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, 144 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 his ,
wa merely because.l thought that the King was a very, as to the time of it ?—His Majesty.
great deal better, and that my attendance was not after the examination of the Physicians
longer necessary at that time. Privy Council, certainly distressed us,
You have mentioned, the King's competency to ' prospect of immediate recovery to a greater
business, in the intervals of periods of flurries which but I do not think of ultimate recovery,
I
may occur after the disease has in a great measure Are you of opinion, that a person,
ceased ; doping 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 wet,
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 something 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 ?—yes,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, 6e;
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 ;1t
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 effect
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.
hemselrei?
In what way did those aivantages shew t
Pitt also SAW
t The King became more composed, and he !vas n'm
mperianonagseainblate afterwards
tendance
00; ant
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 courser 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 before
pit 'toes
Con
so and
;Teeter • s you
ry,
bavio tortniF
)re or less 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 attack ompani
`jestl is nova ;asyiett
calculation,lt
take the ,uld.att
efore, the oi
and dim as rail
in
11
o
f
he
n
ttenda
ore
rtpek::De eared
served ed:lvomalarfuibeeni°sotcylupol3hulh.dlrciolt‘inlii 4e
fse;i)-uotnitsllihelfic nvyro,:sea there2f442
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 his ma.r ns ;bi
1,
—No. ent,
'hysicians and se t
seen his mi.,t Trig
atysiet,sastte;
day. his m
Has
npropriety of 'tweet'
—?—TheYels:thed
reviously, ap.
—hot that lr boure
You
since of the ph his
u his Majesty'
Ares permitted over
r
es,erlly
Jeer
a discuss'', k
ibt on some of,
od or irritate hi so
Can
I the Chance' .
1611121
cided amour,“
I,2,med to have m.
ncellor, there w 'm in
ting it, than , • mat
nin:
n ; and tit
tie
nanimous concur '
tee (
his 1
Majesty Lb- :e.ePl4l
eedd, that the Chan nem'
information gir. ids
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. bC
ir Henry Halford, •,
sty, in the manner th-ii
dance, would you
informed ? —That &hit
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