A BRIEF HISTORY OF BRITISH LAY HOMOEOPATHY

[Guest guest]

A BRIEF HISTORY OF BRITISH LAY HOMOEOPATHY

by Peter Morrell

 

(based upon a Paper given at the 1st International Conference on the

History of Homoeopathy at the Robert Bosch Institute for the History

of Medicine in Stuttgart 4-6 April 1995)

 

In this outline sketch of British homoeopathic history we shall

concentrate only on the main events and a small number of important

figures.

 

Origines

 

Homoeopathy is a form of medicine developed in the late 1780's in

Saxony by the illustrious German physician, linguist and chemist

Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843). It depends upon the use of mainly

herbal and mineral drugs that are used singly, in minute dosage and

after the maxim `like cures like' or the law of similars. The drugs

are 'proved' or tested on healthy volunteers and are generally

without side-effects.

 

Homoeopathy mounted a succession of vigorous and often acrimonious

challenges to medical orthodoxy throughout the last century,

eliciting subtle changes in the medical practice and theory of

Regular physicians. By the 1870's, Regular practice had been purged

of its many barbaric practices, leading to gentler techniques, the

abandonment of complex mixtures of drugs (polypharmacy) and the move

towards theories of disease based upon infectious agents. All these

had originally been features of the homoeopaths. Finally, the

wholesale plundering of the homoeopathic materia medica by the

Regular school was the highest unwitting compliment allopaths ever

paid to homoeopathy. By 1900 for example, Aconite, Belladonna and Nux

vomica were in common use throughout medicine. All had been

originally proved and brought into use by the homoeopaths.

 

Homoeopathy spread rapidly throughout Germany and France and

eventually to Russia, Austria, India, the Americas and southern

Europe. It claimed particular success in the treatment of acute

epidemic diseases like Cholera and quickly became the favoured

medical system of the European Royals and aristocracy.

 

Britain

 

Homoeopathy first came to Britain in the 1830's, mainly through the

stronglyinterconnected German and British Royal families. Homoeopathy

was very popu-lar with the Kings of Saxony, Prussia, Wurttenburg and

Westphalia, who patronised a range of homoeopathic physicians

including the founder of homoeopathy, Dr Hahnemann.

 

British Royals and aristocrats soon followed suit and the therapy

became very popular with the nobility, who not only patronised

homoeopathic physicians, but they also gave generous financial

assistance with the setting up of homoeopathic hospitals, pharmacies

and free homoeopathic dispensaries for the poor.

 

Dr Frederick Hervey Foster Quin, in 1820

 

The first UK homoeopaths were all close colleagues of Dr Samuel

Hahnemann(1755-1843) in Paris and they came to England specifically

to set up homoeopathic practice in the 1830's (1). They were Dr F F H

Quin (1799-1878), Dr Paul Curie (1799-1853) - grandfather of the

scientist Pierre Curie (1859-1906) - Mr William Leaf (1790-1874), a

rich London Silk Merchant, and Rev Thomas Rapoul Everest (1801-1855),

reputedly a younger brother of Sir George Everest (1790-1866),

sometime Surveyor-General of India and after whom Mount Everest is

named. Quin's practice in London was established in Sept 1832 at 19

King Street (1b), while in 1844 he established the British

Homoeopathic Society (BHS) with 10 colleagues (1c) . All these

figures had been close confidant's of Hahnemann during the last 10 or

so years of his life (2).

 

Because all the earliest homoeopaths learned homoeopathy through

apprenticeship, so we can depict homoeopathic history in terms of

teaching lineages. Hahnemann was practising homoeopathy in Paris from

1835 until his death in 1843 (3).

 

Lay Practitioners

 

Another interesting aspect of homoeopathy in general is the growth of

the medically unqualified or plebeian practitioners. This aspect

homoeopathy shared with herbalism, the practitioners of which were

almost entirely medically unqualified. Almost from the start, there

were lay practitioners of homoeopathy springing up in all places

where it became popular. In the 1850's they even formed their own

English Homoeopathic Association in London. In the 1930's and again

since the late 1970's they became important aspects of the popular

movement.

 

It is often hard to find evidence of lay practitioners in Britain in

the last century. That is not to say they did not exist. The

difficulty revolves around their thinly dispersed nature, their lack

of publications and organisations, and their 'hand-to-mouth'

existence, relying mostly on grassroots community presence and word-

of-mouth referrals, rather than upon advertising or listings. Nor did

they tend to make publications. Thus they left few traces behind.

