— 5,000 New England. Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” 1942, p. 16.
–~3,492-~4,664 Blanchard tally of “state” and local breakouts below.
See separate sections below starting at p. 14, for breakouts of mortality by year and place.
- Page 14
- Page 26
- Page 32
- Page 35
- Page 37
- Page 38
- Page 40
Sources, p. 41
Connecticut 1736-1741 ( 500-1,000)
–500-1,000 Caulfield 1938 (II) 313.[2]
— 349 Blanchard tally from Caulfield examples.[3]
Maine, Kittery 1735-1737 ( 317-500)
— ~500 Area that is today’s Maine, 1735-1737. Williamson V.II 1832, p.186.
— 317 Maine, 1735-1739. Caulfield I and II.[4]
Massachusetts 1735-1740 (1,616-1,645)
— 942 Tally from Caulfield.[5]
–1,616-1,645 Tally by county using Caulfield, Essex Antiquarian and Creighton.
Breakout of Diphtheria Fatalities by Locality (where noted):
–>1,400 Essex Co. (children) 11-17-1735–12-31-1737.[6] Essex Antiquarian. VI/N1, 1897, 10.
— >53 Middlesex County, 1736-1738, 1740. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-294.
— >9 Norfolk County, 1738-1739. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-294.
–76-114 Suffolk Co., Boston. Creighton. “The Throat-distemper of New England,” 1894, 688.[7]
— >78 Worcester County, 1737-1740. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-294.
New Hampshire (1735-1738 (>1,040-1,500)
— 1,500 Christianson. “Medicine in New England,” in Leavitt, Sickness…Health. 1997, 54.[8]
— ~1,200 Merchant, Dean. “History in focus: Diphtheria epidemic.” Seacoastonline. 6-27-2008.
— ~1,000 1735-1736. Caulfield (1st year of epidemic — thus ~June 1735 through May 1736).[9]
— 40 1737-1738. Caulfield 1938, p. 231.[10]
— >1,000 Duffy, John. Epidemics in Colonial America. Baton Rouge: LSU Press, 1953, p. 118.
— 997 Belknap. History of New-Hampshire, II. 1791, p. 122.[11]
— 984 Fitch. An Account…the Distemper…Throat…Province of New-Hampshire. 1736.[12]
— 954 Kohn. Encyclopedia of Plague and Pestilence… 2001, p. 234.
New Jersey ( 8)
–8 Elizabeth Town vicinity. 1735. (All children from one family “in about a Fortnight.”).[13]
New York ( 11)
1736 ( 6)
–>5 Easthampton. Caulfield 1938 (II), 315.[14]
— 1 Huntington, Oct 3. Hannah Prime. Caulfield 1938 (II), 315.[15]
1738 (>5)
—>5 Easthampton. Caulfield 1938 (II), 315.[16]
Narrative Information
New England
Caulfield: “The most frightful epidemic of any childhood disease in American history began in 1735. It appeared suddenly in Kingston, New Hampshire, during May, 1735, and gradually spread northward along the coast of Maine and southward into Essex County, Massachusetts. For some strange reason Boston and most of the surrounding towns were not involved to any great extent; for the epidemic, as it approached Boston, turned to the west and southwest and eventually fused with a similar epidemic which had started in New Jersey about the same time and had spread to the northeast.
“This epidemic seems to have been most severe in the small frontier towns. In Kingston the first forty cases were fatal, and within a few months about half of all the children died. More than half of all the children of Haverhill died. In Hampton Falls one-sixth, and in Byfield and Rowley one-eighth of the population died. In New Hampshire there were at least fifteen hundred deaths out of an estimated population of less than twenty thousand. In Essex County alone there were fourteen hundred deaths. Altogether this so-called “throat distemper” caused five thousand deaths in New England within the first five years.
“Over and over again it was called a “new” disease, for no one then alive could recall having seen the like of it before. An analysis of nearly one thousand fatal cases in New Hampshire during 1735–1736, however, reveals that over ninety-five percent were under twenty years of age. Consequently most adults must have been immune; hence, in spite of contemporary opinion, it could not have been a “new” disease….” (Caulfield. “Some Common Diseases of Colonial Children.” Transactions of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, Vol. 35, April 1942, p. 16.)
Creighton: “The accounts of the great wave of ‘throat-distemper’ that spread over the towns and villages of New England in 1735 are singularly clear and even numerically precise. The arrival of this sickness is one of the most definite incidents in the whole history of epidemics; it was hardly possible for the common belief, whether popular or professional, to have been mistaken about it. Just a hundred years had passed since the first settlement of the Puritans on Massachusetts Bay and along the Connecticut river; Boston had grown to a town of some 12,000 inhabitants, and many small towns and townships had sprung up along the coast and in the interior. The population was still sparse, although it was growing rapidly from within…” (p. 685)
“The disease “did emerge,” as Douglass says, on the 20th of May, 1735, at Kingston township, some fifty miles to the east of Boston.[17] The first child seized died in three days; in about a week after three children in a family some four miles distant were successively seized, and all died on the third day; it continued to spread through the township, and Douglass was informed that of the first forty cases none recovered. It was vulgarly called the “throat illness” or “plague in the throat.” Some died quickly as if from prostration, but most had “a symptomatic affection of the fauces[18] or neck: that is, a sphacelation[19] or corrosive ulceration in the fauces, or an infiltration and tumefaction in the chops and forepart of the neck, so turgid as to bring all upon a level between the chin and sternum, occasioning a strangulation of the patient in a very short time.”
“In August it was at Exeter, a town six miles distant, but it did not appear at Chester, six miles to the westward, until October. After the first fatal outburst in Kingston township it became somewhat milder; but in the country districts of New Hampshire it was fatal to 1 in 3, or 1 in 4 of the sick, and in scarce any place to less than 1 in 6. This average was made up by its excessive fatality in some families; Boynton of Newbury Falls lost his eight children; at Hampton Falls twenty-seven died in five families. The following table [omitted here], compiled by Fitch, minister of Portsmouth, shows the deaths from it in various towns and townships of New Hampshire during fourteen months from May, 1735, to 26 July, 1736, with the ages.[20]….
“The meaning of these figures in the townships of New Hampshire will appear from the case of Hampton. In the year 1736 its burials from all causes were 69, and its baptisms 50; while the throat-distemper alone, during fourteen months of that and the previous year, cut off 55….” (pp. 686-687)
“When the disease broke out in due course at Boston it proved much less malignant than in the country. The first case, on the 20th August, had white specks in the throat and an efflorescence of the skin. A few more soon followed in the same locality, of which none were fatal; they had soreness in the throat, the tonsils swelled and speckt [?], the uvula relaxed, a slight fever, a flush in the face and an erysipelas-like efflorescence on the neck and extremities. The first death was not until October, the disease becoming more frequent and more fatal in November, and reaching its worst in the second week of March, when the burials from all causes rose to 24, the average per week in an ordinary season being 10. The fatalities in Boston were so few for the enormous number of cases that many could scarce be persuaded that it was the same disease as in the Townships. In the corresponding weeks (1 Oct. to 11 May) of eight ordinary years preceding, the average deaths were 268, whites and slaves; during this sickness they were 382, or an excess of 114, which were probably all due to the throat-distemper, as many as 76 fatal cases having come to the knowledge of Douglass himself. He estimates the whole number of attacks at 4000, giving a ratio of one death in thirty-five cases ; but it is clear that very slight cases of sore-throat were counted in.
“The fatal cases in Boston seem to have shown a great range of malignant symptoms : “We have anatomically inspected persons who died of it with so intense a foetor[21] from the violence of the disease that some practitioners could not continue in the room.” Among the bad symptoms were the coming and going of the miliary[22] eruption, dark livid colour of the same, the vesicles large, distinct and pale, like crystalline smallpox; an ichorous[23] discharge from the nose; many mucous linings expectorated, resembling the cuticle raised by blisters; pus brought up where no sloughs could be seen in the fauces; extension to the bronchi, with symptoms of a New England quinsey ? croup); in some children, spreading ulcers behind the ears; the tongue throwing off a complete slough with marks of the papillae. Among the after-effects in severe cases were anasarca[24] or dropsy of the skin, haemorrhages, urtications,[25] serpiginous[26] eruptions chiefly in the face, purulent[27] pustules, boils, or imposthumations[28] in the groins, armpits and other parts of
the body, indurations[29] of the front of the neck (the same by which many in the country were suffocated, and a few in Boston), hysteric symptoms in women, and epileptic fits.
“Douglass gives special attention to the eruption, which he calls miliary in his title-page. Some had a sore-throat without any eruption, and a very few had an eruption with no affection of the throat beyond the tonsils and uvula[30] swollen. In some the eruption preceded the soreness of the throat, in some the two came together, but in the general case the eruption was a little later than the affection in the throat. The ordinary course was a chill and shivering, spasmodic wandering pains, vomiting or at least nausea, pain, swelling and redness of the tonsils and uvula, with some
white specks: then followed a flush in the face, with some miliary eruptions, attended by a benign mild fever; soon after, the miliary efflorescence appears on the neck, chest and extremities; on the third or fourth day the rash is at its height and well defined, with fair intervals; the flushing goes off gradually with a general itching, and in a day or two more the cuticle scales or peels off, especially in the extremities. At the same time the cream-coloured sloughs or specks on the fauces become loose and are cast off, and the swelling goes down. Where the miliary eruptions were considerable, the extremities peeled in scraps or strips like exuviae;[31] in one or two, the nails of the fingers and toes were shed. Some who had little or no obvious eruption underwent a scaling or peeling of the cuticle.
“The epidemic having spent its force upon the New England towns from the autumn of 1735 until the summer of 1736, gradually travelled westward, and was to years in reaching the Hudson River, distant only two hundred miles in a straight line from Kingston [NH], where it first appeared in May, 1735. It continued its progress, with some interruptions, until it spread over the colonies from Pemaquid in 44° N. latitude to Carolina; and as Douglass, writing in 1736, had heard that ‘it is in our West India Islands,’ it was probably the same disease that Warren recorded for Barbados in the same years under the names of ‘an obstinate and ill-faour’d erysipelatous quinsey,’ and ‘a very anomalous scarlet fever’; and the same as the epidemic ‘sore-throats’ that another records for the Virgin Islands in 1737….[32]
“This was the first appearance of sore-throat with efflorescence of the skin among the English colonists of North America. For at least two generations after, the disease remained in the country, breaking out unaccountably from time to time at one place or another and often cutting off many children, but never so malignantly as at first.”[33] (pp. 688-689.)
“….The figures of…mortality which have been preserved for the town of Hampton, New Hampshire, may serve as a sample of its prevalence subsequent to the original explosion of 1735-36. In the first epidemic, 1735-36, there died at Hampton of the throat-distemper, 55 persons, mostly children. In the second, from January 1754 to July 1755, there died of it 51 persons. The deaths from all causes in those two years were 85, and the births 70.” (p. 690.)
(Creighton, Charles, M.D. “The Throat-distemper of New England, 1735-36,” pp. 685-690 in A History of Epidemics in Britain (Vol. II). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1894.)
New Hampshire
Christianson: “In 1735-36, scarlet fever and diphtheria struck simultaneously (for the former, largely in Boston), resulting in the most destructive epidemic of any childhood disease in American history. Whereas scarlet fever claimed over 100 deaths from the estimated 4,000 persons infected, diphtheria in New Hampshire alone took 1,500 from a population of 20,000.” (Christianson, Eric H. “Medicine in New England,” in Leavitt, Judith Walzer & Ronald L. Numbers. Sickness and Health in America: Readings in the History of Medicine and Public Health (3rd Ed., Revised). Madison, WI: Univ. of Wisconsin Press, 1997, p. 54.)
Duffy: “Eleven years later [1735] the first large-scale outbreak of throat distemper began in Kingston, New Hampshire. ‘About this time, the country was visited with a new epidemic disease, which has obtained the name of the throat distemper,’ wrote one colonial historian. ‘The general description of it is a swelled throat, with white or ash-colored specks, an efflorescence on the skin, great debility of the whole system, and a strong tendency to putridity.’[34]
“The year of the New Hampshire epidemic was long accepted by medical historians as the real beginning of diphtheria. Its extensive nature and high mortality rate made a deep impression upon all observers, both in America and in England. Several pamphlets and many articles were written by physicians and lay observers.[35]
“Not one of the first forty victims, most of them children, recovered. The disease did not spread very fast. Beginning at Kingston in May, it reached Hampton by June or July, Exeter, a town six miles from Kingston, and Boston, fifty miles distant, in August….
“‘In the parish of Hampton-Falls [NH] {the disease} raged most violently. Twenty families buried all their children. Twenty-seven persons were lost out of five families; and more than one sixth part of the inhabitants of that place died within thirteen months. In the whole Province, mot less than one thousand persons, of whom above nine hundred were under twenty years of age, fell victims to this raging distemper.’ Within one year Hampton Falls lost 210 persons by the infection out of a population of about 1,200 and 95 per cent of the victims were below the age of twenty….[36] (Duffy, John. Epidemics in Colonial America. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1953, pp. 117-118.)
Kohn: “New England Diphtheria and Scarlet Fever Epidemics of 1735-40. Severe outbreaks of ‘throat distemper’ (later identified as either diphtheria or scarlet fever) in various parts of New England, when a ‘disease corridor’ ran through the entire area.
“In May 1735 the first cases of ‘throat distemper,’ which was actually diphtheria, occurred in the town of Kingston, New Hampshire, where a recorded 26 children died from the disease in the month of August alone. The epidemic moved northeastward, affecting many small towns in New Hampshire to Maine. From July 1735 to July 1736 the death records of 15 New Hampshire towns show that 954 persons perished from the disease, and most of the victims were children….
“The so-called ‘throat distemper’ epidemic in New England was said to have peaked in March 1736….” (Kohn, George Childs (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Plague and Pestilence From Ancient Times to the Present (Revised Edition). NY: Checkmark Books, 2001, pp. 234-235.)
Merchant: “….After 1735, many more emergencies of diphtheria plagued Kensington and the Seacoast, until the first effective vaccines came into widespread use two centuries later, finally bringing salvation to anxious parents hoping for a preventative for this childhood scourge, which was a leading cause of death in America for so long…. The Rev. Roland Sawyer wrote of the 1735 epidemic in his history of Kensington. “Between June 1 and Dec. 1, 1735, there died over 40 children under 10 years of age. Seven families lost 27 children, everyone dying who was taken sick. The first 8 months of 1736 we lost near 40 more, or near 90 the first 15 months of the plague.” By 1738 so many Kensington children succumbed to diphtheria “there were few children left to die.”” (Merchant, Dean. “History in focus: Diphtheria epidemic.” Seacoastonline. 6-27-2008.)
