait Painter; the only pupil of Daniel Richardson, Esq., late of Dublin, proposes during his stay in Limerick to take portraits from Italian Head to whole length; any person desirous of getting theirs done in historical, hunting, shooting, fishing, or any other character; or their family grouped in one or two paintings from life-size to miniature, so as to make an historical subject, choosing one from history,” &c.

The advertisement went on to announce that specimens might be seen at his (the artist’s) residence, 116, George’s St. He was also willing to take views in the country, and would give instructions “to a limited number of pupils of respectability.” He succeeded fairly well in Limerick, but evidently not well enough to satisfy his ambition.

(From a print in the British Museum.)]

He is next found in London, where he got some employment from Sir Thomas Lawrence, assisting him in his studio; was elected a member of the Royal Society of Literature, also of the Royal Asiatic Society. One of his occupations was to colour anatomical drawings for the professors and pupils of one of the minor surgical schools of London. This perhaps suggested the opening of his brilliant career as an unqualified doctor.

His treatment consisted of the application of a liniment, and the inhalation of a vapour. The liniment had the extraordinary virtue of selecting between sound and unsound tissues. If the part to which it was applied was healthy no effect would be produced; but if there were seeds of disease beneath the surface the liniment might be relied upon to draw out the virus which could then be easily disposed of; thus tubercles on the lungs were extracted and the disease cured. Consumption was the principal disease which Long professed to treat; but gout, rheumatism, palsy, liver disorders, and other frequent complaints were dealt with by him. He was a handsome Irishman with fascinating manners, and the gift of inducing confidence. His consulting rooms in Harley Street were crowded, chiefly by ladies, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., and all the day patients were seated round a piece of furniture which looked like a piano but from which a number of tubes extruded supplied with mouth pieces from which they were inhaling or smoking the medicated vapour. Hopeless cases he declined; those which he preferred were those which were in the imaginary stage.

At the height of his popularity St. John Long was making an income of over £13,000 a year (Gent. Mag. 1843). That was in 1829. The next year, 1830, he was tried for manslaughter, a young Irish lady, Miss Catherine Cushin, having died after, and it was alleged in consequence of, his treatment. A number of aristocratic patients gave evidence in his favour, and Mr. Justice Park, who tried him, summed up strongly on his behalf. But the jury found him guilty, and he was sentenced to pay a fine of £250 or to be imprisoned until the money was paid. Long ostentatiously produced a roll of notes, counted out the amount, and then drove off from the court in the Marquis of Sligo’s carriage. Next year a coroner’s jury returned another verdict of manslaughter against him in connection with the death of a Mrs. Lloyd. He was again tried but on this occasion was acquitted. Strong articles against him appeared in many of the principal newspapers, but his aristocratic clients as a rule remained faithful to him. He published a book in defence of his system and included in it a number of extraordinary testimonials, together with a series of smart attacks on the medical profession. He retained his popularity to the last; but it was not to be for long. He was attacked by the disease over which he had claimed to exercise so much power, and he died from consumption in 1837 in the 37th year of his age. A graceful monument was erected in Kensal Green Cemetery to his memory by his patients and admirers “to show how much its inhabitant was respected by those who knew his worth, and the benefits derived from his remedial discovery.” His estate became the subject of a lengthy litigation, the principal claimant being an elderly woman of evidently humble surroundings, who, it was proved, was his lawful wife. He had married her when a lad, but had afterwards induced her to agree to an amicable separation. It was then remembered how steadfastly the charlatan had resisted the blandishments of his society friends, many of whom in very high circles had shown their infatuation with the attractive Irishman.

