Star. — London, England, 1810-12-19 00:00:00

REPORT Atom Mt COMMITTEE APPOINTED TO EXAMINILTIVE PRY.. SICIANS *HO HAVE ATTENDED HIS MAJESTY DURING MIS ILLNESS, TOUCHING THE STATE OF HIS MAJESTY'S HEALTH ; ORDERED EY THE liOIISE OF COMMONS TO BE !MINTED DECEMBER 17, 1810. The Committee appointed to examine the Physicians who have attended His MAJESTY during his Illness, touching the state of His MAJESTY'S Health, arid to report. such examination to the House, have, pursuant to the order of the House, proceeded to examine the said Physicians ; which examination is as follows : VENEItIS, 14 4 DIE 'MENHIR'S, 1810. Dr. HENRY REVELL REYNOLDS called in ea examined. Q. Is the state of his Majesty's health such as to render him incapable of coming in person to his Par liament, or of attending to any kind of public busi ness ?—A. Certainly, he is incapable. What are the hopes ycu entertain of bis Majesty's recovery ?—I still entertain very confident hopes of his Majesty's recovery. Do you found the opinion, given in your answer to the previous question, upon the particular symptoms of his-- Majesty's disorder ; or upon general expe rience in other cases of the same nature, or upon both ?—Upon both ; and for this reason : with respect to the particular symptoms of his Majesty, they are favourable, from, the circumstances of the soundness of hi.; constitution, preserved by simple and tempente diet. and the regular habits of his life ; and also be cause his memory is as strong and as correct as ever 1 it was, his perceptions as acute, (his judgment is per verted, and he has lost his discretion at present ;) and also because I have seen his Majesty recover from three attacks of the same disease, in some parts of which I think he has been even worse than he is at present. Whether, in that particular species of the disorder his Majesty has fallen into, it has been found, from experience, that the greater number of persops so af fected, have been cured ?—I believe much the greater number. Can you form any judgment, or probable conjec ture, of the duration of his Majesty's illness ?—No, I cannot. • Our hopes and expectations of a speedy re covery have fluctuated with the fluctuations of his Ma jesty's complaint ; but !lathing has hitherto prevented me from thinking favourably of the ultimate termi : I , nation of the cl , sease. As far as experience enables you to judge, do you' think it more probable that bis Majesty will, or will not recover, so as to render him capable of attending, to public business ?—Yes, I have no doubt ; there is such an integrity of mind about his Majesty, that when once his aberrations are gone, he will recover perfectly ; how soon, it is impossible for me to say. I suppose some vestiges of complaint may remain when the principal part of the disease shall be re 'ed ; but I ha' doubt of his being able to dis well as ever. Ice have you had yourself .isorder ?—ln the course practice, I have seen seve. treacly taken place in the isorder, and does the ap. it continue at present ? ions ; his Majesty has some. sometimes again he has been paroxysms S there have been .tn apparently going on well, (ddenly has thrown him back : ken place, but then it has been a little worse again, again. He is much better periods of the disease.. Majesty's disorder at pre. chat it was when you were Council ?—I perceive but what it was at that time. ..ajesty's disorder to any par. iderstand that it came on from the illness of his daughter, believe there can be no doubt who were in attendance satisfy the Committee upon report, I have no doubt mse. ailed in ?--On'the 3d of No- in attendance al the time Heberden, Sir Henry Hal- Lysicians in attendance ?-- fidential medical person in ?—Not at the time I went. in attendance now ?—ln tlemen and myself, Dr. Robert Willis called in ?—To the , on Tuesday the 6th of No- fidential medical person now Physicians ?—Mr. Dundas Mr. Battiscomb is his apo there occasionally ; but person. unities of seeing the King, jour attendance upon his Yes; I saw his Majesty 801, and also in his illness . to attend his Majesty - , or _unities of seeing his Majesty, those illnesses of 1788, 1801, of your being called in, in to had few opportunities ofl in those illnesses. I have two or three times on my me the honour of appoint :traordinary, and then his Physi medically. the greater number of pa tame sort of infirmity as come under your observation, mean in the greater number e age at which his Majesty __ not occurred to me, to see advanced period of life, labouring medical people in general ton- sider, that as life advaftedi, after a certain period. re- I covery is deemed improbable ?