Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 06.djvu/348

 Bright abdominal viscera, with observations on the diagnostic marks of the diseases to which the viscera are subject.' In 1837 he was Lumleian lecturer, his subject being 'Disorders of the brain.' He was censor in 1836 and 1839, and a member of the council 1838 and 1843. He was elected fellow of the Royal Society in 1821, and received the Monthyon medal from the Institute of France, In 1837, on the accession of Queen Victoria, he was appointed physician extraordinary to her majesty. In the earlier part of his career it is said that his practice was not large; but as his reputation rose he took the leading position as consulting physician in London, and was probably consulted in a larger number of difficult cases than any of his contemporaries. Bright was twice married; first to the youngest daughter of Dr. William Babington [q. v.] The only son by this marriage took holy orders, but died young. His second wife was a daughter of Mr. Benjamin Follett, and sister of Sir William Webb Follett. She survived him, as did three sons and two daughters. His eldest son is now (1886) master of University College, Oxford; his youngest a physician in practice at Cannes. He died at his house, 11 Savile How, on 16 Dec. 1858, after a very short illness, which, however, was shown by post-mortem examination to have been the consequence of long-standing disease of the heart. He was buried at Kensal Green cemetery, and a mural monument was erected to his memory in St. James's Church, Piccadilly. The College of Physicians possesses his portrait in oils, and also a marble bust; another bust is at Guy's Hospital, and his portrait is engraved in Pettigrew's 'Medical Portrait Gallery.'

Bright was by general admission a man of fine and attractive nature. From early manhood he was animated by a genuine love of truth and unswerving sense of duty. He was of an affectionate disposition and uniformly cheerful. He was widely accomplished, a good linguist (when this kind of knowledge was less common than it is now), well versed in more than one science, a creditable amateur artist, and possessed of much taste in art; well cultivated on all sides by travel and society. In his intellectual character the first feature which strikes us is a certain simplicity. Beyond most observers he succeeded in viewing objects without prejudice. Not putting forward any theories himself, he was not biassed by any of the prevailing systems of medicine. Next, he had a remarkable tact, which appeared to be exercised unconsciously, of picking out the important facts in any subject, and, perhaps half unconsciously also, of combining them together so as to explain each other. He is said not to have perceived the true value of his own observations, and this is quite credible, but his genius guided him to the right result. Moreover, his industry was indefatigable. He amassed hundreds and thousands of facts, and his minute accuracy of observation was never or rarely at fault.

Bright was not generally regarded as a brilliant man; he had little power of exposition, and in his own school, while his fame was rapidly spreading over the civilised world, he was less popular and impressive as a teacher than his brilliant colleague Thomas Addison [q. v.], though the latter was much less known by the outside public. 'Bright could not theorise,' says Dr. Wilks, 'and fortunately gave us no doctrines and no "views;" but he could see, and we are struck with astonishment at his powers of observation. ... I might allude to the fact that he was one of the first who described acute yellow atrophy of the liver, pigmentation of the brain in miasmatic melanæmia, condensation of the lung in whooping-cough. He was also the first, I believe, who noted the bruit in chorea, and he made also many other original clinical observations' (, 'Historical Notes on Bright's Disease,' &c., Guy's Hosp. Reports, xxii. 259). These minor researches display the same powers as his master work, and have been thought to show even greater originality. It is the importance of its subject and the powerful influence which it has had, and continues to have, on the progress of medicine in all countries, that give to this discovery its classical position, and place Bright among the half-dozen greatest names in the honourable roll of English physicians. His writings were, besides those mentioned above: 1. 'Travels from Vienna through Lower Hungary, with some remarks on the State of Vienna during the Congress in 1814,' 4to, Edinburgh, 1818. 2. 'Address at the Commencement of a Course of Lectures on the Practice of Medicine,' 8vo, London, 1832. 3. 'Clinical Memoirs on Abdominal Tumours,' edited by G. H. Barlow, M.D. (from 'Guy's Hospital Reports'), New Syd. Soc., 8vo, London, 1860. 4. 'Gulstonian Lectures on the Functions of the Abdominal Viscera,' in 'London Medical Gazette,' 1833. In the 'Medico-Chirurgical Transactions:' (1) 'Case of unusually Profuse Perspiration,' xiv. 433. 1828; (2) 'Cases of Disease of the Pancreas and Duodenum,' xviii. 1,1833; (3) 'Cases illustrative of Diagnosis when Adhesions have taken place in the Peritoneum,' xix. 176, 1835; (4) 'Cases of Spasmodic Disease accompanying Affections of the Pericardium,' xxii. 1, 1839. In 'Guy's Hospital Reports,' vol. i.: 'Case of