 

Hahnemann's second wife Melanie (1800-1878) and the Director of the

Munster Botanic Garden, Carl von Bonninghausen (1785-1864), were the

first lay practitioners (4). Melanie was successfully tried in 1847

in Paris for practising medicine without a licence (5).

 

Quin, Leaf, Curie and Everest were part of the inner sanctum of

Hahnemann's proteges. They established practices in the UK and later

free dispensaries for the poor and also several hospitals. Leaf and

Everest might perhaps be better described as `lay homoeopathic

zealots', as was Curie and this was distasteful to Quin who distanced

himself from their excesses, concentrating instead on converting the

medically qualified (6). In 1848, Rosenstein lists 73 homoeopathic

practitioners in England and Scotland, of which 51 are doctors and 22

laypersons (7).

 

In the 1840's the London School of Homoeopathy was established as a

teaching centre. This merged in the late 1870's (after Quin's death)

with the London Homoeopathic Hospital. It was chiefly run by Dr

Robert Dudgeon (1820-1904) and Dr William Bayes (c1823-c1890).

 

Thomas Skinner

 

Drs Drysdale (1817-1892) and Berridge (c1846-c1910) in Liverpool also

established some teaching and two Homoeopathic Dispensaries for the

poor of that city and later a hospital. Clarke and Skinner, for

example, both trained in Liverpool (8). This pattern became repeated

many times throughout Britain such that at their peak in the 1860's

there were 62 such dispensaries operating (9). Many converted into

small hospitals, while others closed down altogetehr. By the 1890's

they had declined to less than 40 (10). By 1909 there were only 31

and declining rapidly (11). These included Liverpool, Birmingham,

Plymouth, Leicester and Bromley homoeopathic hospitals. In their

heyday the Birmingham and Liverpool hospitals were fairly large

thriving institutions.

 

Liverpool hospitals

 

Homoeopathy in the UK also contained peripheral trades like

homoeopathic chemists and publishers, keen to become involved in the

growing movement. Examples include Nelson's (est 1860), E Gould and

Son of Moorgate (est. 1849), Butcher Curnow of Blackheath, Keene and

Ashwell of New Cavendish Street (est 1862) and Epps Thatcher of

Jermyn Street and Threadneedle Street (est 1839). In the north of

England there were several branches of the homoeopathic pharmacy

Thompson and Capper in the industrial towns of Lancashire and

Yorkshire (12). Early publishers included the Homoeopathic Publishing

Co based in London and Henry Turner & Co, based in London and

Manchester.

 

Epps Thatcher

 

Much of this early expansion of homoeopathy only became possible

through rich patrons. Quin himself was a son of the Duchess of

Devonshire (c1765-1824) and was thus an aristocrat (13). When he

began to practise homoeopathy in London, he mainly treated members of

his own class - other members of the nobility. This was very common

at that time as poor people could not afford treatment from doctors

and tended to use the services of amateur herbalists and apothecaries

for their medical needs (14).

 

Quin had the money, the qualifications and the numerous contacts

within the aristocracy to establish homoeopathy in Britain with

relative ease. Leaf had been a patient of Hahnemann and a letter from

the good doctor proves this (see note 6) The benefit of Quin being

aristocratic very quickly became apparent. Quin was allegedly the

illegitimate son of the Duchess of Devonshire, Lady Elizabeth

Cavendish:

 

" He is a mystery man. His names Hervey and Foster suggest a

relationship to the Duchess of Devonshire. Indeed, he is often

depicted as her illegitimate son. The Duchess was born Lady Elizabeth

Hervey and her first marriage was to John Foster.However, there is

absolutely no evidence that the Duchess was Quin's mother although

obviously with those names there must have been some sort of

relationship, possibly that of godson. " (14a)

 

Homoeopathy soon attracted many followers amongst the upper classes

including Royalty, and many of these turned into stoutly loyal rich

patrons of the emerging homoeopathic hospitals and dispensaries. This

`smoothed the pas-sage' of the new therapy in the UK (15). This loyal

devotion to homoeopathy has been passed down through all these titled

families and continues to this day.

 

Sir Henry Tyler

 

Sir Henry Tyler (1827-1908) was one such rich patron. He personally

contributed huge sums of money for the expansion of the London

Homoeopathic Hospital and his daughter Margaret (1857-1943) became an

influential homoeopathic doctor in London after and corresponded with

with Dr James Tyler Kent (1849-1916) (16). Her mother later

consolidated this link as the 'Sir Henry Tyler Scholarship', a Trust

Fund to send young doctors over to the USA for further training in

homoeopathy. Drs Fergie Woods, Douglas Borland and Sir John Weir all

went to Chicago in this way in the early years of this century.

