office of censor in the Royal College of Physicians, in 1792 and 1797, and that of commissioner under the act of parliament for the inspection and licensing of mad-houses, in 1794 and 1795.
In 1799, Dr Baillie relinquished the business of an anatomical lecturer, and in 1800 resigned his duties as physician to St George's Hospital. Partly by the influence of his fame as an anatomist, and partly through the disinterested recommendations of several members of his own profession, he found himself gradually tempted into the less agreeable business of a general physician. He was always resorted to, when more than ordinary scientific precision was required. About the year 1801, when he had attained the mature age of forty, he had become completely absorbed in practice. As a physician, he possessed, in an eminent degree, a facility in distinguishing diseases,—one of the most important qualifications in the practice of medicine; as a want of accuracy in discriminating symptomatic from primary affections leads to the most serious errors; whilst it may be said that, when a disease is once distinctly characterised, and the peculiarities of the case defined, the cure is half performed. Habits of attentive observation had enabled Dr Baillie to know, with great accuracy, the precise extent of the powers of medicine; indeed, there was no class of cases more likely to fall under his observation than those in which they had been abused; younger practitioners being apt to carry a particular system of treatment beyond its proper limits; Dr Baillie's readiness, therefore, in seeing this abuse, rendered his opinions, in many cases, of great value. Yet he was always scrupulously anxious, through the natural benignity of his disposition, to use his knowledge with a delicate regard to the interests of those juniors whose procedure he was called upon to amend. He managed, indeed, this part of his practice with so much delicacy that he was held in the utmost affection and esteem by the younger branches of the profession.
Dr Baillie was remarkable for forming his judgment of any case before him from his own observations exclusively; carefully guarding himself against any prepossessions from the opinions suggested by others. When he visited a patient, he observed him accurately, he listened to him attentively, he put a few pointed questions—and his opinion was formed. Beneath a most natural and unassuming manner, which was the same on all occasions, was concealed an almost intuitive power of perceiving the state of his patient. His mind was always quietly, but eagerly directed, to an investigation of the symptoms; and he had so distinct and systematic a mode of putting questions, that the answers of his patients often presented a connected view of the whole case. On such occasions, he avoided technical and learned phrases; he affected none of that sentimental tenderness, which is sometimes assumed by a physician with a view to recommend himself to his patient; but he expressed what he had to say in the simplest and plainest terms; with some pleasantry, if the occasion admitted of it, and with gravity and gentleness, if they were required; and he left his patient, either encouraged or tranquillized, persuaded that the opinion he had received was sound and honest, whether it was unfavourable or not, and that his physician merited his confidence. In delivering or writing his opinions, he was equally remarkable for unaffected simplicity. His language was sometimes so plain, that his patients have been able to repent to their other medical attendants, every word which he had uttered. In consultation, he gave his opinion concisely, and with a few grounds; those grounds being chiefly facts, rather than arguments, so that little room was left for dispute. If any difference or difficulty arose, his example pointed out the way of removing it, by an appeal to other facts, and by a neglect of speculative reasoning.
In every relation and situation of private life, Dr Baillie was equally to be