The formula and good will in the liniment were ultimately sold for ten thousand pounds, but it does not seem to have retained its popularity after the personality of its inventor had been removed. Nevertheless it possessed certain properties which were thought by some of its users to be little short of miraculous. For example, when applied to the skin the particular part where the pain was most severe would develop redness quicker than the other parts. In the course of a little time, the rubbing being continued, a fluid varying in colour according, as was believed, to the nature of the illness, would ooze from the skin, though the cuticle remained unbroken. Lastly, the treatment being still continued, the part affected would gradually resume its healthy appearance. In the Lancet of June 23, 1838, may be found the report of a meeting of the “Medico-Botanic Society,” held on the 13th of that month, at which Dr. Macreight communicated the result of an investigation into the composition of this famous liniment, an imitation of which had been made by himself and Mr. Fownes, the well-known chemist. The explanation of the analysis was accompanied by a good many disparaging comments on Long, and suggestions that there was nothing very wonderful about his liniment after all. The formula which Dr. Macreight and Mr. Fownes devised for a liniment which they said corresponded exactly with the quack compound was as follows:--

Yolk of one egg; pure oil of turpentine, 1½ oz.; strong acetic acid, 1 oz.; distilled water, 3 oz.

Dr. Macreight notices one of St. John Long’s recommendations to apply a cabbage leaf to the skin when the discharge had been obtained, and remarks “this in many respects is superior to a common cataplasm, which is clumsy and dries up rapidly; but of course no regular practitioner would employ cabbage leaves while the simple and elegant contrivance, lint covered with oiled silk, was within his reach.” Perhaps if a medical man had constructed the cabbage leaf, it might have been also regarded as “a simple and elegant contrivance.”

SEIGNETTE’S SALTS.

(Soda Tartarata, Sodii potassio-tartras, Rochelle salts, Sel de Seignette, Sal polychrestum Seignette.)

Peter Seignette was an apothecary at Rochelle in the later half of the seventeenth century. He had at least a local scientific reputation, and a paper of his describing certain remarkable natural products of his locality was printed in the “Transactions” of the Academy of Sciences of Paris. A little before 1672 Seignette was making some soluble tartar (tartrate of potash), and inadvertently used carbonate of soda with the cream of tartar instead of carbonate of potash. At that time the distinction between the fixed alkalies had not been discovered. The product was a salt different from that which he had expected, and Seignette was ready to believe that he had made a valuable discovery. He ascertained that his new salt had laxative properties, he called it Sal Polychrestum, and advertised it by means of prospectuses, or handbills. From one of these it appears that he sold it at “20 sols la prise,” say 10d. for a dose. Each dose was sold in an envelope on which appeared the design of a goose. One of the prospectuses states that Seignette’s salt was sold in Paris by Lemery, but another refers customers to the “Messieurs Seignette, at present at Paris, lodging on the Quay de le Megisserie.”

Peter Seignette died in 1716, and his son continued to sell the powder. Many attempts to analyse it were made by pharmacists, but it remained a secret until 1731 in which year both Boulduc and Geoffroi, both noted pharmaciens of Paris, solved the problem. Boulduc’s paper on the subject was published in the Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences, Paris, and Geoffroi sent his account to Sir Hans Sloane of London and it was published in the “Philosophical Transactions,” (436, p. 37).

Sal Polychrestum (salt of many virtues) was a name which had been adopted a few years before Seignette made his, by Christopher Glaser, apothecary to Louis XIV. and the Duke of Orleans. Seignette’s salt pushed Glaser’s out of popularity to some extent, so that the latter is generally designated Sal Polychrestum Glaseri in the old books. Glaser made his preparation by mixing nitre and sulphur in equal proportions, then putting the mixture, a spoonful at a time, into a red-hot crucible. The powder would deflagrate, and the next spoonful was not to be added until the flame of the first had gone out. The mixture was kept in fusion for four or five hours, and after cooling was dissolved, the solution filtered and evaporated to dryness. Sulphate of potash with perhaps a little free sulphur was produced, and this has long represented Glaser’s Sal Polychrestum or Sal de Duobus, as it was also called.

Seignette’s salt was first admitted into the London Pharmacopœia of 1788 under the name of Natron Tartarizatum which was altered in 1809 to Soda Tartarizata.

SINGLETON’S GOLDEN EYE OINTMENT.

