A letter to William Smellie, M.D., containing critical and practical remarks upon his Treatise on the theory and practice of midwifery / By John Burton, M.D. Wherein the various gross mistakes and dangerous methods of practice mentioned and recommended by that writer, are fully demonstrated. And generally corrected.

  • Burton, John, 1710-1771.
Date:
MDCCLIII. [1753]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A letter to William Smellie, M.D., containing critical and practical remarks upon his Treatise on the theory and practice of midwifery / By John Burton, M.D. Wherein the various gross mistakes and dangerous methods of practice mentioned and recommended by that writer, are fully demonstrated. And generally corrected. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    263/274 (page 245)
    ^ tin Wordj makes it evident, the'Author quoted ‘ Horace by Memory, and has made him utter a Line ‘ that is neither Senie, Grarhmar, norProfody.’ In this^ Paragraph the Remarker lays it down as a moral Hipoffthiltiy tor, a Compofitor’to light upon ano¬ ther Diffyllahle^ .which happens to be a Latin Werdt But I would advife this Writer to confult any Schoo.K Boy, no farther learned' than the'Grammar, and. he will inform him of a'^.great Number. , of .Dijfylahlles 2i- mongtt the Latin Words^ that might have been lighted fipon^ as well as ; This therefore' comes with a worfe Grace‘from him who fets up for a Judge of ■Senfe, Grammar and Profody. j Secondly, He fays,. ‘ It is evident the Author quoted ‘ Horace by Memory : ’ But I would be glad to know whence it is fo evident? it does not appear fo from my own the Conelufion of my Ejfay, for there I have fhewn I did not -^uote by Memory onl)\. for after the Word fecandi I have mentioned the Place I took it from in that Author, by adding, Art. Poet, Ver. 304. but this Part of the C^rotation the Review Writer omitted, becaufe that would not anfwer Ms End \-.ndihcc could he then with the leafl Shew df Juftnefs have pretended to fliew his Wit or Senfe, and inform the Reader that he underftood Grammar and Prbfody. Had T even omitted to mention the Number of the/Verfe in Horace^ a candid Reader would have concluded the Error to be merely typo¬ graphical efpecially when he found Horace^ Mean¬ ing properly applied *, which I could not be fuppofed to do, had I not underftood the Words and their Pur¬ port i and whether they were Senfe, Grammar, or Pro¬ sody, This Writer may have an Opporturdty, in his Review of the preceding Letter (m)^ with equal Can¬ dour, as here, to fhew his Senfe and Learning, in a Line quoted by me out of Perfius *, where the Com- [m] P. 11. ^ 3 pofitor^