—Yes, I believe that is the general opinion. Then, in the greater number of patients who have recovered, as stated by you, all those patients werein a class of age below that of the King ?—I think so ; there was one whose age I do not recollect precisely. Have you been in the habit of attending any of the public hospitals for the reception of patients un der this disease ?—No, I have not been in the habit of attending any hospital appropriated to the reception, of such patients. You have stated, that you entertain a very favour able opinion of the King's ultimate recovery ; and you have stated one of the reasons of your opinion to be, the soundness of his Majesty's constitution ; in those patients whom you have attended, have you not found that very sound constitutions have often been afflicted with incurable maladies of this nature ? —No, I do not know that I have often found that. Have you found it in any instances ?—I have seen people who have not recovered. With very sound constitutions ?—Not with such tonstitutions as the King; probably I•should have had great hopes of them if they had. But I cannot charge my mind now with every patient of the kind I have attended during forty years. The general im pression made upon my mind, does not authcrize me to answer that question decisively. When the constitution is so sound, as to afford the medical attendant no reason for the mental infirmity as arising out of that constitution, do you think that the probabiliti of recovery is more or less from that circumstance ?—More, certainly, from a sound con stitution. If you cannot trace any cause for the in&rmity ? If I cannot trace any cause, if there is no hereditary taint, or any obvious cause for it, no external injury, or any thing which looks like organical affection of the brain ; I should apprehend a sound constitution affords much the greatest probability of recovery. You have stated, as another reason, the extreme acenracy of the King's memory ; in patients labouring under this infirmity, is not extreme accaracy of me mory very frequent, and sometimes what may be called morbid ?—I never observed that. You have also accounted for the probability of the King's recovery, by observing the strict, simple, and temperate diet the King has always used ; when pa tients have come under your observation, whose ha bits of life have been exactly the reverse of the King's, has not the reducing them to that strict and tempe rate diet and life to which the King has been accus tomed, afforded the best ground of hope for medical men, of his recovery ?—When excess in the habits of like has been too much indulged, the removal of that , excess, and the subsequent adoption of a temperate and rather a more sparing regimen, has been fre quently attended with success. What do you mean by the integrity of the King's mind, at the present time ?—I mean that his memory ; is entire. His perceptions are entire—and his acute- I ness is considerable, which appears from evory now and then a comment on any thing that is said. His judgment I have said was perverted, and that at pre sent his discretion is asleep at times, though every now and then there are gleams of both, but they are transient. In detailing the present state of the King's mind, as to his memory, his perceptions, the aberrations of his judgment, and his loss of discretion, is not that state of mind common to all persons labouring under , the same infirmity, or . are they particular symptoms belonging to the King ?—I do not know that I .ever saw exactly a case parallel to the King's ; the disease is modified by his peculiar constitution, and perhaps in some measure by his peculiar station. You have mentioned your expectation, that the King will recover, and be able to transact public bu siness again, but that some vestiges of the complaint may remain—do you mean to - say, that the recovery will be, in your opinion, complete to the transaction of public business, while vestiges of the complaint remain ?—Yes, I have no doubt there might be times when his Majesty might be perfectly competent to every thing ; and that now and then a little hurry, or something, might, for a quarter of an hour or an ' hour, agitate him, but that it would all subside again. , I understand that was the case in his former recove- ries, for a time—l did not learn when it ceased ;I I did not see the King in any of his illnesses, after he had been declared quite well ; I understood it did not 1 last above a month or two, or a few weeks ; but I I only speak from hearsay in this respect. i Then, in fact, you ceased to visit the King in his ! former illness, after he was declared quite well ?