Memoirs of the Rev. Samuel Parr
Ch XI. 1816-1820
![]()
CHAPTER XI.
A.D. 1816—1820.
Comparative view of the three learned professions—Dr.
Parr’s preference of the medical profession—His opinion of the ancient
physicians—Hippocrates, Celsus,
Galen, &c.—His opinion of the modern
physicians—Browne, Sydenham,
Boerhaave, &c.—His medical friends—Dr.
Percival, Dr. Arnold, Dr. James
Johnstone, &c.—His opinion of the legal profession—His friendly
intercourse with many of its distinguished members—Jones,
Erskine, Romilly, &c.—His opinion of some
of the church-dignitaries—His friends at Cambridge—at Oxford.
In the comparative view which he often took of the three learned
professions, Dr. Parr thought the preference due, in
many respects, to the medical.1 “Whilst I
allow,” says he, “that peculiar and important advantages arise from the
appropriate studies of the three liberal professions, I must confess, that in
erudition, in science, and in habits of deep and comprehensive thinking, the
pre-eminence must be assigned, in some degree, to physicians.”2 In the hearing, indeed, of the present writer, he has often
declared that he consi-
1 “The most desirable profession,” said
Dr. Parr, “is that of physic:
the practice of the law spoils a man’s moral sense and philosophic
spirit: the church is too bigoted and stiff-starched; but the study and
practice of physic are equally favourable to a man’s moral sentiments and
intellectual faculties.”—Dr. Gooch in Blackwood’s Mag. Oct. 1825. 2 , p. 82. |
![]()
![]()
![]()
dered the medical professors as the most learned, enlightened, moral,
and liberal class of the community; and though he often lamented the scepticism on
religious subjects which some have shown; yet even this, he thought, might be explained
upon principles, which evince the strength rather than the weakness of the human mind,
contemplating under certain circumstances the multiplicity and the energy of physical
causes. But if the “Religio
medici,” when weighed in the balance of the sanctuary, might in some
instances be found wanting; yet he consoled himself, he said, with reflecting on the many
instances in which there was certainly the deepest conviction of religious truth, not
merely declared by an exterior profession, but displayed in all its best and happiest
effects on the heart and the conduct. “In support of our sacred cause,”
he would often say, “might we not triumphantly appeal to such illustrious names as
those of Sir Thomas Browne, Sydenham, Boerhaave, and Hartley, in days
that are past; and, in our own times, to those of Gregory, Heberden, Falconer, and Percival?”1
There was no subject on which Dr.
Parr delighted to converse more than on the character and the pretensions of
the great men, who, at different times, have appeared in the medical world. Speaking of the
most distinguished of all the ancient physicians, Hippocrates, he said that he had read much of his works, as much as any man
in this country: and he thought that the duties of a physician were never more beautifully
exemplified
![]()
![]()
![]()
than in his conduct, or more eloquently described than in his
writings. He often particularly noticed the attention which the great father of physic paid
to the nature and properties of water, and its effects on the human frame. This he
considered as a subject of far more importance to the medical practitioner than is commonly
apprehended; and perhaps the observation was suggested to his mind, by recollecting the
laborious researches, directed to that very object, by his much-respected friend, Dr. Lambe; begun during his residence at Warwick, and
continued many years after his removal to London. Celsus
he pronounced “a very wise man;” and said that his works ought not only
to be read, but read night and day, by the medical student. His style, he said, is very
good Latin; and if it were not so, he ought still to be read for the medical knowledge
which he communicates. Almost all that is valuable in Hippocrates, he
remarked, may be found clearly and beautifully epitomised in Celsus.
In recommending to a young physician the study of Aretæus, a bold and decisive practitioner in the reign of Vespasian, whose works have ever been admired for the accurate
description of diseases which they contain, and for the judicious mode of treatment which
they prescribe—“Aye,” said he, “if I could find one, with a
mind like Aretæus, he should be my physician.” Speaking
of Dioscorides, distinguished no less as a botanist than
as a physician, he said that he sometimes read his works, and always with pleasure, though
it is often difficult to translate his words, especially in the description of plants. ![]()
![]()
Tournefort, Sibthorpe, and other travelling botanists, have taken, he thought, the only
sure method of explaining the plants both of Theophrastus and Dioscorides, by diligent researches
in the countries where they were originally found. He looked upon Galen as decidedly one of the most learned men who have ever appeared in
the medical world; though inferior in other respects, especially as a pathological
observer, to Hippocrates or Aretæus. The poem of
Frascatorius, the celebrated physician of
Verona, in the 16th century, being mentioned, Dr. Parr said, it was
one of the most classical productions, which have appeared since the Georgics of Virgil;
with which indeed for its melodious versification, its vivid imagery, and its noble
sentiments, it has often been compared.
Descending from the ancients to the moderns, he often spoke in praise of
the literary acquirements and professional skill of Sir Thomas
Browne, Sydenham, and Harvey; but pre-eminently his favourite medical writer was
Hermann Boerhaave; and upon his genius, his
attainments, his important works, and his noble character, he was accustomed to expatiate,
with almost rapturous delight. It was he that opened, Dr.
Parr said, a new and splendid era in the science of medicine and chemistry:
and to his instructions, delivered in his lectures and his writings, the wonderful
discoveries and improvements of later times may be principally ascribed. Next to
Boerhaave, the glory of the Dutch school of medicine, stood, in
Dr. Parr’s estimation, the contemporary and friend of
Boerhaave, Dr. Mead, the
illustrious ornament of me-![]()
![]()
dical science in England; who was eminently
distinguished, not only for his professional talents, but also for his literary
attainments, and for his fine taste in all the arts which adorn and improve human life. The
Latin style of his works, Dr. Parr said, is entitled to commendation:
but, he added, though a good scholar, Dr. Mead was not skilful in
writing Latin; and was therefore obliged to borrow the aid of Dr. Ward1 and Dr.
Letherland.2
In Dr. Freind he admired the man of
profound erudition, as well as of extensive medical knowledge: and in reading his works, he
always met, he said, the deep-thinking philosopher, as well as the elegant writer.
