- Email: [email protected]
The Discovery of Anesthesia
THE DISCOVERY OF ANESTHESIA B y EM ORY A . B R Y A N T , D .D .S ., LL.B., M .P.L ., C harleston, South Carolina
T the banquet given at the close o f a m eeting o f the Southern Surgical Society, in Charleston, S. C ., Dec. 11, 1924, and follow ing a lecture given by him , D r. J . W . Long, o f Greensboro, N . C ., made the follow ing statem ent:
A
Though many previously had used ether in various forms, it was Dr. C raw ford W. Long who discovered the scientific application of it as an anesthetic fo r surgical operations and thus revolutionized modern surgery within recent times.
T h a t statem ent was challenged by me in the Charleston Sunday N ew s o f Dec. 14, 1924, and immediately there a fte r, I began an investigation o f all the literature and facts, relative to the issue, that had been published in this and other countries; the action o f Congress, the files o f the Patent Office, and such other sources o f inform ation as were available. A m ong the inform ative data collected was the follow ing letter from M ajor G eneral Ireland, Surgeon G eneral o f the U . S. A. In reply refer to S. G. O. 730 (Anesthesia). W ar Department Office of the Surgeon General Washington. February 5, 1925 Lieut. Commander Emory A. Bryant, U.S.N., U. S. Naval Hospital, Charleston, S. C. M y dear Commander Bryant: I am in receipt o f your letter of January 30th with reference to anesthesia. In taking the query in your first para Jour. A. D. A ., August, 1926
graph; Samuel Guthrie had nothing to do with the introduction of anesthesia by chloro form or ether, but was one of the discoverers of chloroform , having obtained it by distill ing alcohol with chlorinated lime in 1831, simultaneously with Soubeiram of Paris, who isolated it in the same year (18 3 1). You will find Guthrie’s articles about his discovery in the American Journal of Arts and Sciences, 183 1, xxi, 64; xxii, 105. You will find biographies of Guthrie in D r. Howard Kelly’s “ Cyclopaedia o f American Medical Biogra phy,” 2nd E dition; in the Buffalo Medical Journal 1917, xii, 459; 502; and in the Med ical Historical Bulletin, N. Y., 1920, 1, 4. T he controversy in regard to the priority of M orton or Long in the introduction of ether in surgical anesthesia has long since been settled in favor o f M orton. It is true that Dr. Long used ether in surgical operations on the neck and elsewhere in 1842-3 and that this has been vouched fo r, but he did not pub lish his findings, and priority in medical as well as scientific is always determined by date of publication. The question has been pretty thoroughly thrashed out in extensive litera ture on the subject, and the general consensus of opinion is that expressed by Professor W illiam H. Welch in his “ Ether-day Address” that “ We cannot assign to him (Long) any influence upon the historical development of our knowledge o f surgical anesthesia or any share in its introduction to the w orld at large.” The question came up recently in the selection 6f the name of Morton fo r a place in the H all of Fame, and was decided, as ordinarily, in his favor. The feeling of physicians like Drs. M arion Sims, Hugh H. Young, and Gwathmey is simply that the man who first did a thing is entitled to the credit fo r it, but in science this credit turns, as stated, upon priority o f publication and upon the effect which the individual exerted in the subsequent progress o f science. In regard to your other query, relating to
1112
B ryant— The Discovery of Anesthesia Dr. J. G. Dickinson, I regret that we have no information about him in our files. It is highly improbable that he published anything or that anything has been published about him, as our records in this respect are very complete. T rusting that the above w ill be helpful, I am Very sincerely yours, M . W. I r e l a n d , M ajor General. T he Surgeon General.
In my letter to the public press, I suggested the appointm ent, by their re spective associations, o f a com m ittee, to be composed o f three prom inent sur geons o f the medical profession and three from the dental profession, to consider all the evidence and decide this long standing controversy and place the .honors where they belong by right. T h e statue o f C raw fo rd W . Long, M .D ., recently placed in the H all of Fam e in the Capitol at W ashington, D . C ., bears the follow ing inscription: GEORGIA’S T R IB U T E W. L o n g , M .D.,
C ra w fo rd
Discoverer of the use of sulphuric ether as an anaesthetic in surgery on March 30, 1842, at Jefferson, Jackson Co., GEORGIA, U.S.A.
