lornajarrettblanchard

–652  Henry. “Experience in Massachusetts…with Smallpox…” 1921, p. 221.[1]

–539  Natural

—  30  Inoculated

–569  Celebrate Boston. Boston Disasters. “Smallpox Epidemics.”

–539  Naturally exposed deaths.

—  30  Smallpox inoculation deaths.

–569  Creighton. Table: “Smallpox in Boston, Massachusetts.” p. 626 in History of Epidemics.[2]

–569  Rev. Thomas Prince. Ltr. to ed., Gentlemen’s Magazine, 1753, pp. 413-14 (in Duffy, 59).

–569  Purvis, Thomas L. Colonial America to 1763. NY: Facts On File, Inc., 1999, p. 173.[3]

–550  Childs. A History of the United States…1492 to the Year 1885.   1888, p. 26.

–550  Simonds. The American Date Book.   1902, p. 82.

–545  Willsey and Lewis.  “Massachusetts,” Harper’s Book of Facts. 1895, 489.

–514  Naturally exposed deaths.

—  31  Smallpox inoculation deaths.

–535  Duffy (early in year to July 30). Epidemics in Colonial America, 1979, p. 36.

–504  Naturally exposed deaths.

—  31  Smallpox inoculation deaths.

–532  Jan-June. Blake. Public Health in the Town of Boston 1630-1822. 1959, p. 86.

—    5  Jan-March

–119  April

–205  May

–203  June

–500  Henry. “Experience in Massachusetts…with Smallpox…” 1921, p. 221.

 

Narrative Information

 

Blake: “…Late in December 1751, a ship from London infected with smallpox came to grief in Nahant Bay near Boston. According to Douglass, rescuers caught the disease and thus brought it to Chelsea. A Suffolk County jury, however, alleged that the captain, knowing his ship to be infected and ‘not regarding the Health Or Lives’ of the people, had ‘Inhumanly and Wickedly’ caused several persons who he knew had never had smallpox to go aboard and remove infected goods. Thereby they became sick, the jurors charged, and smallpox spread to Chelsea.[4] The culprit pleaded nolo contendere. No doubt hoping to prevent such an occurrence in the future, the General Court shortly thereafter passed an act requiring Justices of the Peace to segregate goods suspected of infection.[5]

 

“The first case appeared in Boston on January 6, 1752, and the Selectmen immediately removed the patient to the pesthouse in the West End. Two weeks later they also sent another victim from the same family. Rumors soon circulated that the sickness was rife, but during February the Selectmen kept it well under control. It appeared in only three houses besides the pesthouse, and the physicians promised not to inoculate without due notice.[6] The first two weeks of March seemed equally hopeful, and according to one Bostonian most people thought the epidemic ‘might have been stop’d had the phisians {sic} & the town in general desir’d.’ However, she continued, ‘it was thought to be a good Season of the year and no business in town to be hindred [sic] therefore was best to have it Spread.’ In consequence, smallpox having broken out in several new families, the Selectmen officially informed the public on March 23 of their opinion that ‘no Method can be taken to prevent the spreading of that Distemper.’[7] [end of p. 83]

 

“ ‘Upon this,’ Benjamin Franklin later reported, ‘all that inclined to Inoculation for themselves of families hurried into it precipitately, fearing the infection might otherwise be taken in the common way.’[8]…. [p. 84]

 

“….The best argument for the opposition [to inoculation] was a letter published in the Evening-Post on April 13. So far as the author could discover, there were by April 6 about six dead, fifty recovered, and forty currently sick from natural smallpox, and perhaps twelve hundred inoculated cases, with more coming every day. He thought it very dangerous to inoculate so many at a time…. [p. 85]

 

“This writer’s fears seem to have had some justification. During January, February, and March there were only five deaths from smallpox, but early in April those who had been inoculated late the month before broke out and, as Franklin later wrote, they ‘spread the infection likewise more speedily among those who did not chuse Inoculation.’ Many more people caught it the natural way than by inoculation, and nearly all who died were among the former. The death toll mounted rapidly. During April there were 119 smallpox deaths, in May 205, and in June 203.[9] The Selectmen curtailed the tolling of funeral bells and ordered the dead buried without the usual solemnities. As hundreds fled the stricken town, neighboring communities set gates and guards to ward off the infected….

 

“By the end of June the epidemic was waning. The Selectmen predicted on July 4 that it would soon be safe for country people to enter and warned any inhabitants then out of town who planned to return for inoculation that the treatment would be forbidden as soon as only twenty families were infected….By July 27 only twenty-three persons, in seventeen families, were still sick….” [p. 86]  Blake. Public Health in the Town of Boston 1630-1822. 1959.

 

Celebrate Boston: “In 1752, it again appeared amongst the then 15,684 inhabitants, 7,669 were supposed to have then received the disease. Many of the citizens removed from the town, and all the residents but 174 had it either by inoculation or by the natural way. 2,124 were treated by the first method of whom 30 died. 5,545 were seized with it, of whom 539 died.” (Celebrate Boston.  Boston Disasters.  “Smallpox Epidemics.”)

 

Childs: “The small-pox visited Boston this year, of which disease about 550 died. The town contained at the time 17,574 inhabitants.”  (Childs 1886, p. 26.)

 

Creighton:

Boston population                   15,684

Attacked by smallpox               5,545

Died of smallpox                          569

Had smallpox before                 5,598

Moved out of town                   1,843.

 

Duffy: “The fourth smallpox epidemic to ravage Boston in the eighteenth century began early in 1752 and lasted until the end of summer. In midsummer, when the worst was over, the selectmen made a careful check of the town and found that there had been a total of 7,653 cases during the outbreak. Of these, 5,544 had taken it naturally and another 2,109 were inoculated. The death tolls numbered 504 among the natural cases and 31 through inoculation, representing case fatality rates of 9.1 percent and 1.5 percent respectively.”[10] [pp. 35-36]

 

“….A clergyman of Boston, the Reverend Thomas Prince, in an article in the Gentlemen’s Magazine in 1753, claimed that out of a total population of 15,684 smallpox seized 5,545; another 2,124 were inoculated with it, and of these 569 died….” [p.59]

 

“The disease apparently did little damage outside of Boston, despite the exodus of hundreds of refugees, some of whom must have carried the infection. Records of surrounding towns speak of the epidemic in Boston but say nothing of the infection of their own localities. However, the Pennsylvania Gazette reported in April that the contagion was in Concord and other Massachusetts towns.[11]” (Duffy, Epidemics in Colonial America, 1979.)