Sir George Baker he considered not only as one
of the best physicians, but also as one of the best scholars, and one of the best writers
of Latin of his day; and readily yielded to him, in this last respect, the palm of
superiority over himself. Dr. Akenside he extolled
as a man of vast learning, as well as of high talent, but united, unhappily, with excessive
pride. Cullen he thought a most extraordinary man;
and said that he once intended to write his life. In Dr.
Aikin he acknowledged elegance of taste and high cultivation
![]()
![]()
![]()
of mind. Dr. Heberden he
called “the amiable and accomplished author of the ‘,’ or history of the
diseases which came under his own observation, written in pure and flowing
Latinity.” Of Dr. Gregory, well known
for his useful moral as well as medical publications, Dr.
Parr remarked, “that his writings are extensively read, and that
they do credit to the ingenuity, the sensibility, and the piety of the
author.”
With great and unfeigned respect, Dr.
Parr cherished the memory of Dr.
Percival, Dr. Arnold,1 and especially of Dr. James
Johnstone of Worcester, whom he describes “as a man of much
intellectual vigour and various research,”2 and of his son
the accomplished and truly excellent Dr. James
Johnstone;3 whose life fell a sacrifice, at the age
of thirty, to his humane and zealous discharge of professional duty, in visiting the
prisoners, during the period of a raging fever in Worcester gaol. No medical practitioner
ever acquired, within the same space of time, a higher reputation than this young
physician; and his virtues, his talents, and the valuable services of his life, terminated
under such affecting circumstances by his death, have secured for him a place in the
grateful and honourable remembrance of the city
![]()
![]()
![]()
in which he lived and died, and of all to whom his name and his
merits were, in any degree, known. A monument to his memory was erected in Worcester
cathedral; for which the inscription in Latin was written by Dr.
Parr.1
Of the members of the medical profession, whose friendship Dr. Parr cultivated, whilst living, and whom he has
enumerated in his “Last Will” amongst the number of his friends, are, Dr. E. Johnstone, and Dr.
Male, of Birmingham, Dr. Lambe,
Dr. Bright, and Sir
Anthony Carlisle2 of London, Dr. Hill of Leicester, Dr.
Bourne of Coventry, and his own medical attendants, Dr. J. Johnstone, Dr. A.
Middleton, Mr. Blenkinsop,3 and Mr. Jones. In the same solemn registry,
he has recorded the high value at which he prized the friendship of “the very
learned, scientific, and truly pious Dr.
Falconer of Bath;” and of the eminently distinguished
Dr. Holme, “who,” says he,
“in sincerity, in uprightness, in professional skill, in taste for reading
classical authors, and in the knowledge of chymistry, zoology and English antiquities,
has few equals among his contemporaries.”
![]()
![]()
![]()
Of the legal profession, in its effect on the mind and the character, the
reader is aware that Dr. Parr thought unfavourably.
As its honours and preferments depend so little upon merit, and so much upon court-favour,
he could not help trembling, he used to say, for the moral and especially for the political
integrity of those, who entered into it. He often deeply deplored the subserviency, to men
in power, amounting almost to sycophancy, not only of the law-officers, but even of too
many of the judges; and often indignantly adverted to the remarkable fact that, during the
last and the present reign, their decisions on all questions between the crown and the
people have been, with few exceptions, against popular rights, and in support of regal
prerogative. In mentioning this last term, so much a favourite with the advocates of
absolute authority, he would sometimes pause; and, with a smile, remark, that of all their
arguments, none amused him more than those founded on prerogative;
“because,” said he, “the very derivation of the word, from
prae-rogare, supplies of itself a clear and sufficient answer to
them.” In describing the state of the law, he condemned, with severity, the
excessive attachment of lawyers to the barbarous institutions of ancient times, their
pertinacious adherence to the most obvious errors and absurdities, and their obstinate
resistance to all reformation of “that hideous mass,” as he called it,
“of iniquity, inconsistency and sanguinary cruelty, the criminal
code.”—“We are bad enough,” he said, “in the
church:—but the church is purity itself compared with the law:—![]()
![]()
the
accumulated abuses of which,” he often insisted, “ought to be
reprobated by every honest and reflecting man, as at once the shame and the curse of
the country.”
With this strong opinion on the defective and corrupted state of the law,
and on the evil influences, to which all who engage in the study and practice of it are
exposed, great in proportion would of course be his admiration of those magnanimous
individuals, who have not only the virtuous principle to stand firm against the tempting
seductions of professional honours and emoluments; but who have the strength and elevation
of mind, to break from the trammels of long-established system—to soar above the powerful
prejudices, which chain down the whole herd of practitioners to their hoary precedents and
antiquated maxims, and to ascend to those large and enlightened views of jurisprudence,
which lead to the true end of all just government, in securing and promoting the rights,
the liberties, and the happiness of the governed. In this high class of illustrious
individuals stand the distinguished names of Jones,
Erskine, Romilly, Bentham, Mackintosh, Montagu, Brougham, and Denman, and all these, it was with pride and with joy that
Dr. Parr reckoned in the number of his friends.
Amongst many others, also, for whom he entertained the greatest possible respect, may be
mentioned, Sir William Adam, Sir Thomas Plomer, Mr. Sergeant
Wilde, Sir James Scarlett, Sir Nicholas Tyndal, Mr. John
Williams, and Mr. Dwarris.1
|
1 All these are respectfully noticed in Dr. Parr’s will.
|
![]()
![]()
![]()
Among the liberal and enlightened members of the legal profession, who were
honoured with a place in the friendly regards of Dr.