Robert Gibson Miller (1862-1919) is especially important for

revitalising Scottish homoeopathy, centred mainly in Glasgow (17). He

had also trained with Kent, earlier, in the 1880's, in St Louis.

 

Margerie Blackie & Sir John Weir

 

Other patrons include HRH the Duchess of Teck (1833-1897) and the

Lord Mayor of London Sir George Wyatt Truscott (1857-c1940). There

were dozens of these rich patrons of homoeopathy throughout Britain

at the turn of the century. It spread like wild fire through the

ruling classes. Little wonder then that it became called the 'rich-

man's therapy'. Other examples of rich patrons include the Duchess of

Hamilton and Brandon (c1870-c1940), Lord Cawdor (1870-1914), Lord

Robert Grosvenor (1801-1893), the Earl of Wemyss and March (1857-

1937) and the Earl of Donoughmore (1875-1944) (18). Clear evidence of

rich patronage can be seen in the funding of the Hahnemann Hospital

in Liverpool, by the Tate family, of Tate Gallery and Tate and Lyle

sugar fame; and the Bristol Homoeopathic Hospital by members of the

Wills tobacco family.

 

Lord Donoughmore

 

The arrival of homoeopathy in Britain also coincided with mass

obsession with a range of other medical fads, like Medical Botany,

Spiritualism, Medical Galvanism, Mesmerism and Phrenology. As a

result, homoeopathy became fairly popular and its numerous cheap and

harmless remedies were sold in most chemist's shops, often as do-it-

yourself dispensatory medicine chests complete with a hand-book for

treating common ailments.

 

Sir Edwin Tate

 

Also in London there came to be established the 'Cooper Club', which

was an informal gathering of several leading homoeopathic doctors.

They met regu-larly andshared their notes and experiences over a

period roughly from 1880 to 1903. It chiefly consisted of Drs Thomas

Skinner (1825-1906), James Compton Burnett (1840-1901) and Robert

Cooper (1844-1903). Later they were joined by the much younger Dr

John Henry Clarke (1853-1931) (19).

 

James Compton Burnett

 

A terrible hiatus then overtook the movement, with many of the early

homoeopathic doctors dying within a 20 year period. Seven or so

important figures like Cooper, Hughes, Bayes, Burnett, Dudgeon and

Skinner all died between 1890 and 1906. The movement was clearly in

rapid decline and was not to recover for over 70 years!

 

Clarke soon became a very important UK homoeopath, publishing many

influen-tial works, many aimed - like 'The Prescriber' - at the

amateur practitioner. Embittered by the hostile reaction of his

orthodox brethren to homoeopathy and by its sinking into further

decline, Clarke left the British Homoeopathic Society (BHS) in

disgust c1900 and never returned to the fold despite repeated

attempts to woo him back (20). Meanwhile he taught many laypersons

the rudiments of homoeopathy, some of whom later became important in

their own right. Three such were Canon Roland Upcher, (21) Noel

Puddephatt (22) and J Ellis Barker. Other members of the Cooper Club

might also have taught laypersons.

 

Canon Roland Upcher

 

J Ellis Barker was a very interesting figure. Born in Cologne, the

son of a doctor, he emigrated to the UK in the 1920's (23). A close

confidant of Dr Clarke, he was handed the Editorship of 'The

Homoeopathic World' early in 1932, soon after Clarke's death. (This

surprising move was very probably a further snub by Clarke to the BHS

and UK homoeopathic doctors in general, most of whom he by then

despised as traitors of the homoeopathic cause and largely

responsible for its decline). Barker restyled the journal and re-

named it `Heal Thyself', then launched into bitter attacks on medical

orthodoxy and the apathy of the BHS, both of whom he blamed for the

lack of any further expansion of homoeopathy. He stirred up a great

deal of interest in homoeopathy at grassroots level and inspired a

renaissance of lay practice throughout the 1930's and 1940's as a

result. The journal `Heal Thyself' reached a peak of popularity in

the late 1930's (24).

