<h3> CHAPTER XXXVII <br/><br/> FAMOUS ENGLISHMEN NOT IN POLITICS </h3>
<p class="t3b">
I</p>
<p>There are, perhaps, a few names of to-day
which it is possible to mention without
becoming involved in the politics of to-day. The
English, it is true, draw a broader line between
what is purely political and what is personal than
we do. They can give and take hard knocks,
whether in Parliament or on the platform or even
in the Press, without animosity or resentment.
But since in America it seems to be supposed that
any reference to these encounters may have its
danger side I avoid them for the present. I turn
away from the Revolutionary present, of which
one's stock of Memories increases day by day, to
the more peaceful past or to a more peaceful
world in the present; a world unravaged by political
passions. True, the past was not always a
peaceful past while it lasted. We do not always
remember how fierce were the storms which have
subsided. But where Death has made a solitude
we call it peace.</p>
<p>In two, at least, of the great contests waged
these periods of peace I had a share, which
<span class="pagenum">{<SPAN id="P353"></SPAN>353}</span>
I must mention again for the sake of another story
I have to tell. One was the conflict about Irish
Home Rule which became critical and revolutionary
in 1881 and 1886; when I was allowed to
state my own views, unpopular as they were in
America, in <i>The Tribune</i> week by week or day
by day; a policy of generous and far-sighted
courage on the part of that journal; honourable
to its editor and I hope in the long run not
injurious to the paper.</p>
<p>The second was in 1895 and 1896, in <i>The Times</i>
of London. When President Cleveland flung his
message of war upon the floor of the House at
Washington in December, 1895, I necessarily had
much to say about it in <i>The Times</i>. There again
I was given a free hand. It is sometimes said
that the correspondents of this journal frame their
news dispatches in accordance with orders issued
to them from the home office. I can only say,
if indeed I may say so much without violating
obligations of secrecy, that during a service which
lasted ten years I never knew of or heard of any
such orders.</p>
<p>Coming to England in the summer of 1896 on a
holiday, I had some slight illness and asked a
friend whom I should consult. My own doctor
was by that time attending patients, I suppose, in
another and better world. My friend said he had
lately seen fourteen physicians about his son and
each of the fourteen had given a different name
to his son's disease.</p>
<p>"Then I went to Dr. Barlow, who said, after a
<span class="pagenum">{<SPAN id="P354"></SPAN>354}</span>
long examination, 'I do not know what is the
matter with your son nor what to prescribe for
him.' Then I felt I had found a doctor whom I
could trust."</p>
<p>So I went to Dr. Barlow, without an introduction.
At the end of a rather long consultation
and a definite opinion and a settled prescription,
I asked what his fee was.</p>
<p>"Nothing."</p>
<p>I thought he had misunderstood my question,
and repeated it.</p>
<p>"Nothing. I can take no money from a man
who has done as much as you have to keep the
peace between the two countries."</p>
<p>When I next saw the manager of <i>The Times</i> I
told him of this incident, which he seemed to think
interesting. He said:</p>
<p>"Such evidences of good feeling from a man so
distinguished as Barlow and so far removed from
politics do indeed make for good feeling on both
sides. I hope you will tell all your own people."</p>
<p>It is difficult, for I cannot tell it without more
or less directly paying a compliment to myself.
But many years have since ebbed away. Modesty
is at best but an inconvenient handmaiden, from
whom I would part company if I could. Let her
keep to her proper place. An obligation of honour
is peremptory; and this, perhaps, is one. I did
tell a certain number of friends at the time, and
now I repeat the anecdote to a larger number. I
set it against Mr. Price Collier's mischievous
dictum that English and Americans do not like each
<span class="pagenum">{<SPAN id="P355"></SPAN>355}</span>
other. The dictum already seems to belong to a
distant and misty and mythical past.</p>
<p>Since that year of 1896 Dr. Barlow has become
(in 1902) Sir Thomas Barlow, Bart., and Physician
to the King's Household; about as high as anybody
can go in the medical profession. A Lancashire
lad to begin, with, he has had a vast hospital
experience, and still keeps up his hospital work;
he has a vast private practice; Harvard and two
Canadian universities have given him their LL.D.;
he is an F.R.S., a K.C.V.O., and other parts of
the alphabet pay him tribute. All these and
many other titles and distinctions have their
value, though the late Sir Henry Drummond
Wolff, who had more than most men, did say:
"They give me every kind of letter to my name
except L.S.D." But the essential thing in Sir
Thomas Barlow's case is that he has the confidence
of the public and of his profession.</p>
<p>One thing, it seems to me, the great surgeons
and physicians I have known had in common.