Parr, the writer is proud to introduce into his pages the name of one of his
own relatives, Barron Field, Esq., late judge of the
supreme court of New South Wales. On assuming his official dignity in the distant province,
over which he was appointed to preside, he was called to deliver an opinion on certain
actions, to recover duties which had not been imposed by Parliament; and he gave it against
the crown. So equitable and so reasonable did this opinion appear, that the governor of the
colony, who had himself imposed the duties, acquiesced in it; and the crown-lawyers at home
afterwards fully justified it. The writer cannot soon forget the high and delighted
approbation, which Dr. Parr expressed, when he was informed of these
acts of constitutional firmness and spirit, exhibited on the seat of justice; where, he was
accustomed with sorrow to remark, we too often see the subserviency of the courtier, rather
than the independence and impartiality of the judge.1
|
1 “Cases have occurred, in which Mr. Justice Field has displayed a very independent
judgment; and has proved that although he was ready to give effect to the public orders
and proclamations of the governor, whenever he found them to be consistent with the
laws of England, or to be justified by palpable necessity; yet he has never allowed his
decisions to be swayed by any consideration of the personal wish of the governor, or
the supposed influence of the government. Your lordship has been already apprised of
Mr. Justice Field’s refusal to receive actions in the
supreme court for the recovery of duties on spirits, or imported goods, until those
duties had received the sanction of the British legislature.”—Second Report of Commissioners of Inquiry in New South
Wales, p. 9.
|
![]()
![]()
![]()
Dr. Parr always spoke, with peculiar satisfaction, of
his occasional intercourse with Charles Warren,
Esq., chief justice of Chester; “who has often delighted me,”
he said, “by the shrewdness of his remarks, by the clearness of his reasoning, and
by the great accuracy of his knowledge in the Latin language.”1 Of the late Mr. Serg. Lens,
so justly regarded by the whole profession, and by every one who knew him, as a model of
all that is honourable and dignified in the lawyer and the man, he has thus traced the
character:—“His erudition, his taste, his correct judgment, his spotless
integrity, gave additional lustre to the reputation, which he deservedly acquired by
his professional knowledge.”1 He entertained, and he
has expressed a high opinion of the present Mr. Sergeant
Rough, “for his professional and classical knowledge, for his
delicate sensibility, for his polished manners, and pure integrity.”1 To this gentleman he intended to bequeath a legacy of 100l.; but afterwards changed the bequest into a gift of the same
amount presented to him during life. With exultations of pride and delight Dr.
Parr often spoke of his acquaintance with the celebrated Jeremy Bentham, Esq., whom he describes as “the
ablest and most instructive writer on the most difficult and interesting subjects of
jurisprudence that ever lived.”1
Mr. Butler of Lincolns Inn, eminent as a lawyer, and
highly distinguished as a writer, has himself given an account of his friendly intercourse
with
![]()
![]()
![]()
Dr. Parr, in the second volume of his Reminiscences, lately published.
“They frequently met,” he relates, “at the houses of their
common friends: the reminiscent could not but be gratified in seeing that Dr.
Parr was pleased with his society; and even sometimes desired him to be
invited to parties purposely made for him. The reminiscent uniformly found the Doctor
instructive and agreeable: with strong prepossessions on some subjects; with kind and
liberal feelings on all; loved and esteemed in proportion as he was known and justly
appreciated; ever mentioned with esteem, and frequently with gratitude. He honoured the
reminiscent by a bequest of a ring.”1 This account is
given by Mr. Butler as introductory to “a correspondence”
of some extent between himself and his learned friend—in the course of which some pleasing
criticism on classical subjects occurs; and many remarks by Dr. Parr,
chiefly complimentary, on Mr. Butler’s publications in defence
of the “Catholic faith,” of which he is a bright ornament and a powerful
advocate. Certainly, if any thing could reconcile a Protestant to the religious system, for
which Mr. Butler pleads—a system so revolting to reason, so opposed to
the rights of private judgment, and to the benefits of free inquiry—it would be the
softened aspect under which that system is exhibited, and the tolerant spirit with which it
is united, in his writings and in his conduct.
In the whole circle of the legal profession there were few who stood
higher in Dr. Parr’s estima-
![]()
![]()
![]()
tion than Robert Smith,
Esq.,1 member in the last parliament for Lincoln. He
was educated at Eton; where he acquired fame, not only as a classical scholar, but as a
principal contributor to a work entitled “The
Microcosm,” reflecting so much honour on the youthful writers engaged in
it. From Eton he went to Cambridge, and entered of King’s College. He is mentioned by
Dr. Parr, among the learned academics,2
whose numbers and whose merits justify, he thought, the application to the two universities
of the praise bestowed by Cicero upon Athens, as
“omnium fere doctrinarum inventrices, ubi dicendi vis
scribendique, vel reperta, est vel perfecta.”
Shortly after his appearance at the bar, Mr.
Smith received a high legal appointment at Calcutta. On his return to
England, he soon obtained a seat in parliament; but he greatly disappointed the
expectations, excited by the extraordinary powers he was known to possess, when he appeared
among the orators of St. Stephen’s. He rose to speak; and after uttering a few
sentences, sat down, and was never heard more.3 With that
anxiousness
1 “Homeri Opera,
Gr. et Lat. curante Lederlino et post eum Stephano Berghlero, 2
vols.—The gift of that most honourable, magnanimous, learned, ingenious man,
Mr. Robert Smith, before he went to
India in 1803. I value them exceedingly; for they were his constant companions.
S. P.”—Bibl. Parr. p. 175. 2 “Τη άκριβεία και δεινότητι
μεγαλοπρεπεία, ευδοκιμουντος.”—Spital Sermon, Notes, p.
110. 3 “To Dr.
Parr’s most sagacious and most learned friend, Robert Smith, whose terrors in his first, and
indeed only speech in parliament, quite overcame his wonderful courage,
|
![]()
![]()
![]()
to soften the pang of disappointment, which ever distinguished him,
Dr. Parr soothingly said, on hearing of it:
“Well! it is of little consequence. Smith can well afford
to lose the portion of additional fame, which that speech would have gained
him.” In his “Last Will,” bequeathing to him a ring, he bears his
testimony to that “admiration with which he had ever contemplated in him
erudition, genius, and magnanimity!”
The public have heard much of the friendship which subsisted between
Dr. Parr and Sir
James Mackintosh; and of the long interruption of that friendship, in
consequence of some serious displeasure, which he, by whom it was excited, would probably
now confess, not to have been wholly without just and reasonable cause. That displeasure,
and the cause which excited it, are here alluded to, however, merely in justification of
the part which Dr. Parr thought himself obliged, on that occasion, to
take. Replying to the exclamation of an acquaintance, “What! you and
Parr not friends! why, you were the idol that he
worshipped!” when Sir James said, “That may be:
but Parr is a furious iconoclast, who knocks down the idol he has
set up!”—there was more wit
he used to apply one of Polemo’s
sayings—‘Gladiatores aliquando spectans, quendam
æstuantem et horrorem præsentis exitii totius corporis sudore declarantem
cum intueretur; talis est, experto credito, dixit miseria oratoris
declamatorii.’ The same remark has been made by
Cicero concerning
himself—‘Equidem et in vobis animadvertere soleo, et in
me ipso sæpissime experior, ut exalbescam in principiis dicendi, et tota
mente et omnibus artubus contremiscam,’
&c.”—Bibl. Parr. p. 693. |
![]()
![]()
![]()
than real force in the reply; since it cannot be denied that the
idol, thrown down, was not exactly that, which had been set up.
It is pleasing to relate that the friendship, thus interrupted, was
afterwards renewed; and the object of respectful and affectionate regards restored to its
former place in Dr. Parr’s estimation. Many are
the testimonies he has borne to the talents, the acquirements, and the public services, of
which he thought so highly; and to these is added, in his “Last Will,” the
following:—“I bequeath to Sir James
Mackintosh, M. P., a ring, as a mark of my unfeigned respect for his
deep researches in metaphysics, ethics, history, and literature—for his splendid
eloquence—and for his meritorious parliamentary exertions, in mitigating the severity
of the penal code.”
Of the church, among the dignitaries, to whom Dr. Parr looked up with high and unfeigned respect, were Archbishops
Sutton and Magee, Bishops Howley, Cornwall, Pelham,
Burgess, Law, and Legge, and his own pupil,
Bishop Alexander. Great similarity in literary
pursuits and tastes, much harmonious concurrence in religious and political opinion, and an
equal participation in the same noble spirit of candour and charity, drew close the
attachment between himself and the excellent Bishop
Bathurst. He delighted to speak of the “very learned”
Bishop Kaye, the “amiable and
accomplished” Bishop Ryder, the
“kind-hearted and learned” Bishop
Huntingford, and “the eminently learned” Bishop Blomfield, lately raised to the see of Chester. ![]()
![]()
But how disappointed and mortified would Dr.
Parr have been, if he had lived to witness the first efforts of the
last-mentioned prelate exerted, as a peer of parliament, and that too in opposition to his
own decided opinion in former life, against the claims of a large portion of his
Majesty’s subjects to the rights which belong to them as men and Britons! On so plain
a question of civil policy and religious toleration, involving, too, the integrity and
safety of the empire; the determined resistance of so many of the clerical and of some
other orders of the community, pretending to be “pars indocili melior
grege,” is the shame of the present age, as it will be the
wonder or contempt of the next.
Of the state of the ecclesiastical bench, during his own time, speaking
generally, Dr. Parr often said, that it comprised,
indeed, no very great learning, no very brilliant talent, but much strong sense, much right
feeling, and a large portion of the wise and just spirit of religious moderation. To
express his idea of that moderation, turning to the present writer, whom with affected
concern, but with real good-humour, he usually designated “the inveterate
non-con,” or the “incorrigible heretic,” he would say,
“Sir, I do not believe there are more than two or three individuals on the
bench, if so many, who would do even such as you the slightest harm.” He
always, however, bitterly deplored, as mistaken and mischievous policy, the opposition of
the high dignitaries and the whole clerical body to all reforms both in church and state,
and to all plans for the diffusion of know-![]()
![]()
ledge, and the extension of
religious and civil liberty. “Ah!” he would often mournfully say,
“our venerable church is injured and dishonoured far more by its friends than
its enemies.”—“Yes,” he would sometimes add, “if
they go on so, much longer, they will force even me, who hate schism, to become a
schismatic.”
With these strong sentiments impressed upon his mind, it is easy to
imagine the joy, with which, if he had lived, Dr.
Parr would have witnessed the progress and the happy issue of the late
parliamentary proceedings, which terminated in the repeal of the test and corporation acts;
and that joy, it may be added, would have risen to the high and proud exultation, which all
who are concerned for the honour of the church must feel, in observing that this important
measure was not only not opposed, but approved and actively promoted, with few exceptions,
by the whole bench of bishops; and approved also, in general, though not actively promoted,
by the whole body of the clergy. “De nobis, quos in republica vobiscum simul
salvos et ornatos, quoties cogitabitis, toties de incredibili liberalitate, toties de
singulari sapientia vestra cogitabitis; quæ non modo summa bona, sed nimirum audebo vel
sola dicere.”1
There is one distinguished divine, in the church, towards whom Dr. Parr always felt and expressed the most extreme dislike
and disapprobation. Even his sincerity in the profession of religious truth he called in
question; and would never acknowledge him for a true and faithful son of the
![]()
![]()
![]()
church. The present writer, having read and studied his theological
works, with high satisfaction, was strongly disposed, from admiration of the author, to
think well of the man; and in attempting to defend his character, and especially in
asserting the value of his literary labours, he often found himself engaged in a warm
contest with his illustrious friend. “He had once some right feeling,”
said Dr. Parr, “but he has long walked in a crooked
path.”—“Of his talents,” he would say, “I will
allow they are considerable, but not great: and of his learning, that it is something,
but not much; and what little he has is second-hand, not derived from original sources,
but from modern writers.” Even upon one of the most acute, and probably most
important theological, works of the last century, Dr. Parr, more from
the impulse of his prejudices than from the dictate of his judgment, poured ridicule and
contempt. On another ground, his censures, hurled against the distinguished ecclesiastic
here alluded to, were more reasonable. “Sir,” said he on one occasion to
the writer, “will you pretend that our church owes him any obligation for the
audacious attempt to prove that it would be endangered by the circulation of the
Scriptures, if unattended or unexplained by the Common Prayer
Book?”—“What an attempt!” he exclaimed, after a
moment’s pause, with a scornful expression, “why, it is as much as to say
that the plain and obvious sense of Scripture is against us! If you, or any of your
heretical crew had so said, we should have instantly retorted,—a foul calumny! a wicked
lie!”—“I say,” con-![]()
![]()
tinued he,
speaking vehemently, “that publication was the act of a traitor, stabbing the
breast which he ought to protect and cherish.”—“And, sir,”
added he, “what I tell you, I have told him:—yes, himself!” and then he
went on to relate the following story, which the writer has heard him repeat more than once
or twice:—“When I visited him,” said he, “at his own college,
soon after the publication just mentioned, I reproached him bitterly for his
disingenuous and unworthy conduct; and on parting with him at the college-gates, I laid
hold of his coat-button, and looking him full in the face, said, ‘For writing
that book—I do not swear—but I use the word emphatically—you are a ——
——!’”
Occasionally he visited Cambridge; and he always returned from his
excursions refreshed and delighted. This was the transient scene of one of the happiest
periods of his life; and from the recollection of the pleasures and advantages which he
there enjoyed, Cambridge kept a strong hold upon his respect and gratitude, to the latest
moment of his existence. He was proud of belonging to that university, because, as he often
observed, more unfettered freedom of thought and inquiry was admitted, and wiser and better
plans of study adopted, than at Oxford; though it must be owned that some late important
reforms have done much to remove the reproach, which had so long rested on that sister
university.
At Cambridge, it was always with joy that Dr.
Parr met his former associates, rivals, and instructors; though of all
these, the number, with ad-![]()
![]()
vancing life, must have been continually
diminished, by removal and by death. But other friends succeeded in their places, and
rendered his visits often highly interesting, and always agreeable. In a letter to
Mr. Parkes, dated Cambridge, June 10, 1814, thus
he writes:—“I never spent my time more agreeably; and yet, you may suppose, that
my understanding and my memory have been severely exercised by the many learned men
with whom I have had to converse, and sometimes to struggle.” Speaking to his
friend, Dr. Wade, who had mentioned his intention of
going to Cambridge—“Aye,” said he, “when I met you there in the
summer of 1822, I had a delightful visit. Then I took Mrs.
Parr with me to show her the university. I was most sumptuously
entertained in the combination room of your college. Pray, remember me to Hornbuckle; and tell him I shall never forget his
hospitality. We were all in high spirits; full of fun and glee. I think they did not
dislike my company.”1
Among his Cambridge friends, who stood high in his estimation, were,
Dr. Davy, master of Caius; Dr. Cory, master of Emanuel; Dr. Thackery, provost of Kings, the grandson of his own revered preceptor, formerly master of Harrow School; Mr.
Brown, of Trinity; Mr. Woodhouse, of
Caius; and the two learned Professors Monk and
Dobree. Dr. Davy was, for a
short time, Dr. Parr’s pupil, and through life
his devoted friend; of whom he has expressed his high opinion in these words of his
“Last Will:”—“I give to Dr. Davy a ring, as
![]()
![]()
![]()
a mark of my just, and therefore great respect for him, as a man
of learning, as a man of science, and a man of integrity quite unsullied.” Of
Mr. Brown, in a letter of introduction to Mr. Roscoe, he thus speaks:—“He is a Whig; he is
a scholar; he is a gentleman; and he is my friend.”
Sometimes Dr. Parr visited Oxford,
and though these visits were less frequent, they were scarcely less agreeable than those to
Cambridge. It may be thought that he entertained an unfavourable opinion of the Oxford men,
since he used to say, “they are very good men; but too orthodox in religion, too
rampant in loyalty, and too furious in politics.” It was, indeed, impossible
that he should not look with disgust upon the efforts of lazy, prejudiced, and jealous
minds, to shut out, from the first and greatest university, the light of increasing
knowledge and improvement, and to paralyse the exertion, and stop the progress of human
thought; yet he was ready to do justice to every individual instance of literary
excellence, which appeared amongst its professors: and he acknowledged that he always found
at Oxford many very wise and very worthy men, with whom he delighted to converse; and some
of whom he was most happy to receive, on the terms of friendly and confidential intimacy.
Among these, were the late Dr. White, professor of
Arabic; the late Rev. H. Kett, of Trinity; Dr. Elmsley, of Alban Hall; Dr. Copplestone, provost of Oriel; and Dr.
Vaughan, warden of Merton; and to them remains to be added the name of
“his most learned, most wise, upright, and truly pious friend”—so he
him-![]()
![]()
self reverently designates him—Dr.
Martin Routh, of Magdalen College.
It is of this learned scholar and excellent man that Dr. Parr thus writes to his friend, Mr. Roscoe:—“I have told you that I think the
President of Magdalen, where I am now residing, the most learned ecclesiastic in
England, and one of the best men in Christendom. He is nominally a Tory; but his
sagacity, his knowledge, his integrity, his independence, and his benevolence, lead him
to think and sometimes to talk with you and me. Yes!—you ought to be
acquainted,” &c.
It is of the same most revered and beloved friend, that Dr. Parr, in one of his printed works, has drawn the
following portrait, traced with the outlines, no doubt, of truth and fidelity, though
probably touched with the warm colourings of fond and affectionate friendship:—
“Why should I deny myself the satisfaction, I must feel in saying
of him here, what of such a man I could say every where, with equal justice and equal
triumph? The friendship of this excellent person, believe me, readers, will ever be
ranked by me, among the sweetest consolations and the proudest ornaments of my life.
He, in the language of Milton, ‘is the
virtuous son of a virtuous father;’ whose literary attainments are
respected by every scholar to whom he is known; whose exemplary virtues shed a lustre
on that church, in which they have not been rewarded; and whose grey hairs will never
descend to the grave, but amidst the blessings of the devout and the tears of the poor.
He fills a station, for which other men are some-![]()
![]()
times indebted to
the cabals of party, or to the caprices of fortune; but in which he was himself most
honourably placed, from the experience his electors had long had of his integrity, and
the confidence they reposed in his discernment, in his activity, and his impartiality.
The attachment, he professes to academical institutions, proceeds not less from a
sincere conviction of their utility, than from a deep reverence for the wisdom of
antiquity, in the regulations it has made, for preserving the morals of youth, and for
promoting the cultivation of learning. His government, over the affairs of a great and
respectable college, is active without officiousness, and firm without severity. His
independence of spirit is the effect not of ferocious pride, but of cool and steady
principle; which claims only the respect it is ever ready to pay; and which equally
disdains to trample on subordination, and to crouch before the insolence of power. His
correct judgment, his profound erudition, and his various knowledge, are such as seldom
fall to the lot of man. His liberality is scarcely surpassed even by his orthodoxy; and
his orthodoxy is not the tumid and fungus excrescence of
prejudice, but the sound and mellowed fruit of honest and indefatigable inquiry. In a
word, his mind, his whole mind, is decked at once with the purest crystals of
simplicity, and the brightest jewels of benevolence and piety.”1
![]()
William Adam (1751-1839)
Scottish barrister, Whig MP (1784-1812) and ally of Charles James Fox (whom he once
wounded in a duel); he was privy councillor (1815) and a friend of Sir Walter Scott.
John Aikin (1747-1822)
English physician, critic, and biographer, the brother of Anna Laetitia Barbauld; he
edited the
Monthly Magazine (1796-1806).
Mark Akenside (1721-1770)
English poet and physician, author of
The Pleasures of Imagination
(1744); his
Odes on Several Subjects (1743) was also widely
admired.
Nathaniel Alexander, Bishop of Meath (1760-1840)
Educated by Samuel Parr at Harrow and Stanmore, and at Emmanuel College, Cambridge; he
was Bishop of Clonfert (1801), Down and Connor (1804), and Meath (1823). He was an Irish
privy councillor.
Thomas Arnold (1742-1816)
Leicester physician educated at Edinburgh University; he specialized in cases of insanity
and was the first president of the Leicester Literacy Society.
Sir George Baker, first baronet (1723-1809)
Educated at Eton and King's College, Cambridge, he was physician to George III and Queen
Charlotte and an admired writer of Latin prose.
Henry Bathurst, bishop of Norwich (1744-1837)
Educated at Winchester and New College, Oxford, he was prebendary of Durham (1795) and
bishop of Norwich (1805); he was the only bishop to support the 1832 Reform Act.
Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)
The founder of Utilitarianism; author of
Principles of Morals and
Legislation (1789).
Richard Bentley (1662-1742)
Classical scholar and master of Trinity College, Cambridge (1700-42); he was satirized by
Swift and Pope.
William Blenkinsop (1768 c.-1847)
He was a Warwick surgeon and acquaintance of Samuel Parr.
Herman Boerhaave (1668-1738)
Professor of botany and medicine at the University of Leiden from 1709.
Edward Bourne (1828 fl.)
Educated at University of Edinburgh, he was a Coventry physician and acquaintance of
Samuel Parr.
John Bright (1780 c.-1870)
Educated at Wadham College, Oxford, he was a London physician and Latin scholar who
specialized in the treatment of lunatics.
Henry Peter Brougham, first baron Brougham and Vaux (1778-1868)
Educated at Edinburgh University, he was a founder of the
Edinburgh
Review in which he chastised Byron's
Hours of Idleness; he
defended Queen Caroline in her trial for adultery (1820), established the London University
(1828), and was appointed lord chancellor (1830).
Sir Thomas Browne (1605-1682)
English physician and essayist; he was the author of
Religio
medici (1642) and
Pseudodoxia epidemica (1646).
Thomas Burgess, bishop of Salisbury (1756-1837)
Educated at Winchester and Corpus Christi College, Oxford, he was domestic chaplain to
Shute Barrington, bishop of St. David's (1803) and Bishop of Salisbury (1825).
Charles Butler (1750-1832)
Of Lincoln's Inn, the first Catholic barrister to practice in more than a century; he
wrote
An Address to the Protestants of Great Britain and Ireland
(1813).
Sir Anthony Carlisle (1768-1840)
English surgeon and professor of anatomy at the Royal Academy (1808).
Edward Copleston, bishop of Llandaff (1776-1849)
Educated at Corpus Christi College, Oxford, he was a fellow of Oriel, Oxford Professor of
Poetry (1802-12), dean of St. Paul's (1827-1849), and bishop of Llandaff (1827-49); he
published
Three Replies to the Calumnies of the Edinburgh Review
(1810-11).
James Cornwallis, bishop of Lichfield and Coventry (1743-1824)
The son of Charles Cornwallis, first Earl Cornwallis; educated at Eton and Christ's
College, Cambridge, he was Dean of Canterbury (1774-81) and Bishop of Lichfield and
Coventry (1781-24). He inherited the earldom a few months before his death.
Robert Towerson Cory (1759 c.-1835)
Educated at Emmanuel College, Cambridge, he was master (1797-1835), professor of moral
philosophy (1809-13) and vice-chancellor (1797-98, 1813-14).
William Cullen (1710-1790)
He was professor of medicine at Glasgow (1751-55) and professor of chemistry at Edinburgh
(1756).
Martin Davy (1763-1839)
English physician educated at Edinburgh University and Gonville and Caius College,
Cambridge; he was master of Caius and a vice-chancellor of the university.
Thomas Denman, first baron Denman (1779-1854)
English barrister and writer for the
Monthly Review; he was MP,
solicitor-general to Queen Caroline (1820), attorney-general (1820), lord chief justice
(1832-1850). Sydney Smith commented, “Denman everybody likes.”
Peter Paul Dobree (1782-1825)
Educated under Richard Valpy at Reading School and at Trinity College, Cambridge, he
succeeded James Henry Monk as regius professor of Greek at Cambridge in 1823.
Henry Dodwell (1641-1711)
Educated at Trinity College, Dublin, he was a scholar, theologian, and non-juring
clergyman.
Sir Fortunatus William Lilley Dwarris (1786-1860)
Born in Jamaica and educated at Rugby and University College, Oxford, he was called to
the bar from the Middle Temple and published on law.