 

YEAR No. OF PAGES

1932 550

1933 673

1934 791

1935 793

1936 903

1937 1073

1938 906

1939 715

1940 581

1941 547

1942 391

1943 297

1944 400

1945 347

1946 345

1947 345

1948 341

1949 332

1950 320

1951 319

1952 320

1953 318

 

 

He castigated both the BHS and the British Homoeopathic Association

(BHA) as little more than rich-men's talking-shops that blocked any

further expansion or popularisation of homoeopathy. Editorial after

editorial of his lamblasted them mercilessly just as Clarke had done

as Editor in the 1880's and 1890's. Barker also incited the lay

practitioners to `take homoeopathy to the masses'. He was also a keen

Naturopath. He was thus the inspiration of the first, brief though

glorious mass movement of alternative medicine in Britain (25). He

died in August 1948 after which the journal changed hands several

times and then became an obscure health magazine, finally ending in

1967 (26).

 

After the War homoeopathy again collapsed back into a 30 year period

of obscurity, becoming a quiet and quaint backwater of UK medical

practice, totally marginalised by orthodox medicine, subservient to

the BHS and BHA and widely regarded (if at all) as the domain of

cranks. During this period we see the influence of Edwin Tomkins in

London and also The Speights and Noel Puddephatt, unsuccessfully

trying to fan the embers of the mass move-ment back into the glory of

the two previous decades (27).

 

Frank Parker Wood

 

Several other important though hazy figures dominated the lay

movement at that time, mainly in London. They include Darnall Cooper,

F Parker Wood, Dr Otto Leeser, Edward Cotter and Ephraim Connor

(c1890-c1987), the latter practising first in Glasgow and then in the

Scottish Highlands (28). In the 40's he published a small book on the

homoeopathic treatment of dogs (29). His son Jim became a

homoeopathic doctor and then emigrated to Canada. One of his sons,

also Jim, is a medical historian in Toronto and has written a PhD

thesis on the history of homoeopathy in Canada (30).

 

Based in High Wycombe, Dr Leeser (c1890-1964) taught Tomkins, the

homoeopathic pharmacist John Pert and others as well as running a

homoeopathic supply company, publishing house - Hippocrates

Publishing Co - and a homoeopathicmanufacturing chemists, The London

Homoeopathy Laboratories (31). He returned to Germany in the 1950's

to run the Robert Bosch Homoeopathic Hospital in Stuttgart (32).

 

George Vithoulkas

 

Puddephatt is an important influence throughout the 1950's. He was a

strongKentian, taught Phyllis Speight (33) (later his partner in

practice), Sheilagh Creasy (now teaching at the LCCH) (34), and

George Vithoulkas (35), founder of the influential Athens School of

Homoeopathy. Puddephatt emigrated to South Africa in 1963 and died

there some years later of cancer (36).

 

The Speights (Leslie and Phyllis) were important as publishers of

homoeopathic books, first through The Homoeopathic Publishing Co and

then through Health Science Press (37). They published many reprints

of 19th century classics like Clarke's 'Dictionary' and Dudgeon's

translation of Hahnemann's 'Organon' as well as many modern works.

This work greatly helped UK homoeop-athy through those dark days of

stagnation and decline.

 

Thomas Maughan

 

This quality of `quiet backwater' continued into the 1950's with

H.E.A.L. (the Homoeopathic Educational Association for the Layman)

(38) and Thomas Maughan (1901-1976) who then became an important

teacher along with the Gibraltarian John Da Monte (1916-75) (39).

They taught homoeopathy to groups of London students for over ten

years, until their deaths in 1975-76. These students then came

together to form the Society of Homoeopaths in 1977, forming a

Register, a Journal and the first teaching college, the London

College of Homoeopathy, in 1978 (40). There are now some 14 of these

colleges in London, the Provinces and Scotland (41).

 

John Da Monte

 

Two other important landmarks in British homoeopathy were the NHS Act

of 1944 and the Medicines Act of 1968. Both had detrimental effects

upon the lay movement, temporarily causing panic and pandemonium. In

response to the NHS Act, Tomkins formed the shortlived Incorporated

Institute of Homoeopaths Ltd in 1946 to protect the interests of lay

prescribers (42). In response to the Medicines Act, Tomkins, Maughan,

Da Monte and several others formed the first Society of Homoeopaths

in Jan 1970 (43). The anticipated threat to lay practice failed to

materialise and the Society faded.

 

The resurgence of homoeopathy as a medical specialism began in the

late 1970's and has continued unabated since. Currently, lay

homoeopaths are rapidly undergoing professionalisation and are

integrating gradually into the NHS, increasing numbers working as

consultants to General Practitioners or in clinics, working on a

referral basis (44). Successive Governments have shown no inclination

to legislate against lay practitioners. Indirectly therefore, and

through the influence of a leaner and more market-driven health

service, lay homoeopaths are becoming a legitimised part of the NHS,

inhabiting a similar niche to Chiropracters, Acupuncturists and

Osteopaths. The Colleges of lay homoeopathy continue to produce

dozens of graduates each year and the movement is still growing

rapidly. With unified and demanding 3-year teaching curricula, the

Colleges offer a training programme widely seen as considerably

superior to that of the Faculty of Homoeopathy (45). Licensed and

Registered lay prescribers now easily outnumber homoeopathicdoctors

(46).

 

Additions (1997-8)

 

As we have seen, homeopathy has been practised in Britain

continuously since the 1830's, mainly by doctors. It reached its peak

of popularity, and hence highest numbers, in the 1860's, with around

300 doctors registered as homeopaths, though there were probably the

same number again undeclared homeopaths who wished to avoid

persecution from allopathic colleagues (47). From then until the

1920's it went into decline and there were approximately 180 doctors

practising it on a regular basis (48). This number remained steady

well into the 1960's and then began to slowly increase. Since the

late seventies there has been moderate growth and there are now

something like 400 doctors practising homeopathy on a regular basis

(49).

 

This picture fails of course to show the homeopathic activity of the

laypractitioners, who have always played a prominent and important

part in the UK homeopathic scene. They were not very common in the

last century, but expanded rapidly after the first war and underwent

a resurgence in the 1930's, 40's and 50's. They completely dominated

the scene at that time, with an estimated 500 regular lay

practitioners at their height in the mid-30's (50). A pattern that

was of course, to repeat itself 50 years later.

 

Many of the lay practitioners were initially taught by doctors who

had become disillusioned with the decline of homeopathy and fearful

that it might die out completely (51). Others were self-taught or

apprenticed to each other. An oral tradition thus emerged and all the

books and remedies were freely available from specialist publishers

and pharmacies. The lay scene went into a lull after the NHS act of

1948 and declined further into the 1960's.

 

Since 1978 there has been a massive revival of the therapy, based

almost entirely upon the foundation of lay Colleges in London and the

provinces, the Society of Homoeopaths and their Journal and Register

(52). From around 10 members in 1978, the number of registered

practitioners has gradually increased to its present size of 300+.

There are 20+ colleges throughout the country, being most numerous in

London and the south (53). They each produce on average 20 graduates

per year, thus 400 per year in total approximately. Many of these do

not get into practice for various reasons, others become registered

after clinical experience and then become full-time practitioners

within a year or two. It is of interest to note that over 3/4 of the

students and graduates of the Colleges and of registered homeopaths

are women (54).

 

There are two other routes to practise. One is still the self-taught

path or through sharing knowledge with others and learning through

doing, study and reflection. Secondly there are two other Registers

with approximately 200 lay practitioners each. One is from the UKHMA

based in Kent and with offices in USA, Canada, India, etc. Then there

is also the ICM Register of homeopaths. The UKHMA has its own

colleges, its own vigorous and expanding teaching programmes, and its

own registration procedures. The ICM just has a Register. Both are

also keen to accept graduates of the lay colleges onto their

registers (55).

 

There are probably approaching 1000 registered lay practitioners

operating in the UK at this time, and the number is expanding at the

rate of 200-300 per year. The total number is difficult to estimate

as there are also many unregistered and self-taught lay practitioners

operating in what is a laissez-faire market-place. The teaching

programme for doctors is also expanding, run by the Faculty of

Homeopathy based at the London Homoeopathic Hospital. They are

probably producing at least 50 newly trained homeopathic doctors per

year. There are clearly far more homoeopaths working in Britain today

than at any previous time.

 

The effect of this massive expansion of homeopathy in the UK has not

beenconfined to Britain, but has also occurred in many other

countries, most notably USA, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand and

Australia where teaching programmes, Societies and Colleges have been

established along with visiting lecturer programmes, along similar

lines to those in the UK (56). This has stimulated a revival of the

therapy in these countries also. Some of the former Eastern Block

countries like Czechia and Rumania have also benefitted from visits

and teaching programmes etsablished by notable British homeopaths

(57).

 

Homeopathy in the UK is currently undergoing professionalisation,

with registration of practitioners and degree status of courses

rapidly becoming a reality. The recent passing of the Chiropracters

and Osteopaths Acts (1993 & 1994) have paved the way for a legal

framework for the gradual registration of all alternative therapists

as specialists who can work within the NHS. This process is not

likely to take more than 5 years, by which time there will be well

over 2000 lay practitioners and approx 1000 homeopathic doctors. The

future for UK homeopathy is therefore very bright and in less than 20

years it has become a major player in the global homeopathic scene.