—Yes. And you have heard that, subsequent to that de claration, there were occasional paroxysms of the dis order, though slight and short ?—They could hardly be called paroxysms ; it was mere a hurry of manner than any thing else ; as I understood from those who saw his Majesty. 1 Were you a party to the declaration in the three former illnesses, that the King was perfectly well ? Not in the three former instances : at the time•that II declared the King to be well, in the year 1789, I theni thought the King well ; that was, I think. in the be- ginning of March 1/89. Were yon a party to the declaration, that the King was perfectly well in 1789 ?—I was. In 1801, were you a party to the declaration; that ; the King was perfectly well ?—No, in 1501, after thel King was so much better, that the bulletins ceased in the morning, I withdrew : the King was going then to Kew, and I thought the King was so well I did not apprehend it to be necessary for me to attend any longer. The King had a relapse, I understood, at Kew ; bill I did not see him in that relapse. Can you recollect the date of the last bulletin that was signed by you, in the year 1801 ?—/shi, I have no memorandum of it. Who where the medical attendants upon the King, on his relapse at Kew in 1801 ?—I believe the late Dr. t Gisborne, and Dr. John and Dr. Robert Willis. I do I not know whether Mr. Dundas might see him ; but `they were the only Physicians attending him at that i time. ! Were you a party to the declaration that the King was perfectly well, in the year 1804 ?—Yes, I think I was at that time. Was there .any relapse after that declaration, in that illness ?—Not any that I understood, I did not see his Majesty after that, but I never heard of any after wards. When you withdrew in the year 1801, was it in consequence of any claret= of opinion with the Other medical attendants ?—None is the world ; it id before the Priv) Connell at ee hi s , wa merely because.l thought that the King was a very, as to the time of it ?—His Maje sty . great deal better, and that my attendance was no t after the examination of the Physicia ns longer necessary at that time. Privy Council, certainly distre sse d us, You have mentioned, the King's competency to ' prospect of immediate recovery to a g reater business, in the intervals of periods of flurries which but I do not think of ultimat e recovery, I may occur after the disease has in a great measure Are you of opinion, that a per son , ceased ; d o ping those periods of flurry, do you think with an interval of several years' repeal that the King would be competent to transact any this malady , is on the last attack more business, public or private ?—f cannot answer that to recover , than a person who has not question from my own knowledge ;, but what I un- , ously subject to attack ?—I should rat derstood was this, that if the King . was, from any the circumstance of his having got w e t, little opposition, rather in a flurry, if he was told there , similar attacks, is a foundation of hope, was any business to transact, it composed him , di- . from this. rectly that was the testimony that was given to me Does advanced age, coupled with by several persons who saw litm at the time. the same disorder with which his Mal Who were the persons who gave you that testi. flicted; make any difference, in your mony ?—I cannot tell exactly now ;it was those who to the probability of his recovery were about him at the time ' • I think I heard some- i other case ; but there is som e thi ng so thing of that kind from Dr. Heberden, but Ido not King's, Ido not think it has sl> en mean to rely upon my quotation. What are the peculiarities which t. In 1801 there was a relapse ?—Yes. case out of your general observation But after the complete recoveries in 1789 and 1804 * 1 cumstances to which I have alluded bef those flurries occurred ?—Yes. I did not understand still of certain faculties of his mind, at there was any relapse in the first illness; nor in 1801. no mark of fatuity about him. I believe, as far as I can recollect, taking the whole You have stated, that you understood together, that illness was shorter than that of the year his Majesty's present malady to have , 1788 and 1789 ; even taking in the period of the re- about the Princess Amelia ; have you lapse, tke whole cf the attack was shorter, because in what were supposed to be.the causes 1788 the complaint commenced in October, and we his Majesty had in 1788, 1801, and did not declare the King well till the beginning of ther those attacks were refer-red to an March. In 1801, it commenced in February; and I —I do not know that the first attack * think the Ring was well befdre the end of May, and any known cause; in 1801, I did under that includes the period of relapse. a cause; I did not understand that in At the time you ceased to attend the King in 1801, any assignable cause. was tbefe any declaration made, that he was com- When you were called in, on the 3d pletely recovered ?