T h ere has never been any dispute or controversy as to the fact that D r. Horace W ells o f H a rtfo rd , C onn., was the first to practically apply nitrous oxid gas as an anesthetic fo r the extraction o f teeth, in 1844, or that he used it fo r a time in his office fo r that purpose. A lthough he was successful to that ex tent, unfortunately he was unsuccessful in his demonstration before the Massa chusetts G eneral Hospital Staff and the students and physicians present, and was accused o f being a fake and fra u d by them, which so preyed on his m ind that
1113
he soon had to give up the practice o f dentistry and finally com m itted suicide. In view o f later events o f successful use by the dental profession, it is rea sonable to suppose that his failure above referred to was due to the crude appli ance used or to insufficient inhalation o f the gas. From w hatever cause nitrous oxid gas as an anesthetic was abandoned until revived in France by the chemist C olton, who had, at the suggestion o f D r. W ells, administered the gas to him and had draw n a tooth w hile D r. W ells under its influence, thus practically inform ing him self as to its effects, and discovering its anes thetic properties. T h e re never has been any dispute or controversy over the fact that D r. W illiam T . G. M orton successfully demonstrated the use o f sulphuric ether as an anesthetic in surgical operations, O ct. 16, 1846, at the Massachusetts G eneral Hospital in Boston, Mass., and that a surgical operation was perform ed by J . C. W arren , M .D ., on the patient anesthetized by D r. M orton at that time, or that this successful dem onstra tion was published to the w orld at large by H enry L . Bigelow, M .D ., Nov. 18, 1846, or that D r. Bigelow was present when the operation was perform ed, and therefore wrote from a personal know l edge o f the result. These are abso lutely undisputed facts throughout the w orld. T h ey are accepted and noted by every w riter on the subject o f anes thesia in surgery, medicine and dentis try. T h ey are accepted as historical facts by various authorities in the U nited States and Europe. I t is undisputed and o f historical record that H enry L. Bigelow, M .D ., obtained and took to E ngland some sul
1114
The Journal of the American Dental Association
phuric ether and introduced its use in that country successfully in December, 1846, and “ when Europe confirmed the efficacy o f ether, the opposition sub sided,” and it became the standard anesthetic in surgery throughout the w orld. T h is was w hat im m ediately fo l lowed M orton’s successful dem onstra tion o f the use o f sulphuric ether as an anesthetic, O ct. 16, 1846. O n M arch 30, 1926, a life size statue o f C raw fo rd W . L ong, M .D ., o f Athens, G a., was unveiled in Statu ary H all in the Capitol— as one o f two citizens o f the State o f G eorgia selected by that state to be placed in the N a tional H all o f Fam e under the general law governing this procedure. T h e proceedings at the unveiling ex ercises are printed in fu ll in the “ Appendix” o f the Congressional Rec ord o f A pril 23, 1926, pages 79887996, and the rem arks o f Senator W illiam J . H arris o f Georgia in the Senate o f the U nited States at the time he introduced the C oncurrent Resolu tion (S. No. 7) fo r the acceptance o f the statue from the State o f Georgia also appear on the latter page. Senator H arris said in part, in his re marks above referred to: As D r. C raw ford W. Long, of Georgia, is now recognized by all competent investi gators as the physician who first used an anesthetic in a surgical operation, my state has wisely named him as one of the two greatest citizens in her history, to be placed in Statu ary H all of the Capitol of our country. Realizing as I do the value of the physicians to their communities everywhere and believing that the discovery of the use of anesthesia in surgery has been of immeasurable advantage to the whole world, I am naturally proud that my state selected Dr. C raw ford W. Long, the now unquestioned discoverer o f the use of anesthetics in surgical operations, one of the
greatest blessings that has come to the human race. This great achievement was accomplished by C raw ford W. Long, who on M arch 30, 1842, in the town of Jefferson, Ga., removed a tumor from the back of the neck of James Venable, to whom ether was administered on a towel placed over the patient’s nostrils. The tumor was removed without pain to the patient. Satisfactory evidence of this, the first surgical operation under an anesthetic, still exists. It is also established by the fo l low ing facts: In 184-9, W. F. G. M orton, a dentist o f Boston, Mass., acked Congress for a grant o f $100,000 to him as the discoverer of the use of anesthetics in surgery. This led to a bitter debate in Congress, in which friends of D r. Charles T . Jackson, a well known physician of Boston, urged his claims to this honor, fo r he had used an anesthetic in a surgical operation in Boston on October 16, 1846, and the friends of a dentist, Horace Wells, of H artford, Conn., urged-that he had used an anesthetic in the painless extraction of teeth on December 11, 1844. It is to the credit of one of these claimants that he made a visit to Dr. C raw ford W. Long, in Jeffer son, Ga., in 1854, and investigated the facts. He was so thoroughly convinced of the priority o f D r. Craw ford W. Long in the discovery of the anesthetic powers of ether that he publically withdrew his claims and presented facts that made it impossible fo r anyone else to be considered.
In the remarks made by H ugh H. Young, M .D ., at the unveiling exer cises w ill be found incorporated a copy o f the letter o f Charles T . Jackson, M .D . (first column, page 7993) of Boston, Mass., the physician to whom Senator H arris refers as “ having pub lically w ithdraw n his claims.” U nfortunately, Senator H arris was mislead into two serious misstatements o f facts in respect to D r. Charles T . Jackson: First, it was not D r. Jackson who “ used an anesthetic in a surgical operation in Boston on O ctober 16, 1846,” but D r. W illiam T . G . M o r ton, a dentist. Second, D r. Jackson did
Bryant— The Discovery of Anesthesia not “publically w ithdraw his claims” in the letter referred to, neither did D r. Jackson present “ facts” therein “ that made it impossible fo r anyone else to be considered,” but the very opposite o f that proposition. N ot only was Senator H arris mislead by D r. Y oung but also many other prom inent physicians and surgeons who have supported the claims o f D r. C raw ford W . Long, D r. Y oung having expunged that part of the letter o f D r. Jackson which was not in support of his desires and which is to be noted in the printed copy in the “ Appendix” I have referred to. H erew ith is that part o f the Jackson letter expunged: O f that I have no doubt. T he only ques tion is, was the ether thus charged to M r. Venable employed by inhalation fo r the pur pose of preventing pain and was it actually so used in the surgical operation charged at the time? The proofs of this must be in the statement of Dr. Long supported by the affidavit of the parties on whom the opera tions were performed or who witnessed them. These documents as above stated I have seen in the hands of D r. Long, or rather copies of them, fo r the originals were sent to D r. Paul F. Eve o f Augusta, Ga., and were lost by him, so they did not appear in the Southern Medical Journal then published by that gentleman. On asking Dr. Long why he did not write to me or make known what he had done, he said when he saw my dates he did not suppose anything done after that would be considered of much importance, and that he was awakened to the importance1 o f as serting his claims to the first surgical use of ether in operations by learning that such claims were set up by others, and consequently wrote to the Georgia delegation in Congress stating the facts which Senator Dawson re quested me to inquire into.