Pediatrics: “The most frightful epidemic of any childhood disease in American history began in 1735. The disease was diphtheria which in colonial records was also known as cynanche, angina, canker, bladders, rattles, or throat distemper. The most characteristic feature of this epidemic was the occurrence of multiple deaths in families. There were at least six instances of eight deaths at a time due to diphtheria in a single family.” (Pediatrics. “On the Treatment of Diphtheria in 1735 (Abstract), Vol. 55, No. 1, 1-1-1975, pp. 43.)
Haverhill, Massachusetts Bay Colony
Essex Antiquarian: “Throat Distemper in Haverhill, 1735-7.
“The throat distemper which prevailed throughout the County of Essex[37] in 1735, ‘6 and ‘7 so disastrously among the children was particularly fatal in Haverhill. From Nov. 17, 1735, to Dec. 31, 1737, two hundred and fifty-six children, most of them under ten years of age, died in that town from this disease, and in the whole county the deaths of about fourteen hundred children and a considerable number of adults are estimated to have thus resulted. This estimate is undoubtedly low, as scarcely a cemetery of that time can be visited without seeing the little gravestones bearing dates of this period, and to one accustomed to examining old burying grounds the general appearance of each stone betrays the fact that the child buried beneath it is a victim of the distemper. It would seem that some gravestone maker must have supplied the people of the county with the stones during this period, the demand for them being so great that variation in design was not to be entertained.
“In the old parish in Haverhill the number that died during the period named was eighty-eight; in the west parish, sixty-two; and in the north parish one hundred and six. Two hundred and ten were under the age of ten; thirty between ten and fifteen; eleven between fifteen and twenty; three between twenty and thirty; one between thirty and forty; and one more than forty years. From Nov. 17 to Dec. 31 1735, ten died; in 1736, one hundred and sixteen; and in 1737 one hundred and thirty.
“The number of families bereaved was one hundred and thirty-nine, twenty-three of whom were left childless. The names of the heads of such families are given below, the names of those having thus lost all their children being printed in italics.
“Families that lost one child each: Dea. P. Ayer, Rev. Mr. Bacheller, Capt. Bartlet, Nat. Bartlet, Isaac Bradley, Nehemiah Bradley, Eben. Brown, Ed. Carlton, jr., Widow Clark, Lieutenant Clement, Jonathan Clement, Moses Clement, Nat. Clement, S. Clement, John Corlis, — Cothran, Reuben Curier, Samuel Davis, Lydia Dillaway, William Dillaway, James Eatton, Jonathan Eatton, Samuel Eatton, Widow Emerson, jr., Ephraim Emerson, Jo. Emerson, jr., Stephen Emerson, jr., Ed. Flynt, Benjamin Gale, Samuel G-le, Bartholomew Heath, David Heath, Josiah Heath, Sarah Heath, Abner Herriman, John Herriman, Joseph Herriman, Joshua Herriman, Cornel Jonson, Jeremiah Jonson, Stephen Jonson, Thomas Jonson, Abner Kimball, Deacon Little, N. Marble, Joseph Merrill, Nath. Merrill, Samuel Merrill, James Mitchel, Edw. Ordway, ___ Otterson, Widow Page, Caleb Page, Edmund Page, Thomas Page, Captain Pecker, Jonathan Shepard, Benjamin Smith, Samuel Staples, Aaron Stevens, Benjamin Stone, Elis Tomson, Samuel Webster, W. Whitaker, jr., John White, David Whiting, John Whiting, Ezekiel Wilson, William Wilson, — Wood, and N. Woodman.
“Families that lost two children each: Daniel Annis, Colonel Bailey, John Black, William Blay, James Bradbury, Dan. Bradley, Jacob Chase, Moses Cop, John Currier, John Dowe, jr., David Emerson, William Hancock, Jo. Hassaltine, Sa Hassaltine, Richard Hazzen, Caleb Heath, Samuel Heath, William Heath, James Hutchins, Jo. Hutchins, Timothy Jonson, William Jonson, — Kent, John Merrill, Nat. Merrill, jr., Andrew Mitchel, John Mitchel, Judge Saltonstall, — Trumbal, John Warner, Stephen Webster, Samuel White, Han. Whittaker, Eben. Whittier, N. Whittier, and Sa. Worthen, jr.
“Families that lost three children each: Rev. Mr. Brown, David cop, Isaac Dalton, John Davis, Jeremiah Eatton, Abiel Foster, Daniel Gile, Joseph Gile, Samuel Greele, Deacon Kimball, Jonathan Page, Widow Parker, Seth Patee, Benjamin Philbrick, Hugh Pike, Matthew Plummer, Benjamin Richards, Daniel Roberds, Jonathan Roberds, John Stevens, and Stephen Whittaker.
Families that lost four children each: — Gatchel, John Heath, jr., John McHard, P. Merrill, John Webster, jr., and Daniel Whittaker.
“Families that lost five children each: John Bradley, Abner Chase, Thomas Corlis, James Holgate, and Joseph Page.
“Rev. John Brown, who was then settled in the ministry at Haverhill, and who lost three children by the distemper, prepared an address to the people of Haverhill, particularly to the bereaved parents, Aug. 14, 1737, prefixing to it, “A Brief Relation” of thirty-four “Comfortable and Remarkable Instances of Death” among the children. This was published in Boston by Daniel Henchman, the following year, in a pamphlet of ninety-two duodecimo pages, which is to-day a rare book. Most of the material for this article was taken from it, and thus has a peculiar interest.
“The names of the thirty-four children, whom Mr. Brown cites as showing extraordinary spiritual insight and Christian resignation…are as follows:–
“Lydia White, died April 6, 1736, aged eight. She was sick about twenty-four hours, having a violent fever with the distemper. She has been a pleasing child, fond of instruction. Her brother died also a few days later.
“Eunice Emerson, died June 13, 1736, aged fifteen. Though she had symptoms of the distemper, it was not certain that she died of it, She bled to death, having been troubled with bleeding before.
“Whitely McHard, died at one o’clock in the morning of July 12, 1736, aged four.
“John McHard, aged seven, brother to the preceding, died at noon on the same day, surviving him only eleven hours. Two other children of the family died before the month had passed, on the same day. This was the first family in the town to be deprived of all their children by this disease. The had another son born to them during the next year, however.
“Daniel Chase, died July 18, 1736, aged seven years and eight days. A brother, aged four, was sick in the bed with him, one at the head and the other at the food. The younger died, and Daniel survived him an hour and a half. They were enclosed in the same coffin. This family lost five children.
“Sarah Chase, died Aug. 3, 1736, aged nine. She was sister to the next preceding….Her younger sister Molly was also very sick when she died.
“Thomas Shepard, died Aug. 28, 1736, aged eleven. He was sick several weeks, as was his eldest sister, also, who lived.
“David Hassaltine, died Aug. 29, 1736, aged seven.
“Ruth Merrill, died Sept. 9, 1736, aged twelve. Her younger brother died a short time before herself.
“Samuel Gatchel, died Sept. 20, 1736, aged twelve. He was the eldest of a family of six children, four of whom died with the distemper. He and his brother next to him had been sick of the disease in the preceding spring, and had apparently recovered, but some hard bunched in the throat remained, finally proving fatal. He had a three year old brother, named Jesse, who had died with the distemper….
“Anne Gatchel, died Sept. 11, 1736, aged six. She was a sister of Samuel above. She was asked if she was willing to die… “Yes, I’m willing to die to go to my Aunt Johnson and my brother Jesse.” This Aunt Johnson…was the only person above the age of forty years who died of the distemper in the town.
“Daniel Gatchel, died Sept. 14, 1736, aged ten. He was a brother to the preceding. He had the whooping cough with the disease.
“Joseph Richards, died Sept. 18, 1736, aged eight. A younger brother named Abraham died before him.
“Elizabeth Davis, died Sept. 19, 1736, aged twenty-two….
“Martha Brown, died Oct. 5, 1736, aged fourteen. She was a daughter of Rev. John Brown. She was taken sick Sept. 30th….Early in the morning of the day she died she said to a girl friend of about her own age… ‘I shall be with Betty Bailey before night.’ Betty Bailey was a loving companion of Pattee’s (as she was familiarly called), aged fifteen, who with her sister Molly Bailey, aged thirteen, were taken from the family of Colonel Bailey. Betty died of the scarlet fever May 5, 1736, and Molly of the throat distemper May 11, 1736. Pattee died at about eight o’clock in the evening…
“Mehitable Page, died Oct. 10, 1736, aged nineteen.
“Nathaniel Brown, died Oct. 12, 1736, aged twelve. “Nattie” was a brother to Martha Brown above, and son to Rev. John Brown.
“Sarah Eatton, died Oct. 17, 1736, aged four.
“Mary Merrill, died Oct. 27, 1726, aged fourteen. Three other children of the family died with the distemper.
“Elizabeth Bradbury, died Nov. 15, 1736, aged six….
“Sarah Chase, died Nov. 17, 1736, aged fourteen. Her younger brother also died and was buried in the same coffin with her.
“Obadiah Bradley, died Nov. 26, 1736, aged thirteen. He was sick three days. His younger sister died the day before his own death. He had a brother David, who died the year before. He had also a sister… All the five children of the family died of the distemper.
“Sarah Corlis, died Dec. 30, 1736, aged nineteen.
“Mary Hasseltine, died Jan. 2, 1736-7, aged nineteen….
“Lydia Hasseltine, died Jan. 28, 1736-7, aged nine. She was a sister of Mary Hasseltine…
“Susanna Wilson, died Jan. 26, 1736-7, aged seven. She had an elder sister.
“Sarah Whittaker, died Feb. 22, 1736-7, aged seven. She was the eldest of a family of four children, who all died the same week, the three latter being buried together. The names of the two middle children were Mary and Samuel. The youngest child was two years old.
“Susannah Emerson, died Mar. 3, 1736-7, aged fifteen…
“Susannah Emerson, died Sept. 2, 1737, aged 10. Her grandmother was present at her death.
“Martha Kimbal, died Sept. 13, 1737, aged eleven. She had sisters and brothers, one of whom was named Benjamin. Her sister Abigail died on the same day, at the age of five.
“John Appleton White, died Sept. 28, 1737, aged five…
“Hannah Webster, died Sept. 30, 1737, aged ten. Her brother Joseph and sisters Mercy and Sarah had died. She was the last….
“Nathaniel Bradley, died Oct. 4, 1737, aged sixteen….
“James Holgate, died Dec. 26, 1737, aged five. He was the last of five children that died of throat distemper in the family, all dying in a little more than a week’s time. The names of two of the other children were Judith and Benjamin.” (Essex Antiquarian. A Monthly Magazine Devoted to the Biography, Genealogy, History and Antiquities of Essex County, Massachusetts. “Throat Distemper in Haverhill, 1735-7.” Vol. I, No. 1, Jan 1897, Salem, Mass., pp. 10-13, Sidney Perley, editor.)
Kohn: “New England Diphtheria and Scarlet Fever Epidemics of 1735-40. Severe outbreaks of ‘throat distemper’ (later identified as either diphtheria or scarlet fever) in various parts of New England, when a ‘disease corridor’ ran through the entire area.
“In May 1735 the first cases of ‘throat distemper,’ which was actually diphtheria, occurred in the town of Kingston, New Hampshire, where a recorded 26 children died from the disease in the month of August alone. The epidemic moved northeastward, affecting many small towns in New Hampshire to Maine. From July 1735 to July 1736 the death records of 15 New Hampshire towns show that 984 persons perished from the disease, and most of the victims were children. The epidemic also moved south to Haverhill, Massachusetts, in November 1735; records indicate that 116 people in Haverhill died of ‘throat distemper’ in 1736, and 130 perished the following year (of all these fatalities, 98 were children and youngsters under 20 years old).
“Bostonians to the south feared that the deadly disease would soon strike their city; the first case of ‘throat distemper’ which was actually scarlet fever, was reported on August 20, 1736. While human deaths had occurred almost immediately after the outbreak of ‘throat distemper’ in the New Hampshire towns, Boston experienced considerable time lag between the first case of the disease and he first fatalities, which occurred in October 1736.
“The so-called ‘throat distemper’ epidemic in New England was said to have peaked in March 1736. Fatalities in Boston were comparatively low during the epidemic, which killed 114 city residents of the more than 4,000 who reportedly contracted the disease (scarlet fever). Boston’s surrounding towns were hit much harder, with about one in three to six cases proving fatal at the time. Newport, Rhode Island, also reported that about one person out of 50 died from ‘throat distemper.’ Evidently scarlet fever affected Boston and Newport much less than diphtheria affected the smaller towns.
“Connecticut also suffered from attacks of diphtheria between 1735 and 1740, but its mortality rate from the disease was not nearly as high as that of the northeastern New England regions. Two possible explanations have been proposed for this difference: one, that the epidemic in Connecticut spread from the southwest to the northeast, thus making it unlikely that Massachusetts’s epidemic had moved into Connecticut and more likely that Connecticut had a different strain of diphtheria (which originated there or was part of a New Jersey outbreak at the time). The second explanation for Connecticut’s lower mortality rate is based on the theory that human beings can build up immunity to diphtheria. Because the disease had attacked Connecticut previously, much of the population may have acquired some immunity to it.
“At the time physicians did not understand fully how the ‘throat distemper’ was transmitted; many thought that human beings did not spread the disease, evidently because many who were exposed to it never contracted either diphtheria or scarlet fever. Moreover, many people who had never been exposed to infected persons came down with the disease. Hence, the New England physicians failed to realize that healthy persons were also carriers of scarlet fever and diphtheria, both of which share many of the same symptoms, making physicians easily confused in the 1700s. A very sore throat and fever are characteristic of both scarlet fever and diphtheria. However, scarlet fever produces a rash, while diphtheria produces ulcers in the glands or throat. Thus, the difference in the severity of the ‘throat distemper’ outbreak in Boston compared to the outbreaks in surrounding areas greatly puzzled many early physicians and scientists. They did not know that scarlet fever had attacked Boston while diphtheria had struck the other towns. Boston doctors at first attributed the city’s lower fatality rate to their superior medical treatment, and the clergy believed that Massachusetts laws requiring adequate pay for ministers saved the people there from a more terrible wrath of God. Because these laws did not exist in New Hampshire, the clergy thought that God was punishing the heathen in New Hampshire….”[38] (Kohn, George Childs (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Plague and Pestilence From Ancient Times to the Present (Revised Edition). NY: Checkmark Books, 2001, pp. 234-235.)
Marcelais on Haverhill, MA:
“Elisabeth Bayley d. 1736, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic….
“Martha Brown d. 1736, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic.
“Nathaniel Brown d. 1736, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic.
“Ebenezer Buck d. 1736, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic.
“Lydia Buck d. 1736, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic….
“Abigail Holgate d. 1737, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic. 1 of 5 children lost to James and Jemima Holgate in 25 days.
“Deborah Holgate d. 1737, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic. 1 of 5 children lost to James and Jemima Holgate in 25 days.
“James Holgate d. 1737, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic. 1 of 5 children lost to James and Jemima Holgate in 25 days.