They were great men, first of all. They had
great qualities outside of their profession. Two
years ago last September, a time when the big
men are mostly away, I wanted a surgeon and
knew not where to find one. A chemist finally
gave me a name, Mr. Henry Morris, and an
address; name wholly unknown to me, though the
address, Cavendish Square, implied at least
professional prosperity. I had had a fall at the
Playhouse, as Mr. Maude calls his little theatre,
the night before, leaving a box by what I supposed
<span class="pagenum">{<SPAN id="P356"></SPAN>356}</span>
to be steps and in the absence of steps coming
down on the floor, bruised, and I knew not what
else. My surgeon made his examination. What
struck me was that he wasted never a word nor a
gesture. The touch of his hands, of his fingers,
had a mathematical or instrumental precision. So
had his questions. In five minutes or less he had
covered the ground and delivered his opinion.
Anything might have happened, but nothing had,
bar the bruised muscles. "We'll attend to those
for you." He asked if I was leaving town and
when I said I was sailing for New York on Saturday
he remarked:</p>
<p>"If you were a working-man I should send you
to the hospital and you would be kept in bed till
you were well. But if you choose to sail on the
<i>Lusitania</i> you must bear the pain. Now, as you
are here, you might as well let me overhaul you."</p>
<p>Then, as before, the same precision, the same
delicacy of touch, the same rapidity, nothing
hurried, nothing missed; his examination a work
of art as well as of science. Then he began to
talk of other things; and again, and even stronger,
was the impression of being in contact with a
master mind. Seldom have I spent a more
stimulating hour. He was, I found later, Mr. Henry
Morris, Consulting Surgeon to the Middlesex
Hospital and President of the Royal College of
Surgeons. In other words, Mr. Henry Morris,
about whom I ought to have known, but did not,
was, and is, in the very front rank of his profession.
His eminence has since been recognized and
<span class="pagenum">{<SPAN id="P357"></SPAN>357}</span>
rewarded by the King, and he is now Sir Henry
Morris, Bart. I suppose even a Republican may
admit that if titles are to be conferred they are
well conferred on men eminent in science.</p>
<p><br/><br/></p>
<p class="t3b">
II</p>
<p>Sir Thomas Barlow has since been elected President
of the Royal College of Physicians in succession
to Sir Douglas Powell. This is the Blue
Ribbon of the profession, perhaps a greater honour
than a knighthood or baronetcy, though the
knighthood or the baronetcy is from the King,
the source and fountain of all such distinctions.
But the Presidency of the Royal College of Physicians
is conferred by the Profession itself. The
Fellows of the College, who number some three
hundred, are the choosing body. They vote by
ballot and the man whom they elect is the man
by whom they wish to be represented before the
public; the man by whom they are content to be
judged. They say, in effect, of him whom they
choose: "This is the Head of the Medical
Profession for the time being." The public, which
really and rightly has much more confidence in
the judgment of the doctors upon each other
than in any lay reputation, accepts that. When
you say of a physician, "He is a doctors' doctor,"
you have said about all you can.</p>
<p>The President of the Royal College of Physicians
has, no doubt, duties which are not medical.