I t w ill not only be seen that D r. Jackson questioned D r. L ong’s claims 1.
“ Idea” in original letter.
1115
but le ft his own claims open fo r future action by him if the opportunity arose. I t may not be amiss at this point to state that the records show, and there appeared in the newspapers o f the South in November, 1846, accounts o f D r. M orton’s demonstration in the Massa chusetts G eneral Hospital, Boston, Mass., o f the use o f ether as an anes thetic in surgical operations, O ct. 16, 1846, and a patent (N o. 4 .8 4 8 ) was issued, Nov. 12, 1846, to D rs. M orton and Jackson, making public the details and methods o f adm inistering ether as w ell as the operations applicable to its use, which were published also by Henry L . Bigelow, M .D ., in the Boston M ed i cal and Surgical Journal, November, 1846, and that in December, 1846, D r. C raw fo rd W . L ong received a copy thereof, and thus was made fam iliar, in 1846, as to “ claims set up by others.” I t is at once apparent th at his w riting to the Georgia delegation in Congress, in 1854, was fo r other reasons than that disclosed by D r. Charles T . Jackson, am ong which obviously m ight have been the tem pting $100,000 fo r which M o r ton had applied to Congress to pay him fo r his patent and the use o f his methods in the A rm y and Navy o f the U nited States, its use then being general w ithout any recompense or power to obtain it other than by sale. M r. B rand, o f Georgia, spoke in the House o f Representatives, Tuesday, M arch 30, 1926, as follow s: M r. Speaker, I rise to call the attention of the membership of the House to the fact that this afternoon at 3 o’clock in Statuary Hall w ill occur the ceremony o f the unveiling of a life-size statue of D r. C raw ford W. Long, of the State of Georgia. The State o f Geor gia contends, and it is generally recognized throughout the world, that D r. Long was the
1116
The Journal of the American Dental Association
original discoverer of the use of ether as an anesthetic in surgery. He was born in M adi son County, Ga., and thereafter fo r many years resided in Jackson County, in the same state in which county, March 30, 1842, he performed the first operation in which the use o f ether was employed. He lived fo r many years and died in Athens, Clarke County, Ga., where I live. His two daughters, Mrs. Francis T aylor Long and Miss Emma Long, residents of Athens, will be present and w ill unveil the statue. Doctor Long has done more, in my ju d g ment, fo r the relief of the human race than any other person, living or dead, since the birth of Christ. A cordial invitation is ex tended to all members who can be present at the ceremonies.
L et us examine this last paragraph’s statem ent by comparison. I herew ith quote the original bill fo r services ren dered to M r. Jam es Venable from which date these claims are made: James Venable, to Dr. C. W. Long, Dr. 1842 Jan. 28 Mch. 30 M ay 13 June 6
Sulphuric ether __________ $ .25 Sulphuric ether and Exsecting tumor ______________ 2.00 Sul. ether ________________ .25 Exsecting tumor ___________ 2.00 $4.50
I t must be remembered that all docum entary evidence and the paper read before the Georgia M edical and Surgical Association in 1852 and his first published paper in the Southern M edical and Surgical Journal, D ecem ber, 1849, are conclusive as to D r. L o n g ’s adm inistering ether to any per son desiring the same and freely, in w hat was term ed “ E th er frolics,” and as Venable states in his affidavit that he “ frequently inhaled ether fo r its exhil arating effects,” the bill demonstrates the fact beyond a reasonable doubt, that
D r. L ong’s fee fo r ether “ fo r exhila rating effects” was 25 cents. A ll o f D r. L o n g ’s claimed “ experi m ents” were some fo u r in num ber from M arch, 1842, to December, 1849, the date o f his first paper. W h a t happened to benefit the “ hum an race” or com pare w ith the birth o f C hrist o f record so fa r as the w orld at large was con cerned or anyw here outside his local town and county? F rom 1842 to 1849, nothing ap peared publicly. In 1849, he published an account o f his experiments but no one ever heard o f this publication or his work in anesthesia outside the State o f Georgia. F rom 1850 to 1852, no'thing illum inating or o f public bene fit was disclosed. In 1852, he pub lished another paper, a summary merely o f the form er paper, and nothing new on the subject. In 1853, the w orld heard nothing o f D r. L ong’s discovery or o f any great act o f hum anity or prevention of suffering and pain. In 3 854, D r. L ong appeared on the political horizon o f Congress. H e had an interview with D r. Charles T . Jackson as a prelim inary to the plunge, and, fo r the first tim e in his life he becomes a national character by having his name injected into a Senate bill (2 1 0 ) by Senator Dawson o f Georgia, who stated on the floor o f the Senate when he put in L o n g ’s name by an am endm ent on the floor o f the Senate w ithout its having been submitted to the Committees o f Congress, who had been investigating such claims fo r three years before: I regret that I failed this morning to bring some papers connected with the subject. I wish now to ask that furth er consideration of this bill be postponed until tomorrow, in order that I may produce those papers. I have in
Bryant— The Discovery of Anesthesia my possession a letter from D r. Jackson and one from D r. Long of Athens, State of Georgia, on this subject. D r. Long is a very young man, but he commenced his practice as early, I think, as the year 1843, and has, therefore, been over ten years in the profes sion. T he evidence which I have will, I think, establish beyond controversy that this young man applied this discovery in the same form in which it is said to have been applied by one of the three individuals mentioned. I have forgotten his given name, or I would propose to insert it in its proper place. MR. E V E R E T T : It is provided fo r by the general provision allowing all persons to come in. MR. DAWSON: I know that, but I wish Dr. Long to stand among the fo u r named in the bill as one of the individuals who, in all probability, made the first discovery. Per haps it would be sufficient to put in “Dr. Long of Georgia.”