“Judith Holgate d. 1737, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic. 1 of 5 children lost to James and Jemima Holgate in 25 days….
“Elisabeth McHard d. 1736, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic. 1 of 4 children lost to James and Margaret McHard in 19 days.
“James McHard d. 1736, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic. 1 of 4 children lost to James and Margaret McHard in 19 days.
“John McHard d. 1736, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic. 1 of 4 children lost to James and Margaret McHard in 19 days.
“Whitely McHard d. 1736, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic. 1 of 4 children lost to James and Margaret McHard in 19 days….
“Benjamin Rideout d. 1737, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic….
“Nathaniel White d. 1737, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic.
“Samuel White d. 1736, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic.
“William White d. 1737, Victim of the Throat Distemper epidemic….”
(Marcelais, Jenn. A Very Grave Matter (website). “Burying Grounds, Cemeteries, Gravestones & History of Haverhill, Massachusetts.” Gravematter.com. 2002.)
1735 — June-Dec, Throat distemper (diphtheria), esp. NH (>754) MA (>210) CT/ME/NJ->981
—>981 Blanchard tally of Colony (State) breakouts below.[39]
Summary of Colony (State) Breakouts Below
— 2 Connecticut
— >7 Maine
—>210 Massachusetts
—>754 New Hampshire
— 8 New Jersey
Connecticut ( 2)
–2 Stamford, autumn. Caulfield 1938 (II), 300.[40]
Maine ( >7)
— ~500 (1735-1737; area that is today’s Maine) Williamson V.II 1832, p. 186.
— ? Arundel (Kennebunk). Caulfield 1938, 244.[41]
— ? Berwick. Caulfield 1938, 244.[42]
— ? Black Point (Prout’s Neck). Caulfield 1938, 244.
— ? Cape Purpose. Caulfield 1938, 244.
— ? Casco Bay. Caulfield 1938, 245.
— ? Falmouth (Portland). Caulfield 1938, 244.
— >7 Kennebunkport. Caulfield 1938, 244.[43]
— ? Kittery. Caulfield 1938, 243.
— ? Pemaquid. Caulfield 1938, 245.[44]
— ? Presumpscot Falls. Caulfield 1938, 245.
— ? Purpoodock (Cape Elizabeth/South Portland). Caulfield 1938, 244.
— ? Saco. Caulfield 1938, 244.
— ? Scarborough. Caulfield 1938, 244.
— ? Spruce Creek. Caulfield 1938, 244.[45]
— ? York. Caulfield 1938, 244.[46]
— ? Wells. Caulfield 1938, 244.
Massachusetts (210)
— >2 Amesbury (“Multiple” children of Rev. Pain Wingate. Caulfield 1938, 269.[47]
–>100 Byfield (autumn, 1735-1736). Caulfield 1938 (Part II), 279.[48]
— 2 Haverhill, Nov. Two Whittier children. Caulfield 1938 (Part II), 284.
–>100 Newbury. Caulfield 1938 (Part II), 277-278.[49]
— >4 Rowley. Caulfield 1938 (Part II), 279.[50]
— >2 Salisbury. Caulfield 1938 (Part II), 277.[51]
New Hampshire (>754)
— 1,500 1735-36. Christianson. “Medicine in New England,” in Leavitt, Sickness… 1997, 54.[52]
–~1,200 1735-36. Merchant. “History in focus: Diphtheria epidemic.” Seacoastonline. 6-27-2008.
–~1,000 1735-36. Caulfield (1st year of epidemic — thus ~June 1735 through May 1736).[53]
–>1,000 1735-36. Duffy. Epidemics in Colonial America. Baton Rouge: LSU Press, 1953, 118.
— 997 1735-36. Belknap. History of New-Hampshire, II. 1791, p. 122.[54]
— 984 1735-36. Fitch. An Account…Distemper…Throat…New-Hampshire. 1736.[55]
— 954 1735-36. Kohn. Encyclopedia of Plague and Pestilence… 2001, p. 234.
— >754 Blanchard tally of Caulfield (1938) numbers, pp. 228-242.
Breakout of diphtheria fatalities by locality where noted:
— 21 Chester (1735-36; pop. ~400). Caulfield 1938, 238; Belknap 122, from Fitch, 6.
— 88 Dover (Oct 1735-July 1736). Caulfield 1938, 235; Belknap 122, from Fitch, 6.
–100 Durham (Sep 1735 beginning). Caulfield 1938, 235;[56] Belknap 122, from Fitch, 6.
–127 Exeter (Aug 1735-~Aug 1736). Caulfield 1938, 235;[57] Belknap 122, from Fitch, 6.
— 37 Gosport (July 1735-July 1, 1736). Caulfield 1938, 241; Belknap 122, from Fitch, 6.
— 18 Greenland (near Exeter). Caulfield 1938, 241; Belknap 122, from Fitch, 6.
— 55 Hampton. Caulfield 1938, 234;[58] Belknap 122, from Fitch, 6.
— 13 “ (after Fitch account ends). Belknap. History of New-Hampshire, II. 1791, p. 122.
–210 Hampton Falls. Belknap. p. 122, from Fitch 1736, 6.
–220 “ Creighton 1894, 687; reproducing Rev. Fitch’s table from Belknap.[59]
— 50 Hampton Falls (Dec). Caulfield 1938, 233.[60]
— >2 Haverhill (“multiple” deaths noted in one family) Caulfield 1938, p. 269.[61]
— 36 Isle of Shoals, winter-spring, 1735-1736. Caulfield 1938, 242.
–102 Kingston, June-Dec. Caulfield 1938, 231.[62]
–13 June. Caulfield 1938, 241.[63]
–19 July. Caulfield 1938, 228-229.
–26 Aug. Caulfield 1938, 231-232.
— 6 Sep. Caulfield 1938, 231-232.
–15 Oct. Caulfield 1938, 231-232.
— 6 Nov. Caulfield 1938, 231-232.
— 8 Dec. Caulfield 1938, 231-232.
— 11 Newcastle (July 1735-July 1, 1736). Caulfield 1938, 241; Belknap 122, from Fitch, 6.
— 21 Newington (July 1735-July 1, 1736). Caulfield 1938, 241; Belknap 122, from Fitch, 6.
— 22 Newmarket (~Exeter). Caulfield 1938, 241; Belknap 122, from Fitch, 6.
— 2 Rochester. Caulfield 1938, 238.
— 44 Rye. (July 1735-July 1, 1736). Caulfield 1938, 241; Belknap 122, from Fitch, 6.
— 18 Stratham (near Exeter). Caulfield 1938, 241; Belknap 122, from Fitch, 6.
New Jersey ( 8)
–8 Elizabeth Town vic. (all children from one family “in about a Fortnight.”).[64]
Narrative Information — New Hampshire
Caulfield on Kingston: “….It has long been known that there was an epidemic of some disease in Kingston, New Hampshire, in 1735, but it is not so well known that this was merely a small part of a greater epidemic which involved most of the inhabited regions of New England and caused great loss of life wherever it appeared. To that generation of Americans it was a new disease and to them its behaviour was as strange as it was mortal. In some of the towns nearly half of all the children died and at times it was feared that the disease would actually destroy the colonies. It drove the people to their churches to meditate and pray, and special fast days were proclaimed in Massachusetts and in Connecticut….
The “…epidemic continued for at least five years and among an equal number of people about five thousand deaths occurred.… [pp. 219-220]
“As the tradition goes,[65] in April of that year [1735], one of the hogs that belonged to a Mr. Clough was “taken sick with a complaint in its throat and died. Mr. Clough skinned the hog and opened it. Soon after, he was taken with a complaint in his throat, and died suddenly.” But this is probably mere tradition, because there is no record of the death of Mr. Clough in 1735.
“However, on May 20, 1735, Parker Morgan, the son of John Morgan, died after a few days’ sickness. About a week later, in a house four miles away, Nathaniel, John, and Elizabeth, the three children of Jeremiah Webster, died within three days. There was something unusual about the deaths of these four children, each with the same short illness. Some blamed the unseasonable weather; others knew it was a warning from an angry God; all agreed that it was very strange. The events of June are effectively told in the stark realism of the parish records:’
June ye 5 Deborah Child of Josiah Batchelor Died
7 Dorothy Daughter of Jacob Gilman Died
17 Samuel Lock Lost a Daughter
18 Ebenezer Sleeper Lost a son. Both died with a Quinsey
19 Samuel Emons Eldest Daughter Died
21 Died David son of Joseph Greely
23 Samuel Emons lost another
23 The Same Day Ebenezer Sleeper Lost another
25 Andrew Webster Lost his Child
25 Joseph Bean lost one of His Children
27 Died another of Joseph Beans Children
28 Died Margaret Eldest Daughter of Joseph Bean
30 Samuel Emons Lost another Child
“By the end of June the people were very much alarmed, for only once, in 1730, had the deaths for a whole year exceeded the deaths for this one month. This strange “Plague in the Throat” was not like any disease with which they were familiar. They knew that whooping-cough and measles could spread among children, but never had any such mortality accompanied a childhood epidemic. They could understand smallpox epidemics because that disease spread by contact, but this one attacked here and there “not according to the effects of contagion or qualities of the soil” and so was beyond their understanding. Soon it was certain that “God hath been provoked to visit this People with sore and grievous Calamities,” so the young minister quickly summoned his afflicted people to fast and pray together.
“Meanwhile, the disease had invaded many other homes and July only brought increased sorrows.
July ye 1st Died Nathaniel youngest son of Mr. Jose Greely
4 Died Daniel son of John Huntoon
8 Died Isaac Son of Isaac Godfrey
10 Died William Another son of Isaac Godfrey
11 Died Nathaniel the Other son of Isaac Godfrey
11 Died Gideon son of John Yonng
14 Died a Daughter of Benjamin French
16 Rachel Died Daughter of Richard Tandy
17 Died Caleb Webster Brother of Jeremiah Webster
19 Died William ye Eldest son of William Smith
22 Died Mary Youngest Child of John Huntoon
26 John Webster Lost a Child
27 Died ye Wife of ye Revd Mr. Ward Clark and her Infant
28 Died Moses ye son of Deacon Elkins
28 Ralph Plazdel Lost a Child
29 William Smith Lost an other Child
31 Jacob Flanders Lost a Child
31 Died Henery Youngest son of Deacon Elkins [pp. 228-229]
“….If the first few cases had occurred in neighboring homes, perhaps the people would have suspected that the disease was spread by contact, but the first cases were four miles apart and the disease kept reappearing in widely separated sections of the town without any apparent reason, so it was decided that this “Strange unusual Distemper” was the “Fruit of strange Sins” and contagion was not thought to be a factor.[66] Up to this time the remedies of Dr. Simeon Brown and Dr. Green had failed in every case. Bleeding, blistering, and purging had invariably hastened death and the long-tried and favorite remedies seemed to have suddenly lost their power. Only the “Tenders and Watchers” could soften the distress. In spite of the “Many Days of Fasting and Prayer that were observed in the Beginning of this fatal Calamity,” the disease raged on through August:
August ye 1 Obediah Elkins Lost a Child
6 Obediah Elkins Their other Child
7 William Buzzel Lost a Child
9 John Clifford Lost a Child
10 Eliz: Daughter of Samuel Colcord Died
11 Sam’ Bean Lost a Child
11 Dr Brown lost a Child an Only Daughter
11 Joseph Elkins Lost His Eldest Daughter
12 Died Ruth Daughter of Simon French
13 Sergt William Buzzel Lost another Child
14 Daniel Bean Lost a young Son
14 Joseph Elkins Lost Another of their Children
15 Joseph Elkins Lost Another of their Children
15 Jacob Flanders Lost another Child
16 Died Thomas Son of Jedidiah Philbrick
19 John Clifford Lost another son 14 years old
19 Joshua Prescut Lost a young daughter
21 Joshua Prescut Lost another
22 Joseph Elkins Lost his other Child
23 Died John Clark Son of ye Revd Mr. Clark
23 Died a Son of Jonathan Samborn
26 Died Benjamin Clark Son of ye Revd Mr. Clark
27 Robert Stockman Lost a Child
27 John Clifford Lost another
31 Samuel Bean Lost another a Daughter
31 Benjamin Sweat Lost His Eldest Child [p. 230]
“In September…There were only six deaths compared with twenty-six in August, but in October there was another increase to fifteen, twelve of whom were children. With six deaths in November and eight more in December, the total stood one hundred and two for the year, whereas since records had been kept the yearly average had been less than ten.[67] No detailed descriptions of the disease have been found, but written into the church records at the close of 1735 is this simple entry:
This Mortality was By a Kanker Quinsey or Peripn [eumony], which mostly Seized upon young People and has Proved Exceeding mortal in Several other Towns yt It is supposed there never was ye like Before in this Country.
“Tradition says that many died within twelve hours and that others, while sitting up at play, would fall and expire with their playthings in their hands.[68]
“The epidemic continued through 1736, when there were thirty-four deaths… With twenty-four deaths in 1737 and sixteen in 1738, it was not until after 1739 that the death-rate resumed average proportions. The epidemic had spent itself, but it had visited most of the families in the town and left many of them childless. Within a year, one family lost all four, another lost four out of six, and six families lost three each.[69] Of the first forty who were taken sick, not a single one recovered.[70] And more than a third of all the children in the town had died.[71]….” [231-232]
Caulfield on the epidemic in nearby Hampton Falls (where there was a church some Kingston residents attended): “an epidemic started in Hampton Falls in June, a few weeks after the disease broke out in Kingston.
“The Hampton Falls epidemic reached its peak during the winter months and during December alone there were fifty deaths. This town suffered more than any other in New Hampshire, and within about a year two hundred and ten had died, of whom two hundred were under twenty years of age. One family lost seven children, two families lost six, two lost five, six lost four, and about fourteen families lost three apiece.[72] The disease was still present in 1739 when Joseph Batchelder lost twelve or thirteen children — it was not known which — for “Mrs. Batchelder afterwards was unable to decide whether she had twelve or thirteen children.” It was also said that only two houses where there were children escaped the epidemic.”[73]
Caulfield on Hampton: “In contrast to Hampton Falls, the first parish of Hampton, which was north of Taylor River and contained the same number of people, had only fifty-five deaths from the distemper within the first year and about eighty for the years 1735-37. The Hampton church records contain a brief first-hand account of the disease:
July ye 26, 1735 on Saturday my Brother Samuels daughter Abigil was taken ill with a mortal distemper: the Tuesday following which was the 28 day of July his only son Sam” was taken with the same awful illness they continued till Saturday and both died: august ye 2nd abigil early in ye morning and Samll early that evening they were lovely in their life and in their death they were not divided: they were decently buried in one grave on Monday aug 4th and on Tuesday morning his daughter Elisabeth died after about three days after she was taken with the same distemper the distemper dreadfully siezed their throat in an awfull manner.[74]
“By August, 1735, the disease had spread to Exeter, six miles to the north, and another conflagration burned with all its devastating fury. Within a year there were one hundred and twenty-seven deaths, all but nine among children under fifteen years of age. Exeter was an older and much larger town than Kingston and, although it appears that the epidemic was not as extensive in proportion to the population, the disease was just as mortal in the particular homes where it occurred. With utter disrespect for the remedies of those days it even crossed the threshold of the home of Dr. Deane, the chief physician of the town:[75]
Deborah Deane died Sept. 6 1735
Sarah “ “ “ 15 “
Abigail “ “ “ 18 “
Mary “ “ “ 19 “
“Stratham, Greenland, and Newmarket, small towns near Exeter, each had about twenty deaths.
