Page:A History of the Medical Department of the University of Pennsylvania.djvu/108

 dissent from the determination was entered by Dr. Thomas Young. In this dissent he was supported by his Colleagues Drs. Cullen, Monro, Ramsay, Gregory, and Black, and by Dr. James Hay. In the progress of the discussion, which lasted until May, 1772, when the College reverted to their original resolution of prohibiting the practice of Surgery and its several departments, by Fellows of their own body, Dr. Cullen took, in a great measure, the lead at the meetings of the College. The following reasons were given in opposition to this act with reference to Obstetrics.”

“If the separation of Midwifery from Physic was the principal intention for passing this new act, it is certainly one of the most improper. Midwifery is a part of Surgery the most diversified that we know of, and the most requiring the general principles of physic. A judgment in physic is often inseparable from the practice of Midwifery, when it is not possible to have either the physician always at hand, or to render him useful unless he is exercised in the practice of it; therefore it is to the interest of mankind to have the two conjoined, if possible, in one person.”

“We are persuaded that the public will think it for their interest, in cases which are attended sometimes with so great and sudden danger that physicians of the first rank should undertake the profession of Midwifery, and that the Legislature will not suffer the College of Edinburgh to put a mark of contempt upon such physicians by excluding them from their Society.”

Before Dr. Cullen died this act was repealed, and practitioners of midwifery admitted as Fellows of the College.

The elevation of Midwifery to its true position in England is due mainly to the writings of Dr. Smellie, Dr. William Hunter, and his pupil Dr. Denman; while Mauriceau and Baudelocque were, by their clear and philosophical exposition of its principles, mainly instrumental in establishing its importance on the Continent.