A nd D r. L ong is quoted by his friends as saying: “ M y only wish about it is to be know n as a benefactor o f my race.” A nd at his funeral g reat praise was given fo r this attribute, and at a meeting o f physicians resolutions were passed that said in part: “ T ru ly did he subordinate his desire fo r fo rtu n e and fam e to the one great purpose o f bene fiting his race.” ’ A nd D r. Y oung, in his address at the unveiling states: “ B ut a presentation of his (L o n g ’s) documents by Senator Dawson, o f G eorgia, prom ptly killed the bill to give M orton $100,000. (D aw son never presented any docu ments to Congress.) A nd D r. Y oung has this to say, f u r ther: “ T h a t the general usage o f ether in surgery came a fte r the surgeons o f the Massachusetts G eneral Hospital had operated on cases anesthetized by M o r ton, no one w ill gainsay.” W e have seen w hat happened in all the years from 1842 to 1854, as bene
1117
fiting the hum an race by the efforts o f D r. C raw fo rd W . Long, and have summed up the results year by year. D r. M orton dem onstrated success fu lly the use o f ether in preventing pain in surgical operations, O ct. 16, 1846, and, w ithin three months, ether was adopted as an anesthetic in both Europe and the U nited States and suc cessfully used in surgical operations by follow ing the methods o f adm inister ing ether as given by D r. M orton, and it has been the most generally used anesthetic throughout the w orld from that tim e to the present. T h e bill (S .2 1 0 -1 8 5 4 ) passed the Senate by a vote o f 24 to 13, A pril 19, 1854, and it came up in the House of Representatives, A pril 21, 1854, and was tabled with scant consideration be cause it provided a court method o f designating the discoverer o f practical anesthesia that w ould, in effect, super cede the patent laws o f the U nited States; so it was this fact that defeated the bill by a vote o f 82 to 46 in the House, and not anything brought before Congress by D r. C raw fo rd W . Long or his friends. M r. M orrell, in his speech fo r the adoption o f the Resolution provided for the H all of Fam e in the Capitol at W ashington, said in part: “ T h e su f frages of no state w ill fail to be hon estly and fairly bestowed, fo r no local shams w ill be intruded where the judgm ent o f the w orld is sure to be challenged, and where partisanship loses its current value.” T h e dental profession has and w ill continue to challenge the claims of the friends o f D r. C raw fo rd W . L ong to such an honor. D r. Long, in his paper read in 1852,
1118
The Journal of the American Dental Association
admits his failure o f title to such hon ors, thus: I know that I deferred the publication too long to receive any honor from the priority of the discovery, but having by the persuasion of friends presented my claims before the pro fession I prefer that its correctness be fully investigated before the medical society. Should the society say that the claim, though well founded, is forfeited by not being presented earlier, I w ill cheerfully respond: “So mote it be.”
The Society passedthe resolution:
follow ing
Resolved, T h at this society is of the opin ion that D r. C raw ford W. Long was the first person who used sulphuric ether as an anes thetic in operations, and as an act o f justice to him individually and to the honor of the profession of our own state, we most earnestly recommend him to present at once his claims to priority in the use of this most important agent to the consideration o f the American Medical Association at its next meeting.
Here we see D r. L ong defers to the society, and it in turn defers to the A m erican M edical Association, and I am inform ed by the then chairm an o f the L ong U nveiling Exercises held in the Capitol at W ashington, M arch 30, 1926, that as fa r as he knew, the A m erican ' M edical Association had never taken any action respecting Long’s claims.
T h e only scientific body that has ever passed on the claims o f Long, wherein the documents and evidence were pre sented fo r their examination, was the electors o f the H all o f Fam e o f the U niversity o f New York, in 19151920, he receiving 11 and 4 votes re spectively and M orton’s name being “ selected” fo r the honor by a vote of 72 out o f a possible 100, w hile Long received 4 votes at the same time (1 9 2 0 ). T h e records show that outside o f be ing designated by the Confederate G ov ernm ent then in Richm ond to care fo r the fam ilies and men who remained at home in and around Athens, G a., dur ing the w ar between the states, 18601865, and that “he had a large country practice,” D r. L ong never did anything in his lifetim e o f a national character or that would so designate him , let alone honor him. T h e question at once arises, w hat ground, fact or argum ent can the State o f Georgia give fo r hav ing selected Long fo r “ N ational Com memoration in the H all o f Fam e in the Capitol at W ashington?” W as he a national character or was he merely w hat M r. M orrell designated a “ local sham? ” U. S. Naval Hospital.
T the banquet given at the close o f a m eeting o f the Southern Surgical Society, in Charleston, S. C ., Dec. 11, 1924, and follow ing a lecture given by him , D r. J . W . Long, o f Greensboro, N . C ., made the follow ing statem ent:
A
Though many previously had used ether in various forms, it was Dr. C raw ford W. Long who discovered the scientific application of it as an anesthetic fo r surgical operations and thus revolutionized modern surgery within recent times.
T h a t statem ent was challenged by me in the Charleston Sunday N ew s o f Dec. 14, 1924, and immediately there a fte r, I began an investigation o f all the literature and facts, relative to the issue, that had been published in this and other countries; the action o f Congress, the files o f the Patent Office, and such other sources o f inform ation as were available. A m ong the inform ative data collected was the follow ing letter from M ajor G eneral Ireland, Surgeon G eneral o f the U . S. A. In reply refer to S. G. O. 730 (Anesthesia). W ar Department Office of the Surgeon General Washington. February 5, 1925 Lieut. Commander Emory A. Bryant, U.S.N., U. S. Naval Hospital, Charleston, S. C. M y dear Commander Bryant: I am in receipt o f your letter of January 30th with reference to anesthesia. In taking the query in your first para Jour. A. D. A ., August, 1926
graph; Samuel Guthrie had nothing to do with the introduction of anesthesia by chloro form or ether, but was one of the discoverers of chloroform , having obtained it by distill ing alcohol with chlorinated lime in 1831, simultaneously with Soubeiram of Paris, who isolated it in the same year (18 3 1). You will find Guthrie’s articles about his discovery in the American Journal of Arts and Sciences, 183 1, xxi, 64; xxii, 105. You will find biographies of Guthrie in D r. Howard Kelly’s “ Cyclopaedia o f American Medical Biogra phy,” 2nd E dition; in the Buffalo Medical Journal 1917, xii, 459; 502; and in the Med ical Historical Bulletin, N. Y., 1920, 1, 4. T he controversy in regard to the priority of M orton or Long in the introduction of ether in surgical anesthesia has long since been settled in favor o f M orton. It is true that Dr. Long used ether in surgical operations on the neck and elsewhere in 1842-3 and that this has been vouched fo r, but he did not pub lish his findings, and priority in medical as well as scientific is always determined by date of publication. The question has been pretty thoroughly thrashed out in extensive litera ture on the subject, and the general consensus of opinion is that expressed by Professor W illiam H. Welch in his “ Ether-day Address” that “ We cannot assign to him (Long) any influence upon the historical development of our knowledge o f surgical anesthesia or any share in its introduction to the w orld at large.” The question came up recently in the selection 6f the name of Morton fo r a place in the H all of Fame, and was decided, as ordinarily, in his favor. The feeling of physicians like Drs. M arion Sims, Hugh H. Young, and Gwathmey is simply that the man who first did a thing is entitled to the credit fo r it, but in science this credit turns, as stated, upon priority o f publication and upon the effect which the individual exerted in the subsequent progress o f science. In regard to your other query, relating to
1112
B ryant— The Discovery of Anesthesia Dr. J. G. Dickinson, I regret that we have no information about him in our files. It is highly improbable that he published anything or that anything has been published about him, as our records in this respect are very complete. T rusting that the above w ill be helpful, I am Very sincerely yours, M . W. I r e l a n d , M ajor General. T he Surgeon General.
In my letter to the public press, I suggested the appointm ent, by their re spective associations, o f a com m ittee, to be composed o f three prom inent sur geons o f the medical profession and three from the dental profession, to consider all the evidence and decide this long standing controversy and place the .honors where they belong by right. T h e statue o f C raw fo rd W . Long, M .D ., recently placed in the H all of Fam e in the Capitol at W ashington, D . C ., bears the follow ing inscription: GEORGIA’S T R IB U T E W. L o n g , M .D.,
C ra w fo rd
Discoverer of the use of sulphuric ether as an anaesthetic in surgery on March 30, 1842, at Jefferson, Jackson Co., GEORGIA, U.S.A.
T h ere has never been any dispute or controversy as to the fact that D r. Horace W ells o f H a rtfo rd , C onn., was the first to practically apply nitrous oxid gas as an anesthetic fo r the extraction o f teeth, in 1844, or that he used it fo r a time in his office fo r that purpose. A lthough he was successful to that ex tent, unfortunately he was unsuccessful in his demonstration before the Massa chusetts G eneral Hospital Staff and the students and physicians present, and was accused o f being a fake and fra u d by them, which so preyed on his m ind that
1113
he soon had to give up the practice o f dentistry and finally com m itted suicide. In view o f later events o f successful use by the dental profession, it is rea sonable to suppose that his failure above referred to was due to the crude appli ance used or to insufficient inhalation o f the gas. From w hatever cause nitrous oxid gas as an anesthetic was abandoned until revived in France by the chemist C olton, who had, at the suggestion o f D r. W ells, administered the gas to him and had draw n a tooth w hile D r. W ells under its influence, thus practically inform ing him self as to its effects, and discovering its anes thetic properties. T h e re never has been any dispute or controversy over the fact that D r. W illiam T . G. M orton successfully demonstrated the use o f sulphuric ether as an anesthetic in surgical operations, O ct. 16, 1846, at the Massachusetts G eneral Hospital in Boston, Mass., and that a surgical operation was perform ed by J . C. W arren , M .D ., on the patient anesthetized by D r. M orton at that time, or that this successful dem onstra tion was published to the w orld at large by H enry L . Bigelow, M .D ., Nov. 18, 1846, or that D r. Bigelow was present when the operation was perform ed, and therefore wrote from a personal know l edge o f the result. These are abso lutely undisputed facts throughout the w orld. T h ey are accepted and noted by every w riter on the subject o f anes thesia in surgery, medicine and dentis try. T h ey are accepted as historical facts by various authorities in the U nited States and Europe. I t is undisputed and o f historical record that H enry L. Bigelow, M .D ., obtained and took to E ngland some sul
1114
The Journal of the American Dental Association
phuric ether and introduced its use in that country successfully in December, 1846, and “ when Europe confirmed the efficacy o f ether, the opposition sub sided,” and it became the standard anesthetic in surgery throughout the w orld. T h is was w hat im m ediately fo l lowed M orton’s successful dem onstra tion o f the use o f sulphuric ether as an anesthetic, O ct. 16, 1846. O n M arch 30, 1926, a life size statue o f C raw fo rd W . L ong, M .D ., o f Athens, G a., was unveiled in Statu ary H all in the Capitol— as one o f two citizens o f the State o f G eorgia selected by that state to be placed in the N a tional H all o f Fam e under the general law governing this procedure. T h e proceedings at the unveiling ex ercises are printed in fu ll in the “ Appendix” o f the Congressional Rec ord o f A pril 23, 1926, pages 79887996, and the rem arks o f Senator W illiam J . H arris o f Georgia in the Senate o f the U nited States at the time he introduced the C oncurrent Resolu tion (S. No. 7) fo r the acceptance o f the statue from the State o f Georgia also appear on the latter page. Senator H arris said in part, in his re marks above referred to: As D r. C raw ford W. Long, of Georgia, is now recognized by all competent investi gators as the physician who first used an anesthetic in a surgical operation, my state has wisely named him as one of the two greatest citizens in her history, to be placed in Statu ary H all of the Capitol of our country. Realizing as I do the value of the physicians to their communities everywhere and believing that the discovery of the use of anesthesia in surgery has been of immeasurable advantage to the whole world, I am naturally proud that my state selected Dr. C raw ford W. Long, the now unquestioned discoverer o f the use of anesthetics in surgical operations, one of the
greatest blessings that has come to the human race. This great achievement was accomplished by C raw ford W. Long, who on M arch 30, 1842, in the town of Jefferson, Ga., removed a tumor from the back of the neck of James Venable, to whom ether was administered on a towel placed over the patient’s nostrils. The tumor was removed without pain to the patient. Satisfactory evidence of this, the first surgical operation under an anesthetic, still exists. It is also established by the fo l low ing facts: In 184-9, W. F. G. M orton, a dentist o f Boston, Mass., acked Congress for a grant o f $100,000 to him as the discoverer of the use of anesthetics in surgery. This led to a bitter debate in Congress, in which friends of D r. Charles T . Jackson, a well known physician of Boston, urged his claims to this honor, fo r he had used an anesthetic in a surgical operation in Boston on October 16, 1846, and the friends of a dentist, Horace Wells, of H artford, Conn., urged-that he had used an anesthetic in the painless extraction of teeth on December 11, 1844. It is to the credit of one of these claimants that he made a visit to Dr. C raw ford W. Long, in Jeffer son, Ga., in 1854, and investigated the facts. He was so thoroughly convinced of the priority o f D r. Craw ford W. Long in the discovery of the anesthetic powers of ether that he publically withdrew his claims and presented facts that made it impossible fo r anyone else to be considered.
In the remarks made by H ugh H. Young, M .D ., at the unveiling exer cises w ill be found incorporated a copy o f the letter o f Charles T . Jackson, M .D . (first column, page 7993) of Boston, Mass., the physician to whom Senator H arris refers as “ having pub lically w ithdraw n his claims.” U nfortunately, Senator H arris was mislead into two serious misstatements o f facts in respect to D r. Charles T . Jackson: First, it was not D r. Jackson who “ used an anesthetic in a surgical operation in Boston on O ctober 16, 1846,” but D r. W illiam T . G . M o r ton, a dentist. Second, D r. Jackson did
Bryant— The Discovery of Anesthesia not “publically w ithdraw his claims” in the letter referred to, neither did D r. Jackson present “ facts” therein “ that made it impossible fo r anyone else to be considered,” but the very opposite o f that proposition. N ot only was Senator H arris mislead by D r. Y oung but also many other prom inent physicians and surgeons who have supported the claims o f D r. C raw ford W . Long, D r. Y oung having expunged that part of the letter o f D r. Jackson which was not in support of his desires and which is to be noted in the printed copy in the “ Appendix” I have referred to. H erew ith is that part o f the Jackson letter expunged: O f that I have no doubt. T he only ques tion is, was the ether thus charged to M r. Venable employed by inhalation fo r the pur pose of preventing pain and was it actually so used in the surgical operation charged at the time? The proofs of this must be in the statement of Dr. Long supported by the affidavit of the parties on whom the opera tions were performed or who witnessed them. These documents as above stated I have seen in the hands of D r. Long, or rather copies of them, fo r the originals were sent to D r. Paul F. Eve o f Augusta, Ga., and were lost by him, so they did not appear in the Southern Medical Journal then published by that gentleman. On asking Dr. Long why he did not write to me or make known what he had done, he said when he saw my dates he did not suppose anything done after that would be considered of much importance, and that he was awakened to the importance1 o f as serting his claims to the first surgical use of ether in operations by learning that such claims were set up by others, and consequently wrote to the Georgia delegation in Congress stating the facts which Senator Dawson re quested me to inquire into.
I t w ill not only be seen that D r. Jackson questioned D r. L ong’s claims 1.
“ Idea” in original letter.
1115
but le ft his own claims open fo r future action by him if the opportunity arose. I t may not be amiss at this point to state that the records show, and there appeared in the newspapers o f the South in November, 1846, accounts o f D r. M orton’s demonstration in the Massa chusetts G eneral Hospital, Boston, Mass., o f the use o f ether as an anes thetic in surgical operations, O ct. 16, 1846, and a patent (N o. 4 .8 4 8 ) was issued, Nov. 12, 1846, to D rs. M orton and Jackson, making public the details and methods o f adm inistering ether as w ell as the operations applicable to its use, which were published also by Henry L . Bigelow, M .D ., in the Boston M ed i cal and Surgical Journal, November, 1846, and that in December, 1846, D r. C raw fo rd W . L ong received a copy thereof, and thus was made fam iliar, in 1846, as to “ claims set up by others.” I t is at once apparent th at his w riting to the Georgia delegation in Congress, in 1854, was fo r other reasons than that disclosed by D r. Charles T . Jackson, am ong which obviously m ight have been the tem pting $100,000 fo r which M o r ton had applied to Congress to pay him fo r his patent and the use o f his methods in the A rm y and Navy o f the U nited States, its use then being general w ithout any recompense or power to obtain it other than by sale. M r. B rand, o f Georgia, spoke in the House o f Representatives, Tuesday, M arch 30, 1926, as follow s: M r. Speaker, I rise to call the attention of the membership of the House to the fact that this afternoon at 3 o’clock in Statuary Hall w ill occur the ceremony o f the unveiling of a life-size statue of D r. C raw ford W. Long, of the State of Georgia. The State o f Geor gia contends, and it is generally recognized throughout the world, that D r. Long was the
1116
The Journal of the American Dental Association
original discoverer of the use of ether as an anesthetic in surgery. He was born in M adi son County, Ga., and thereafter fo r many years resided in Jackson County, in the same state in which county, March 30, 1842, he performed the first operation in which the use o f ether was employed. He lived fo r many years and died in Athens, Clarke County, Ga., where I live. His two daughters, Mrs. Francis T aylor Long and Miss Emma Long, residents of Athens, will be present and w ill unveil the statue. Doctor Long has done more, in my ju d g ment, fo r the relief of the human race than any other person, living or dead, since the birth of Christ. A cordial invitation is ex tended to all members who can be present at the ceremonies.
L et us examine this last paragraph’s statem ent by comparison. I herew ith quote the original bill fo r services ren dered to M r. Jam es Venable from which date these claims are made: James Venable, to Dr. C. W. Long, Dr. 1842 Jan. 28 Mch. 30 M ay 13 June 6
Sulphuric ether __________ $ .25 Sulphuric ether and Exsecting tumor ______________ 2.00 Sul. ether ________________ .25 Exsecting tumor ___________ 2.00 $4.50
I t must be remembered that all docum entary evidence and the paper read before the Georgia M edical and Surgical Association in 1852 and his first published paper in the Southern M edical and Surgical Journal, D ecem ber, 1849, are conclusive as to D r. L o n g ’s adm inistering ether to any per son desiring the same and freely, in w hat was term ed “ E th er frolics,” and as Venable states in his affidavit that he “ frequently inhaled ether fo r its exhil arating effects,” the bill demonstrates the fact beyond a reasonable doubt, that
D r. L ong’s fee fo r ether “ fo r exhila rating effects” was 25 cents. A ll o f D r. L o n g ’s claimed “ experi m ents” were some fo u r in num ber from M arch, 1842, to December, 1849, the date o f his first paper. W h a t happened to benefit the “ hum an race” or com pare w ith the birth o f C hrist o f record so fa r as the w orld at large was con cerned or anyw here outside his local town and county? F rom 1842 to 1849, nothing ap peared publicly. In 1849, he published an account o f his experiments but no one ever heard o f this publication or his work in anesthesia outside the State o f Georgia. F rom 1850 to 1852, no'thing illum inating or o f public bene fit was disclosed. In 1852, he pub lished another paper, a summary merely o f the form er paper, and nothing new on the subject. In 1853, the w orld heard nothing o f D r. L ong’s discovery or o f any great act o f hum anity or prevention of suffering and pain. In 3 854, D r. L ong appeared on the political horizon o f Congress. H e had an interview with D r. Charles T . Jackson as a prelim inary to the plunge, and, fo r the first tim e in his life he becomes a national character by having his name injected into a Senate bill (2 1 0 ) by Senator Dawson o f Georgia, who stated on the floor o f the Senate when he put in L o n g ’s name by an am endm ent on the floor o f the Senate w ithout its having been submitted to the Committees o f Congress, who had been investigating such claims fo r three years before: I regret that I failed this morning to bring some papers connected with the subject. I wish now to ask that furth er consideration of this bill be postponed until tomorrow, in order that I may produce those papers. I have in
Bryant— The Discovery of Anesthesia my possession a letter from D r. Jackson and one from D r. Long of Athens, State of Georgia, on this subject. D r. Long is a very young man, but he commenced his practice as early, I think, as the year 1843, and has, therefore, been over ten years in the profes sion. T he evidence which I have will, I think, establish beyond controversy that this young man applied this discovery in the same form in which it is said to have been applied by one of the three individuals mentioned. I have forgotten his given name, or I would propose to insert it in its proper place. MR. E V E R E T T : It is provided fo r by the general provision allowing all persons to come in. MR. DAWSON: I know that, but I wish Dr. Long to stand among the fo u r named in the bill as one of the individuals who, in all probability, made the first discovery. Per haps it would be sufficient to put in “Dr. Long of Georgia.”
A nd D r. L ong is quoted by his friends as saying: “ M y only wish about it is to be know n as a benefactor o f my race.” A nd at his funeral g reat praise was given fo r this attribute, and at a meeting o f physicians resolutions were passed that said in part: “ T ru ly did he subordinate his desire fo r fo rtu n e and fam e to the one great purpose o f bene fiting his race.” ’ A nd D r. Y oung, in his address at the unveiling states: “ B ut a presentation of his (L o n g ’s) documents by Senator Dawson, o f G eorgia, prom ptly killed the bill to give M orton $100,000. (D aw son never presented any docu ments to Congress.) A nd D r. Y oung has this to say, f u r ther: “ T h a t the general usage o f ether in surgery came a fte r the surgeons o f the Massachusetts G eneral Hospital had operated on cases anesthetized by M o r ton, no one w ill gainsay.” W e have seen w hat happened in all the years from 1842 to 1854, as bene
1117
fiting the hum an race by the efforts o f D r. C raw fo rd W . Long, and have summed up the results year by year. D r. M orton dem onstrated success fu lly the use o f ether in preventing pain in surgical operations, O ct. 16, 1846, and, w ithin three months, ether was adopted as an anesthetic in both Europe and the U nited States and suc cessfully used in surgical operations by follow ing the methods o f adm inister ing ether as given by D r. M orton, and it has been the most generally used anesthetic throughout the w orld from that tim e to the present. T h e bill (S .2 1 0 -1 8 5 4 ) passed the Senate by a vote o f 24 to 13, A pril 19, 1854, and it came up in the House of Representatives, A pril 21, 1854, and was tabled with scant consideration be cause it provided a court method o f designating the discoverer o f practical anesthesia that w ould, in effect, super cede the patent laws o f the U nited States; so it was this fact that defeated the bill by a vote o f 82 to 46 in the House, and not anything brought before Congress by D r. C raw fo rd W . Long or his friends. M r. M orrell, in his speech fo r the adoption o f the Resolution provided for the H all of Fam e in the Capitol at W ashington, said in part: “ T h e su f frages of no state w ill fail to be hon estly and fairly bestowed, fo r no local shams w ill be intruded where the judgm ent o f the w orld is sure to be challenged, and where partisanship loses its current value.” T h e dental profession has and w ill continue to challenge the claims of the friends o f D r. C raw fo rd W . L ong to such an honor. D r. Long, in his paper read in 1852,
1118
The Journal of the American Dental Association
admits his failure o f title to such hon ors, thus: I know that I deferred the publication too long to receive any honor from the priority of the discovery, but having by the persuasion of friends presented my claims before the pro fession I prefer that its correctness be fully investigated before the medical society. Should the society say that the claim, though well founded, is forfeited by not being presented earlier, I w ill cheerfully respond: “So mote it be.”
The Society passedthe resolution:
follow ing
Resolved, T h at this society is of the opin ion that D r. C raw ford W. Long was the first person who used sulphuric ether as an anes thetic in operations, and as an act o f justice to him individually and to the honor of the profession of our own state, we most earnestly recommend him to present at once his claims to priority in the use of this most important agent to the consideration o f the American Medical Association at its next meeting.
Here we see D r. L ong defers to the society, and it in turn defers to the A m erican M edical Association, and I am inform ed by the then chairm an o f the L ong U nveiling Exercises held in the Capitol at W ashington, M arch 30, 1926, that as fa r as he knew, the A m erican ' M edical Association had never taken any action respecting Long’s claims.
T h e only scientific body that has ever passed on the claims o f Long, wherein the documents and evidence were pre sented fo r their examination, was the electors o f the H all o f Fam e o f the U niversity o f New York, in 19151920, he receiving 11 and 4 votes re spectively and M orton’s name being “ selected” fo r the honor by a vote of 72 out o f a possible 100, w hile Long received 4 votes at the same time (1 9 2 0 ). T h e records show that outside o f be ing designated by the Confederate G ov ernm ent then in Richm ond to care fo r the fam ilies and men who remained at home in and around Athens, G a., dur ing the w ar between the states, 18601865, and that “he had a large country practice,” D r. L ong never did anything in his lifetim e o f a national character or that would so designate him , let alone honor him. T h e question at once arises, w hat ground, fact or argum ent can the State o f Georgia give fo r hav ing selected Long fo r “ N ational Com memoration in the H all o f Fam e in the Capitol at W ashington?” W as he a national character or was he merely w hat M r. M orrell designated a “ local sham? ” U. S. Naval Hospital.