“In September the disease broke out in Durham, and within a few months another hundred deaths was added to the rapidly growing list. Now up to this time the cause of the epidemic had remained obscure and even the doctors who were supposed to know all about such things were forced to admit that they were helpless…. [pp. 234-235]
“Beyond Durham, the road to the north leads into Dover, where the sickness began in October, 1735, and caused eighty-eight deaths before the following July….The epidemic even reached the small remote settlement at Rochester, where Nathaniel Ham and his brother, the first two children born in the town, died of “throat distemper” and were buried in the same grave.[76]
“Chester was a small town of about four hundred people out in the “Chestnut Country” west of Kingston, and during 1735-36, although there were only twenty deaths, considerable attention was given to the Chester phase of the epidemic. It was supposed that a contagious disease would spread rapidly in all directions. From Kingston, this disease had spread to Hampton Falls on the east by June, to Exeter on the north by August, but it was not until October that it reached Chester on the west. That puzzled everyone and together with the strange behaviour of the disease in other towns the evidence now seemed convincing that this disease was not contagious.
If the people had considered other facts they would have found some evidence that it was, because the epidemic could be seen spreading to the north at a definite rate per day. Starting from Kingston in June, it reached Exeter in August, then ten miles north to Durham in September, and then ten miles further north to Dover in October. But they repeatedly overlooked such facts and emphasized exceptions. Throughout the subsequent history of the epidemic the contagion theory occasionally reappears, but every time that it does some contrary evidence arises to overthrow it…. [p. 238]
Maine
Caulfield on Maine: “Maine was a part of Massachusetts Bay Province at that time, but for convenience the Maine towns are treated as a separate group. Most of them were small fishing towns at occasional harbors between the Piscataqua River and Casco Bay and their total population was less than nine thousand.
“The epidemic began in Kittery in June, 1735, which was very soon after it began in Kingston, but this could not have been a direct spread across the Piscataqua River from the vicinity of Portsmouth for the epidemic had not yet reached that region…. [243]
“That same month [Oct 1735] other fasts were held at York and Berwick to prevent the spread of the disease, but the fasts were answered ‘by terrible things in Righteousness’ and the settlements at Spruce Creek, York, and Wells soon became involved. From the reports it cannot be determined when the epidemic appeared in the various towns, but there are records of it at Arundel (Kennebunk), Cape Porpoise, Saco, Black Point (Prout’s Neck), Scarborough, Purpoodock (Cape Elizabeth and South Portland, Falmouth [end of 244] (Portland), Casco Bay, Presumpscot Falls, North Yarmouth, and Pemaquid.
“The epidemic continued for many months. June 16, 1736, was a day of fasting and prayer at the First Church in Falmouth on account of ‘the terrible distemper that has been and is still prevailing in the land.’…. Parson Smith, physician as well as minister, made frequent notes in his journal about those days of sickness and mentions that the epidemic was still present in 1737 and 1738….” (Caulfield 1738, p. 145.)
Williamson on Maine: “1735….The throat distemper… it is painful to trace the ravages, and note the fatal effects of a disease, which in its course swept from Maine about 500 of its inhabitants. This was called the Throat Distemper. It first made its appearance at Kingston, New-Hampshire, in May [1735], and gradually spread through New-England. It was very mortal, especially among children. In Maine it spread and raged at intervals more than three years…. Parents trembled at its approach, for children when seized, were sick only a very short time, before death. Six, and sometimes more, were taken from single families; several buried three or four in a day; and there were many parents who lost their all. In the single town of Kittery, 122 died of the distemper; and having entered Arundel, it carried off great numbers both of young people and children. It proved so fatal and alarming, that a solemn fast was kept, Oct. 31, to invoke relief from Almighty God. The next year [1736] it was neither so general nor so mortal. However, in January, 1737, it broke out afresh in York and Wells, and laid numbers in their graves. About 75 died in North-Yarmouth; 49 in Falmouth; and 26 in Purpooduck. So deadly was it in Scarborough, for instance, that not a single one survived the attack; and at Saco and Presumpscot Falls, it seemed, the next year, to riot on human life, baffling alike all medicine, skill and exertions. It raged at all seasons of the year; being in general the most mortal, where blood-letting and cathartics[77] were practiced.” (Williamson II, 1832, pp. 186-187.)
Scarlet Fever versus Diphtheria
Caulfield: “For the benefit of the non-medical reader, it may be said that on paper, at least, scarlet fever and diphtheria are similar diseases. They frequently occur in epidemic form, have a tendency to attack the same age group-children under twenty years-and are characterized by sore throat and fever. Swallowing and breathing may be difficult in both diseases. Indeed, it is sometimes difficult to distinguish the two diseases by the appearance of the throat alone. In the great majority of cases, however, diphtheria begins insidiously, has no rash, and is accompanied, if untreated, by a very high mortality; scarlet fever begins suddenly, generally with vomiting, has a very distinct rash over most of the body, and, although it may be a very malignant disease in some epidemics, is usually less fatal than is diphtheria. It has already been stated that the disease in Boston was scarlet fever and now an attempt will be made to prove that the New Hampshire disease could not have been the same….” [261-262]
Caulfield on origin of the epidemic: “Why a diphtheria epidemic occurred in Kingston in 1735, or what may have been the original cause of the “throat distemper,” is another question not so easily answered. The early colonists had many explanations. The sick pig in Kingston, the default of ministers’ salaries, the mortally infected air, Original Sin, dead caterpillars, God’s Holy Anger, and various other causes were considered at different times, but because modem science is still uncertain about many things concerning epidemics, we cannot dismiss all their theories with a haughty smile. Even our latest theories are constantly being challenged by the accumulation of new facts and some of the science of today may easily become the quaint and ridiculous folk-lore of tomorrow.
“Possible explanations again depend somewhat upon whether or not diphtheria had been prevalent in New Hampshire. The supposition that it was a new disease would correspond with the fact that no clinical evidence of the disease has been found, particularly in Kingston where the epidemic began, but that is not proof that diphtheria did not exist. At that time, however, there was a firm belief that “there never was ye like Before in this Country” and over and over again the opinion was everywhere expressed that it was a new disease. But diphtheria has frequently been described as a new disease in other, more recent, epidemics and so the popular contemporary opinion is no proof of scientific fact. Therefore, one cannot be certain that diphtheria was a new disease in Kingston and the other frontier towns; the most that can be said is that these towns had not previously experienced such a malignant epidemic.
“On the other hand, there is some other indirect evidence that diphtheria was not a new disease in New Hampshire. As pointed out above, Dover, Exeter, Hampton, and Portsmouth, the four oldest towns, seemed to have fewer deaths in proportion to their populations than had the smaller outlying towns, and if this difference can be attributed to a difference in population immunity, then diphtheria was probably endemic in the oldest towns. Moreover, Fitch’s figures reveal the very significant fact that ninety-six per cent of the deaths were among children under twenty years of age. This age distribution is similar to that found today with certain diseases such as whooping cough, chicken pox, and measles. These diseases do not attack children because of any special predilection for a particular age group, for when they occur on islands where there is little contact with the civilized world, all ages are attacked; and even in seventeenth century New England, when measles epidemics were infrequent, the disease attacked adults as well as children. However, in most populations where there is intimate social contact, these diseases attack only the children because the adults are immune, this immunity having been acquired as the result of earlier infection. But many adults are immune to diphtheria when there is no apparent history of previous infection and hence it has been assumed that these persons must have had subclinical or very mild infections of which they were unaware….the weight of opinion at the present time is that adult immunity to diphtheria results only from contact with diphtheria toxin and the conclusion seems warranted that, in spite of no history of diphtheria in Kingston, the disease must surely have been present in a mild form at least.
“Inasmuch as there is some difference of opinion, let it be merely supposed that diphtheria was actually unknown in Kingston, and that a malignant type was carried in from some other infected town. Perhaps some travelling “pedalar,” visiting relative or friend, or perhaps some one of the families that moved into town and entered intimately into church and social life, served as a carrier of the disease. We are certain that most of the Kingston children had no immunity. The powder was dry and only a spark was needed for an explosion….
“…we are led to consider the possibility that diphtheria was already present in Kingston and in New Jersey and that during the spring of 1735, and for some unexplained reason, the organism suddenly underwent some change and took on an added virulence and infectivity. This theory finds some support in our experience with other epidemics and is related to the so-called cyclic variation in virulence of diseases. Smallpox today is supposed to be milder than was the smallpox of the eighteenth century, and scarlet fever, influenza, and measles are thought to vary in virulence from time to time. By far the best evidence that diphtheria became more virulent about 1735 is found in the Vital Records of almost every New Hampshire and Massachusetts town. At that period one can find hundreds of instances of multiple deaths, whereas, before then, multiple deaths were very infrequent and most of those that have been found can be accounted for by dysentery and smallpox. This sudden increase in multiple deaths is so striking that I have used it as evidence of the “throat distemper” in some few towns where other records could not be found. That it was a new and unusual experience for the colonists is also shown by that notice in the New York Gazette which said that the burial of four Boynton children in one grave was an event “seldom known in this part of the world.” We can understand how the colonists may have failed to mention sporadic cases of diphtheria and how they may have confused various types of disease, but a disease that frequently killed from three to eight children in a family within about a month was not likely to be quickly forgotten. And so it seems that this sudden marked increase in the occurrence of multiple deaths can be taken as evidence of an increased virulence in diphtheria which, if true, would be a reasonable explanation for the epidemic….” (Caulfield, Part II, pp. 329-332.)
Christianson: “In 1735-36, scarlet fever and diphtheria struck simultaneously (for the former, largely in Boston), resulting in the most destructive epidemic of any childhood disease in American history. Whereas scarlet fever claimed over 100 deaths from the estimated 4,000 persons infected, diphtheria in New Hampshire alone took 1,500 from a population of 20,000.” (Christianson in Leavitt. 1997, p. 54.)
Creighton: “The accounts of the great wave of ‘throat-distemper’ that spread over the towns and villages of New England in 1735 are singularly clear and even numerically precise. The arrival of this sickness is one of the most definite incidents in the whole history of epidemics; it was hardly possible for the common belief, whether popular or professional, to have been mistaken about it. Just a hundred years had passed since the first settlement of the Puritans on Massachusetts Bay and along the Connecticut river; Boston had grown to a town of some 12,000 inhabitants, and many small towns and townships had sprung up along the coast and in the interior. The population was still sparse, although it was growing rapidly from within…” (p. 685)
“The disease “did emerge,” as Douglass says, on the 20th of May, 1735, at Kingston township, some fifty miles to the east of Boston.[78] The first child seized died in three days; in about a week after three children in a family some four miles distant were successively seized, and all died on the third day; it continued to spread through the township, and Douglass was informed that of the first forty cases none recovered. It was vulgarly called the “throat illness” or “plague in the throat.” Some died quickly as if from prostration, but most had “a symptomatic affection of the fauces[79] or neck : that is, a sphacelation[80] or corrosive ulceration in the fauces, or an infiltration and tumefaction in the chops and forepart of the neck, so turgid as to bring all upon a level between the chin and sternum, occasioning a strangulation of the patient in a very short time.”
“In August it was at Exeter, a town six miles distant, but it did not appear at Chester, six miles to the westward, until October. After the first fatal outburst in Kingston township it became somewhat milder; but in the country districts of New Hampshire it was fatal to 1 in 3, or 1 in 4 of the sick, and in scarce any place to less than 1 in 6. This average was made up by its excessive fatality in some families; Boynton of Newbury Falls lost his eight children; at Hampton Falls twenty-seven died in five families. The following table [omitted here], compiled by Fitch, minister of Portsmouth, shows the deaths from it in various towns and townships of New Hampshire during fourteen months from May, 1735, to 26 July, 1736, with the ages.[81]….
“The meaning of these figures in the townships of New Hampshire will appear from the case of Hampton. In the year 1736 its burials from all causes were 69, and its baptisms 50; while the throat-distemper alone, during fourteen months of that and the previous year, cut off 55….” (pp. 686-687)
Pediatrics: “The most frightful epidemic of any childhood disease in American history began in 1735. The disease was diphtheria which in colonial records was also known as cynanche, angina, canker, bladders, rattles, or throat distemper. The most characteristic feature of this epidemic was the occurrence of multiple deaths in families. There were at least six instances of eight deaths at a time due to diphtheria in a single family.” (Pediatrics. “On the Treatment of Diphtheria in 1735 (Abstract), Vol. 55, No. 1, 1-1-1975, pp. 43.)
1736 — Throat Distemper (Diphtheria), CT (163) ME (124) MA (363) NH (309) NY (6)–965
—>965 Blanchard tally of Colony (State) breakouts below.[82]
Summary of Colony (State) Breakouts Below
—>163 Connecticut
—>124 Maine
—>363 Massachusetts
—>309 New Hampshire
— ? New Jersey
— 6 New York
Connecticut (>163)[83]
— 5 Colchester (all children of Ebenezer Skinner). Caulfield 1938 (II), 305.[84]
— 26 East Haven. Caulfield 1938 (II), 303.[85]
–~30 Farmington. Caulfield 1938 (II), 307 and 312.[86]
–~35 Guilford. Caulfield 1938 (II), 303, 312.[87]
— ? Haddam. Caulfield 1938 (II), 312.[88]
— >2 Hebron. Caulfield 1938 (II), 307.[89]
— 2 Lebanon (children of Nathan Fitch). Caulfield 1938 (II), 305
—>10 New Haven. Caulfield 1938 (II), 301-302.[90]
— 17 New London. Caulfield 1938 (II), 305-307.[91]
— ? Old Lyme. Caulfield 1938 (II), 312.[92]
— ? Preston. Caulfield 1938 (II), 312.[93]
— ? Ridgefield. Caulfield 1938 (II), 312.[94]
— 2 Saybrook. Caulfield 1938 (II), 305.[95]
–~22 Simsbury. Caulfield 1938 (II), 308.[96]
—>12 Stamford. Caulfield 1938 (II), 300.[97]
Maine (124)
— ? Falmouth. Caulfield 1938, 245.[98]
–122 Kittery, York Co. Belknap II. 1791, p. 122.[99]
—>2? Scarborough. Caulfield 1938, 244-145.[100]
— ? Spruce Creek. Caulfield 1938, 244.[101]
— ? York. Caulfield 1938, 244.[102]
Massachusetts (363)
— ? Bradford, Essex County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 289.[103]
— ? Eastham, Barnstable County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 289.[104]
— ? Georgetown, Essex County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 289.[105]
— ? Gloucester (some evidence of distemper in 1736). Caulfield 1938 (II), 282.
— 116 Haverhill, Essex County. Caulfield 1938 (Part II), 284.
–1 Molly Bailey, 13, May 11. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.[106]
–1 Betty Bailey, 15, May 5. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.[107]
–1 Elizabeth Bradbury, 6, Nov 15. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Obadiah Bradley, 13, Nov 26. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Younger sister of Obadiah Bradley, Nov 25. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–3 Bradley children (siblings of Obadiah). Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Martha Brown, 14, Oct 5. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Nathaniel Brown, 12, Oct 12, brother of Martha). Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Daniel Chase, 7, July 18. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Brother of Daniel Chase, 4, July 18. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Sarah Chase, 9, Aug 3. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Sarah Chase, 14, Nov 17. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 brother of Sarah Chase, aged 14, ~same time. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.[108]
–2 Two additional Chase family children later. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Sarah Corlis, 19, Dec 30. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Elizabeth Davis, 22, Sep 19. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Sarah Eatton, 4, Oct 17. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Eunice Emerson, 15, June 13. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Anne Gatchel, 6, Sep 11 (sister of Jessie). Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Daniel Gatchel, 10, Sep 14 (brother of Anne) Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Jessie Gatchel, 3, before brother Samuel. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Samuel Gatchel, 12, Sep 20. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 David Hassaltine, 7, Aug 29. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Johnson female, over 40, aunt of Getchel’s) Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 John McHard, 7, July 12 (Whitely’s brother). Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.[109]
–1 Whitely McHard, 4, July 12. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–2 McHard children, later in July. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.[110]
–1 Mary Merrill, 14, Oct 27. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Ruth Merrill, 12, Sep 9. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–2 Merrill children (not named, no date). Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.[111]
–1 Younger brother of Ruth Merrill, earlier. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Mehitable Page, 19, Oct 10. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Joseph Richards, 8, Sep 18. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Thomas Shepard, 11, Aug 28. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Lydia White, 15, April 6. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Brother of Lydia White, a few days later. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
— 21 Ipswich. How family children, Nov 5-28, 1736. Caulfield 1938 (II), 280-281.[112]
— ? Nantucket, Nantucket County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-294.[113]
— >18 Reading, Middlesex County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-294.[114]
–~200 Rowley and neighboring parishes, especially beginning of summer of 1736.[115]
— ? Salem, Essex County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 281.[116]
— >8 Sherborn, Middlesex County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-294.[117]
— ? Topsfield, Essex County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 289.[118]
— ? Wakefield. Caulfield 1938 (II), 289.[119]
— ? Weston, Middlesex County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-294.[120]
New Hampshire (309)
— 13 Hampton. Belknap II, 1791, p. 122.
–~150 Hampton Falls. Caulfield 1938, 233.[121]
— 34 Kingston. Caulfield 1938, 231.
— 1 North Yarmouth. Caulfield 1938, 245.[122]
— 99 Portsmouth. Caulfield 1938, 241.
— >12 Rye, July-Aug. Four Lock children and multiple deaths in four other families named.[123]
New Jersey ( ?)
–? Crosswicks Caulfield 1938 (II), 315.[124]
New York ( 6)
–>5 Easthampton. Caulfield 1938 (II), 315.[125]
— 1 Huntington, Oct 3. Hannah Prime. Caulfield 1938 (II), 315.[126]
Narrative Information
Caulfield on the epidemic in Hampton Falls (where there was a church some Kingston residents attended): “an epidemic started in Hampton Falls in June [1735], a few weeks after the disease broke out in Kingston.
“The Hampton Falls epidemic reached its peak during the winter months and during December alone there were fifty deaths. This town suffered more than any other in New Hampshire, and within about a year two hundred and ten had died, of whom two hundred were under twenty years of age. One family lost seven children, two families lost six, two lost five, six lost four, and about fourteen families lost three apiece.[127] The disease was still present in 1739 when Joseph Batchelder lost twelve or thirteen children — it was not known which — for “Mrs. Batchelder afterwards was unable to decide whether she had twelve or thirteen children.” It was also said that only two houses where there were children escaped the epidemic.”[128]
“Hampton Falls, then a town of about two hundred houses and twelve hundred people, had been separated from the old town of Hampton in 1726… it was on the main road that led through New Hampshire southward to Salisbury and Newbury in the province of Massachusetts Bay. A fair, which attracted people from neighboring towns, was held at the Falls two or three times a year and travelers on their way to Maine often stopped at the inn and mingled with the people of the town, so when Hampton Falls became a second focus there was an opportunity for the disease to spread even beyond the borders of the province.” [pp. 233-234]
Caulfield on Portsmouth: “Portsmouth, with about three or four thousand people, was the cultural, financial, and governmental center of New Hampshire. Most of the provincial trade with foreign countries passed through this town and there was frequent contact with the people in neighboring towns, so it is surprising, therefore, to find that Portsmouth escaped the epidemic until nearly all the other towns had become infected. In a sermon preached during the winter of 1735-36,[129] it was said that the mortal sickness, though present, did not prevail to the same extent as in other towns; and it was not until January that a Portsmouth epidemic was first mentioned in the contemporary press. On February 9, the Boston Evening Post reported:
We are informed, that 7 Children died at Portsmouth the last Week, and that 3 children of Mr. Thomas Bickford of that Place, and which were all that he had, were buried together on Wednesday last.
“Subsequently, very conflicting accounts appeared. In March, the Boston News-Letter mentioned that the epidemic had been “pretty favourable at Portsmouth hitherto,” but later that month it was as “mortal as in any of the neighboring Towns” and seventy had died within a short time. By April the epidemic had “considerably abated,” but by July the number of deaths had reached one hundred. There was a pest-house in Portsmouth at this time and in 1736 the provincial government allowed an increased appropriation for its maintenance.[130] Here is indirect evidence that Portsmouth physicians may have treated the distemper as a contagious disease and, if it is supposed that the first few cases were immediately isolated, the small number of deaths during 1735 can possibly be explained. But it does not seem that a single pest-house could have been effective for very long because it would surely have been overtaxed with the seventy fatal cases during the late winter, so it is probable that the isolation treatment in Portsmouth was ineffectual. Certainly it cannot explain the fact that, in proportion to the population, Portsmouth had fewer deaths than any other New Hampshire town….” [pp. 238-239]
Caulfield (II), on NH and MA: “During the spring of 1736, the disease was very prevalent throughout New Hampshire and northeastern Massachusetts. (Caulfield 1938 (II), p. 283.)
1737 — Throat Distemper (Diphtheria), CT (>40), ME (>147), MA (>207), NH (24) — >418
—>418 Blanchard tally of Colony (State) breakouts below.[131]
Summary of Colony (State) Breakouts Below
— >40 Connecticut
—>147 Maine
—>207 Massachusetts
— 24 New Hampshire
Connecticut ( >40)[132]
— ? Colchester. Caulfield 1938 (II), 312.[133]
— ? Derby. Caulfield 1938 (II), 309.[134]
— 1 East Haddam (Brainard family child). Caulfield 1938 (II), 307.[135]
–~18 East Haven. Caulfield 1938 (II), 302.[136]
— >2 Hebron. Caulfield 1938 (II), 307.[137]
— >4 Newtown (4 Ephraim Washband children, Oct-Nov 1737). Caulfield 1938 (II), 309.[138]
— 6 Saybrook. Caulfield 1938 (II), 305.[139]
— ~7 Simsbury. Caulfield 1938 (II), 312.[140]
— >2 Wallingford Caulfield 1938 (II), 309.[141]
Maine (>147)
— ? Falmouth. Caulfield 1938, 245.[142]
— 7 Kennebunkport (children from one family in one week). Caulfield 1938, 245.[143]
–74 North Yarmouth. Caulfield 1938, 245.[144]
–40 Portland (Falmouth). buy May 1737–might have begun late 1735). Caulfield 1938.
–26 Purpoodock (before May 1737, possibly going back to late 1735). Caulfield 1938, 244.[145]
Massachusetts (>207)
—>12 Beverly . Caulfield 1938 (II), 281.[146]
— ? Bradford. Caulfield 1938 (II), 289.[147]
— >5 Dudley (Benjamin and Martha Conant children, Dec 29, 1736 (1), Jan 5-8, 1737 (4).)[148]
— ? Georgetown. Caulfield 1938 (II), 289.[149]
–130 Haverhill. Caulfield 1938 (II), 284.[150]
–1 Nathaniel Bradley, 16, Oct 4. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.[151]
–1 Susannah Emerson, 15, March 3. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Susannah Emerson, 10, Sep 2. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Lydia Hasseltine, 9, Jan 28 (sister of Mary). Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Mary Hasseltine, 19, Jan 2. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Benjamin Holgate, brother of Judith, same week. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 James Holgate, 5, Dec 26. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Judith Holgate, sister of James, about same time. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–2 James Holgate siblings, names not provided. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.[152]
–1 Abigail Kimbal, 5, Sep 13. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Martha Kimbal, 11, Sep 13. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Hannah Webster, 10, Sep 30. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.[153]
–1 Joseph Webster, brother of Hannah; date not noted. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Mercy Webster, sister of Hannah; date not noted. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Sarah Webster, sister of Hannah; date not noted. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 John Appleton White, 5, Sep 28. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Mary Whittaker, Feb (younger sister of Sarah). Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Samuel Whittaker, Feb (younger brother of Mary). Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Sarah Whittaker, 7, Feb 22. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Whittaker sibling, 2, same week as Sarah. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
–1 Susanna Wilson, 7, Jan 26. Essex Antiquarian, 1897, 10-13.
— ? Salem. Caulfield 1938 (II), 281.[154]
—>45 Marblehead (45 within 15 days). Caulfield 1938 (II), 281.[155]
— ? Topsfield. Caulfield 1938 (II), 289.[156]
— ? Wakefield. Caulfield 1938 (II), 289.[157]
— >4 Watertown, Middlesex County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-94.[158]
—>11 Wenham. Caulfield 1938 (Pt. II), 281.[159]
New Hampshire ( 24)
–24 Kingston. Caulfield 1938, 231.
1738 — Throat Distemper (Diphtheria), CT (>16), MA (>61), NH (16), NY (>5) — >98
—>98 Blanchard tally of Colony (State) breakouts below.[160]
Summary of Colony (State) Breakouts Below
—>16 Connecticut
— ? Maine
—>61 Massachusetts
— 16 New Hampshire
— 5 New York
Connecticut (>16)[161]
— 2 East Haddam (Brainard family children). Caulfield 1938 (II), 307.[162]
–10 East Haven. Caulfield 1938 (II), 302.[163]
—>2 Hartford. Caulfield 1938 (II), 310.[164]
—>2 Hebron. Caulfield 1938 (II), 307.[165]
Maine ( ?)
–? Falmouth. Caulfield 1938, 245.[166]
Massachusetts (>61)
–>61 Blanchard tally of locality breakouts below.
— ? Andover (1738-1739), Essex County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 289.[167]
— ? Braintree (1738-39, Norfolk County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293.[168]
—>10 Brookfield, Worcester County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293.[169]
—>12 Malden, Middlesex County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 291-92.[170]
— >4 Milton, Norfolk County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-94.[171]
— 31 Sandy Bay/Gloucester, Essex County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 282.[172]
— >4 Woburn, Middlesex County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-94.[173]
New Hampshire (16)
–16 Kingston. Caulfield 1938, 231.
New York (>5)
—>5 Easthampton. Caulfield 1938 (II), 315.[174]
1739 — Throat Distemper (Diphtheria), CT (at least 72), MA (at least 39) — >111
—>111 Blanchard tally of Colony (State) breakouts below.[175]
Connecticut (>72)[176]
— ? Ashford. Caulfield 1938 (II), 312.[177]
— ? Bolton. Caulfield 1938 (II), 312.[178]
— ? Coventry. Caulfield 1938 (II), 312.[179]
— >3 Hartford. Caulfield 1938 (II), 310.[180]
— >2 Hebron. Caulfield 1938 (II), 307.[181]
— 7 Lebanon (children of Amos Fuller (3); Josiah Webster (4)). Caulfield 1938 (II), 305.
— ? Mansfield. Caulfield 1938 (II), 312.[182]
–~35 New Haven. Caulfield 1938 (II), 301-2.[183]
–~25 Saybrook. Caulfield 1938 (II), 305.[184]
Massachusetts ( >39)
—>24 Andover (1738-1739), Essex County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 289.[185]
— >5 Braintree (1738-39, Norfolk County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293.[186]
— >4 Harvard, Worcester County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293.[187]
— >6 Middleton, Essex County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 289.[188]
— ? Weston, Middlesex County (173901740). Caulfield 1938 II, 293-94.[189]
1740 — Throat Distemper (Diphtheria), CT (at least 32), MA (at least 62) — >94
—>94 Blanchard tally of Colony (State) breakouts below.[190]
Connecticut (>32)[191]
— 22 Coventry. Caulfield 1938 (II), 310.[192]
— 3 East Haddam. Caulfield 1938 (II), 307.