—No declaration was then made, did the Physicians, who had been prey that he was completely recovered. I do not recol- tendance, inform you when the first lect what the last bulletin was ; but I know that I Majesty's present complaint was observed thought the King so well, that I could take my leave —I think they told me on the 25th of Octc of him with propriety, and I did it ; seeing the King Have any of the Royal Family seen Wu getting better, and understanding that he was soon since you have been in attendance ?—No. going to Kew, I thought that it would have a good t Has any person, other than the Physician, appearance to the public, that I had withdrawn ; Attendants under their inspection, seen his that it would be a confirmation to the public, that since you have been in attendance ?—TheLc the King was getting well. cellor saw him the day before yesterday. Did you, esteem the King well, at the time you ' Did the Lord Chancellor apply to you withdrew your attendance upon him ?-1 should your opinion as to the propriety or impropriet rather think that I did think him well at that time ; ing his Majesty, before he saw him ?—y es ,t I thought him so nearly so, that I could very safely Had any of the Royal Family, previously, withdraw. for permission to see his Majesty ?—Net that You wished the public to understand, from your derstood. withdrawing from attendance, that the King was Was it with the unanimous concurrence oft well ?—I wished so, because I thought so myself. sicians, that no injury could arise t 4 his M But I do not recollect the precise terms of the last health, that the Lord Chancellor was mail Bulletin ; but lam sure I never signed any thing that see his Majesty thin day before yesterday • I did not think, was no absolute dissentient ; there w The Committee is to understand, that the complete' , recovtty of the Kin is the same as the complete re covery of any other person of the same disorder, to be intrusted with any thing he may have to transact, whether public or private ?—I think so. There is no difference, in your estimation, between the recovery of the King, and that of any other per son ?—None, in my estimation. Is the present age of his Majesty likely more to af fect the duration of his illness, than his age at the respective periods of his former attacks of this disor der ?—I can only answer that question by saying, that age seems to have made very few depredations upon his Majesty. He is apparently younger and srronger than many persons much younger than him self ; and therefore muck better able to resist the ef fect of disease, than several persons, younger than himself, would be. You will, in your answer, compare his Majesty, not with other persons, but with himself only : does his present age, more or less, affect the probability of the duration of the disorder, than his age at the former periods of attack?-1 should apprehend that it must have some effect ; though I do not see that he has at present suffered from his age. At the period of his Majesty's former attack, in 1804, was his Majesty's sight as much affected as it is at present ?—No ; I did not observe that his Ma jesty had any defect of sight at that period. Is his Majesty's sight now become very defective ? —Very defective. Is that defect of sight likely to have any influence upon his Majesty's ultimate recovery from the disease, or likely to have any influence upon the duration of the disorder, supposing him ultimately to recover?