■ [ 50 ] 



fcription of this difeafe on record, but as pointing out a diverfity 

 in the habit of body then accompanying this difeafe from what 

 has been fince met with ; for though Pifo declares that the veficlcs 

 in this cafe fupervened on a putrid fynochus, yet he fays that 

 he let blood in the beginning with great advantage, and earneftly 

 recommends the fame pradice in fimilar cafes. In everv inftance, 

 however, that I have feen of this diforder, fuch a pradice would 

 have been plainly improper, if not pernicious. 



The next author who mentions pemphigus is Morton. Speak- 

 ing of the difeafes which prevailed in London between 1682 

 and 1692, he mentions, among other fevers of a malignant type, 

 fome in which watery veficles were fcattered over the head and 

 cheft. Thefe fevers however, he fays, were merely fporadic, 

 and not propagated by contagion, as in the peftilential confti- 

 tution. 



For the next authentic * account of pemphigus we are indebt- 

 ed to the obfervations of Sauvages, He firft obferved it in the 

 hofpital at Montpellier in 1725, in a foldier who fell a vidim 

 to it. Afterwards he faw five other cafes, chiefly of beggars, or 

 other poor people, in all of which acute febrile fymptoms were 

 prefent. Twice, however, he faw it unattended with fever. 



Lastly, Dr. Stewart, of Aberdeen (in a letter to Dr. Duncan, 

 which is inferted in the Medical Commentaries for 1778) men- 

 tions a cafe of pemphigus, which occurred to him in the hofpital 

 in that town. A foldier had been ordered to march foon after he 



* See Culleni Nofol. torn. ii. c. xxxiv. 



had 



