Open main menu

Page:New observations on inoculation - Angelo Gatti.djvu/10

This page has been validated.
Preliminary Discourse.

other name, written with great art and no less disingenuousness, contains, besides the old and exploded objections of Wagstaff, Blackmore, Cantwell, and De Haen, a number of facts collected both in France and in Great Britain. The book no sooner appeared, but the most material of these facts, said to have happened in the first of these kingdoms, were publickly contradicted, and proved to be mistakes; and it would be no difficult task to do the same, with respect to most of those sent over from this island, were this a proper place for such a discussion.

Later, but not less keen, were the favourers of inoculation in their answer[1]. The col-

    petite vérole lu en présence de la faculté de Médecine de Paris & imprimé par son ordre, pour étre communiqué á tous ses docteurs, avant qu'elle donne sur cette question l'avis que le parlement lui a demandé par son arret du 8 Juin 1765. In 4to. The six opposing docters were, De l'Espine, Astruc, Bouvart, Baron, Verdelhan, and Macquart.

  1. Premier & second Rapport en faveur de l'Inoculation lus dans les Assemblées de la faculté de Médecine de Paris en 1764. & 1766. & imprimés par son ordre. Par M. A. Petit, Docteur Régent de la Faculté de Médecine en l'Université de Paris, &c. Paris 1766. 2 vols, in 8vo. The commissaries who signed this report were besides the author, Dr. Geoffroy, Thierry, Lorry, and Maloet: the sixth, Dr. Cochu, published a separate report equally in favour of inoculation.