— During a certain period of the disease, and under cer tain circumstances, his being blind, is rather a benefi cial Circumstance, because it intercepts some sources of irritation ; but at another period of the disease, it will be adverse to him, because it also intercepts some sources of amusement. Computing, then, the different tendencies of the defectiveness of his Majesty's sight, do you, upon the whole, conclude that the defect of sight is favourable or unfavourable to the ultimate recovery of his Ma jesty, or tends to shorten or to prolong the duration ofhis illness, supposing him ultimately to recover ? That is a question I can hardly make up my mind to : I see it operate sometimes for his benefit ; and there are times when I think that the loss of sight will be a grievance, by preventing the amusing him and ab stracting him from himself: but what effect it will have upon the protracting or accelerating his reco very, is a great deal more than I can give a definitive answer to. • In persons labouring under the disease under which his Majesty now unfortunately labours, do not the persons attending them, address their countenances and manner, very frequently, very much to the eye of the afflicted person ?—Yes, undoubtedly. Does not the eye afford, to the persons attending persons afflicted as his Majesty is, when in its perfect state, a means of controul over the afflicted person —I have understood that sometimes, that effect has been produced, but I cannot say that I ever saw any remarkable instance of it. Was not Dr. Simmons called in, to attend the King, at the commencement of his present illness ? —I understood lie was ; but that was before I was there. He did not continue in that attendance ?—He did not see the King. Are you more or less sanguine in your hopes of the King's ultimate recovery, than you were when you were examined before the Privy Council am not less sanguine of his ultimate' recovery, than I was then. Have you experienced any - disappointment, ;n the expectations you eatortained when you were cumin on the subject, and there was a dolibL minds, whether it would do him good but his Majesty had been informed I was to be there, and it was then decided that as that was the case, and he seemed up his mind to the seeing the Chancel' more chance of irritation by preventir was by the Chancellor's seeing him , the Chancellor saw him with the unal tence of all, after that. discussion. By whom was his Majesty informed, cellor would be there, and was that iaformation to his Majesty with the knowledge anel - the Physicians % in attendance ?-1 belie Halford was the person who informed' Chancellor was to be there. With the knowledge and concurrence physicians ?—Not at the time ; Si, - was alone with the King at the time we did not hear of it till afterwards. Then the day before yesterday, in such information conveyed to his 24 the other physicians had none but a choose from ; that was, whether he would 'by seeing him, or more irritated by • That was not exactly the case; we that the seeing the Chancellor 'nigh . more self-possession, and I do not knl for a time, because, we had known illnesses, that it had done so. But to be apprehended from it, except there been a little momentary anxiety abor doubted whether it would be right or cussion amongourselves ; but there was nothing of clash or opposition of Sentiment ; it was a temperate discussion ; there was no dissection at all ; it not apprehended that it was a choice of two evils. Had you been consulted by Sir Henry Halfordi whether he should inform his Majesty, in the manner he did, as to the Chancellor's attendance, would ' have agreed to his Majesty being informed ? would have depended entirely on the state in which I might have seen the King at that time. Have you, within the last fortnight, seen the King, at any time, in such a state, that you thought it de• sirable the Chancellor should visit him ?—I do net know that I should of myself have mentioned it ; at the same time I do not know that I had any objection to it. Ido not think the King was quite in the state in which I sh'ould have expected much benefit to hare resulted from it. When the Chancellor consulted the physicians, on the propriety of seeing his Majesty, did the phYsi clans agree on any stipulations as to speaking on sub' jects of business or otherwise ?—Yes, they did; del desired the Chancellor to avoid any thing that might I create discussion. One principal reason why it was suggested that it might be right for the Chancellor? ; see the King, was, that Parliament might not tan I the state of the King merely from the representations of his physicians. In the first attendance I bad upon his Majesty in the year 1788, for that reason, 6 e; sired that the Chancellor would see the King, n' a that Mr. Pitt would see the King ; and at my desire i they both saw him. At what period of the King's illness was hat It was within the first Month, for it was while r Majesty was at the Queen's Lodge at Windsor ; 1 t was in the latter end of the month of November, 1788 ; Lord Thurlow went in, aad . Vel the King at that time before his Majesty was rein° from Windsor to Kew. s e ffect I Do you recollect whether any advantagcou Pia ; was produced on . his Majesty, by seeing Mr.. and Lord T:urlow ?