time and the bodies were dissected, or “an anatomy was held” in a hall crowded with eager witnesses, by a demonstrator, the students having no chance to do any practical dissection with their own hands. In 1752 an act was passed providing for the dissection of the bodies of all persons executed for murder in Great Britain. The ostensible purpose of the Act was to make the penalty of homicide more infamous and similarly, in order to diminish the increasing prevalence of burglary and highway robbery, then still punishable with death, a Bill was introduced into the House of Commons in 1796, providing that the bodies of persons executed for those crimes should also be handed over for dissection. But, on the ground that it annihilated the difference between murder and the lesser forms of crime (though the older grants had failed to recognize any such difference) the Bill failed to secure acceptance. It was not until 1832 that the so-called Warburton Anatomy Act was passed providing a legal way in which an ample supply of anatom- ical material could be secured by all reputable schools and teachers. Peachey gives a list of the private teachers of anatomy in England between 1700 and 1746 with some account of their activities. It is inter- esting to Americans to find Dr. Abraham A Memoir of Will iam and John Hunt er : By Chovet among those mentioned, because he George C. Peachey, William Brendon and Son, came to this country and attained a distin- Plymouth, G. B., 1924. guished place in the profession in Philadelphia. The first chapter of this book is devoted to a He was on the staff of the Pennsylvania Hos- sketch of the history of the early teaching of pital and that institution possesses a wax anatomy in England, down to the year 1746, medalion portrait of him made by one Eckhout, including a resume of the various acts of parlia- who probably had assisted him in the construc- ment or royal grants whereby attempts were tion of the wax models which he used in his made to provide bodies for dissection, with an teaching. All these private teachers had to account of courses of lectures on the subject depend on models or drawings for demonstration from 1740 to 1746. In view of the present-day purposes to supplement the meager supply of agitation in regard to punishment for murder bodies which were practically unprocurable the following facts are of interest. From the for their dissecting rooms except when got by reign of Henry vm on, various sovereigns of body snatching. Peachey quotes a warning Wil- England had made grants whereby incorporated liam Hunter gave to his students as late as 1783: societies such as the Barbers and Surgeons, the College of Physicians of London and the In a country where liberty disposes the people to licentiousness and outrage, and where (private) Universities of Oxford and Cambridge were anatomists are not legally supplied with dead bodies, given a certain number of bodies of executed particular care should be taken to avoid giving felons, generally from two to four a year, for offense to the populace or to the prejudices of our purposes of dissection. As long as there were neighbours. Therefore it is to be hoped that you will no methods known by which to preserve bodies be on your guard, and out of doors, speak with cau- it was necessary to make the best possible use tion of what may be passing here, especially with of this scanty material in the quickest possible respect to dead bodies. Peachey gives William Hunter the credit of understanding the dead languages; but I could having been the first to introduce what was then teach him that on the dead body which he never known as the “Paris Method/* of providing a knew in any language, dead or living.” subject for dissection to each student, with Peachey gives rather briefly an account of the personal demonstration by the teacher of the controversies between William Hunter and process to be followed, which was a great step the Monroes and tells of his offer of £7,000 to forward in the progress of the study of anatomy the government, if the latter would donate the in England. The chief outlines of William land for the foundation of an anatomical school Hunter’s life are fairly familiar to most readers in London. His offer was not accepted and but Peachey presents several new points of shortly afterwards he established the famous interest and corrects some errors regarding it. school in Windmill Street where with Hewson He gives two hitherto unprinted letters, one and John Hunter he continued his private from William to his brother James Hunter, and courses. After Hewson and he had a disagree- the other from James to William, bearing on ment and parted, Cruikshank became his partner William’s first arrival in London, and proves in the enterprise, and later Hunter’s nephew, that he left Edinburgh towards the end of 1743, Matthew Baillie, became associated with the instead of in 1740 as generally stated and also school which he and Cruikshank continued after that he lived with Smellie throughout the William Hunter’s death. Hunter in 1762 had winter of 1740-1741 instead of only staying at delivered the Queen of the baby who subse- his house for a few weeks. Peachey goes very quently became George iv and had been thoroughly into Hunter’s early years in London, appointed physician extraordinary to the Queen. relating how he severed the arrangement he had His practice in midwifery had grown to such entered into with Cullen and Smellie and went an extent that it must have seriously inter- to live and work with James Douglas, another fered with his personal application to anatomy. Scotchman who had a large practice and was a In 1774 he published his magnificent volume on successful teacher of anatomy in London. The “The Anatomy of the Human Gravid Uterus.” author has discovered a great deal of valuable In this work he described certain structures and new information about the Society of Navy relations which completely reversed views Surgeons before whom Samuel Sharp gave hitherto held on that organ. This led to the courses of lectures, which William Hunter gave famous quarrel with his brother John who after Sharp’s retirement, and proves that claimed that he had first brought them to his contrary to the usual belief, Hunter had given brother’s notice and was therefore entitled to private courses in anatomy and surgery prior recognition as the original discoverer. Peachey to this time. He took over Sharp’s course in places the final break between the brothers in 1749, whereas Peachey prints an advertisement 1777, and points out that it could not have of a course to be given by him in 1746, therefore occurred sooner because John lectured in the he had been lecturing at least three years before Great Windmill Street anatomical theater in he undertook Sharp’s course. October, 1777. John did not call public attention In 1748 John Hunter joined his brother to the omission from the Atlas of the credit William in London. Jesse Foot’s fable of his due him for the discoveries described in it until having been a wheelwright or carpenter before 1780. Peachey thinks there must have been some entering on the study of anatomy has long been other cause of disagieement between them and discarded. Another of Foot’s statements which is inclined to accept Jesse Foot’s statement: has been proved untrue was that though John It arose from John having invited William to the Hunter served a long apprenticeship in anatomy sight of a diseased part of a soldier, who had died in he had only devoted five months to surgery consequence of it; and William having found that before commencing its practice. Peachey shows this diseased anatomical property would prove a that John Hunter passed two years working valuable preparation for his museum caused it to with Cheselden at Chelsea, had attended Pott’s be taken to his house, and refused to give it up service at St. Bartholomew’s, and had had two to the claim made by John. courses as a pupil and five months as a house- Although the statement has been made that surgeon at St. George’s. He quotes Hunter’s the brothers were reconciled just before Wil- famous remark: “Jesse Foot accuses me of not liam’s death, Peachey considers that this was not so. Nevertheless John attended his brother with the menagerie and museum which he professionally after he was stricken with his formed at Earl’s Court. Although he lectured fatal apoplexy. John however was not men- to private pupils at least as early as 1770 the tioned in William’s will nor did he attend his first public advertisement of his lectures that brother’s funeral. Peachey has found is dated October, 1775. In 1787 he associated his brother-in-law Everard As between the brothers it is in John’s favor that Home in the course with him. Home was much William never denied the truth of John’s detailed younger than Mrs. Hunter. John Hunter had description of the affair; and in William’s favor is the fact that on the appearance of the Atlas, John become interested in him when he was a school- had made no remonstrance against the omission of boy and had offered to take him as a student. his name in this specific reference. The offer was accepted and Home studied with Hunter and subsequently became his assistant William Hunter, dying in 1783, uttered his in his practice and teaching, and in his museum.