English medicineThe trial, which began on 12 December 1828, certainly opened in dramatic fashion. For a civil proceeding between two private individuals it sparked a remarkable degree of popular interest ?so much so, in fact, that by eight o’clock that morning, an hour before proceedings were due to commence, `the different avenues leading into the court were so crowded that there was scarcely any possibility of forcing a passage’. According to The Times, `it was with (��)-Zanubrutinib biological activity utmost difficulty’ and only `with the most active assistance of constables and officers of the court’ that `counsel, jury and witnesses could obtain an entrance’.74 Upon finally reaching their seats, `many of them presented a most ludicrous appearance; some of the wigs of the barristers were off, others half off; some gentlemen had parts of their coats torn entirely away, and large rents were made in others’. So great was the commotion that the start of the trial was delayed by a full ninety minutes, by which time the heaving courtroom contained `almost every hospital surgeon and eminent practitioner in London . . . besides an immense number of students’.75 Like the great trials of radical folklore, then, this was to be a highly public occasion. In terms of its cast, too, the trial of Cooper v. Wakley at the Court of King’s Bench could hardly have been better calculated to stir radical memory. On one side was Thomas Wakley, a radical journalist representing himself, albeit with the preparatory assistance of Henry Brougham, `foremost advocate of the rights and liberties of the people’.76 On the other was Cooper’s counsel, headed by none other than Sir James Scarlett. One of the wealthiest barristers of the age, Scarlett was a notorious opponent of the popular press and frequent target of radical satire.77 As counsel for the Crown he had successfully prosecuted Henry Hunt for his part in the ill-fated Manchester meeting of 1819, and as an MP he had proposed a reform of the poor laws which, according to Cobbett, sought `to cure pauperism by starvation’.78 During the trial, Wakley made numerous sardonic allusions to Scarlett’s establishment Whiggism, fusing, imaginatively and linguistically, the discourses of medical and Lonafarnib site political radicalism. Drawing upon a possible etymology for the term Whig as deriving from the word `whey’, he asked: If we have Whigs in the political state, why should we not have Bats in the surgical? I am sure that hospital surgeons are just as much, or more, like BATS, than Sir James Scarlett is like sour milk ?(much laughter) ?and yet that is the meaning of Whig.79 He likewise quoted the observation of a `wag’ that `our worthy knight [Scarlett], owing to the extreme heat of the court, had taken an unusual quantity of SOUR MILK, a favourite drink, for a time, with BATS, RATS, and BARRISTERS’.The Times, 13 December 1828, 1, col. G. Wakley, A Report of the Trial of Cooper v. Wakley for an Alleged Libel (London, 1829), 1. 76 Clarke, op. cit., 40. 77 G. F. R. Barker, `Scarlett, James, first Baron Abinger (1769 ?844)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford, 2004). For example, see Cobbett’s Weekly Political Register, 39:3 (21 April 1821), 199 ?08. 78The Lancet, 11:277 (20 December 1828), 380.75T.Wakley, Report of the Trial, op. cit., 29. 146. For a political use of this trope, see Cobbett’s Weekly Political Register, 65:6 (9 February 1828), 165. This etymology is mentioned in Samuel Johnson’s celebrated dictionary. S. Johnson, A Dictionary of the En.English medicineThe trial, which began on 12 December 1828, certainly opened in dramatic fashion. For a civil proceeding between two private individuals it sparked a remarkable degree of popular interest ?so much so, in fact, that by eight o’clock that morning, an hour before proceedings were due to commence, `the different avenues leading into the court were so crowded that there was scarcely any possibility of forcing a passage’. According to The Times, `it was with utmost difficulty’ and only `with the most active assistance of constables and officers of the court’ that `counsel, jury and witnesses could obtain an entrance’.74 Upon finally reaching their seats, `many of them presented a most ludicrous appearance; some of the wigs of the barristers were off, others half off; some gentlemen had parts of their coats torn entirely away, and large rents were made in others’. So great was the commotion that the start of the trial was delayed by a full ninety minutes, by which time the heaving courtroom contained `almost every hospital surgeon and eminent practitioner in London . . . besides an immense number of students’.75 Like the great trials of radical folklore, then, this was to be a highly public occasion. In terms of its cast, too, the trial of Cooper v. Wakley at the Court of King’s Bench could hardly have been better calculated to stir radical memory. On one side was Thomas Wakley, a radical journalist representing himself, albeit with the preparatory assistance of Henry Brougham, `foremost advocate of the rights and liberties of the people’.76 On the other was Cooper’s counsel, headed by none other than Sir James Scarlett. One of the wealthiest barristers of the age, Scarlett was a notorious opponent of the popular press and frequent target of radical satire.77 As counsel for the Crown he had successfully prosecuted Henry Hunt for his part in the ill-fated Manchester meeting of 1819, and as an MP he had proposed a reform of the poor laws which, according to Cobbett, sought `to cure pauperism by starvation’.78 During the trial, Wakley made numerous sardonic allusions to Scarlett’s establishment Whiggism, fusing, imaginatively and linguistically, the discourses of medical and political radicalism. Drawing upon a possible etymology for the term Whig as deriving from the word `whey’, he asked: If we have Whigs in the political state, why should we not have Bats in the surgical? I am sure that hospital surgeons are just as much, or more, like BATS, than Sir James Scarlett is like sour milk ?(much laughter) ?and yet that is the meaning of Whig.79 He likewise quoted the observation of a `wag’ that `our worthy knight [Scarlett], owing to the extreme heat of the court, had taken an unusual quantity of SOUR MILK, a favourite drink, for a time, with BATS, RATS, and BARRISTERS’.The Times, 13 December 1828, 1, col. G. Wakley, A Report of the Trial of Cooper v. Wakley for an Alleged Libel (London, 1829), 1. 76 Clarke, op. cit., 40. 77 G. F. R. Barker, `Scarlett, James, first Baron Abinger (1769 ?844)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford, 2004). For example, see Cobbett’s Weekly Political Register, 39:3 (21 April 1821), 199 ?08. 78The Lancet, 11:277 (20 December 1828), 380.75T.Wakley, Report of the Trial, op. cit., 29. 146. For a political use of this trope, see Cobbett’s Weekly Political Register, 65:6 (9 February 1828), 165. This etymology is mentioned in Samuel Johnson’s celebrated dictionary. S. Johnson, A Dictionary of the En.