Peter Elmsley (1774-1825)
Classical scholar educated at Christ Church, Oxford, who published in the
Edinburgh Review and
Quarterly Review.
Southey described him to W. S. Landor as “the fattest under-graduate in your time and
mine.”
Thomas Erskine, first baron Erskine (1750-1823)
Scottish barrister who was a Whig MP for Portsmouth (1783-84, 1790-1806); after defending
the political radicals Hardy, Tooke, and Thelwall in 1794 he was lord chancellor in the
short-lived Grenville-Fox administration (1806-07).
William Falconer (1744-1824)
English physician educated at Edinburgh and Leiden; he practiced at Bath and studied the
efficacy of the waters there.
Barron Field (1786-1846)
English barrister and friend of Leigh Hunt, Thomas Hood, and Charles Lamb.
Girolamo Fracastoro (1478-1553)
Italian physician and professor at Padua who wrote a Latin poem on syphilis.
John Freind (1675-1728)
Educated at Westminster School, and Christ Church, Oxford, he was an MP, physician to
Queen Caroline, and a suspected Jacobite.
Galen (129-199 c.)
Greek physician who systematized the study of medical science.
John Gregory (1724-1773)
Professor of philosophy at Aberdeen (1746-1749) and professor of medicine at Edinburgh
(1766-1773), he was the author of the popular
A Father's Legacy to his
Daughters (1774).
David Hartley (1705-1757)
English philosopher and physician educated at Jesus College, Cambridge; he published
Observations on Man, his Frame, his Duty, and his Expectations
(1749).
William Harvey (1578-1657)
English physician who discovered the circulation of the blood.
William Heberden (1710-1801)
London physician educated at St John's College, Cambridge; his
Commentaries on the History and Cure of Diseases (1802) was edited by his son
William, royal physician.
John Hill (d. 1857)
Educated at Marischal College in Aberdeen, in 1816 he succeeded Thomas Arnold as the
manager of Belle Grove, a private madhouse in Leicester, and afterwards practiced as a
surgeon in Derby. He was a friend of Samuel Parr.
Hippocrates (460 BC c.-370 BC c.)
Greek physician who founded the practice of medicine on an empirical basis.
Edward Holme (1770-1847)
Educated at Göttingen, Edinburgh, and Leiden, he was a Manchester physician, antiquary,
book collector, and president of the Portico Library.
Thomas Waldron Hornbuckle (1775 c.-1848)
The son of Thomas Hornbuckle; he was educated at St. John's College, Cambridge where he
was fellow and president (1823-27). He was rector of Staplehurst, Kent (1826)
William Howley, archbishop of Canterbury (1766-1848)
Educated at Winchester and New College, Oxford, he was regius professor of Divinity
(1809-13), bishop of London (1813-28), and archbishop of Canterbury (1828-48).
George Isaac Huntingford (1748-1832)
Educated at Winchester and at New College, Oxford, after teaching at Winchester under
Joseph Warton he was promoted to bishop of Gloucester in 1802 and to Hereford in 1815. He
had a reputation as a strident conservative and disciplinarian.
Edward Johnstone (1757-1851)
Educated at Kidderminster grammar school and Edinburgh University, he was a Birmingham
physician for more than half a century; Sarah Siddons and Samuel Johnson were among his
patients. The physician John Johnstone (1768-1836) was his brother.
James Johnstone of Galabank (1730-1802)
Scottish physician educated at Edinburgh University; he practised at Worcester and was
laird of Galabank.
James Johnstone (1753-1783)
The son of James Johnstone of Galabank (d. 1802); he was a physician educated at
Edinburgh University who died of typhus while treating prisoners in Worcester
Castle.
Sir William Jones [Oriental Jones] (1746-1794)
English poet, jurist, and oriental philologist; he published
Poems,
consisting chiefly of Translations from the Asiatic Languages (1772).
John Kaye, bishop of Lincoln (1783-1853)
Of Christ's College, Cambridge (where he knew Byron); he was regius professor of divinity
(1814-30), bishop of Bristol (1820-27) and Lincoln (1827-53).
Henry Kett (1761-1825)
Educated at Norwich grammar school and Trinity College, Oxford, he was a college fellow,
poet, Bampton lecturer, and author of textbooks.
William Lambe (1765-1847)
Educated at St John's College, Cambridge, he was a physician in Warwick, where he knew
Samuel Parr, and from 1804 in London, where he was a fellow of the Royal College of
Physicians. He was an advocate for vegetarianism and acquaintance of Shelley and
Keats.
George Henry Law, bishop of Bath and Wells (1761-1845)
The son of Edmund Law (1703-1787), bishop of Carlisle; he was educated at Charterhouse
and Queen's College, Cambridge and was bishop of Chester (1812-24) and bishop of Bath and
Wells (1824-45).
Edward Legge, bishop of Oxford (1767-1827)
The son of the second earl of Dartmouth, he was educated at Rugby School and Christ
Church, Oxford, was Dean of Windsor (1805), and bishop of Oxford (1816-27).
John Lens (1756-1825)
Educated at St John's College, Cambridge, he was Serjeant-at-law (1799) on the western
circuit and a friend of Charles James Fox.
Joseph Letherland (1699-1764)
English physician educated at Leiden; he practised in London and was physician to St
Thomas's Hospital (1736).
Sir James Mackintosh (1765-1832)
Scottish philosopher and man of letters who defended the French Revolution in
Vindiciae Gallicae (1791); he was Recorder of Bombay (1803-1812) and
MP for Knaresborough (1819-32).
George Edward Male (1638-1845)
The son of James Male of Belle Vue, he was educated at Eton and Edinburgh University and
practiced and wrote on medicine in Birmingham.
Richard Mead (1673-1754)
Educated at the University of Leiden, he was an English physician, writer on medicine,
and virtuoso who collected books and art.
Amos Middleton (1779-1847)
English physician who practiced at the Warneford Hospital in Oxford and at Leamington
Spa.
Conyers Middleton (1683-1750)
Latitudinarian divine and Woodwardian Professor at Cambridge; he published
Letter from Rome (1729) and a
Life of Cicero
(1741).