He has executive, administrative, consultative
<span class="pagenum">{<SPAN id="P358"></SPAN>358}</span>
duties; and the very important duty of dining
with the Lord Mayor, the Corporation of the City
of London, and the City Companies. In discharging
these latter functions he incurs, I suppose,
less risk than most men incur. But risk or
no risk these feasts have to be faced. Between
all Corporations, Guilds, and Colleges there is a
kind of freemasonry. They have points of
contact, of sympathy, and are likely to stand by
each other in difficulties. Whether dinners were
invented as a test and standard of friendship, I
cannot say. But go to which of them you like,
you will find a collection of the Heads of
other Companies, Colleges, etc.; not all, perhaps,
dinner-giving, but all willing victims of others'
hospitality.</p>
<p>The Royal College of Physicians is also a Senate
or Parliament; with powers of legislation and of
professional guidance and discipline. The Fellows
of this College are Trustees for the whole Profession.
The President has an authority of his own, depending
in part on statutes and on custom, in part on
his personal authority. In the latter Sir Thomas
Barlow will not be found wanting. It is not the
less, it is perhaps the greater, for the genial good
nature which accompanies it. I said to him once:</p>
<p>"Sir Thomas, you have one quality which must
be a great drawback to your success."</p>
<p>"Dear me, what is that?"</p>
<p>"When you come into a room your patient at
once thinks himself better, and even doubts
whether he need have sent for you at all, and so
<span class="pagenum">{<SPAN id="P359"></SPAN>359}</span>
gets well much quicker than he ought. It's taking
money out of your pocket."</p>
<p>"Very good. I'll take care you don't get well
too soon."</p>
<p>There was an electioneering story—oh, no
politics in it—the other day with an equally serious
but not more serious, side to it. Men were discussing
the system of plural voting still prevailing
in this country and certain to prevail so long as
votes, or any votes, are based on property
qualification. Said a well-known doctor:</p>
<p>"I have sixteen votes, all of which I am going
to poll."</p>
<p>"But how?"</p>
<p>"Oh, I have two votes of my own and I have
fourteen patients who are of the wrong party and
not one of them will be well enough to go out till
after election."</p>
<p>Think how completely non-political must be a
profession of which an eminent member can tell a
story like that and run no risk of being misunderstood.
The traditions of honour are indeed high
among English doctors, nor could they be in
better keeping than now in Sir Thomas Barlow's.</p>
<p>One of his predecessors, Sir William Gull, was
also not merely fashionable and popular but
recognized by his associates as a scientific
practitioner. Sir William Jenner was perhaps reckoned
by the medical profession the best all-round man
ever known. Sir William Gull was not far off, yet
there is an anecdote of him which suggests that
he put a very high value on the average capacity
<span class="pagenum">{<SPAN id="P360"></SPAN>360}</span>
of doctors. He was asked to go a long distance
into the country to see a patient. He declined.
He was told that any fee he liked to name would
be gladly paid. Still he declined, saying there
were cases he could not leave, and when he was
pressed further the great man burst out:</p>
<p>"But why do you want me? There are five
hundred doctors in London just as good as I am."</p>
<p>Which perhaps was not quite true.</p>
<p>Sir William Broadbent said almost the same
thing to me, twenty years ago and more, when I
asked him to see Mr. Hay whom I had just left
in his rooms, in Ryder Street, St. James's, to all
appearance extremely ill. Hay said in his
emotional way:</p>
<p>"Broadbent is the only doctor I believe in. If
you don't bring Broadbent bring nobody. Let
me die."</p>
<p>But Broadbent said no. He was starting to
catch a train for a life and death consultation in
the country. He must not miss his train.</p>
<p>"But there's time enough. See Hay on your
way to the train. Give him five minutes and let
somebody else do the rest."</p>
<p>"I shall let somebody else do the whole."</p>
<p>"Hay will see nobody unless he sees you first."</p>
<p>"There are plenty of men as good as I am. I
will give you half a dozen names."</p>
<p>"I want none of them. I want you. You know
you can stop your carriage for five minutes as you
drive to the station."</p>
<p>"My carriage has not come round."</p>
<p><span class="pagenum">{<SPAN id="P361"></SPAN>361}</span></p>
<p>"My hansom is at the door. Drive with me and
let your carriage follow."</p>
<p>Finally he did. When he came out of Hay's
bedroom he was a very angry man. He said:</p>
<p>"Your friend has a bad attack of indigestion.