 

Harper’s: “Small-pox again visits Boston…1752.  (Of 2100 persons inoculated with it, only 31 died; of the 5550 taken without inoculation 514 died.)”  (Willsey and Lewis.  “Massachusetts,” Harper’s Book of Facts. 1895, p. 489.)

 

Sources

 

Blake, John B. Public Health in the Town of Boston 1630-1822. President and Fellows of Harvard College, 1959. Google preview accessed 3-26-2018 at: http://books.google.com/books?id=Zk2j4jrSf2EC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Celebrate Boston. Boston Disasters. “Smallpox Epidemics.” Accessed 12/06/2008 at:  http://www.celebrateboston.com/disasters/epidemics/smallpox.htm

 

Childs, Emery E.  A History of the United States In Chronological Order From the Discovery of America in 1492 to the Year 1885.  NY:  Baker & Taylor, 1886.  Google digitized at:  http://books.google.com/books?id=XLYbAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Creighton, Charles MD. A History of Epidemics in Britain (Vol. II) Cambridge: At the University Press, 1894. Google preview accessed 3-23-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=qYQoAAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Duffy, John. Epidemics in Colonial America. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1953; 1979 printing.

 

Henry, Jonathan E., M.D. “Experience in Massachusetts and a Few Other Places with Smallpox and Vaccination.” Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, Vol. 185, No. 8, pp. 221-228, 8-25-1921. Accessed 1-8-2018 at: http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJM192108251850802

 

Purvis, Thomas L. Colonial America to 1763. NY: Facts On File, Inc., 1999. Google digital preview: http://books.google.com/books?id=BZRJSx3uMYEC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Simonds, W. E. (ed.)  The American Date Book.  Kama Publishing Co., 1902, 211 pages. Digitized by Google. Accessed at:  http://books.google.com/books?id=JuiSjvd5owAC

 

Vital Records of Chelsea Massachusetts, to the Year 1850 (compiled by Thomas W. Baldwin, New England Historic Genealogical Society). Boston, MA: Wright & Potter Printing Co., 1916. Google preview accessed 3-26-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=mG7Ea8MOQMMC&dq=vital+records+of+chelsea&source=gbs_navlinks_s

 

Willsey, Joseph H. (compiler), and Charlton T. Lewis (editor). Harper’s Book of Facts: A Classified History of the World Embracing Science, Literature, and Art.. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1895. Google preview accessed 3-23-2018 at:

https://books.google.com/books?id=UcwGAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

 

[1] We do not use 652 as the high-end of the fatality range in that the numbers Henry shows in Table I. — Smallpox in Boston, Mass., 1700-1800,” add to 569 (539 naturally caught smallpox deaths and 30 deaths after inoculation).

[2] Cites: Gent. Magazine, Sep 1753, p. 413, as “collected from the Accounts of the Overseers in the Twelve several Wards,” and sent by the Rev. T. Prince.

[3] Cites as source: John B. Blake, Public Health in the Town of Boston, 1630-1822 (1959), p. 244. Shows 539 “natural smallpox” deaths out of 5,545 cases, and 30 “inoculated smallpox” deaths our of 2,124 cases. Total Boston population is listed as 15,684.

[4] We have consulted the Vital Records of Chelsea and find no smallpox deaths noted for 1751 or 1752.

[5] Cites, in footnote 27: Douglass, Summary, Historical and Political, II, 397; Presentment at the Superior Court for Suffolk County, February 1752, MS. in Mellen Chamberlain Papers, V, Mass. Hist. Soc.; Acts, 1751-52, ch. 12, Mass. Acts and Resolves, III, 596-597.

[6] Cites, in footnote 28: Boston News-Letter, Jan 9, 23, Feb. 13, 20, 27, 1752.

[7] Cites, in footnote 29, Abigail Greenleaf to Robert Treat Paine, Boston, July 24, 1752, MS. in R. T. Paine Papers, Mass. Hist. Soc.; Post-Boy, Mar. 23, 1752.

[8] Cites, in footnote 30, B. Franklin and William Herberden, Some Account of the Success of Inoculation for the Small-Pox in England and America Together with Plain Instructions, by Which Any Person May Be Enabled to Perform the Operation, and Conduct the Patient through the Distemper (London, 1759, 3.

[9] Cites, in footnote 34: Thomas Prince, “Observations on the State of the Small Pox at Boston, in 1752,” Gentleman’s Magazine, and Historical Chronicle (London), XXIII (1753), 414; Franklin and Hebreden, Some Account of the Success, 3; John Tudor, Deacon Tudor’s Diary (William Tudor, ed., Boston, 1896), 7-8.

[10] Duffy, in footnote 19, p. 36, cites Boston News-Letter, No. 2614, July 30, 1752.

[11] Cites, in footnote 34, Pennsylvania Gazette, No. 1224, May 28, 1752.

–240-290.  Blanchard tally of breakouts below.

 

Abington

–60  Hobart. An Historical Sketch of Abington…Massachusetts. 1849, p. 86.

 

Hingham

–80  Hingham.

–80  Hingham.  Caulfield, citing diary of Benjamin Loring of Hingham. (Caulfield 1950, 44.)

 

Weymouth

–~150  Grob. The Deadly Truth. 2002, p. 83.

—  120  Adams. Wessagusset and Weymouth. p. 52.

—  110  Town of Weymouth, MA. Historic Timeline. Highlights of Weymouth’s past.

—  100  Caulfield, citing diary of Benjamin Loring of Hingham. (Caulfield 1950, 44.)

 

Narrative Information

 

Caulfield, Early Childhood Diseases: “This paper concerns only seven of the two thousand diseases that were known to the physicians of Cotton Mather’s time. These seven have been studied as a group because they were all common contagious diseases and therefore responsible for many, if not most, of the colonial epidemics. So far as children were concerned, two of these diseases, chicken pox and mumps, were relatively harmless; but another two, diphtheria and dysentery, outranked smallpox as a cause of death….

 

“In colonial records one looks for diphtheria under the name of cynanche, squinancy, quinsy, angina, canker, bladders, rattles, hives, throat ail, or throat distemper. It is said that the first epidemic occurred about 1659. According to Cotton Mather, it was during December, 1659, that the Reverend Samuel Danforth lost three children within a fortnight from “Bladders in the Windpipe,” which could have been laryngeal diphtheria. Scattered references to probable sporadic cases or local epidemics can be found particularly in Connecticut and Massachusetts between 1712 and 1735. John Walton’s Essay on Fevers, the Rattles & Canker (Boston, 1732) was the earliest American article on diphtheria…

 

“After a lull of about a year, that is, during 1751-1752, some terrible epidemics reappeared in this same area [southeastern MA] but in different towns — Abington, Attleborough, Hanover, and Weymouth. Twelve percent of the population, or 150 persons, mostly children, died in Weymouth during ‘The Throat Distemper Year’ of 1751.[1] The Colson family lost four children [end of p. 22] in January, 1752, and three more from ‘throat ail’ in 1760.[2] About eighty children died in Hingham….” (Transactions of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, Vol. 35, April 1942, pp. 4-65.)

 

Caulfield, “The Pursuit of a Pestilence”: “Inasmuch as the News-Letter [Boston] for February and March, 1752, contains numerous references to various outbreaks of throat distemper, it would seem that the two separate epidemics in Boston[3] could be easily explained. But all references to throat distemper concern its prevalence ‘in some Countrey Towns,’ and although one can trace its ravages among the children of Abington, Attleborough, Bridgewater, Framingham, Hanover, Hingham, Sudbury, and Weymouth during 1751-1752, no specific references to this disease in Boston have been found….” (Caulfield, Ernest. “The Pursuit of a Pestilence.” Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society, April 1950, pp. 43-44.)

 

Abington

 

Hobart: “In 1751-2, a disease, commonly called the throat-distemper, prevailed, and carried off many of the inhabitants, particularly children. More than 60 persons died of it.”[4] (Hobart. An Historical Sketch of Abington…Massachusetts. 1849, p. 86.)

 

Weymouth

 

Adams: “…the other disaster which made memorable the year [meeting house fire] was far more terrible than the destruction of any building the work of human hands. That year was marked by a veritable slaughter of the innocents. Death stalked through the town. Between May, 1751, and May, 1752, a terrible throat distemper so raged among the children as to amount almost to a pestilence. In October, 1751, alone, thirty died, and in all there perished some one hundred and twenty. Out of a population of only twelve hundred, no less than one hundred and fifty persons died in the town during that twelvemonth.[5] During the succeeding year the disease gradually disappeared, and has since been almost unknown in Weymouth. Rarely, indeed, however, even in times of plague, has the death-rate exceeded that of Weymouth in 1751-2.” (Wessagusset and Weymouth. p. 52.)

 

Grob: “In Weymouth, Massachusetts…about 150 persons (overwhelmingly children), or 12 percent of the population, perished from the throat distemper” in 1751…” (Grob. The Deadly Truth. 2002, p. 83.)

 

Town of Weymouth: “A large proportion of Weymouth’s population perishes from a ‘throat distemper’ that same year [1751]. One book says one tenth of the population died in this manner. Another books says one eighth of the population died, and a third book says 110 people died…it was a widespread tragedy.” (Historic Timeline. Highlights of Weymouth’s past.)

 

Sources

 

Adams, Charles Francis Jr. Wessagusset and Weymouth. Weymouth Historical Society, 1905. Google preview accessed 1-16-2017 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=aT4WAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Caulfield, Ernest. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, Vol. 35, April 1942, pp. 4-65. Accessed 1-17-2018 at: https://www.colonialsociety.org/node/865

 

Caulfield, Ernest. “The Pursuit of a Pestilence.” Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society, April 1950, pp. 21-52. Accessed 1-17-2018 at: http://www.americanantiquarian.org/proceedings/44807204.pdf

 

Grob, Gerald N. The Deadly Truth: A History of Disease in America. Cambridge, MA: President and Fellows of Harvard College, Harvard University Press, 2002. Partially Google digitized at: http://books.google.com/books?id=U1H5rq3IQUAC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Hobart, Aaron. An Historical Sketch of Abington, Plymouth County, Massachusetts. With an Appendix. Boston, Samuel N. Dickinson, 1849. Google preview accessed 1-16-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=DMwTAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Town of Weymouth, MA. Historic Timeline. Highlights of Weymouth’s past. Accessed 1-16-2018 at: http://www.weymouth.ma.us/history/pages/historic-timeline

 

 

[1] Caulfield footnote 50:

[2] Caulfield footnote 51.

[3] Goes on to note these outbreaks in Boston were probably smallpox.

[4] Hobart footnote: “Mr. Dodge, in his journal, 22d October, 1752, says, ‘from August 1^st, 1751, to August, 1752, there died, belonging to this town and congregation, with the throat distemper, 41 — in the whole, 50.’ 24^th February, 1753, he says — ‘attended two funerals of children, who died of the throat distemper. N.B. — We have lost 60 in town and congregation, since August, ’51.’”

[5] It seems clear that 120 children died. It is less clear if the 150 deaths, which would seem to include adults, are due to the epidemic. In that thirty deaths of adults within a year in a small settlement seems large, it could well be that at least some of the thirty deaths beyond the 120 children, would be due to the epidemic as well.

—<119  Blanchard tally from Caulfield, including conversion of “a great many” into <10.

 

Canaan           (<10)

— ~10?   “…a great many old people” died. (Caulfield 1942, p. 51, citing Webster.)[1]

 

Hartford         (  64)

–64  Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” 1942, p. 51.[2]

 

New Haven     (  45)

–45  Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” 1942, p. 51.[3]

 

Narrative Information

 

Beach: “In 1751 dysentery, in an epidemic form, and also angina maligna, became general, and prevailed for several years.” (Beach, Wm. Morrow, M.D. “Contagions and Epidemics in America,” Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. IV, No. 11, 3-14-1885, p. 282.)

 

Graves: “The 1751 ‘the dysentery was epidemic and mortal in Hartford and New Haven probably in many other places. With this fatal dysentery prevailed a mortal angina for several years.’ ‘The dysentery and ulcerous sore throat were very fatal this year in Guilford.” (p. 76)

 

Webster: “The dysentery was epidemic and mortal, in the same year, at Hartford and New-Haven; probably in many other places. — With this fatal dysentery prevailed a mortal angina for several years.” (1799. p. 242.)

 

Sources

 

Beach, Wm. Morrow, M.D. “Contagions and Epidemics in America,” Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. IV, No. 11, 3-14-1885, pp. 281-282. Google preview accessed 1-28-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=EvVGAQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Caulfield, Ernest. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, Vol. 35, April 1942, pp. 4-65. Accessed 1-17-2018 at: https://www.colonialsociety.org/node/865

 

Webster, Noah. A Brief History of Epidemic and Pestilential Diseases; with the principal phenomena of the physical world which precede and accompany them, and observations deduced from the facts stated (in two volumes). Hartford, DT: Hudson & Goodwin, 1799. Accessed 1-7-2018 at: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/evans/N27531.0001.001/1:12?rgn=div1;view=fulltext

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1] For the purpose of a tally we convert “a great many” to approximately 10.

[2] Cites Webster Pestilential Diseases, I, 241-242, II, 23-27; New England Gen. Register, Xii, p. 124.

[3] Cites Webster Pestilential Diseases, I, 241-242, II, 23-27; New England Gen. Register, Xii, p. 124.

–252->262  Blanchard tally of locality breakouts below.[1]

—         187  Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” 1942, p. 52.

—         150  Webster, Noah. A Brief History of Epidemic and Pestilential Diseases. 1799, p. 241.

 

Bethlehem      (40-50)

–40-50  Graves. “President’s Address. Epidemic Disease in Early Connecticut Times,” p. 76.[2]

 

Cornwall        (     20)

–20  Packard. The History of Medicine in the United States. 1901, p. 100.

–20  Webster, Noah. A Brief History of Epidemic and Pestilential Diseases. 1799, p. 241.

 

Hartford         (     >5)

–>5  Packard. The History of Medicine in the United States. 1901, p. 100. “Many” died.[3]

 

Waterbury     (   130)

—  130  Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions. 1942, p. 52.

–~130  Graves. “President’s Address. Epidemic Disease in Early Connecticut Times.” P. 76.

—  130  Packard. The History of Medicine in the United States. 1901, p. 100.

–~130  Webster, Noah. A Brief History of Epidemic and Pestilential Diseases. 1799, p. 241.

 

Woodbury      (     57)

–57  Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions. 1942, p. 52.

–Terrible.  Webster, citing Douglas, Vol. 2, p. 208.

 

Narrative Information

 

Caulfield: “…epidemics definitely identified as dysentery occurred in Connecticut in Waterbury (1749), where 130 died, [and] Woodbury (1749), where 57 died…” (Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions…Colonial Society of Mass., V35, April 1942, 52.)

 

Graves: “The years 1749-1751 were characterized by very distressing epidemics in some of the Connecticut communities. Webster says:

 

In 1749 the dysentery and nervous long fever visited many towns in Connecticut with distressing mortality. Waterbury suffered a loss of about 130 of hr inhabitants principally by dysentery. Cornwall, then a new settled village on high mountains, lost twenty of her citizens. Hartford was severely visited with intermittent for the last time.

 

“At the same time there was ‘terrible dysentery’ in Woodbury, and in Bethlem[4] ‘raged a mortal fever which swept away between 30 and 40 of the inhabitants’.”

 

Packard: “In 1749 dysentery again visited the towns of Connecticut. Waterbury had one hundred and thirty deaths, chiefly from that disease. Cornwall lost twenty persons by it. In Hartford and Woodbury many died.” (Packard. The History of Medicine in the United States. 1901, p. 100.)

 

Webster: “In 1749 the dysentery and nervous long fever visited many towns in Connecticut with distressing mortality. Waterbury sustained a loss of about 130 of her inhabitants principally by dysentery. Cornwall, then a new settled village, on high mountains, lost twenty of her citizens….Douglas, vol. 2. 208. I am authorized to say that the terrible dysentery in Woodbury did not appear to be very contagious—it excited great alarm; every one avoided the sick, if possible; but many who lived remote and never came near the sick, were seized, and suddenly died.” (Webster, Noah. A Brief History of Epidemic and Pestilential Diseases. 1799, p. 241.)

 

Sources

 

Caulfield, Ernest. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, Vol. 35, April 1942, pp. 4-65. Accessed 1-17-2018 at: https://www.colonialsociety.org/node/865

 

Graves, Charles B., M.D. “President’s Address. Epidemic Disease in Early Connecticut Times.” pp. 67-95 in: Proceedings of the Connecticut State Medical Society 1920, 128^th Annual Convention, Held at New Haven, May 19^th and 20^th, 1920 (James Frederick Rogers, Editor). Published by the Society, September 1920. Google preview accessed 1-29-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=gHACAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Packard, Francis Randolph, M.D. The History of Medicine in the United States. Philadelphia and London, J. B. Lippincott Company, 1901. Google preview accessed 1-26-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=dCxAAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Webster, Noah. A Brief History of Epidemic and Pestilential Diseases; with the principal phenomena of the physical world which precede and accompany them, and observations deduced from the facts stated (in two volumes). Hartford, DT: Hudson & Goodwin, 1799. Accessed 1-29-2018 at: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/evans/N27531.0001.001/1:12?rgn=div1;view=fulltext

 

 

 

 

[1] Several sources cited below write that dysentery was fairly widespread in CT this year. We report, though, just those localities for which we have seen numbers.

[2] Graves quotes his uncited source as stating that a mortal fever” “raged” there. He does so in a section of dysentery.

[3] The number is our “translation” of “many” into a number in order to include in a tally. Packard notes that “many” died in Hartford and Woodbury. Caulfield notes that fifty-seven died in Woodbury. Thus our “translation” of “many” into “five or more” (>5), seems to us to be conservative.

[4] Most probably a reference to the town of Bethlehem in Litchfield County, CT.

—>106-112  Blanchard tally of numbers in Caulfield footnote 44 below.[1]

 

Bedford          (    13)

–3  Bacon family.                   Vital Records of Bedford, 113-115; in Caulfield, p. 20, footnote 44.

–3  Fitch family.                     Vital Records of Bedford, 119-121; in Caulfield, p. 20, footnote 44.

–3  Hutchinson family.           Vital Records of Bedford, 125; in Caulfield, p. 20, footnote 44.

–4  Whitmore family.             Vital Records of Bedford, 140; in Caulfield, p. 20, footnote 44.

 

Billerica          (    11)

–2  Daves family.                   Vital Records of Billerica, 355; in Caulfield, p. 20, footnote 44.

–2  Dutton family.                  Vital Records of Billerica, 357; in Caulfield, p. 20, footnote 44.

–2  Lewis family.                   Vital Records of Billerica, 376; in Caulfield, p. 20, footnote 44.

–3  William Stickney family. Vital Records of Billerica, 398; in Caulfield, p. 20, footnote 44.

–2  Daniel Stickney family.   Vital Records of Billerica, 398; in Caulfield, p. 20, footnote 44.

 

Byfield            (     17)            Essex Antiquarian, Vol. VII, 145-146; in Caulfield, p. 20, fn. 44.

 

Chelmsford    (>7-12)

—      3  Blodget family.          Vital Records of Chelmsford, 366-367; in Caulfield, p. 20, fn. 44.

—      2  Harris family.             Vital Records of Chelmsford, 399; in Caulfield, p. 20, footnote 44.

—>2-7  Spaulding family.       Vital Records of Chelmsford, 443-447; in Caulfield, p. 20, fn. 44.[2]

 

Rutland          (      3)

–1  Daniel Goodenow, Oct 7, 1749. WikiTree. “David Goodenow (1735-1814).”[3]

–1  Abija Goodenow, Oct 15, 1749. WikiTree. “David Goodenow (1735-1814).”

–1  David Goodenow, Oct 25, 1749. WikiTree. “David Goodenow (1735-1814).”

 

Tewksbury     (   >38)            Vital Records of Tewksbury, 201; in Caulfield, p. 20, footnote 44.[4]

–2  Coggin family.                 Vital Records of Tewksbury, 201; in Caulfield, p. 20, footnote 44.[5]

–3  Frost family.                     Vital Records of Tewksbury, 209-211; in Caulfield, p. 20, fn. 44.

–2  Haseltine family.              Vital Records of Tewksbury, 214-215; in Caulfield, p. 20, fn. 44.

–3  Kidder family.                  Vital Records of Tewksbury, 219; in Caulfield, p. 20, footnote 44.

–4  Isaac Kittredge family.     Vital Records of Tewksbury, 220-223; in Caulfield, p. 20, fn. 44.

–2  Joseph Kittredge family.  Vital Records of Tewksbury, 220-223; in Caulfield, p. 20, fn. 44.

–2  William Kittredge family. Vital Records of Tewksbury, 220-223; in Caulfield, p. 20

[1] We have included three Goodenow children from Rutland, because we know there was a diphtheria outbreak there, and because, as Caulfield notes, multiple deaths of children in a family in a short period of time is one of the hallmarks of diphtheria, and usually is an indicator that this form of “throat distemper” is not scarlet fever.

[2] Caulfield writes that “At least two of the seven Spaulding children who died in Chelmsford between August 18 and November 20 had throat distemper.

[3] WikiTree notation: “This means that the family lost all three of their children within a month. Although the causes of their deaths are not listed, there is a mention of a significant outbreak of ‘throat distemper’ (diphtheria or scarlet fever) in Rutland in 1749.”

[4] Caulfield notes that these deaths were between April and December 1749.

[5] Caulfield presents these and the following Tewksbury deaths as examples, not the entire mortality list.

 

 

—>33  Blanchard estimate based on Lining description of those most susceptible to fatal attack.[1]

 

Lining. A Description of the American Yellow Fever…at Charleston…in the Year 1748. 1799.

—>3  “almost all the nurses…” (p. 6.)

—>3  “country-people when they came to town…” (p. 6.)

—>3  Indians (Native Americans). (p. 7.)

—>3  “Mulatoes” (mixed black and white heritage). (p. 7.)

—>3  “those who lay in small chambers not conveniently situated for…fresh air…” (p. 25.)

—>3  “those of an athletic and full habit…” (p. 25.)

—>3  “strangers who were natives of a cold climate…” (p. 25.)

—>3  “those who had the greatest dread of it…” (p. 25).

—>3  “those, who…had overheated themselves by exercise in the sun…” (p. 26.)

—>3  “those who…by excessive drinking of strong liquors…” (p. 26.)

—>3  “those who had been weakened by any previous disease…” (p. 26.)

 

Narrative Information

 

Duffy: “Outbreaks of yellow fever were reported in Charleston in 1745 and 1748, but letters from the S.P.G.[2] missionaries indicate the continued presence of the disease for three successive summers….The series of epidemic fevers beginning in 1745 culminated in a severe attack of yellow fever in 1748.” (Duffy. Epidemics in Colonial America. 1953, reprinted 1979, p. 159.)

 

Lining: “…that this is really an infectious disease, seems plain…almost all the nurses catched it and died of it; but likewise, as soon as it appeared in town, it soon invaded newcomers, those who never had the disease before, and country-people when they came to town, while those who remained in the country escaped it, as likewise did those who had formerly felt its dire effects, though they walked about the town, visited the sick…and attended the funeral of those who died of it. And lastly, whenever the disease appeared here, it was easily traced to some person who had lately arrived from some of the West-Indian Islands [Caribbean], where it was epidemical. Although the infection was spread with great celerity through the town, yet if any from the country received it in town, and sickened on their return home, the infection spread no further, not even so much as to one in the same house.

 

“The subjects which were susceptible of this fever, were both sexes of the white colour, especially strangers lately arrived from cold climates, Indians…Mulatoes of all ages, excepting young children and of those only such as had formerly escaped the infection….

 

“This fever began in the middle or rather towards the end of August, and continued till near the middle of October, when the weather became cold enough to prevents its further progress. In the beginning of August, the weather was warmer than I had ever known it in that month…. [p. 6-8]

 

“….The disease was generally more fatal to those who lay in small chambers not conveniently situated for the admission of fresh air, to those of an athletic and full habit, to strangers who were natives of a cold climate, to those who had the greatest dread of it, and to those, who, before the attack of the disease, had overheated themselves by exercise in the sun, or by excessive drinking of strong liquors; either of which seemed to render the body more susceptible of the infection. Lastly, the disease proved most certainly fatal to valetudinarians, or to those who had been weakened by any previous disease…. [pp. 25-26] (Lining, John. A Description of the American Yellow Fever, Which Prevailed at Charleston, in South Carolina, in the Year 1748. 1799.)

 

Ramsay: “In 1745 and 1748 it [yellow fever] returned, but with less violence [than 1732 and 1739];[3] however, many young people, mostly Europeans, died of it.” (Ramsay. Ramsay’s History of South Carolina. 1858, p. 47.)

 

Sources

 

Duffy, John. Epidemics in Colonial America. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1953, reprinted 1979.

 

Lining, John, MD. A Description of the American Yellow Fever, Which Prevailed at Charleston, in South Carolina, in the Year 1748. Philadelphia: Thomas Dobson, 1799. Accessed 4-4-2018 at: https://collections.nlm.nih.gov/catalog/nlm:nlmuid-2561035R-bk

 

Ramsay, David (M.D.). Ramsay’s History of South Carolina, From its First Settlement in 1670 to the Year 1808. Published by W. J. Duffie, Newberry, SC, printed in Charleston by Walker, Evans & Co., 1858. Digitized by archive.org and accessed 9-11-2016 at: https://archive.org/stream/ramsayshistorys00ramsgoog#page/n4/mode/2up

 

[1] Though Lining produced a 30-page document on the outbreak he did not provide a fatality estimate. He did, though, note a eleven categories of people where “The disease was generally more fatal…” We have assumed at least (>) three deaths for each category to derive an estimate of at least 33.

[2] Society for the Propagation of the Gospel.

[3] In 1732 there were 13-150 yellow fever deaths in Charleston, and in 1739 we estimate dozens.

— >43  La Roche. Yellow Fever…in Philadelphia from 1699-1854… (Vol. 1), 1855,  p. 59.[1]

 

Narrative Information

 

Barton, June 29 letter: “XVIII. Notice of the Yellow-Fever, as it appeared at Philadelphia, in the year 1747.

 

“The following memorandum is worthy of preservation. It is an extract of a letter from Mr. David Palmer, to the late Mr. Edward Penington, of Philadelphia.

 

People are exceeding sickly in many parts of the country, and especially in this city, where upwards of twenty are frequently buried in a day; the Yellow-Fever being very brief, carrying off healthy people in two or three days. I heartily wish we many both escape the dangers with which we are threatened, that we may once more meet…

 

David Palmer, Philadelphia, 6^th mo. 29^th, 1747.

 

(Barton. Philadelphia Medical and Physical Journal, Vol. II, Part II, 1805, p. 89.)

 

Barton, Sep 3 letter: “Since my last [editor], a contagious Fever has raged amongst us, which admits of no relief, cure, or abatement; never intermitting to the last moments of life. It has carried off three of my most intimate acquaintance, among which are my dear friends Mr. Andres Hamilton, and Mr. Currie. Philadelphia has been a melancholy place, and many, whose business and family would permit them, have fled the city. But the air is now become much cooler, and those under the disorder revive: the symptoms (a pain in the head and back, vomiting) are less violent, and the fever gradually abates. Messrs. Allen and Turner’s family are yet under the disease, the one having lost a near relation, and Mr. Allen himself not out of danger. Philadelphia, September 3d, 1747.” (Barton. Philadelphia Medical and Physical Journal, (Part I, Vol. I), 1804, p. 136.)

 

Barton, Sep 24^th communication: “September 24^th, 1747. The Yellow-Fever is yet amongst us. Yesterday was buried young Samuel Powell, who died of it.”[2] (Barton. Philadelphia Medical and Physical Journal (Part I, Vol. I). 1804, p. 137.)

 

Duffy: “The following years [1747] yellow fever returned to Philadelphia after an absence of six years.[3] A letter from the Pennsylvania council to the proprietor in 1747 reported that a malignant fever had been lurking in town all summer, but fortunately had not been so fatal as the previous outbreak of 1741. The council pointed out that the fever invariably began in the mud and filth around the docks and requested advice and assistance in alleviating this condition. Thomas Penn, the proprietor, countered that there was no necessity for improving the docks because the disease had been traced to the West Indies [Caribbean] and was in no way connected with the unsanitary conditions….

 

“Following the pattern of the last epidemic in New York, the 1747 Philadelphia infection spread beyond the city and into Delaware. The Reverend Thomas Bluett of Dover, Delaware, reported that yellow fever ‘of which multitudes died in Philª & many in the lower Countys,’ had afflicted the province, but fall brought a gradual abatement.”[4] (Duffy. Epidemics in Colonial America. 1953, reprinted 1979, pp. 158-159.)

 

La Roche: “Very different is the character of the testimony we possess relative to the prevalence of the yellow fever…in 1747; for although on this, as on former occasions, we must be contented with the statements of a few unprofessional writers, yet these statements leave no doubt as to the epidemic development of the disease in that year….

 

“As on other occasions, the fever, in 1747, broke out during the hottest part of summer…it already existed at the close of June….and we may infer, not only from the course the disease has pursued at other times, but from Dr. Franklin’s letter, that it continued to prevail till arrested by the accession of frost. In this letter, which…bears date of 16th October, the doctor says: ‘Besides the measles and flux,[5] which have carried off many children, we have lost some grown persons by what we call the yellow fever; though that is almost, if not quite, over, thanks to God.’

 

“The disease was mostly confined within the limits of the southern part of the city, below the drawbridge, and at lodgings for sailors, and in the neighbourhood of the dock, which was then uncovered.[6] As to the mortality it occasioned, we know but little; but there is reason to believe that, though, as Mr. Palmer stated, it frequently occurred that twenty were buried in a day, it was not great — much inferior, both numerically and in comparison to population to what it had been in some of the former, and has been in subsequent epidemics. Mr. Willing says that it caused the death of several [at least three] men of standing, and about forty others of those in the neighbourhood of the bridge; but, as the fever extended its ravages below the dock, we may presume the number of deaths from it was larger than here mentioned. Be this as it may, the fever became soon the source of great alarm among the citizens, and engrossed the conversation in all companies. So early as the 3d of September, Philadelphia, according to Lardner, had become a melancholy place, and many, whose business and family would permit them, fled the city, and sought refuge in the country….

 

“As to the causes of the epidemic, its origin, and mode of propagation, the public mind, judging from the letter-writers referred to, seemed to have been more fully made up than it had been heretofore. The disease is said to have exhibited contagious properties, and to have been imported from abroad. Pemberton contents himself with giving it, in general terms, a West India origin. Others were more explicit as to the particular mode of its introduction. Mr. Chew, in a passage I insert, not as expressing his individual sentiment on the subject, but that of the public generally and of the medical practitioners of the day, says: ‘I well remember it was the universal opinion that the disease was imported in a vessel from some part of the West Indies, and was communicated by the clothing contained in the chest of a person who died on the disease in the West Indies (Willing says Barbadoes); and that the person or persons who were present at the opening of the said chest were the first who were taken with the yellow fever; and to some or all of them it had proved fatal….” (La Roche. Yellow Fever…as it has Occurred in Philadelphia from 1699-1854… (Vol. 1 of 2), 1855,  pp. 59-60.)

 

Sources

 

Barton, Benjamin Smith, MD (Collected and Arranged by). The Philadelphia Medical and Physical Journal (Part I, Vol. I, 1804). Philadelphia: J. Conrad & Co., 1804. Google preview accessed 4-4-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=n3TOUn_ZacgC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Barton, Benjamin Smith, MD (Collected and Arranged by). The Philadelphia Medical and Physical Journal (Parts I and II, Vol. II). Philadelphia: J. Conrad & Co., 1805. Google preview accessed 4-4-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=KzxJAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Duffy, John. Epidemics in Colonial America. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1953, reprinted 1979.

 

La Roche, Rene, M.D. Yellow Fever, Considered in its Historical, Pathological, Etiological, and Therapeutical Relations, Including A Sketch of the Disease as it has Occurred in Philadelphia from 1699-1854… (Vol. 1 of 2). Philadelphia: Blanchard and Lea, 1855. Google preview accessed 3-15-2018 at: http://books.google.com/books?id=Fsg1AQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1] See La Roche in Narrative section. After citing sources noting deaths of several notable citizens as well as forty others “below the bridge” he states his belief that death toll was higher than this because the disease spread further than below the bridge.

[2] A footnote speculates that this was an extract from one of the letters of a Mr. John Bartram, printed earlier.

[3] In 1741, 250 people died from yellow fever in Philadelphia. (See my 1741 entry in Chronology & Spreadsheet.)

[4] Cites, in footnote 40, p. 159: Thomas Bluett to Secretary, Dover in Kent, Del., January 4, 1748, in S.P.G. [Society for the Propagation of the Gospel], MSS., B16-17, fp. 251; Rush, Medical Inquiries, 4^th ed., III, 100.;

[5] The latter possibly is a reference to dysentery.

[6] Cites, in footnote 1, p. 60: Pemberton, pp. 6, 7; Th. Willing, p. 9.

–137->141  Blanchard tally of locality breakouts below.[1]

 

Massachusetts            (~89)

 

Bridgewater                ( 41)[2]

–3  Alden family. Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions, 1942. 21.

–3  Bass family.   Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions, 1942. 21.

–3  Beal family.    Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions, 1942. 21.

–3  Brett family.   Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions, 1942. 21.

–4  Brown family. Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions, 1942. 21.

–2  Dunbar family. Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions, 1942. 21.

–4  E. Haward fam. Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases…Colonial Children.” Transactions, 1942. 21.

–2  S. Haward fam. Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases…Colonial Children.” Transactions, 1942. 21.

–3  Kingman fam.  Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions, 1942. 21.

–3  Packard fam.    Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions, 1942. 21.

–2  Shaw family. Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions, 1942. 21.

–3  C. Washburn fam. Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases…Colonial Children.” Transactions, p. 21.

–2  Z. Washburn fam. Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases…Colonial Children.” Transactions, p. 21.

–4  Whitman family.  Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases…Colonial Children.” Transactions, p. 21.

 

East Bridgewater        ( 10)

–4  Angier family. Vital Records of East Bridgewater, 335; in Caulfield, “Some Common…”

–3  Hayward family. Vital Records of East Bridgewater, 357; in Caulfield, “Some Common…”

–3  Kingman family. Vital Records of East Bridgewater; 367-68; in Caulfield, “Some…”

 

Cohasset                      (   3)

–3  Stodder family. Vital Records of Cohasset, 229; in Caulfield, “Some Common…”

 

Halifax                                    (   5)

–2  Andrews Bars family, April-Oct. Vital Records of Halifax, 2, 3; in Caulfield, “Some…”

–3  Austin Bars family

 

Kingston                     (~30)

–~30  Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions, Apr 1942, p.21.

 

Scituate                       (   ?) Caulfield notes “three palmer children had throat distemper in 1747.”

 

New Hampshire         (48-52)

–48-52  Kensington. Sawyer in Merchant. Hampton Union, 6-27-2008.

 

Narrative Information

 

Caulfield: “In southeastern Massachusetts the disease was most erratic in its progress, or so it seems from the records now available. Multiple deaths began to occur in Bridgewater about December, 1746, and were followed [end of p21] during 1747–1749 by others in East Bridgewater, Kingston, Scituate, Cohasset, Braintree and Halifax.[3] It was said of Kingston:

 

Jan. 7. 1747, 8. The Sickness in this Town remains exceeding bad; but here has been one Instance the like of which has not been known in the Memory of Man, viz. Mr. Thomas Cushman of this Town had jive Children of his own and another related to him in his House, four of his own Children died about a Week ago within the Space of eight Hours, of the Throat-Distemper, and this Week the other two Children died, and the Family left childless. About 30 have died in this small Town in a few Months past, and three of them grown in years, the rest Children.[4]

 

(Caulfield, Ernest. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, Vol. 35, April 1942, p. 22 of pp. 4-65.)

 

Merchant: “The Rev. Roland Sawyer wrote of the…epidemic in his history of Kensington….[5] “throat distemper” ravaged the town…1747 — 48-52 children died.” (Merchant, Dean. “History in Focus: Diphtheria Epidemic.” Hampton Union, 6-27-2008.)

 

Source

 

Caulfield, Ernest. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, Vol. 35, April 1942, pp. 4-65. Accessed 1-17-2018 at: https://www.colonialsociety.org/node/865

 

Merchant, Dean. “History in Focus: Diphtheria Epidemic.” Hampton Union, 6-27-2008. Accessed 1-18-2018 at: http://www.hampton.lib.nh.us/hampton/history/diphtheriaepidemicHU20080627.htm

[1] Caulfield notes other localities and deaths, but it is not clear if the deaths were in 1747, 1748, 1749 or 1750.

[2] Caulfield, in footnote 48, notes that “Most of these deaths, for which no causes are stated, occurred in 1747.”

[3] Caulfield footnote 48: Vital Records of Bridgewater, II. 423-427, 434, 436, 440-442, 458-459, 5080509, 532-535, 554-555, 569-579. , II. For East Bridgewater see Vital Records of East Bridgewater, 335; for Scituate, see records of Second Church (New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., LX, 62); for Cohasset, see Vital Records of Cohasset, 229; for Halifax, see Vital Records of Halifax, 2, 3.

[4] Caulfield footnote 49: Independent Advertiser, January 11, 1748. For further data bout the epidemic in Kingston, see 2 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., III. 216; Vital Records of Kingston, 319-322, 373, 375.

[5] The work mentioned is not cited. We believe it to be reference to: Sawyer, Roland D. The History of Kensington, New Hampshire, 1663-1945. Farmington, MA: 1946.

–84  Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions, Apr 1942, p. 10.

 

Narrative Information

Caulfield: “On the basis of some figures in the Births and Burials for Christ Church Parish, Philadelphia, it is estimated that there were 84 deaths from measles among the 15,000 inhabitants of that city during 1747. That makes a measles death rate of 560 per 100,000 population, which seems extraordinarily high compared with the present rate of about 0.3 per 100,000.

“Only a few scattered notes are available concerning the disease in New Hampshire,[1] Massachusetts,[2] Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania and South Carolina.” (Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions, Apr 1942, p. 10.)

 

Philadelphia Medical and Physical Journal: “Last summer (1747) the measles afflicted abundance of children, and a looseness following carried many off, in town (Philadelphia).” (Philadelphia Medical and Physical Journal. Notices of the Epidemics of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, in the years 1746, 1747, and 1749,” p. 4.)

 

Zuckerman: “The first reference to measles in the Philadelphia records is 1714, with subsequent epidemics throughout the 18^th century. Overall, mortality was fairly high during the initial and subsequent epidemics, with some variation. The mortality rates in 1747, 1759, and 1772 were particularly devastating and contributed greatly to the overall death rates for these years. For instance, the Christ Church Bills of Mortality list 23 deaths from measles in 1747, 22 deaths in 1759, and 17 deaths in 1772 (Klepp, 1991[3]).” (Zuckerman. Modern Environments and Human Health. 2014.)

 

Sources

 

Caulfield, Ernest. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, Vol. 35, April 1942, pp. 4-65. Accessed 1-17-2018 at: https://www.colonialsociety.org/node/865

 

Philadelphia Medical and Physical Journal (Part I, Vol. I). Philadelphia: . & G. Palmer, 1804. Google preview accessed 1-18-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=n3TOUn_ZacgC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Zuckerman, Molly K. (Ed.). Modern Environments and Human Health: Revisiting the Second Epidemiologic Transition. Wiley Blackwell. 2014. Google preview accessed 1-11-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=EdYVAwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=measles&f=false

 

 

 

 

[1] Jeremy Belknap. History of New Hampshire (Dover, 1812), III. 181: three measles deaths in Hampton between 1745 and 1754 (presumably 1747, 1748, or 1749).

[2] Diaries of Benjamin Lynde and of Benjamin Lynde, Jr., F. E. Oliver, Editor (Boston, 1880), 167.

[3] Susan E. Klepp. “The Swift Progress of Population:” A Documentary and Bibliographic Study of Philadelphia’s Growth, 1642-1859. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1991.

–45  Curtis. “Medicine in Albany County,” in Bi-Centennial History of Albany. 1886, p. 207.

–45  US Census. Report of the Social Statistics of Cities… 1886, p. 449

 

Narrative Information

 

Curtis: “In 1746 a malignant epidemic of what was called the Barbadoes distemper, and also various other names, reached Albany. It was imported from foreign ships, and, beginning in August, ended with frost. From the description it was clearly yellow fever. It carried off 45 victims, mostly robust men.”

 

Duffy (Yellow Fever Chapter): “A year later [1746] an epidemic fever in Albany, New York, aroused considerable interest. Three of the most outstanding colonial physicians studied the outbreak but were unable to agree on its exact cause. Dr. Mitchell gathered evidence showing that many of the victims turned yellow, but he did not try to determine what the disease was. Douglass unhesitatingly called it yellow fever, but Colden declared it was a nervous fever.”[1]

 

“The seriousness of the epidemic was emphasized by Governor George Clinton in an address to the New York general assembly. Speaking of a trip which he had made with Colden the previous July he told the assemblymen that ‘When e came to Albany that place was afflicted with a contagious Distemper of which many dy’d more perhaps in proportion to the number of people during our residence there of near three months on the publick Service than perhaps has happen’d in this age in North America.’[2] In as much as Colden was familiar with yellow fever and was the only one of the three who actually witnessed the outbreak, his diagnosis of nervous fever doubtlessly was the correct one. The nervous or continuous fever of Colden’s time is the typhoid of today — a disease much more likely to have prevailed as far inland as Albany.” (pp. 157-158)

 

Keating: “A History of the Yellow Fever….1746.–Albany, N. Y., commencing in August.” (p. 78)

 

Toner: Toner, in a listing of epidemics by type, and then by place and year, lists Albany, in 1746 within both “Nervous fever” and Yellow fever.” (p. 94.)

 

U.S. Census: “In 1746 Albany was visited by an epidemic of yellow fever which carried off 45 of its inhabitants — nearly 2 per cent. of the population.” (p. 449)

 

Sources

 

Curtis, Frederic C., MD. “Medicine in Albany County.” Bi-Centennial History of Albany: History of the County of Albany, N.Y., From 1609 to 1886 Part 1 (George Rogers Howell, editor). New York: W. W. Munsell & Co., Publishers, 1886. Google preview accessed 4-4-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=HGkJAQAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Duffy, John. Epidemics in Colonial America. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1953, reprinted 1979.

 

Keating, J. M. A History of the Yellow Fever Epidemic of 1878 in Memphis, Tenn. Memphis, TN: Howard Association, 1879. Google preview accessed 3-16-2018 at: http://books.google.com/books?id=WEIJAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Toner, Joseph M, MD. Contributions to the Annals of Medical Progress and Medical Education in the United States Before and During The War of Independence. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1874. Google preview accessed 4-4-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=BRUJAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

United States Census Office. Department of the Interior. “Social Statistics of Cities. New York. Albany, Albany County, New York: Historical Sketch.” Report of the Social Statistics of Cities, Compiled by George E. Waring, Jr., Expert and Special Agent. Part I. The New England and the Middle States. Part II. The Southern and the Western States. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1886. Google preview accessed 4-4-2019 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=i79NAQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1] Cites, in footnote 37, page 157, Webster. History of Epidemic Diseases, I, 239.

[2] Cites in footnote  38, page 158, ,Message of Governor George Clinton to New York General Assembly, November 24, 1746, in Colden Papers, III, 1919, p. 289.