John Milton (1608-1674)
English poet and controversialist; author of
Comus (1634),
Lycidas (1638),
Areopagitica (1644),
Paradise Lost (1667), and other works.
James Henry Monk, bishop of Gloucester (1784-1856)
He was successor to Richard Porson as regius professor of Greek at Cambridge and bishop
of Gloucester (1830); he published the
Life of Richard Bentley
(1830).
Basil Montagu (1770-1851)
An illegitimate son of the fourth earl of Sandwich, he was educated at Charterhouse and
Christ's College, Cambridge, and afterwards was a lawyer, editor, and friend of Samuel
Romilly, William Godwin, and William Wordsworth.
John Parkes (1764 c.-1851)
Of Warwick, textile manufacturer and friend of Samuel Parr; he was the father of the
solicitor and election agent Joseph Parkes (1796-1865).
Mary Parr [née Eyre] (1765-1848)
The daughter of John Eyre of Coventry and sister of the Solihull schoolmaster John Eyre;
in 1816 she became the second wife of Samuel Parr.
Samuel Parr (1747-1825)
English schoolmaster, scholar, and book collector whose strident politics and assertive
personality involved him in a long series of quarrels.
George Pelham, bishop of Exeter (1766-1827)
After tutoring by the poet James Hurdis he was educated at Clare College, Cambridge; a
friend of the Prince Regent, he was bishop of Bristol (1803), Exeter (1807), and Lincoln
(1820).
Thomas Percival (1740-1804)
English physician educated at the Warrington Academy and Edinburgh University; he was a
founder of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society (1781).
Sir Thomas Plumer (1753-1824)
English barrister educated at Eton and University College, Oxford; he was attorney
general (1812), vice-chancellor (1813), and master of the rolls (1818).
Sir Samuel Romilly (1757-1818)
Reformer of the penal code and the author of
Thoughts on Executive
Justice (1786); he was a Whig MP and Solicitor-General who died a suicide.
William Roscoe (1753-1831)
Historian, poet, and man of letters; author of
Life of Lorenzo di
Medici (1795) and
Life and Pontificate of Leo X (1805). He
was Whig MP for Liverpool (1806-1807) and edited the
Works of Pope,
10 vols (1824).
Sir William Rough (1772 c.-1838)
Educated at Wesminster and Trinity College, Cambridge (where he knew Southey and
Coleridge, respectively), he was a poet, barrister, and chief justice of the supreme court
in Ceylon.
Martin Joseph Routh (1755-1854)
President of Magdalen College Oxford, 1791-1855; he published
Reliquiae
Sacrae (1814-48), a collection of patristic writings.
James Scarlett, first baron Abinger (1769-1844)
English barrister and politician educated at Trinity College, Cambridge and the Inner
Temple; he was a Whig MP (1819-34) who served as attorney-general in the Canning and
Wellington ministries.
Humphrey Sibthorp (1641-1722)
English physician educated at Magdalen College, Oxford; he was Sherardian professor of
botany (1747-84).
Robert Percy Smith [Bobus Smith] (1770-1845)
The elder brother of Sydney Smith; John Hookham Frere, George Canning, and Henry Fox he
wrote for the
Microcosm at Eton; he was afterwards a judge in India
and MP.
Thomas Sydenham (1624-1689)
Educated at Magdalen Hall, Oxford, he fought on the side of Parliament in the Civil Wars
and became the leading physician in England.
George Thackeray (1777-1850)
He was assistant master at Eton College (1801), provost of King's College, Cambridge
(1814), and a notable book-collector.
Thomas Thackeray (1693-1760)
Educated at Eton and King's College, Cambridge, he was headmaster of Harrow (1746-60) and
archdeacon of Surrey (1753-60).
Theophrastus ( 371 BC c.-287 BC c.)
The pupil and friend of Aristotle who invented the character genre much imitated in later
literature.
Sir Nicholas Conyngham Tindal (1776-1846)
Educated at Trinity College, Cambridge and Lincoln's Inn, he was a Tory MP for Wigtown
(1824-26) and Harwich (1826-27); as a judge he presided over the trial of Lord Melbourne
for criminal conversation.
Titus, emperor of Rome (39-81)
The son of the emperor Vespasian who captured Jerusalem in 70 AD and was emperor of Rome
79-81.
Peter Vaughan (1770 c.-1826)
The fourth son of James Vaughan MD of Leicester and younger brother of Sir Henry Halford
(d. 1844) and Sir John Vaughan (d. 1839); he was assistant-master at Rugby (1792), warden
of Merton (1810), and dean of Chester (1820).
Virgil (70 BC-19 BC)
Roman epic poet; author of
Eclogues,
Georgics, and the
Aenead.
Arthur Savage Wade (1787-1845)
Educated at St John's College, Cambridge, he was rector of St. Nicholas in Warwick, a
friend of Samuel Parr, and a Chartist podium speaker.
John Ward (1679 c.-1758)
English antiquary and classicist who was professor of rhetoric in Gresham College
(1720).
Charles Warren (1764-1829)
Educated at Westminster School, he was chief justice for Chester and MP for Dorchester
(1819-26).
Joseph White (1746-1814)
Educated at Wadham College, Oxford, he was a clergyman, professor of Arabic (1774) and
regius professor of Hebrew at Oxford (1804). He was faulted for failing to acknowledge the
assistance of Samuel Badcock and Samuel Parr in composing his Bampton lectures of
1784.
Thomas Wilde, first baron Truro (1782-1855)
English judge who made his reputation defending Queen Caroline; he was serjeant-at-law
(1824), Whig MP for Newark-on-Trent (1831-32), and lord chancellor (1850-52).
Sir John Williams (1777-1846)
Educated at Trinity College, Cambridge and the Inner Temple, he was junior counsel for
the defence at the trial of Queen Caroline in 1820, a Whig MP for Lincoln, Ilchester, and
Winchelsea, and justice of the court of king's bench (1834).
Robert Woodhouse (1773-1827)
Educated at Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge; a mathematician, he was fellow of the
Royal Society (1803) and Lucasian professor of mathematics (1820).