 

Brian Inglis

 

References:

 

1. see Trevor Cook, 1981, Samuel Hahnemann the Founder of

Homoeopathy,Thorson's, p146; Margery Blackie, 1976, The Patient Not

the Cure, MacDonald and James, pp32-33; also Brian Inglis, 1964,

Fringe Medicine, Collins, p79; also Hilary Jenkins, 1989, The History

of the Royal London Homoeopathic Hospital, BHJ 78, pp198-202

 

1b. see Blackie, 1976, p32.

 

1c. see Blackie, 1976, p34.

 

2. see Thomas L. Bradford, 1895, Life and Letters of Hahnemann, Jain

Edition, p46; also Richard Haehl, 1922, Samuel Hahnemann His Life and

Work, 2 vols, Jain Edition, Vol 2, pp505-507,

 

3. see Haehl, 1922, Vol 1, pp226-233, and Vol 2, pp341-351; also in

Brad-ford, 1895, pp333-341.

 

4. see Haehl, 1922, Vol 1, p396: Bonninghausen was cured of

tuberculosis in 1829 by a homoeopathic doctor - Dr A Weihe of

Munster - and then commenced the study and practise of homoeopathy

with great enthusiasm. In July 1843 he was granted a special Medical

Licence by the Prussian King, Friedrich Wilhelm IV (1795-1861).

However, according to Professor Robert Jutte, Director of the Robert

Bosch Institute for the History of Medicine in Stuttgart, (in a

private communication) the Bonninghausen casebooks held in Stuttgart,

commence in 1829, in his own handwriting, so it is quite clear that

he was a practising lay homoeopath some years prior to Melanie

Hahnemann, who first encountered Hahnemann in October 1834 (Haehl,

1922, Vol 2, p322).

 

5. see Haehl, 1922, Vol 1, pp347-8 & vol 2, pp447-451

 

6. see Philip A Nicholls, 1988, Homoeopathy & The Medical Profession,

Croom Helm; and Philip Nicholls & Peter Morrell, 1995, Lay

Practitioners & Medical Heretics, an Introduction to the History of

Homoeopathy in Britain, Paper to 1st International Conference on the

History of Homoeopathy, Robert Bosch Institute for the History of

Medicine, Stuttgart, April 1995, p5; also Inglis, 1964, p79, pp80-81;

also Haehl, 1922, op cit, Vol 2 pp505-507; also op cit, Jenkins,

1989, p200.

 

'Everest was a zealous homoeopath and promoter of homoeopathy in

England, he published a Sermon in 1851 delivered in favour of the

London Homoeopathic Hospital, also wrote to Hahnemann 1-5-1834 and 30-

3-1838; he died 15 June 1855' condensed from Haehl, 1922, Vol 2,

pp508-9

 

7. see J.G. Rosenstein, (c1800-c1870?), Evidence of the Truth of the

Homoeo-pathic Medical Practice, Its Progress and Development, 1849,

published by Thomas Mark, Kidderminster, pp7-8

 

8. see Clarke's Obituary & Appreciation, BHJ 1932, Vol 22, pp116-125

 

9. see The Homoeopathic Medical Directory for 1867, Homoeopathic

Publishing Co, London.

 

10. see The British, Colonial and Continental Homoeopathic Medicaly for 1895, Homoeopathic Publishing Company, London, pp59-76.

 

11. see The International Homoeopathic Medical Directory, 1909, Hom

Publishing Co, London, pp70-86.

 

12. see adverts in Heal Thyself, 1930-50, (eg vol 75, July 1940, p337)

 

13. see Inglis, 1964, p79; also Blackie, 1976, pp32-33; also Cook,

1981, p146; also Bernard Leary, 1989, Frederic Quin, founder of the

Hospital, BHJ 78, pp204-209.

 

14. see Ivan Waddington, 1984, The Medical Profession In The

Nineteenth Century, Gill & Macmillan, pp26-27 & note 65, p209 for an

excellent example of this

 

14a. see Dr Leary, in 'Homoeopathy', Vol 41 No 1, Feb 1991, pp19 et

seq

 

15. see Inglis, 1964, p85; also op cit Leary, 1989, pp204-209

 

16. see Sixty Five Years Work, The History of The London Homoeopathic

Hospital, 1914, publ by LHH, London, pp75-80; also Celia McConnell,

1992, Women In Homoeopathy, unpublished Thesis, London College of

Classical Homoeopathy, pp15-23.

 

17. see letter John Pert, 1990; also Obituary, BHJ 1919, p107

 

18. see Homoeopathic Medical Directories, 1867-1911/12 and op cit

Sixty-five Years Work; also many figures mentioned in the pages of

Health Through Homoeopathy, (official journal of the BHA), 1940-50

and of Heal Thyself, 1932-55; also op cit Leary, 1989, p209, & op cit

Jenkins, 1989, p200.

 

19. see Clarke's Obituary & Appreciation, BHJ 1932, Vol 22, pp116-

125; also PhyllisSpeight, 1979, Homoeopathy, a Practical Guide to

Natural Medicine, Granada, p152

 

20. ibid as note 7 above

 

21. see The Prescriber, 1924, pp55-58; also Eastern Daily Press,

Obituary to Upcher, 28 Oct 1929

 

22. see op cit, Speight, 1979, p152

 

23. see Who Was Who 1941-50 and J.Ellis Barker, 1931, Miracles Of

Healing and How They are Done, John Murray, London

 

24. see length in pages of issues 1932-53, which peaked in 1937

 

25. see Heal Thyself, 1932-34, especially June 1932, pp221-224; July

1932, pp267-266, p279 & p290; September 1932, pp367, pp371-2 & pp394-

8.

 

26. see Heal Thyself, 1948-55; also Vital Forces - a profile of

Phyllis Speight, by Rebecca Gethin, Devon Life, April 1990, pp36-37

 

27. see Jerome Whitney, 1986, Regarding Edward Tompkins (sic),

Society of Homoeopaths Newsletter 10, Jan 1986, p7; also Edwin

Tomkins Interview with P Morrell, Enfield, 20 July 1990.

 

28. see Treuherz profile, The Homoeopath, 5:3, 1986, pp143-144; also

Geof-frey Brown, 1990, Recorded Interview with P Morrell, August,

1990, Bradford

 

29. see Simplified Dog Cures, 1946; see Heal Thyself, 1946 for book

review; also op cit Brown.

 

30. see Dr James Connor, Paper presented to the Stuttgart

Conference, 'Homeopathy in Nineteenth century Canada', April 1995;

also conversations with Jim Connor, Stuttgart Conference, April 1995.

 

31. see Interview with Edwin Tomkins, 1990; also letters from John

Pert, 1990; see also adverts in Heal Thyself, 1930-50; see also

Leeser's publications; also the British Telephone Directories for

High Wycombe, 1930-60, held at the BT Archive, Millbank, London

 

32. see his Obituary, BHJ, 1965, p69

 

33. see op cit, Speight, 1979, preface, p1; also op cit Gethin, 1990,

pp36-37

 

34. see letter from Sheilagh Creasy, 1990

 

35. ibid

 

36. see Heal Thyself, March & April 1963; also Speight, 1990, Letter,

6-6-90; also op cit Gethin, Devon Life, April 1990, pp36-37; also UK

Telephone Directories, 1930-60, held at the BT Archive, Millbank,

London

 

37. see British Books in Print, 1968-90; also op cit, Gethin, 1990,

pp36-37

 

38. see HEAL, 1950-55

 

39. see Recorded Interview with Elizabeth Danciger, Islington,

London, 26 May 1990; also Karen Ludwinski, 1993, Thomas Maughan His

Life and Teachings, Unpublished Thesis, London College of Classical

Homoeopathy, London; also Madeline Evans, 1990, Homoeopathy, Druidism

and related matters, conversation, 13-6-90; also Thomas Maughan,

1973, Talking with Dr Laundy, tape (courtesy of Patrick Derham in New

Zealand); Martin Miles, 1990, Letter, August 1990; Martin Miles,

1990, Letter to P Morrell; Martin Miles, 1992, Interview with Karen

Ludwinski, (transcript); Bob Withers, 1990, Telephone conversation

with P Morrell about Thomas Maughan Study Group, August 1992; also

Patrick Derham, 1990, The Thomas Maughan Study Group, taped

interview, August 1990, Auckland, New Zealand

 

40. see Robert Davidson, 1980, The College of Homoeopathy, Homoeopath

1:1, summer 1980; Robert Davidson, 1987, Origins of the College of

Homoeopathy, Newsletter 17, Dec 1987; also Peter Chappell, 1980, The

Society of Homoeopaths Emerges, The Homoeopath 1:1, pp2-3; Peter

Chappell, 1989, letter to P Morrell, July 1989; Peter Chappell, 1990,

The Thomas Maughan Group, letter to P Morrell, June 1990; Berenice

Benjelloun, 1989, The Origins of the Society of Homoeopaths, letter

June 1989; also Misha Norland, 1989a, History of Lay Homoeopathy,

letter 23-5-89; Misha Norland, 1989b, The School of Homoeopathy,

Devon, letter 30-5-89; Misha Norland, 1990, Telephone conversation

with P Morrell, 9-6-90; also Ernest Roberts, 1989a, Origins of the

Society of Homoeopaths, conversation, April 1989; Ernest Roberts,

1989b, History of Lay Homoeopathy, letter 8-5-89; Ernest Roberts,

1989c, The North West College of Homoeopathy, letter 23-5-89; also

Kay Samuel, 1989, Origins of the Society of Homoeopaths, letter, 12-6-

89.

 

41. see Society of Homoeopaths Newsletters, 1982-95

 

42. see Interview with Edwin Tomkins, Enfield, 20 July 1990; also a

facsimile of the Codes and Rules for the Incorporated Institute of

Homoeopaths Ltd, Dec 1946

 

43. see letter from John Wilcox, Devon, 15-5-1990; John Wilcox,

1990a, The History of Lay Homoeopathy in Britain, letter 9-5-90; John

Wilcox, 1990b, The History of Lay Homoeopathy in Britain, letter 17-5-

90; John Wilcox, 1990c, Letter, 7-6-90; interview with Edwin Tomkins,

Enfield, July 1990; also Jerome Whitney, 1986, Regarding Edward

Tompkins (sic), Newsletter 10, Jan 1986, p7; Jerome Whitney, 1990a,

Letter, 15-6-90; Interview with Jerome Whitney, Dulwich, 18 June

1990; Jerome Whitney, 1994, Conversations at a Conference, Nov 19

1994, London.

 

44. The Student Homoeopath Education in Homoeopathy Conference,

London, 19 Nov 1994, included several presentations on this theme,

especially one by Alistair Dempster of Huddersfield.

 

45. see College Prospectuses compared with Faculty training programme

prospectus; see also The Homoeopathic Handbook, 1982, Nelson's, pp90-

92 re Faculty training courses for doctors

 

46. see Faculty lists compared with Registers of Society of

Homoeopaths 1981-94; also Faculty of Homeopathy Lists of Members

1939, 1953, 1969, 1974, 1979, 1982,1987, 1992; Homoeopathic Medicalies 1867, 1874, 1895, 1909, 1911-12 and 1932; also Brit Hom

Journal (1990) Obituaries from the BHJ index 1911-90, courtesy of

Glasgow Homoeopathic Hospital Librarian - Mary Gooch; also Medical

Registers and Directories (British), various years (1931-1989)

 

47. see lists in British Homoeopathic Directories; and also in

Nicholls, 1988, re persecution of homoeopaths by their colleagues.

 

48. This is based upon the lists published in the British

Homoeopathic Society's publications such as their Homoeopathicies.

 

49. ibid re the Faculty lists which are still published annually.

 

50. This is based upon study of the journal Heal Thyself, which

reached a peak of readership, length and popularity in 1937. 500 is a

fair estimate based upon listings of names in this journal over the

period in question. It may well have been double that figure.

 

51. see previous reference re Drs John Henry Clarke, Percival Quinton

and William W Rorke, who all taught lay persons. This remark applies

equally to the late homoeopathic vet George McLeod

 

52. The Soc Hom Register was first published in 1981, the journal The

Homeoopath in 1979.

 

53. In London itself you have the College of Homoeopathy, the College

of Practical Homoeopathy, the College of Classical Homoeopathy and

the Guild of Homoeopaths; in the south you have the London School of

Homoeopathy, the Purton House College and the School of Homoeopathy

in Devon. Compare this with Northern College, NorthWestern College,

the Sheffield School of Homoeopathy, the Soluna School in Derbyshire

and Midlands College in the north and midlands.

 

54. see Registers of Soc Hom 1990-96 and also letters regarding this

in The Homoeopath issues 55-61

 

55. I am indebted to Michael Endacott of the ICM and to Derek Cole of

the UKHMA for this information.

 

56. see Prospectuses of the Colleges and also Soc Hom Newsletters.

 

57. eg Peter Chappell of the London College of Classical Homeopathy

 

Homeopathe International