An allusion to this renowned proprietary preparation will be found under Citrine Ointment, this Vol., page 126, in connection with the several discordant guesses as to its composition which have been published by eminent authorities. The ointment is mentioned in this section also because of its long history. According to the statement published by its present proprietor it is the oldest proprietary remedy still sold in this country. The present proprietor, Mr. Stephen Green, inherited it from his grandfather of the same name who died in 1874. He acquired the property by marrying (in 1825) Selina Folgham, who brought to him one-fifth share in the rights as a part of her marriage settlement, and after her death in 1831 the elder Stephen Green bought up the shares of other relatives. This Selina Folgham was a daughter of another Selina Folgham, née Singleton, granddaughter of Thomas Singleton who died in 1779, and whose tomb, I understand, may still be seen in Lambeth churchyard. This Thomas Singleton was the first of the Singletons. Before his time the ointment appears to have been known as “Dr. Johnson’s Golden Ointment,” and the present owners claim that it was first made by a “Dr. Johnson” in 1596, and that it was left by him to a certain George Hind whose great-granddaughter married the Thomas Singleton already mentioned.

MRS. STEPHENS’S CURE FOR STONE.

Perhaps the most notable recognition of a nostrum in English history was the Act of Parliament passed in 1739 entitled “An Act for providing a reward to Joanna Stephens upon a proper discovery to be made by her for the use of the publick of the Medicines prepared by her for the Cure of the Stone.”

Mrs. Stephens was a widow and professed to have received the recipe from her late husband. A number of persons in the higher classes of society had been cured, or believed they had been, by taking her remedy, and in the year 1738 a movement was started to buy the formula from her for the benefit of the public. This was specially advocated in the Gentleman’s Magazine, and the lady being approached expressed her willingness to sell the recipe for £5,000. An account was opened at Drummond’s Bank, and £500 was subscribed in the first few days. Dr. David Hartley, of Bath, was the chief organiser of the fund, and the Bishop of Bath and Wells, the Principal of Brasenose College, Oxford, and other responsible persons wrote letters testifying their knowledge of the good effects produced by Mrs. Stephens’s treatment. Hartley published an account of “Ten Cases of Persons who have taken Mrs. Stephens’s Medicines for Stone.” When Hartley died Warburton in his letters referred to him as “a philanthropic visionary, a martyr to Mrs. Stephens’s medicine.” It is said in some accounts that Horace Walpole was one of Mrs. Stephens’s cures.

The subscription list was kept going until the end of the year, and though it included dukes, earls, bishops, and several doctors of medicine, only a total of £1,356 3s. was promised. Evidently some strong influence was therefore brought to bear on the Government, for early in the next year the Act referred to was passed and the trustees named in the Act being satisfied that Mrs. Stephens had made the full discovery required, the £5,000 was duly paid to her.

Mrs. Stephens’s “full discovery” was published in the London Gazette of June 19, 1739. It was very full indeed. Omitting superfluous details it ran as follows:--

“My medicines consist of a powder, decoction and pills. The powder is made by first taking hens’ egg-shells, cleaning and drying them, crushing them up in the hands, and putting them into a three-pint crucible, lightly, so that they will fill about three-fourths of its capacity. Cover the crucible with a tile and place it in the midst of a strong, clear fire, above and below. Keep the crucible in the fire until the egg-shells are calcined to a greyish-white, and have acquired an acrid, salt taste. This will need eight hours at least. The calcined shells are to be kept in a dry, clean, open earthenware pan, about three parts filled, in a dry room for two months exactly. They will then have become of a milder taste and the part which is sufficiently calcined will be in a powder of such fineness that it will pass through a hair sieve, which has to be done.

“In like manner take garden snails with their shells, cleaned from dirt, put them in a crucible whole, put the crucible in the fire as before, and keep it there until the snails have done smoaking, which will be about one hour. They are then to be rubbed to a fine powder in a mortar, the two powders are to be mixed, sifted through a cypress sieve, bottled in close-stopped bottles, and kept in a dry place for use.”

“I have generally added a small quantity of Swines-Cresses, burnt to a blackness and rubbed fine, but this was only with a view to disguise it,” adds the lady, conscientiously.

“The egg-shells may be prepared at any time of the year, but it is best to do them in summer. The snails ought only to be prepared in May, June, July, or August, and I esteem those best which are done in the first of those months.”