— >2 Hebron. Caulfield 1938 (II), 307.[193]
— 5 Killingly (children of Cabot (3) and Child (2) families). Caulfield 1938 (II), 311.[194]
Massachusetts (>62)
–1,400 Essex County, 1736-1740. Caulfield 1938 (II), 289.[195]
— ? Cambridge, Middlesex County (1740). Caulfield 1938 (II), 297.[196]
— >12 Grafton, Worcester County (1740). Caulfield 1938 (II), 293.[197]
— >8 Lancaster, Worcester County (1740) Caulfield 1938 (II), 293.[198]
— ? Lexington, Middlesex County (1740). Caulfield 1938 (II), 293.[199]
— >1 Littleton, Middlesex County (1740). Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-94.[200]
— >4 Lunenburg, Worcester County (1740). Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-94.[201]
— ? Lynn, Essex County (1740). Caulfield 1938 (II), 289.[202]
— >6 Marlborough, Middlesex County (1740). Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-94.[203]
— ? Martha’s Vineyard (1740). Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-94.[204]
— >9 Oxford, Worcester County (1740-1741). Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-94.[205]
— >3 Shrewsborough [Shrewsbury], Worcester County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-94.[206]
— >11 Southborough, Worcester County. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-94.[207]
— ? Sutton, Worcester County (1740-1741). Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-94.[208]
— >6 Uxbridge, Worcester County (1740-1741). Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-94.[209]
— >2 Westerborough (Westborough?), Worcester Co. Caulfield 1938 (II), 293-94.[210]
1741 — Throat Distemper (Diphtheria), CT — >24
Connecticut (>24)[211]
— ? Coventry Caulfield 1938 (II), 312.[212]
–24 Killingly Caulfield 1938 (II), 311.[213]
— ? Pomfret Caulfield 1938 (II), 312.[214]
Sources
Belknap, Jeremy. The History of New Hampshire (Vol. 1). Dover: S. C. Stevens and Ela & Wadleigh, 1831. Google digitized. Accessed 1-31-2013 at: http://books.google.com/books?id=ck-kNJ8whbEC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
Belknap, Jeremy. The History of New Hampshire. Volume II. Comprehending the Events of Seventy Five Years, from MDCCXV to MDCCXC. Boston: Isaiah Thomas and Ebenezer T. Andrews, MDCCXCI [1791]. Google digitized. Accessed 2-17-2013 at: http://books.google.com/books?id=rjIBAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
Caulfield, Ernest. “A History of the Terrible Epidemic, Vulgarly Called the Throat Distemper, as it Occurred in His Majesty’s New England Colonies Between 1735 and 1740.” Presented at the Beaumont Medical Club,[215] 12-9-1938. Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, Vol. 11, No. 3, 1939, p. 219-272. Accessed 1-11-2018 at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2602079/pdf/yjbm00529-0057.pdf
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 ‘Throat Distemper’ of 1735-1740 (Part II).” Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, Vol. 11, No. 4, March 1939, pp. 277-335. Accessed 1-12-2018 at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2602120/pdf/yjbm00530-0001.pdf
Christianson, Eric H. “Medicine in New England,” in Leavitt, Judith Walzer & Ronald L. Numbers. Sickness and Health in America: Readings in the History of Medicine and Public Health (3rd Ed., Revised). Madison, WI: Univ. of Wisconsin Press, 1997, p. 54. Google digital preview: http://books.google.com/books?id=6eOlhNkjXaAC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=false
Creighton, Charles, M.D. “The Throat-distemper of New England, 1735-36,” pp. 685-690 in A History of Epidemics in Britain (Vol. II). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1894. Accessed 10-3-2013 at: https://archive.org/stream/historyofepidemi02crei#page/n5/mode/2up
Douglas, William, M.D. The Practical History of a New Epidemical Eruptive Miliary Fever, with an Angina Ulcusculosa Which Prevailed in Boston New-England in the Years 1735 and 1736. Boston, N.E.: Thomas Fleet, 1736. Accessed 10-30-2013 at:
https://archive.org/stream/2552021R.nlm.nih.gov/2552021R#page/n5/mode/2up
Duffy, John. Epidemics in Colonial America. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1953.
Essex Antiquarian. A Monthly Magazine Devoted to the Biography, Genealogy, History and Antiquities of Essex County, Massachusetts. “Throat Distemper in Haverhill, 1735-7.” Vol. I, No. 1, Jan 1897, Salem, Mass., pp. 10-13, Sidney Perley, editor. Accessed 2-17-2013 at: http://haverhill.essexcountyma.net/distemper.htm — and on 1-14-2018 at: https://archive.org/details/essexantiquarian01perluoft
Fitch, Jabez. An Account of the Numbers that have died of the Distemper in the Throat Within the Province of New-Hampshire, With some Reflections thereon, July 26, 1736. Boston: 1736. At: http://archive.org/details/2554022R.nlm.nih.gov
Gott Family Line. Geocities. Accessed 1-14-2018 at: http://www.geocities.ws/helenehaw/Gott.html
Kohn, George Childs (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Plague and Pestilence From Ancient Times to the Present (Revised Edition). New York: Checkmark Books, 2001, pp. 234-235.
Marcelais, Jenn. A Very Grave Matter (website). “Burying Grounds, Cemeteries, Gravestones & History of Haverhill, Massachusetts.” Gravematter.com. 2002. Accessed 2-17-2013 at: http://www.gravematter.com/cem-ma-haverhill.php
Merchant, Dean. “History in focus: Diphtheria epidemic.” Seacoastonline. 6-27-2008. Accessed 2-17-2013 at: http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080627/LIFE/806270310
Pediatrics. “On the Treatment of Diphtheria in 1735” (Abstract), Vol. 55, No. 1, 1-1-1975, p. 43. Accessed 2-17-2013 at: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/55/1/43.abstract
Williamson, William D. History of the State of Maine; From its First Discovery, A.D. 1602, to the Separation, A.D. 1820, Inclusive (Volume II of Two). Hallowell: Glazier, Masters & Co., 1832, 615 pages. Accessed 1-12-2018 at: http://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mainehistory/34/
[1] Referred to as throat distemper, and other names at the time, descriptions point to what was later named diphtheria. Scarlet fever occurred as well, with deaths, but sources indicate the major epidemic was diphtheria.
[2] Caulfield notes that from 1736-1741 there were “By actual count over five hundred deaths…attributed to the epidemic” and notes “if the records were complete the number would probably approach one thousand.”
[3] Caulfield does not seek to note all fatalities, but does provide numbers for certain localities in attempt to track the epidemic spread and high number of deaths in some families as in indicator of diphtheria as opposed to scarlet fever.
[4] This number represents only localities where localities and death numbers or estimates are specifically noted. Principally pages 244-245 in Part I, and page 122 in Part II.
[5] Caulfield does not seek to note all fatalities, but does provide numbers for certain localities in attempt to track the epidemic spread and high number of deaths in some families as in indicator of diphtheria as opposed to scarlet fever.
[6] The article notes, that in addition to the children, a “considerable” number of adults died.
[7] Seventy-six is the number of fatal cases coming to the attention of Dr. W. Douglas (Practical History of a New Epidemical Eruptive Miliary Fever…, 1736. Caulfield notes his belief that scarlet fever was the preeminent epidemic in Boston and that scarlet fever could be misconstrued as diphtheria/
[8] In that this is a round number, it bears the prospect of an approximation, though not an unreasonable one given that we know of 997 deaths in fifteen New Hampshire localities alone.
[9] Caulfield 1938, p. 264.
[10] There is a gap, however, for which we do not have a number — the deaths that occurred June-Dec 1736. With such a breakout the total number of deaths would most probably exceed 1,040 for 1735-1738.
[11] Belknap created a table from the work of Fitch and in a footnote added 13 additional deaths in Hampton in 1736 which occurred after the Fitch 14-month timeframe. Highlighted in yellow to denote we are not using in that Caulfield shows deaths in several localities (e.g. Haverhill, Isle of Shoals and Rochester) which are not in Belknap. These show at least 40 additional deaths.
[12] This is just for 15 localities looked at over a 14-month period which had to end by July 26, 1736.
[13] Caulfield II (p. 317) drawing upon Rev. Jonathan’s Observations on that terrible Disease Vulgarly called The Throat-Distemper. Boston: S. Kneeland and T. Green, 1740.
[14] In order to have a number we note at least five based on Caulfield’s statement that there “were many deaths [there] from the distemper during 1736.” Cites: N.Y. Geneal. & Biog. Rec., xxxiv, 251.
[15] Cites: E. D. G. Prime: Notes of the rime Family. 1888, p. 20.
[16] In order to have a number we note at least five based on Caulfield’s statement that there “were many deaths [there] from the distemper during 1736 and 1738.” Cites: N.Y. Geneal. & Biog. Rec., xxxiv, 251.
[17] Cites: W. Douglass, M.D., The Practical History of a New Epidemical Eruptive Miliary Fever, with an Angina Ulcusculosa, which prevailed in New England in the years 1735 and 1736. Boston, N.E. 1736. Creighton: “This rare essay was reprinted in the New England Joural. of Med. and Surg. xiv. i (Jan. 1825).”
[18] Fauces: “The narrow passage from the mouth to the pharynx situated between the soft palate and the base of the tongue – called also isthmus of the fauces.” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary. At: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fauces .)
[19] “The process of becoming or making gangrenous; mortification.” (Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary. C&G Merriam Co., 1913. Accessed at: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Sphacelation
[20] Shows 984 deaths — 802 children under 10, ages 10-20 (139), 20-30 (35), 30-40 (4), and over 40 (4).
[21] A strong foul smell; “an offensive smell; stench.” (Random House Kernerman Webster’s College Dictionary, 2010. Accessed at: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/foetor )
[22] “Having or made up of many small projections or lesions.” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary. At: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/miliary )
[23] “Ichor, n….Pathology: A watery, arid discharge from a wound or ulcer.” (American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (4th ed.) Houghton Mifflin Co., 2000, 2009. At: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Ichorous )
[24] “Anasarca, or extreme generalized edema, is a medical condition characterized by widespread swelling of skin due to effusion of fluid into the extracellular space.” (Wikipedia. “Anasarca,” 8-10-2013 modification.)
[25] Stinging or itching sensation. American Heritage Dictionary. At: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/urtications
[26] “Of or being a skin lesion with a wavy or indented margin.” (American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (4th ed.). At: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/serpiginous )
[27] “Containing, discharging, or causing the production of pus.” (American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (4th ed.). At: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/purulent )
[28] Imposthumation: “The act of forming an abscess; state of being inflamed; suppuration.” (Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary. C. & G. Merriam Co., 1913. At: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Imposthumation )
[29] Induration (Pathology): The hardening of a normally soft tissue or organ, especially the skin, because of inflammation, infiltration of a neoplasm, or an accumulation of blood.” (American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (4th ed.). At: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/induration )
[30] “A small mass of fleshy tissue that hangs from the back of the soft palate.” (American Heritage Science Dictionary. Houghton Mifflin Co., 2005. Accessed at: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/uvula )
[31] “The cast-off skins or coverings of various organisms, such as the shells of crabs or the external coverings of the larvae and nymphs of insects.” (American Heritage Dictionary of he English Language (4th ed.). Houghton Mifflin Co., 2000, 2009. At: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/exuviae )
[32] Cites: Gent. Magaz. Feb. 1752, p. 73.
[33] Creighton footnote 2: The account by Kearsley, of Philadelphia, written about 1769 {Gent. Magaz. XXXIX. 251), refers to a great epidemic of throat-disease in New England in the spring, summer and autumn of 1746; but the date is almost certainly a mistake for 1736, as no such epidemic is known on contemporary authority.”
[34] Cites: Belknap, Jeremy. The History of New-Hampshire (3 vols.). Boston: 1791-92, II, 118.
[35] Cites: Douglas, William. The Practical History of a New Epidemical Eruptive Miliary Fever, with an Angina Ulcusculosa which prevailed in Boston, New England in the Years 1735 and 1736. Boston: 1736. Duffy notes that “Creighton bases much of his account upon this work, which was reprinted in the New England Journal of Medicine and Surgery, XIV, 1825, I.
[36] Cites: Belknap, Jeremy. The History of New-Hampshire (3 vols.). Boston: 1791-92, II, 120.
[37] Northeast of Boston.
[38] Cites as further reading: Duffy, John. Epidemics in Colonial America. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State Univ. Press, 1953; and Top, ed., The History of American Epidemiology; Disease and Society in Provincial Massachusetts: Collected Accounts, 1736-1939.
[39] This number is for 1735. We have sought, as best we could, to breakout 1736-1741 in separate documents
[40] Caulfield phrases in a way to indicate his uncertainty of diphtheria, whereas the deaths in the Smith family several months later (Jan 1736) are “certain evidence of an epidemic.”
[41] I put question marks by names of locations Caulfield notes as having been visited by throat distemper, without noting a death toll.
[42] Caulfield fn: J. C. Scates: Records of the First Church of Berwick. N. E. Hist. & Geneal. Reg., 1928, lxxxii, 97.
[43] Caulfield footnote: Seven children of Joseph Averell and Jane McLellan, died in 1735. The Averill Family, p. 170.
[44] Caulfield footnote: William Douglas–Practical History…p. 13. Virginia Gazette, Apr. 28-May 5, 1738.
[45] Caulfield footnote: Boston News-Letter, March 11-18, 1736.
[46] Caulfield fn: C. E. Banks: Hist. of York, Boston, 1931, I, 354, 367. Boston News-Letter, March 11-18, 1736. Rev. Moody is said to have written an account of the epidemic in York. (Mentioned in John Brown’s Relation. 1737.)
[47] Caulfield earlier notes that “multiple” refers to two or more deaths in the same family in a short period of time. Thus there were at least two deaths.
[48] Caulfield notes that within a year of the start of the epidemic in the Autumn of 1735, there were “over a hundred deaths, which was said to have been more than seventh of the total population.” (Cites: Boston News-Letter, Oct. 14-18, 1736, and Morse and Parish: Compendious Hist. of New Engl., p. 329.)
[49] Writes that: “From Kittery the infection was carried… southward across disputed territory into the Province of Massachusetts Bay…and by September the epidemic had crossed the Merrimac River and like an invading army concentrated its forces at Newbury before it started down the old Bay Path towards Boston.” Notes the deaths of thee children of Stephen Jacques in November 1735. Then: “before the winter was over the epidemic spread throughout the town and there were over 100 deaths between September and the last of December, 1735. (Citing Boston Evening Post, Jan 5, 1736.)
[50] Writes “There were occasional multiple deaths during the winter of 1735-36…” Defined “multiple” as at least two, if this happened “occasionally” then it must have happened at least twice, thus at least four deaths.
[51] “The only evidence of the distemper [diphtheria as opposed to scarlet fever] in Salisbury, as in a few other Massachusetts towns, is the finding of multiple deaths in the Vital Records; see Eaton, Flanders, French, and Hook families.” Thus, since there apparently were multiple deaths in at least one family in Salisbury, and in that Caulfield describes “multiple” as at least two, we do here as well — “<” meaning “at least.”
[52] Number is for 1735-1736, from a population of 20,000. In that this is a round number, it is an approximation.
[53] Caulfield 1938, p. 264.
[54] Belknap created a table from the work of Fitch and in a footnote added 13 additional deaths in Hampton in 1736 which occurred after the Fitch 14-month timeframe. (Belknap, Jeremy. The History of New Hampshire. Volume II. Comprehending the Events of Seventy Five Years, from MDCCXV to MDCCXC. Boston: Isaiah Thomas and Ebenezer T. Andrews, MDCCXCI [1791].
[55] This is just for 15 localities looked at over a 14-month period which had to end by July 26, 1736. (Fitch, Jabez. An Account of the Numbers that have died of the Distemper in the Throat Within the Province of New-Hampshire, With some Reflections thereon, July 26, 1736. Boston: 1736.
[56] Notes that beginning was in September and “within a few months another hundred deaths were added.”
[57] Since we are seeking to break-out these deaths by year as much as is feasible, we put them all in 1735 in that we have no information on 1736 deaths and we know from other localities, the disease was most fatal in early months.
[58] Notes there were 55 deaths “from the distemper within the first year and about eighty for the years 1735-37.”
[59] We suspect an error and believe what was meant was 210, as in Belknap (from Fitch). When the column of fatalities is added down (for localities) the total comes to 994, yet the column total shows 984. When added across (for age groupings), the total comes to 984.
[60] Caulfield notes the epidemic began in Hampton Falls “in June, a few weeks after the disease broke out in Kingston.” He notes that fifty died in Dec alone and 210 died within “about a year.”
[61] On this page Caulfield is not noting fatalities per local, but is giving examples of families experiencing multiple (2 or more) deaths of their children. The Haverhill example is that of Rev. John Brown.
[62] Belknap, drawing from Fitch, shows 113 deaths, but this number includes deaths in 1736. Caulfield shows 34 deaths in Kinston in 1736 in addition to the 102 he shows here for 1735.
[63] On page 326 of Part II, Caulfield has a photograph of the gravestone of David Greley, “who died June 20, 1735, aged 11…One of the first victims of the epidemic.”
[64] Caulfield II (p. 317) drawing upon Rev. Jonathan’s Observations on that terrible Disease Vulgarly called The Throat-Distemper. Boston: S. Kneeland and T. Green, 1740.
[65] Cites. J. Farmer and J. B. Moore: Collections, Topographical, Historical and Biographical relating principally to New Hampshire. 1822, I, 143.
[66] Caulfield footnote: Jabez Fitch: An Account of the Numbers that have died…within the Province of New Hampshire. Boston, 1736, 13.
[67] Caulfield footnote: Ora Pearson: Mortality in Kingston from 1725 to 1832. Coll. N. Hamp. Hist. Soc. 1837, v, 250.
[68] Caulfield footnote: Farmer and Moore: loc. cit.
[69] Caulfield footnote: Jabez Fitch: An Account… etc. p. 5.
[70] Caulfield footnote: William Douglas: The Practical History of a new Epidemical…Fever. Boston 1736, 1.
[71] Caulfield footnote: Mellish: loc. cit. says “nearly all of the young children.”
[72] Caulfield footnote: Jabez Fitch: An Account…pp. 2-6.
[73] Caulfield footnote: Warren Brown: Hist. of Hampton Falls, 301. According to the Boston News-Letter, however (March 28-April 5, 1739), Joseph Batchelder lost six children.
[74] Caulfield footnote: New Eng. Hist. & Geneal. Reg., 1904, lviii, 31.
[75] Caulfield footnote: New Eng. Hist. & Geneal. Reg., 1904, lviii, 31.
[76] Caulfield footnote: McDuffie: Hist. of Rochester, 44.
[77] Substance that accelerates clearing of the bowels.
[78] Cites: W. Douglass, M.D., The Practical History of a New Epidemical Eruptive Miliary Fever, with an Angina Ulcusculosa, which prevailed in New England in the years 1735 and 1736. Boston, N.E. 1736. Creighton: “This rare essay was reprinted in the New England Journal of Med. and Surg. xiv. i (Jan. 1825).”
[79] Fauces: “The narrow passage from the mouth to the pharynx situated between the soft palate and the base of the tongue – called also isthmus of the fauces.” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary. At: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fauces .)
[80] “The process of becoming or making gangrenous; mortification.” (Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary. C&G Merriam Co., 1913. Accessed at: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Sphacelation
[81] Shows 984 deaths — 802 children under 10, ages 10-20 (139), 20-30 (35), 30-40 (4), and over 40 (4).
[82] This number is for 1736. We have sought, as best we could, to breakout 1735 and 1737-1741 in separate pages.
[83] We know we have an undercount of Conn. deaths in that our primary source (Caulfield) notes that from 1736-1741 there were “By actual count over five hundred deaths…attributed to the epidemic” and notes “if the records were complete the number would probably approach one thousand.” We show 349 deaths for this time-frame.
[84] Notes all five deaths took place “during the week ending Dec. 3, 1736.”
[85] “In East Haven, then a parish of New Haven, it was very severe, and in a population of about two hundred people there were twenty-six deaths under twenty years of age. It began in the autumn and continued throughout the winter.” Cites: Stephen Dodd: East Haven Register, 1810, p. 40.
[86] Graph: “Farmington, Conn., deaths, 1726-1745” (page 307) indicates approximately thirty deaths. Chart on page 312 notes that from an estimated population of 1,800 there were twenty-four excess deaths in 1736, 100% children.
[87] “From 1730 to 1735 there were about three deaths annually among the children of Guilford, which at that time included East Guilford (now Madison). During the autumn of 1736, thirty-eight children died.” We subtract the previously experienced annualized three deaths from thirty-eight to derive thirty-five. However, on page 312, Caulfield has a chart which indicates that out of an estimated population of 1,100 in 1736, there were 44 excess deaths, with 82% under the age of 20.
[88] From map showing “The spread of the epidemic throughout the towns of Connecticut” showing towns and years.
[89] “The Hebron records are too small for statistical analysis, although there were multiple deaths in the Buell, Carter, Chapwell, Ford, Newcom, and Sawyer families during 1736-40.” With no breakout we assume at least 2 in 1736.
[90] Derived from graph of New Haven distemper epidemic deaths found on page 302. Two of the victims were Stephen and Mary Mix who died on May 21 and June 11. (From gravestone inscriptions, page 326.)
[91] Reproduced are excerpts from Diary of Joshua Hempstead of New London (New London County Hist. Soc., 1901), which chronicles deaths of children and young adults (21-years-old) from “Distemper in the throat”
[92] From map showing “The spread of the epidemic throughout the towns of Connecticut” showing towns and years.
[93] From map showing “The spread of the epidemic throughout the towns of Connecticut” showing towns and years.
[94] From map showing “The spread of the epidemic throughout the towns of Connecticut” showing towns and years.
[95] Two children of Nathaniel Parker. Cites Saybrook Church Records (Ms. copy in Conn. Hist. Soc.).
[96] Taken from graph: “Simsbury, Conn., deaths, 1730-1740.” Shows sharp spike in 1737 to 22-23 deaths, from background of 1-5 (1730-1735), with about seven in 1736 and back down below five in 1738-1740. Notes “three of the Pettibone children died in January and four of the Hays children died in March-April, 1737.” Cites: Albert C. Bates: Simsbury Births, Marriages, and Deaths. Hartford, 1898.” Also notes multiple deaths in Lampson, Holcomb, and Forward families.
[97] Notes the deaths of five Smith family children Jan 9-25 and cites: Boston News-Letter, Feb 19-26, 1736, to the effect that “some Families in that Town that had but Three or Four Children have buried them all.” To derive a minimal number we add five Smith children, three from another family and four from yet another.
[98] Caulfield note: “June 16, 1736, was a day of fasting and prayer at the First Church in Falmouth on account of ‘the terrible distemper that has been and is still prevailing in the land.’”
[99] Belknap, after noting Fitch’s account of throat distemper deaths among children in a list of NH towns, from July 26, 1736, writes: “In the town of Kittery, in the County of York, died 122.” Kittery is in York County, Maine.
[100] Caulfield writes: “At Scarborough there were times when the mortality approached one hundred per cent.” In that no numbers are noted we assume there must have been at least two, while suspecting there were many more.
[101] Caulfield footnote: Boston News-Letter, March 11-18, 1736.
[102] Caulfield fn: C. E. Banks: Hist. of York, Boston, 1931, I, 354, 367. Boston News-Letter, March 11-18, 1736. Rev. Moody is supposed to have written an account of the epidemic in York. (Noted in John Brown’s Relation. 1737.)
[103] “The Vital Records of Bradford…reveal definite evidence of the distemper in 1736-37. Notes multiple deaths in Carlton, Hardy, Jewet, Pearl, Sessions, Tenney, and Wood families.
[104] Notes “evidence of the distemper,” but does note a death toll. Cites: New England Weekly Journal, Nov 2, 1736.
[105] The Vital Records of…Georgetown…reveal definite evidence of the distemper in 1736-37. Notes multiple deaths in Blasdel, Brocklebank, Cooper, and Harriman families.
[106] The names below are taken from “A Brief Relation” of thirty-four “Comfortable and Remarkable Instances of Death” by Rev. John Brown, who lost three children to the distemper. The Essex Antiquarian writes “The names…Mr. Brown cites as showing extraordinary spiritual insight and Christian resignation…”
[107] Notes she died of scarlet fever. However, since her sister died a few days later of throat distemper which was of epidemic proportions in Haverhill, and in that people confused the two, this might have been distemper death.
[108] The younger brother probably died on or about Nov 17 as well, in that they were buried in the same coffin.
[109] Notes she “was the only person above the age of forth who died of the distemper in the town.”
[110] Notes: This was the first family in the town to be deprived of all their children by this disease.”
[111] Notes that besides Mary Merrill, “Three other children of the family died with the distemper.”
[112] Caulfield argues that both diphtheria and scarlet fever were present in Ipswich during the years 1736-38, with diphtheria having moved south from New Hampshire, and scarlet fever having moved north out of Boston. He writes that scarlet fever may have caused more mortality, but specifically notes “I believe that the Farley, How, Abbott, and Cross children died from diphtheria, the more malignant of the two diseases, or possibly from a combination of the two.” (Five children of Michael Farley died in April, 1736; eight Howe children died Nov 5-28, 1736, John Abbott, a neighbor lost eight children about the same time.)
[113] Notes “evidence of the distemper” without noting deaths, citing Boston News-Letter, June 24-July 1, 1736.
[114] Notes “evidence of the distemper” without noting death toll, though multiple deaths are noted for Batt, Burnap, Damon, Emerson, Nickolls, Parker, Stow, Swain, and Townsend families, citing Eaton: Geneal. Hist. of Reading, 1874, p. 148; and Reading Vital Records. We employ two deaths per named family to derive our number and place all within 1736, not knowing the breakout by year.
[115] Caulfield 1938 (II), p. 279. Writes this represented “one-eighth of the total population.” (Cites: Gage: History of Rowley. 1840, pp. 430, 432.)
[116] Notes “There is evidence of the distemper [diphtheria] at…Salem (1736-1737…” No indication of deaths.
[117] Notes “There is evidence of the distemper,” though without noting death toll. Does note multiple deaths in Greenwood, Lealand, Sanger, and Warfield families. Cites Boston News-Letter, Feb 5-12, 1736 and Sherborn Vital Records. In order to derive a number we multiply the number of multiple death families by 2.
[118] The Vital Records of…Topsfield…reveal definite evidence of the distemper in 1736-37. Notes multiple deaths in Peabody, Perkins, Porter, Reddington, and Towne Families. (Cites Deaths in Topsfield, Essex Inst. Hist. Coll., xxxviii, p. 129.)
[119] The Vital Records of…Wakefield…reveal definite evidence of the distemper in 1736-37. Notes multiple deaths in Batt, Burnap, Damon, Parker, Stow, Swayn, and Wiley families.
[120] Notes “evidence of the distemper” without noting fatalities. Cites: Boston News-Letter, Dec. 18-23, 1736.
[121] 150 is my number. Caulfield notes that 210 people here died within about a year of the outbreak beginning in June 1735, a few weeks after Kingston outbreak. Notes that 50 people died in December alone. We subtract these fifty 1735 deaths from 210 plus an additional ten (though this is just speculation) in order to derive a number for 1736. Belknap, drawing on Fitch (1736, p. 6) shows 210 deaths for 1735-1736. Creighton shows 220 same period.
[122] Caulfield footnote: “Including Freeport and Harpswell. Lydia Tuttle d. Dec. 7, 1736 — ‘The first by throat distemper.’ Multiple deaths in the Anderson, Brown, Burnell, Fogg, Ingersol, Larrabee, Seabury, Weare, and Winslow families. Ms. Record of Deaths, in Maine Hist. Soc.: Old Times in North Yarmouth. Jan. 1884, p. 1105. According to Smith’s Journal there were 75 deaths before May, 1737…”
[123] Caulfield footnote: New Hamp. Geneal. Record. July 1903, i. 43. Multiple deaths in the Berry, Doust, Goss, and Marden families also. For the purpose of a number we translate “multiple deaths” in each of the four named families to two each, to derive eight, which we add to the four Lock children.
[124] Notes that on Feb 9 “the New York Weekly Journal reported an epidemic of ‘Throat Distemper’ at Crosswicks in West Jersey. A clinical description of the ‘terrible Disease in the Throat that has made such Desolations in the Country’ appeared the following week in the same journal. The…author [Rev. Jonathan Dickinson] said that the epidemic began ‘at Newark Mountains [Orange]; and at first proved mortal to almost all that had it.’ In his description there are indications of diphtheria of the throat and larynx…”
[125] In order to have a number we note at least five based on Caulfield’s statement that there “were many deaths [there] from the distemper during 1736.” Cites: N.Y. Geneal. & Biog. Rec., xxxiv, 251.
[126] Cites: E. D. G. Prime: Notes of the rime Family. 1888, p. 20.
[127] Caulfield footnote: Jabez Fitch: An Account…pp. 2-6.
[128] Caulfield footnote: Warren Brown: Hist. of Hampton Falls, 301. According to the Boston News-Letter, however (March 28-April 5, 1739), Joseph Batchelder lost six children.
[129] Caulfield footnote: Jabez Fitch: Two Sermons on the…Fatal Distemper. Boston, 1736, 10.
[130] Caulfield footnote: New Hampshire Provincial Papers. 1722-1737, iv, 723. Edited by N. Bouton.
[131] Number for 1737 only. We have sought, as best we could, to breakout 1735-36 and 1738-1741 in separate pages.
[132] We know we have an undercount of Conn. deaths in that our primary source (Caulfield) notes that from 1736-1741 there were “By actual count over five hundred deaths…attributed to the epidemic” and notes “if the records were complete the number would probably approach one thousand.” We show 349 deaths for this time-frame.
[133] From map showing “The spread of the epidemic throughout the towns of Connecticut” showing towns and years.
[134] “By the end of 1737, the epidemic had spread over the southern half of the colony, Newtown, Derby, and Wallingford having become involved.”
[135] “In East Haddam, three Brainard children died in Dec.-Jan. 1737/38…” (Not knowing the breakout we place one death in Dec 1737 and two in Jan 1738.)
[136] Derived from graph of East Haven distemper epidemic deaths found on page 302.
[137] “The Hebron records are too small for statistical analysis, although there were multiple deaths in the Buell, Carter, Chapwell, Ford, Newcom, and Sawyer families during 1736-40.” We assume at least 2 in 1737.
[138] Notes that five children of Joseph Prindle were treated for “throat distemper” without noting outcome.
[139] Three children each of Jedidiah Dudley and Deacon Blague. Cites Saybrook Church Records (Ms. copy in Conn. Hist. Soc.).
[140] Caulfield, in a chart, notes that from an estimated population of 1,100, there were 29 excess deaths in 1736-37, 96% under age of 20. In that Caulfield at p. 308 notes 22 throat distemper deaths, we subtract those from 29 for ~7.
[141] “Two or more” is how we treat the statement “there was an increased number of children’s deaths in 1737.”
[142] Caulfield writes. “Parson Smith [of Falmouth], physician as well as minister, made frequent notes in his journal about those days of sickness [1736] and mentions that the epidemic was still present in 1737 and 1738.”
[143] Caulfield footnote, p. 245: Boston News-Letter, Jan 22-27, 1737. New Eng. Hist. & Geneal. Reg., 1889, liii, 123. George March of Kennebunkport “lost seven children in one week.”
[144] Caulfield fn: “Including Freeport and Harpswell. Lydia Tuttle d. Dec. 7, 1736 — ‘The first by throat distemper.’ Multiple deaths in the Anderson, Brown, Burnell, Fogg, Ingersol, Larrabee, Seabury, Weare, and Winslow families. Ms. Record of Deaths, in Maine Hist. Soc.: Old Times in North Yarmouth. Jan. 1884, p. 1105. According to Smith’s Journal there were 75 deaths before May, 1737…” We subtract the Dec 7, 1736 death to derive 74.
[145] Caulfield footnote: The Rev. Benjamin Allen lost five children within a week.”
[146] Beverly Vital Records: Multiple deaths in Conant, Cox, Patch, Smith, Stone, and Trash families. Hall’s List of Deaths in Beverly in Hist. Coll. Essex Inst., v. 16. Boston News-Letter, Jan. 22-27, 1737.
[147] “The Vital Records of Bradford…reveal definite evidence of the distemper in 1736-37. Notes multiple deaths in Carlton, Hardy, Jewet, Pearl, Sessions, Tenney, and Wood families.
[148] Caulfield 1938 (II), p. 283.
[149] The Vital Records of…Georgetown…reveal definite evidence of the distemper in 1736-37. Notes multiple deaths in Blasdel, Brocklebank, Cooper, and Harriman families.
[150] “…ninety-eight per cent were under twenty years of age.”
[151] Names here are taken from “A Brief Relation” of thirty-four “Comfortable and Remarkable Instances of Death” by Rev. John Brown, who lost three children to the distemper. The Essex Antiquarian writes “The names…Mr. Brown cites as showing extraordinary spiritual insight and Christian resignation…”
[152] It is noted that all of the Holgate children died and that all died the same week. Names of two not provided.
[153] Notes she died after her brother Joseph and sisters Mercy and Sarah and was the last of four Webster children.
[154] Notes “There is evidence of the distemper [diphtheria] at…Salem (1736-1737…” No indication of deaths.
[155] “…in the brief facts concerning Marblehead conclusive proof of two separate epidemics can be found. According to the New York Gazette, in August, 1737, when the pestilence was at its height in Marblehead, forty-five deaths occurred within fifteen days….”
[156] The Vital Records of…Topsfield…reveal definite evidence of the distemper in 1736-37. Notes multiple deaths in Peabody, Perkins, Porter, Reddington, and Towne Families. (Cites Deaths in Topsfield, Essex Inst. Hist. Coll., xxxviii, p. 129.)
[157] The Vital Records of…Wakefield…reveal definite evidence of the distemper in 1736-37. Notes multiple deaths in Batt, Burnap, Damon, Parker, Stow, Swayn, and Wiley families.
[158] Notes “evidence of the distemper,” specifically the deaths of four children in Parce family. Cites: Watertown Records, Vol. iii, p. 112.
[159] Cites New York Gazette, Feb 21-28, 1737; and Essex Antiquarian, vii, 108. Notes: “Multiple deaths in Batchelder, Dodge, and Patch families. Caulfield defines “multiple” as two or more. We multiply families noted by 2 to derive six. We add five from p. 327 in Caulfield’s Part II, where he has a photograph of the gravestones of Mrs. Martha Gott and her five children, Nathaniel (Oct 9), Rebekah (Nov 14), Martha (Nov 15), John (Nov 29) and Josiah (Dec 5, 1737). A Gott genealogy website notes their deaths as “a pathetic and tragic reminder of the terrible toll extracted by an epidemic of ‘throat distemper’ which raged in New England 1736-38.” (Cites: Daniel Gott, Mount Desert Pioneer.)
[160] Number for 1738 only. We have sought, as best we could, to breakout 1735-37 and 1739-1741 in separate pages.
[161] We know we have an undercount of Conn. deaths in that our primary source (Caulfield) notes that from 1736-1741 there were “By actual count over five hundred deaths…attributed to the epidemic” and notes “if the records were complete the number would probably approach one thousand.” We show 349 deaths for this time-frame.
[162] “In East Haddam, three Brainard children died in Dec.-Jan. 1737/38…” (Not knowing the breakout we place one death in Dec 1737 and two in Jan 1738.)
[163] Derived from graph of East Haven distemper epidemic deaths found on page 302.
[164] Notes the burial on Oct 21 of a child who died of “ye throat distemper” as well as the death on the same day of another child to the same affliction.
[165] “The Hebron records are too small for statistical analysis, although there were multiple deaths in the Buell, Carter, Chapwell, Ford, Newcom, and Sawyer families during 1736-40.” We assume at least 2 in 1738.
[166] Caulfield writes. “Parson Smith [of Falmouth], physician as well as minister, made frequent notes in his journal about those days of sickness [1736] and mentions that the epidemic was still present in 1737 and 1738.” Does not note death toll. In Part II (p. 289), Caulfield writes that “In 1738…the epidemic was…raging in Maine and throughout Essex County, Massachusetts, with no indication of its letting up either in virulence or progress…”
[167] Cites: Andover Vital Records, and notes multiple deaths in Astin, Ballard, Blanchard, Carlton, Clark, Dane, Farrington, Foster, Fice, Lovejoy, Marble, and Peters families. (I use question mark in that we are not told in which years these deaths took place.)
[168] Cites New York Gazette, Feb 21-28, 1737/38. Records of Town of Braintree (1888). Dies not note death toll.
[169] Cites Brookfield Vital Records and notes multiple (2 or more) deaths in Ashely, Gooddel, Goss, Heywood, and Hinds families.
[170] Does not provide a death toll, but does note multiple deaths in Howard, Green, Paine, Sargant, and Upham families. Specifies that four Upham children died. In that Caulfield defines “multiple” as two or more deaths we assume at least eight deaths from the other mentioned families. Cites New Engl. Hist. & Geneal. Reg., xii, 242; xiii, 70. Corey: Hist. of Malden, p. 639. On page 327 of Part II, Caulfield has photograph of the gravestones of Phebe, Abigail, William, and Marcy Upham, and notes they died “between August 15 and September 14, 1738.
[171] Notes “evidence of the distemper,” specifically noting deaths in Davenport and Fenno families. Cites: Milton Records, 1900, pp. 217, 220; Journal of Rev. Thomas Smith, June 27, 1738.
[172] “The infection may have spread to Gloucester…There is some evidence of the distemper in 1736, but the real epidemic there was in 1738. In a memorial to the General Court, the people of Sandy Bay mentioned that they had lost ‘thirty-one of their pleasant children by death,’ and as there were only twenty-seven families at Sandy Bay, this was probably more than a third of all their children….”
[173] Notes “evidence of the distemper,” specifically noting deaths of four children from the Richardson family. Cites: Thomas Smith’s Journal, June 27, 1738; and Woburn Vital Records.
[174] In order to have a number we note at least five based on Caulfield’s statement that there “were many deaths [there] from the distemper during 1736 and 1738.” Cites: N.Y. Geneal. & Biog. Rec., xxxiv, 251.
[175] Number for 1739 only. We have sought, as best we could, to breakout 1735-38 and 1740-1741 in separate pages.
[176] We know we have an undercount of Conn. deaths in that our primary source (Caulfield) notes that from 1736-1741 there were “By actual count over five hundred deaths…attributed to the epidemic” and notes “if the records were complete the number would probably approach one thousand.” We show 349 deaths for this time-frame.
[177] From map showing “The spread of the epidemic throughout the towns of Connecticut” showing towns and years.
[178] From map showing “The spread of the epidemic throughout the towns of Connecticut” showing towns and years.
[179] Does not have a breakout to provide, but notes that out of an estimated population of 800 there were 54 excess deaths 1739-41, with 87% from those under 20-years old.
[180] Specifically mentions deaths of three of the children of Benjamin Richards in January, 1739.
[181] “The Hebron records are too small for statistical analysis, although there were multiple deaths in the Buell, Carter, Chapwell, Ford, Newcom, and Sawyer families during 1736-40.” We assume at least 2 in 1739.
[182] From map showing “The spread of the epidemic throughout the towns of Connecticut” showing towns and years.
[183] Derived from graph of New Haven distemper epidemic deaths found on page 302. Notes that 1739 was the peak.
[184] “…in Saybrook…it reached a peak in 1739. Twenty-five of the thirty-one deaths (80 per cent) were among children under twenty years of age.” Cites Saybrook Church Records (Ms. copy in Conn. Hist. Soc.).
[185] Cites: Andover Vital Records, and notes multiple deaths in Astin, Ballard, Blanchard, Carlton, Clark, Dane, Farrington, Foster, Fice, Lovejoy, Marble, and Peters families.
[186] Cites New York Gazette, Feb 21-28, 1737/38. Records of Town of Braintree (1888). Notes Samuel Pain lost five children in 1739.
[187] Notes “evidence of the distemper”, without noting a death toll and cites Nourse: History of Harvard, 1894, p. 515, specifically noting deaths in the Whitcomb and Witherbee families (thus we speculate at least four deaths).
[188] Cites: Middleton Vital Records, and notes multiple deaths in How, Robinson, and Thomas families.
[189] Notes “evidence of the distemper” without noting mortality. Cites: New Engl. Weekly Journal, Nov 13, 1739; and Town of Weston, Births, Deaths and Marriages, 434 et seq.
[190] Number for 1740 only. We have sought, as best we could, to breakout 1735-39 and 1741 in separate documents.
[191] We know we have an undercount of Conn. deaths in that our primary source (Caulfield) notes that from 1736-1741 there were “By actual count over five hundred deaths…attributed to the epidemic” and notes “if the records were complete the number would probably approach one thousand.” We show 349 deaths for this time-frame.
[192] The graph: “Coventry, Conn., deaths, 1725-1746” indicates about 38 deaths for the year, but it is not clear if this is total deaths. In that Caulfield (citing Dimock) specifically notes 22 multiple child deaths from seven families, we use this number. Writes: “In Coventry there was a frightful epidemic and fifty-three of the sixty-three deaths during 1739-41 were among the children, although there had been only about two deaths among the children each year for the previous twelve years.” Cites: “S. W. Dimock: Births, Baptisms, Marriages and Deaths in Coventry, 1897.
[193] “The Hebron records are too small for statistical analysis, although there were multiple deaths in the Buell, Carter, Chapwell, Ford, Newcom, and Sawyer families during 1736-40.” We assume at least 2 in 1740.
[194] Notes the Child children died on Oct 24 and Nov 5, and the Cabot children between Nov 11 and Nov 22.
[195] Notes that by the time diphtheria had come and gone in Lynn in 1740, “the epidemic had covered practically all of Essex County, and fourteen hundred children had lost their lives. Cites Essex Antiquarian, 1897, I, p. 10.
[196] Writes: “…at Harvard College and surrounding Cambridge there was a definite epidemic. In the preface to a medical book dated at Cambridge in 1740, the printer stated: ‘…now that we have a fresh Alarm by a Return of that astonishing Distemper among us…’” (Jonathan Dickinson: Observations, etc.)
[197] Cites Grafton Vital Records, noting multiple deaths in Benjamin, Drury, Grover, Merrriam, Pratt, Smith families.
[198] Notes “evidence of the distemper” there, citing H. S. Nourse: Birth, Marriage and Death Reg. of Lancaster, p. 158. While not indicating a death toll does specifically note deaths in the Moor and Snow families. On page 327 of Part II, has a photograph of the gravestones of the Children of Joseph and Rebeckah Moor and notes the “Ephraim, aged 7, died June 15; Hannah, aged 3, died June 17; Jacob, aged 11, died June 18…; Cathorign, aged 2, died June 23; Rebeckah, aged 6, died June 26; and Lucy, aged 14, died August 22, 1740.” Notes graves are in the Lancaster “Old Common Burial Ground.” We assume two deaths in Snow family and add the six Moor family deaths for total of 8.
[199] Notes “evidence of the distemper” but no death toll, citing New Eng. Hist. & Geneal. Reg., 1858, xii, 267.
[200] Notes “evidence of the distemper” and the death of “Eliz. Only child of Samuel Dummer,” citing New England Weekly Journal, July 29, 1740.
[201] Notes “evidence of the distemper,” e.g. deaths in Carlile and Heywood families, citing: Lunenburg Vital Records.
[202] Cites Zaccheus Collins Diary. Ms. in Essex Inst., Lewis and Newhall: History of Lynn, p. 325.
[203] Notes “evidence of the distemper,” specifically noting deaths in Brigham, Stewart, and Taintorfamilies, citing: Marlborough Vital Records.
[204] Notes “evidence of the distemper” without noting a death toll, citing: C. E. Banks: New Engl. Hist. & Geneal. Reg., April, 1896, p. 165.
[205] Notes “evidence of the distemper” without noting a death toll. Does note that seven children in family by name of Hudson died with 19-day period and deaths in the family by the name of Town. Cites: Oxford Vital Records.
[206] Notes “evidence of the distemper” without noting a death toll. Does note the deaths of three Hapgood and Goddard children. Cites: New Engl. Weekly Journal, Aug 12, 1740.
[207] Writes: “In Southborough Lieut. Brigham has bury’d three…Mr. Beal two; and Mr. Ephraim Ward’s wife three Children; and several [>3] others have dy’d there.” New Engl. Weekly Journal, Aug 12, 1740.
[208] Notes “evidence of the distemper” without noting a death toll, citing: Benedict and Tracy: Hist. of Sutton, p. 59.
[209] Notes “evidence of the distemper,” specifically noting multiple deaths in Holbrook, Keith, and Rawson families. Cites: Uxbridge Vital Records. For purposes of deriving a number we multiple three families by two deaths each.
[210] Notes “evidence of the distemper,” specifically noting deaths of two Hayward children.
[211] We know we have an undercount of Conn. deaths in that our primary source (Caulfield) notes that from 1736-1741 there were “By actual count over five hundred deaths…attributed to the epidemic” and notes “if the records were complete the number would probably approach one thousand.” We show 349 deaths for this time-frame.
[212] Does not have a breakout to provide, but notes that out of an estimated population of 800 there were 54 excess deaths 1739-41, with 87% from those under 20-years old.
[213] Three children from Dresser family, Jan 1-14; three from Morse family, April 17-May 11; 5 from Daniel Whitmore family, May 1-June 5; four from different Whitmore family, June 1-20, two from Bixby family, Sep 26-Oct 3, 3 from Sterns family, Sep 16-Oct 20; and four from Upham family, Sep 27-Oct 15, 1741.
[214] From map showing “The spread of the epidemic throughout the towns of Connecticut” showing towns and years.
[215] “The Beaumont Medical Club was founded 1n 1920 by a group of Yale University School of Medicine physicians and faculty members. (Yale University. Program in the History of Science and Medicine. “Beaumont Club.”)