—lis both instances a benetoa` effect ensued. hemselre i? In what way did those aivantages shew t Pitt also SAW t The King became more composed, and he !vas n'm m peri an on ag s ea in bl at e afterwards tendance 00 ; a n t ththeatzinztime.W:uthAilnpoares.other / wi n Si to public business ?—Yes, I h • such an integrity of mind a when once his aberrations ard perfectly ; how soon, it is in I suppose some vestiges of c when the principal part of moved ; but I have no doubt charge his functions just as w What degree of experience in this particular species of di , of upwards of forty years pra ml instances of it ; many. Has any amendment alre course of his Majesty's disor pearance of such amendment There have been fluctuations times been better, and sorneti worse ; there have been paros times when he has been app and then something suddenly amendment has certainly tali been transient; and he has bl • and then he has been better al now than he was at several p What is the state of his IV Sent, as compared with what examined before the Privy C very little difference from wh Can you ascribe his Majest titular cause ?-1 understanc ate anxiety of his mind upon t] the Princess Amelia ; I belie of that : those gentlemen v upon her, I believe, will sati that subject ; but from their it originated from that cause When were you first called vember. Who were the physicians i you were called in ?—Dr. H. ford, and Dr. Baillie. Were they the only physi They were. Was there any other confii attendance at the same time ?. Who are the physicians ii addition to those Gentlemen Willis. When was Dr. Robert W best of my recollection, on •ember, in the evening. Is there any other confider in attendance, besides the P 1 has attended his Majesty ; M thecary, and, of course r is there js no other medial per Have you had opportune . from time to time, since yo Majesty in the year 1788 ? is his illness in the year 180 in the year 1804. Have you been called in td have you had any opportunit i, the intervals between tiros( aid 1804, up to the time of this present illness ?--I have seeing his Majesty, except it had occasion to see Lim td own business, when he did n ing me Physician Extraordii clan in Ordinary, but not m You have stated, that the tients, labouring under this his Majesty, who have coma have recovered ; do you me to include patients of the a; has now arrived ?—lt has n( any persons at that advanced under this disease. Do you know that medic; • 4estys • withir 'ans b efore p it ' to es Con so and ;Teet er • s you ry, b avio tortniF )r e or l ess 19. within )t been so ! • nt of n sing ether think ell befo,o :I of Pe, th,a E ?--Of e of the prior attac k ompani `jestl is n ova ; as y i e t t calculation,lt take th e ,uld.att efore, the oi and dim as rail in 11 o f he n ttenda ore rtpek::De eared served ed:l v om alarfui bee n i °s o tc y lu p ol3h u lh.dlrci o l t ‘inlii 4e f s e; i) - uotn itsl l ihelfic nvyro,:sea there 2f442 AhirdrinTs:3onrctibbtas°rlCCdritissihtllll:ll( r)°d the ens, 'hen av 180 ar y na om ed re to r in a t You b 3cl of Neecolier • ancell of are d of October.-- o not seen hi s ma.r ns ;bi 1, —No. ent, 'hysicians and se t seen his mi., t Trig aty s ie t ,s a st te ; day. his m Has npropriety of 'tweet' — ?— The Ye l s: t he d reviously, ap. —hot that lr boure You since of th e ph his u his Maj esty' Ares permitted over r e s , er l l y Jeer a discuss'', k ibt on some of, od or irritate hi so Can I the Chance' . 1611121 cided am o u r,“ I,2, med to have m. ncellor, there w ' m in ting it , than , • mat ni n : n ; and tit tie nan i mous concur ' tee ( his 1 Majesty Lb- : e . e Pl4 l e ed d , that the Chan nem' information gir. id s Ind consent of )elieve Sir Hen 6 : 11 offence of all Y „ s ; ir Henry Halfor e , ehe told him, an. Tr is i , in consequence Majesty, you an! , choice of evils to A " --, would be irritated h' y not seeing him e had some horn ;ht give the Leg Te sow that k did not „ i before in formes ;"..n. t there was no evil tic there might bare out the King. WI •N or not, in our dis• 'I I re was nothing of . 411 t was a temperate .1 on at all ;it was • 2 :a of two evi!s. b C ir Henry Halford, •, sty, in the manner th - ii dance, would you informed ? —That &h i t the state in which t time. al ght, seen the Sins' , Tt4 rou thow'ht it de• it him do not ev e mentioned it ; at had ally objection LS quite in the state stii ucla benefit to hare hi ed the physicians, • rq r