He will be all right in an hour."</p>
<p>And away he went. An angry man is not always
a just man. Hay—God bless his memory—thought
himself suffering from a heart attack.
There is, I believe, a medical analogy between the
symptoms of heart disease and violent indigestion.
I had left him lying on the floor almost in
convulsions. How was he to know it was not heart
disease, to which he believed himself subject?
Hay was not then, to the English, so great a man
as he afterwards became. He had not been
Ambassador, nor Secretary of State, nor dictated to
the European Powers a new policy in the East.
I ought not to use the word dictated. It is not
descriptive of Hay's methods, which were persuasive.
Nor does one Power dictate to another. Let
us say he had secured by the adroit use of accepted
diplomatic methods the adhesion of the European
Powers to his proposals in respect of China. No
American Secretary of State had ever made so
original or beneficent a use of his power. He had
brought his country once for all into the great
world-partnership of great Powers the world over.</p>
<p>Sir William Broadbent did not foresee that.
He could not. If he had he might have been less
angry, for he was thought to be considerate of
greatness in all its forms or in many of them. He
<span class="pagenum">{<SPAN id="P362"></SPAN>362}</span>
liked patients of distinction, which is no reproach.
He had many of them. But the odd thing was
that he seemed never quite able to overcome his
awe of rank and title. In a company of persons
of rank his manner was not that of an equal. He
used to address persons of rank as a servant
addresses them; or it might be kinder to say as
inferiors in position used to address their superiors
two or three generations ago. And always with
embarrassment.</p>
<p>Another celebrated man of medicine, Sir Andrew
Clark, had an almost factitious renown as
Mr. Gladstone's doctor, and Mr. Gladstone was a very
good patient, in one sense. One thing this famous
physician had; he had absolute confidence in himself.
Or, if no doctor has that, he had enough to give
his patient confidence, which is perhaps not less
important. Old Abernethy used to say: "The
second best remedy is best if the patient thinks it
best." And I suppose that is as true of doctors
as of remedies. If Sir Andrew doubted, he never
allowed you to see that he doubted. Like all these
great men, he had a social as well as medical
popularity and he was very good company at
dinner and after.</p>
<p>One evening I met him at a pleasant house
where there was a good cook and the company,
including the host, did not exceed six; all men.
We all noticed that Sir Andrew drank champagne.
Presently one of the men said:</p>
<p>"You don't allow us champagne, Sir Andrew,
but you allow it to yourself."</p>
<p><span class="pagenum">{<SPAN id="P363"></SPAN>363}</span></p>
<p>"Oh, I have had a long day, and I am very tired,
and I must have it. Besides, when I get home
there'll be thirty or forty letters to answer."</p>
<p>So the champagne flowed on, like the water, as
Mr. Evarts said, at one of President Hayes's White
House dinners. Sir Andrew drank no more than
anybody else. It was only because of his habit
of prohibiting it to others that we noticed whether
his glass was full or empty. As we went upstairs
I said to him:</p>
<p>"Do you mean that after all that champagne
you are going to answer thirty or forty letters
when you get home?"</p>
<p>"No, certainly not."</p>
<p>"Then what did you mean?"</p>
<p>"What I meant was that after my champagne
I should not care whether they were answered or
not."</p>
<p>It was Sir Andrew Clark who said of Mr. Gladstone,
some fifteen years before his death at eighty-eight
that there was no physiological reason why
he should not live to be 120. If that was meant
as a prophecy it had the fate of most prophecies.</p>
<p><br/><br/><br/></p>
<p><SPAN id="chap38"></SPAN></p>
<p><span class="pagenum">{<SPAN id="P364"></SPAN>364}</span></p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />