18th Century

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

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

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

Bethlehem      (40-50)

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

Cornwall        (     20)

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

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

Hartford         (     >5)

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

Waterbury     (   130)

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

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

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

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

Woodbury      (     57)

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

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

Narrative Information

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sources

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bedford          (    13)

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

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

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

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

Billerica          (    11)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Chelmsford    (>7-12)

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

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

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

Rutland          (      3)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

—>3  “almost all the nurses…” (p. 6.)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Narrative Information

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sources

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

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

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

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

[2] Society for the Propagation of the Gospel.

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

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

Narrative Information

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sources

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Massachusetts            (~89)

Bridgewater                ( 41)[2]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

East Bridgewater        ( 10)

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

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

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

Cohasset                      (   3)

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

Halifax                                    (   5)

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

–3  Austin Bars family

Kingston                     (~30)

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

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

New Hampshire         (48-52)

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

Narrative Information

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

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

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

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

Source

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Narrative Information

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

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

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

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

Sources

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Narrative Information

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sources

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

–Blanchard tally of locality breakouts below.

Harvard                     (37)

–37  Caulfield 1942, p. 51.[1]

Hopkinton                  (  ?)

–?  Caulfield notes a day of “Solemn Humiliation” on account of “great mortality.” (1942, p. 51)

Northborough           (  ?)

–?  Caulfield notes a day of “Solemn Humiliation” on account of “great mortality.” (1942, p. 51)

Westborough             (25)

–25  Rev. Ebenezer Parkman diary, cited in Caulfield 1942, p. 51.

Narrative Information

Caulfield: “The epidemic that began in Westborough about mid-August, 1746, was still worse than that of the year before. Parkman recorded that twenty-five children died within two months, among them four from the Barns family. Days of ‘Solemn Humiliation Fasting & Prayer on acc^t of y^e great Mortality. were observed in Westborough (September 4), Hopkinton (September 18), and Northborough (September 22). Among the thirty-seven deaths in Harvard were five Willards, four Coles, four Sawyers, and three Warners.[2] At the same time there were multiple deaths in many other Massachusetts towns, but the disease has not been identified though I suspect it was ‘Fever & Flux’.”

Sources

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

Nourse, Henry Stedman. History of the Town of Harvard, Massachusetts: 1732-1893. Harvard, MA: Printed for Warren Hapgood, 1894. Google digital preview accessed 1-29-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=CpQvAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

[1] Cites Henry S. Nourse. History of the Town of Harvard, Massachusetts (Harvard, 1894, p. 116). Norse refers to “the fatal endemic dysentery of 1746…” (p. 481.)

[2] Henry S. Nourse. History of the Town of Harvard, Massachusetts (Harvard, 1894, p. 116). No cause is stated.

–Dozens. Blanchard estimate based on Dawson and DeSaussure note comparing it to 1732.

Narrative Information

Dawson and DeSaussure: “It [yellow fever] again appeared [after 1732 outbreak] in 1739, 1745, and 1748, and is said to have raged as severely in these years as in 1732. The number of deaths which it caused in those years cannot now be ascertained. (p. 201.)

Duffy: “Outbreaks of yellow fever in Charleston and the ‘bilious plague’ in New York were reported in 1745, but both were unquestionably yellow fever. The New York outbreak was so diagnosed by Dr. Colden in the course of an extensive correspondence with Dr. Mitchell of Virginia. He made the point that the fever had broken out in June and commented that it always developed in the dock areas — a fact which he attributed to filthy conditions there.

“The Charleston outbreak was a more serious one. Mr. John Fordyce reported to the S.P.G.[1]in November 1745 that ‘Charles-Town, is now, & has been for some time past, very much afflicted with a great & Malignant Sickness called the Yellow Feaver, in which they die Suddenly,’ that business there ‘can Scarce be transacted,’ and that ‘the General Assembly has been Prorogu’d and Adjourn’d several times on account of said Sickness.’ Fordyce added that a fellow minister was dangerously ill presumably from the fever. ‘I may Justly say’ he added later, ‘there is Scarce a House or Family, but what some, or more have Died in it.’ Like most other attacks of the fever, these two outbreaks probably originated in the West Indies [Caribbean], for Dr. Rush specifically mentioned the prevalence of the disease in Santo Domingo during this year.” (Duffy. Epidemics in Colonial America. 1953, reprinted 1979, pp. 156-157.)

Keating: “1745.–Charleston, S.C., New York, and Stamford, Conn., were invaded.” (A History of the Yellow Fever Epidemic of 1878 in Memphis, Tenn. 1879, p. 78.)

Porter: “Yellow fever is endemic in the cities of the low country on our southern coast, including Charleston….

“Dr. John Moultrie did not believe the disease to be contagious:–

I cannot believe, with others, that this disease is propagated from one place to another by contagion, unless the atmosphere is in a fit state to produce it. In the year 1745, this disease prevailed to a very great extent in South Carolina, when it was very evident that contagion from some other place had no influence in producing it. For the first person seized with the disease that year was a sailor, who, having been drunk for two or three days in succession, afterwards fell ill of this fever, and the heat continuing excessive during the month, the fever spread widely throughout the city of Charleston. For when the weather is hot, there is danger lest an ardent fever should change into this disease of a more violent character; and I very little doubt that this is also occasioned by improper remedies and bad treatment.

(Porter, “…Incidental Remarks of the Yellow Fever of the City of Charleston.”  p. 100.)

Ramsay: “In 1745 and 1748 it [yellow fever] returned, but with less violence [than 1732][2]; however, many young people, mostly Europeans, died of it.” (Ramsay. Ramsay’s History of South Carolina. 1858, p. 47.)

Sources

Dawson, J. L. MD, and H. W. DeSaussure, MD. Census of the City of Charleston, South Carolina, For the Year 1848, Exhibiting the Condition and Prospects of the City, Illustrated by many Statistical Details, Prepared under the Authority of the City Council. Charleston, SC: J. B. Nixon, Printer, 1849. Google preview accessed 4-3-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=xCxNAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

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

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

Porter, John B., MD. “On the Climate and Salubrity of Fort Moultrie and Sullivan’s Island, Charleston Harbour, S.C., with Incidental Remarks of the Yellow Fever of the City of Charleston.” Article V in The American Journal of the Medical Sciences (Isaac Hays, MD, editor), New Series, Vol. 29. Philadelphia: Blanchard & Lea, 1855. Google preview accessed 4-3-2018 at: https://books.google.com/books?id=UgQHAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

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

[1] Society for the Propagation of the Gospel.

[2] There were 130-150 yellow fever deaths in Charleston in 1732.

—>5  Hampton.[1]

–16  Kensington. Merchant. “History…Diphtheria epidemic.” Seacoastonline. 6-27-2008.

Narrative Information

Caulfield on Hampton: “….in New Hampshire, Stratham and Greenland were revisited in 1742, Newmarket in 1743, Kingston and Exeter in 1744, and Hampton in 1745.”[2] (Caulfield 1942, p. 18.)

Merchant on Kensington: “….Sawyer notes statistics of…years when ‘throat distemper’ ravaged the town — 1745 — 16 children died….”[3] (Merchant, Dean. “History in focus: Diphtheria epidemic.” Seacoastonline. 6-27-2008.)

Sources

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

Merchant, Dean. “History in focus: Diphtheria epidemic.” Seacoastonline. 6-27-2008. Accessed 2-17-2013: http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080627/LIFE/806270310  Also accessed 1-18-2018 at: http://www.hampton.lib.nh.us/hampton/history/diphtheriaepidemicHU20080627.htm

[1] As can be seen below, Caulfield notes “numerous deaths…” Since we are attempting a tally we either ignore (having been unsuccessful in attempts to locate another source on numbers of deaths), or create our own number. We make assumption that “numerous deaths” would most probably be at least five, if not more, given the numbers of children who died after coming into contact with dipherthia elsewhere in colonial New England.

[2] In footnote 41, Caulfield writes: “There were numerous deaths from the ‘awful throat distemper in Hampton.” Cites: New England Genealogical Register, LVIII, pp. 29-36.

[3] The Sawyer reference is, we think, a reference to:  Roland Douglas Sawyer. The History of Kensington, New Hampshire, 1663 to 1945 (282 Years) With a Family and Homestead Register of the Pioneer Families, Early Settlers and Permanent Citizens of the Town. Kensington, NH: Woodbury Press, 1946, 404 pages.